POLITICAL THREAD

[Mashburned]

The government has absolutely no right to make laws around social issues. Zilch. They have no business interfering with citizen's private lives. That's communism

Welp, that's where we are. And it's only getting worse.

Yesterday I received an email from Quora.com with quotes from Prez O. about how this Iran deal is the most important foreign policy thingy in my lifetime. It included questions from e-people and "Prez O" or his interns would type a very vague and bullshit response and then people would vote on if they liked it or not.

I almost threw up. I have visited Quora once like 3 years ago. I guess that put me on their list, or something. I have never ever received an email from them before. Bam. Not long after MSM questions the Iran shit, I get some BS propaganda straight to my gmail. I'm sick of this BS country, tbh. We are way too damn big and this humongous groupthink retard mentality is infringing on my personal life.

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

next Republican Presidential nominee

 

[KingOfBBN]

Basically choice only matters if it's on the left.

next Republican Presidential nominee

Your messiah Obama references Jay Z and thought there were 57 states and has never had a real job in his lifetime.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Also, I would be on trial for assault and murder or manslaughter if I hit a pregnant woman in the stomach with a baseball bat killing her unborn baby.

This has always been my argument and point about the hypocrisy of the pro abortion crowd.

When Lacey Petersen was pregnant and murdered by her husband, Scott ; he was tried for TWO murders.

So how do you justify abortion then? The argument is often "Well she wanted that baby." Okay since when does your circumstances of wanting or not wanting something change the reality of a situation? You wanting it or not wanting it doesn't change what it actually is. It's life.

I don't know how any parent could be in favor of that crap. I can understand and sympathize with rape but using abortion as a form of birth control is sick.

 

[warrior-cat]

Rather fitting one Dick to be orating in another Dick's library.

Both who escalated us into pointless wars.
Noticed he's been out with his daughter trying to softened his image, rewrite history and help political aspirations

History much? Kennedy and Johnson put us there and escalated the war before Nixon took the reigns.

The Tonkin Gulf Resolution gave the President a "blank check" to wage the war in Vietnam as he saw fit. After Lyndon Johnson was elected President in his own right that November, he chose escalate the conflict

 

[KingOfBBN]

History much? Kennedy and Johnson put us there and escalated the war before Nixon took the reigns.

Look. Republicans are the enemy at all-times and logic will not get in the way of ideology.

That's why libs think the best Democratic president of all time is Lincoln.

 

[liveblue92]

Planned Parenthood is the new red team boogeyman. Way to not court the females under 70 vote.

And hitching your carts to Kim Davis while not understanding how the Supreme Court works is probably not going to win Mack Blevins (sic) the governorship and definitely won't win any of the theocrats the White House.

Do social conservatives just want to hand the libs the White House like you did in 2012 with your "legitimate rape" shit? Because you're trying really f'n hard to alienate everyone who isn't an old, white, straight, Christian dude. I want to vote for common sense and a government that can create GOOD jobs and balance a budget, not crazy, outdated 1950s ideology.

I won't vote for a Republican who opposes equal rights for all Americans, and if you're gonna try to make me live my life by a fictional book written by GD ancient goat herders, you're insane.

Hillary is a scumbag, lying, hypocritical crook. Bernie is a crazy old bastard who probably hasn't taken his meds in a decade. And the Republican circus (Trump, Mikey Suckadee, Cruz, Santorum, the doctor that thinks jail makes teh gayz, et al) is making these two look normal. Think about that for a second.

Stick to what the GOP is good at: Fiscal conservatism and a strong national defense.

Abandon what the GOP is absolute shit at: Anything social.

And Heisman, what in the holy f is "actual" marriage?

Everything you said is spot on. Republicans have to evolve on social issues or we are gonna keep seeing the same bull shit liberal every four years in Washington.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Everything you said is spot on. Republicans have to evolve on social issues or we are gonna keep seeing the same bull shit liberal every four years in Washington.

It's all libs can do. They have handouts to give to every idiot that refuses to work or comes into this country and then control every brainwashed college kid and then create social division because they cannot run on the success of their policies.

Because they own the media, it makes it very easy to create controversial social issues and then Republicans are put in a tough situation. Stand by and let this insanity and brainwashing continue so you have a chance at getting in power or stick to your morals and convictions but then get painted as a "bigot" for not being a cheerleader for them. It's a brilliant plan by libs and cons are always behind the 8 ball because they have to go against lib politicians buying everyone, liberal universities, media and now they're even importing these idiots over here that will depend upon the government so will of course, vote for more government.

