Holy crap, this thread has turned ugly. Why does the far left get so angry, vile and viscous. You can see it in the AP headlines. Obama headlines - all positive Palin headlines - all negative no joke. You can just feel the rage these AP writers have at the likely possibility of an obama loss. The left feels like its their turn and its their election this year. Now they throw tantrums like babies. waaah! waah!
In 1981 a Republican congressman declared: Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=ron_pauls_abortion_rhetoric
Your correct that the right are liars, but in fairness so are the left. The reason they lie and deceive is because it works, the sheep on both sides eat it up. Just read the posts of the party faithful. There are some here who seem intelligent, but when it comes to politics they are wearing blinders. It blows my mind that most of the time we have to chose between the lesser of two evils for president instead of the best between two good candidates.
Perhaps you could explain why it is important to know that the funder of moveon.org, George Soros, supports a democrat candidate. LOL. In fact, it would be helpful if you could explain why you believe that there is a correlation between wealth and sound political and/or philosophical beliefs. Either way, the Constitutional framers saw fit to give a vote to each person. What they didn't do was weight a particular vote for wealth, trading ability, etc etc. Perhaps you'd like to pass on to Soros and Buffet for me that I'm supporting Republicans. LOL. OldTrader
Barbarian, fruitcake, screwy broad. We can add this to your collection of dumbass, biased comments, along with "bitch". OldTrader
"Either way, the Constitutional framers saw fit to give a vote to each person." Of course that person had to be white, male, and a landowner/taxpayer 21 or older... Many states didn't allow Catholics or Jews the right to vote back in the framers days... http://www.infoplease.com/timelines/voting.html
That pretty much defines 'non-responsive'. I guess the question I asked made you uncomfortable? Even the Republican talking heads are admitting that it is fucking barbaric to suggest that the child victim of a gang-rape should be forced to carry to term a fetus which resulted from the rape. Religious extremists who believe in this sort of nonsense are no different than the mullahs who bury teenagers up to their necks in sand and stone them to death because they were flirting. What if your 13-year old daughter was brutally raped by 3 white trash drunkards? Or more troublesome for you... What if your 13-year old daughter was gang-raped by 3 black criminals and became pregnant? Don't bother with a response, Pabst. I've tried to get a straight answer out of you but you seem strangely unwilling to actually commit to an answer, preferring to post quotes from Senators instead.
The majority of americans think Iraq master-minded 911 Need I say more? When the majority of the population display the level of childish stupidity displayed by the right-wing Taliban posters on this board, one can accurately predict american global military might is waning and it is in its last throes as the sole super-power.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??? You said and I quote: " Pabst, this is indeed a winning post, if it turns out that Ron Pauls holds some of the extremist views that Palin seems to hold. Are you aware that Dr. Paul believes that claptrap about the earth being 6000 years old, or holds the insane view that child rape victims should be forced to bear children? It was my impression that Dr. Paul's statements reflected a rational faith-informed view of public policy (even if that includes opposition to Roe vs. Wade) and not the kind of thing we're seeing attributed to Palin. In fact it's my impression that Dr. Paul thinks the government shouldn't attempt to legislate morality." Is that not a question as to if Dr. Paul's views on policy were based on "morality"? Were you not looking for additional clarification on Paul? My link is a QUOTE by Paul. Did you read it? If I'm misunderstanding let me know but by your friggin' tone you're accusing me of side stepping when I gave you a specific referenced response.
Take it easy, Pabst. Jesus Christ man, I have posted out and out personal insults to you in the past, this was nothing in comparison. Check your post - does it say anywhere in there that you're quoting Ron Paul? No it doesn't. Sorry, okay? And now let's examine the response you gave. I still say it's unresponsive. You are repeatedly failing to respond to the question I am asking. The Ron Paul quote doesn't say anything about the idiotic suggestion that the earth is 6000 years old, nor does is say anything about Dr. Paul's feelings about allowing abortion in the case of gang-rape of a child. Until now I described the suggestion that Palin holds these barbaric and immeasurably cruel beliefs as 'allegation' because I had not heard any confirmation that this is true. I heard tonight that it's a fact. It is beyond belief and if she was complicit in preventing a child from aborting a gang-rape fetus, she should be locked up for 10 years less a day. So the next time you tell me to fuck off, maybe try reading the post you're responding to and making sure that you're actually responding. It's not like I blame you for not responding. What are you guys supposed to do, when faced with the prospect of defending the views of lunatics? I notice you also sidestepped the question of what you would do if it was your daughter. But really, even you aren't capable of believing that a gang-raped child should be forced to carry to term a prgnancy that resulted from the rape... are you?