I said this a month ago on here. The Republican candidates cannot get caught in the liberal trap of talking about gays and abortion. Refuse to answer the questions or say that's an individual opinion and that you're hear to discuss important issues. Because libs keep putting out stupid shit about transgender or gay discrimination all while they sell our country out.

It is an undeniable certainty that if a Dem wins this next election, kiss this country goodbye. No way in hell you ever come back from 16 years of Obama and Hillary. Heck, after Obama, we'll be lucky to right the ship as it is.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Rather fitting one Dick to be orating in another Dick's library.

Both who escalated us into pointless wars.
Noticed he's been out with his daughter trying to softened his image, rewrite history and help political aspirations

What political aspirations? He's 74-years old and has had four heart surgeries.

 

[Mashburned]

Everything you said is spot on. Republicans have to evolve on social issues or we are gonna keep seeing the same bull shit liberal every four years in Washington.

No, that's exactly what we don't need. Wtf. We need a new party that wants t abolish all kinds of laws, rules, regulations, and all the bullshit that has this country bloated to the gills.

You idiots keep voting for more government power. Keep it up. Do it for the kids!

 

[KopiKat]

Al Qaeda declares war on ISIS...Saudi Arabias King Salman visits the White House...Isreal reopens its Cairo embassy...Obama to meet with Netanyahu...Im not sure whats going on but Im not so sure its as cut and dry as we are seeing and for a POTUS as arrogant and bent on leaving his name on American history, I find it odd that he would support such a effing stupid decision as the Iran deal unless there was some underlying reason. I dont think the Obama administration is as stupid as they are sneaky. We (the US) are no strangers to playing puppetmaster in the middle east either, maybe this is the only way to get Iran to show their hand? Maybe this is the only way we get other countries to join together and do their part? Maybe a consolidation of countries in a "enemy of my enemy is my friend". Hell, I dunno but I remember when we pretty much put Osama bin Laden in power many years ago so who knows ...

That is a pretty good post, from a cautious, devil's advocate perspective. But to just further that caution, never forget the risk of making sense by using multiple examples of what doesn't make sense, even if conveniently timed.

 

[jamo0001]

@RandPaul
What does it say about GOP when a 3 & half term Gov w/ a successful record of creating jobs bows out as a reality star leads in the polls?
4:40pm - 11 Sep 15

 

[liveblue92]

No, that's exactly what we don't need. Wtf. We need a new party that wants t abolish all kinds of laws, rules, regulations, and all the bullshit that has this country bloated to the gills.

You idiots keep voting for more government power. Keep it up. Do it for the kids!

I'm not voting for government power, I'm hoping that republicans candidates will stop doing Trump things , and supporting dumbasses like Kim Davis.
No moderate/undecided voter is gonna go for that. Undecided voters (dumbasses) care more about social issues then fiscal issues.

 

[KingOfBBN]

@RandPaul
What does it say about GOP when a 3 & half term Gov w/ a successful record of creating jobs bows out as a reality star leads in the polls?
4:40pm - 11 Sep 15

After Obama has been elected twice despite never doing anything, the left can never say anything ever again.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Those of you who root blindly for either team are the reason we're in this mess.

I'll vote for the best candidate, not a team. Those of us with enough sense to acknowledge each side brings good and bad ideas to the table are the ones who decide elections.

Liberals who think conservatives are to blame for everything are just as ignorant as conservatives who believe liberals are guilty of the same thing.

Both are misguided and brainwashed by propaganda pushers, aka "mainstream" media on the left and AM talk radio and Fox News on the right. (HINT: THEY'RE ALL THE SAME.) It just depends on which ridiculous rhetoric you choose to be spoon fed.

Living outside the red or blue echo chamber is a wonderful thing.

 

[Willy4UK]

Those of you who root blindly for either team are the reason we're in this mess.

I'll vote for the best candidate, not a team. Those of us with enough sense to acknowledge each side brings good and bad ideas to the table are the ones who decide elections.

Liberals who think conservatives are to blame for everything are just as ignorant as conservatives who believe liberals are guilty of the same thing.

Both are misguided and brainwashed by propaganda pushers, aka "mainstream" media on the left and AM talk radio and Fox News on the right. (HINT: THEY'RE ALL THE SAME.) It just depends on which ridiculous rhetoric you choose to be spoon fed.

Living outside the red or blue echo chamber is a wonderful thing.

You drinking the anger juice last night? haha

No, living outside the red or blue echo chamber isn't all that wonderful. Yeah, one that does live outside that prolly has better insight and can look at things with no bias. But that means you're in the minority and unfortunately the majority can only see things black or white, ins or outs. That ain't getting fixed

 

[bigblueinsanity]

It's a personal choice, not a gov't choice. The fact we have to make a law preserving that freedom of choice is what democracy is all about

Although I completely agree about the government staying out of personal freedoms, this is one area where we disagree.

I understand and recognize the womans interest in the unborn child since it grows inside her. But what makes her interest paramount to the expected father, whos DNA makes up half the child? Or to the unborn child - who should have the right to live?

At the very least, it should require the fathers consent. The childs half his. I understand the logistical complications and opportunity for fraud, but this is only logical.

Plus I think abortion should not be allowed for any child who would be viable and survive, if delivered at that moment. Technology is ever improving. We're taking babies born more prematurely all the time, and preserving their life. The only problem is the huge cost.

When Lacey Petersen was pregnant and murdered by her husband, Scott ; he was tried for TWO murders.

An obvious legal inconsistency. Woman wants an abortion? Fine. The baby isnt human yet. Just a fetus. Oh you killed someone who was pregnant? Well, thats double homocide.

Same as the issue of a man not having rights. If that child is born, the man has a child support obligation. If theres an obligation, then there should also be a right.

Everything you said is spot on. Republicans have to evolve on social issues or we are gonna keep seeing the same bull shit liberal every four years in Washington.

Ive posted this numerous times. They need to avoid social issues altogether. But the primaries are when theyre drug into the much by the likes of Cruz and Huckabee. Anyway, just say the law is well established and move on. Or at the most, say I dont personally agree with it, but I respect the law and will follow it (this was basically Kasich's answer on gay marriage and it was well done).

@RandPaul
What does it say about GOP when a 3 & half term Gov w/ a successful record of creating jobs bows out as a reality star leads in the polls?
4:40pm - 11 Sep 15

Or it could be because Perry was an awful candidate to begin with. He blew it last time when he was actually polling pretty decent.

I'm not voting for government power, I'm hoping that republicans candidates will stop doing Trump things , and supporting dumbasses like Kim Davis.
No moderate/undecided voter is gonna go for that. Undecided voters (dumbasses) care more about social issues then fiscal issues.

Iirc, only Huckabee and Cruz support her. The GOP lost at least the last election (maybe the last 2) entirely on social issues. Obama had the lowest approval rating of any president re-elected. But he was on the popular side of social issues.

 

[Willy4UK]

Although I completely agree about the government staying out of personal freedoms, this is one area where we disagree.

I understand and recognize the womans interest in the unborn child since it grows inside her. But what makes her interest paramount to the expected father, whos DNA makes up half the child? Or to the unborn child - who should have the right to live?

At the very least, it should require the fathers consent. The childs half his. I understand the logistical complications and opportunity for fraud, but this is only logical.

Plus I think abortion should not be allowed for any child who would be viable and survive, if delivered at that moment. Technology is ever improving. We're taking babies born more prematurely all the time, and preserving their life. The only problem is the huge cost..

Totally understand man. But the Roe vs Wade decision had to come. Women ER visits for self-abortions was the #1 reason why the decision had to come out the way it did. It was becoming an epidemic. Just telling a woman no, isn't going to be enough to stop it. History has proven this. No amount religion teaching guilt and self-shame is going to stop women from abortions. But you're right, it sucks that a man doesn't play a part in the decision, however, they aren't the one risking their life to get that baby born.

Regardless, this hot button topic always draws the emotion out, which is more funner than talking about budgets and gov't spending. Yet, it will never be changed. We're more likely to lose our right to bear arms than we are to outlaw abortions. To me it's kicking a dead horse, but I do understand that Pro-Lifers need to vent about it. But it ain't changing.

 

[jamo0001]

Maybe because the father isn't the one that's enduring a pregnancy?

Seriously, how is that even a question?

 

[Deeeefense]

@RandPaul
What does it say about GOP when a 3 & half term Gov w/ a successful record of creating jobs bows out as a reality star leads in the polls?
4:40pm - 11 Sep 15

But what puzzles me is God told him to run for president. I guess God forget to tell him he wasn't going to win.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

Totally understand man. But the Roe vs Wade decision had to come. Women ER visits for self-abortions was the #1 reason why the decision had to come out the way it did. It was becoming an epidemic. Just telling a woman no, isn't going to be enough to stop it. History has proven this. No amount religion teaching guilt and self-shame is going to stop women from abortions. But you're right, it sucks that a man doesn't play a part in the decision, however, they aren't the one risking their life to get that baby born.

Regardless, this hot button topic always draws the emotion out, which is more funner than talking about budgets and gov't spending. Yet, it will never be changed. We're more likely to lose our right to bear arms than we are to outlaw abortions. To me it's kicking a dead horse, but I do understand that Pro-Lifers need to vent about it. But it ain't changing.

Sounds an awful lot like the logic behind the war on drugs. While I agree its not sound logic, its still not logic accepted by the powers that be when it comes to most things.

I definitely agree abortion isnt going anywhere legally. As you said, its a much more ingrained right than many that are actually found in the constitution.

 

[qwesley]

They didn't really lose on "issues". BOs best exit polling area was around which candidate "cared most about me". It is why he spent the final days of the campaign on Entertainment Tonight and other idiot platforms. The big advantage the Dems have is that they can cater to idiots more blatantly without alienating the middle....versus the GOP and the religious hardliners.

Perry could not get the stench of 2012 off him plus he was caught in the Trump attention vortex. Should have been a top 5.

The Brit Labour Party elected a socialist as their leader that would make Bernie blush.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

Maybe because the father isn't the one that's enduring a pregnancy?

Seriously, how is that even a question?

In the eyes of the law, if that baby dies by the hand of another - its murder. If by the mother - totally legal. So, the same right should transfer to the man, whos child is half is. If the child is killed, should he not be able to prosecute someone for murder?

I understand this is not the law, btw. But its the same logic. It shouldnt change just because one is male and the other is female.

 

[Willy4UK]

Sounds an awful lot like the logic behind the war on drugs. While I agree its not sound logic, its still not logic accepted by the powers that be when it comes to most things.

I definitely agree abortion isnt going anywhere legally. As you said, its a much more ingrained right than many that are actually found in the constitution.

Ya know, it's tough to be split down the middle on this issue. One hand there's freedom of choice, and on the other there is murder. I think Roe Vs Wade tried to do the best it could with allowing for both sides. Although I know one of the arguments other than a total outright ban is that Pro-Lifers think the 27 or 28 weeks (I think) is too long.

Thing is, it's difficult at this point in time with a lack of technology to truly know when life actually begins. I don't know. But to me until Science can set the limits, then Roe Vs Wade won't be reformed. If there is a better scientific way that comes out, then I could see the time limits reformed. That's all I got man. hahahahaha

 

[fuzz77]

In the eyes of the law, if that baby dies by the hand of another - its murder. If by the mother - totally legal. So, the same right should transfer to the man, whos child is half is. If the child is killed, should he not be able to prosecute someone for murder?

I understand this is not the law, btw. But its the same logic. It shouldnt change just because one is male and the other is female.

It isn't quite that simple.
Women who do drugs or engage in other behaviors detrimental to the fetus while pregnant can also be charged with crimes of endangerment.
No, you logic is not the same because the male doesn't have the burden of carrying the pregnancy. Until you can jump that hurdle the logic will never be the same.
I am pro-choice but would have no problem with a viable limit of when they could be performed with the exception of fetuses with known birth defects. 92% of abortions occur in the first 13 weeks, a time when the fetus is not viable.

 

[jamo0001]

In the eyes of the law, if that baby dies by the hand of another - its murder. If by the mother - totally legal. So, the same right should transfer to the man, whos child is half is. If the child is killed, should he not be able to prosecute someone for murder?

I understand this is not the law, btw. But its the same logic. It shouldnt change just because one is male and the other is female.

Your previous post was taking the "father's consent" angle (which is an utterly ludicrous idea, if you don't mind me saying so), but now you're talking about the admittedly contradictory way in which the law views fetal homicide or whatever the technical term is. I'm not a lawyer and I don't have a great explanation for why one action is legal and one action is criminal, but I would guess the justification for the apparent double standard is similar to the one that allows a family to turn off a patient's ventilator when other random visitors aren't allowed to do so.

 

[VT/UK Rondo]

That is a pretty good post, from a cautious, devil's advocate perspective. But to just further that caution, never forget the risk of making sense by using multiple examples of what doesn't make sense, even if conveniently timed.

Not sure If your being a wiseass or not. Just trying to add something other than Kim Davis, your party bad my party good, God is dead, wash, rinse, repeat...

 

[qwesley]

Here we go...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/12/kostigen-climate-change-reparations/72014440/
Poorer nations suffering from extreme weather disasters, so much so that their citizens are seeking refugee in safer terrains outside their borders, want rich nations like the United States to pay for reparations and to relocate populations.

Preparatory talks ahead of the United Nations Conference on Climate Change to be held in Paris in December has representatives from developing nations asking for more than an already agreed upon $100 billion per year for climate change mitigation measures. They want additional compensation for weather-related disasters as well as a "displacement coordination facility" for refugees. And they want all this to be legally binding as part of the larger anticipated Paris accord.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

That didn't take long....what's the o/u on when Iran gets a nuke again? 6.5 years?

There isn't a single segment of US foreign or domestic policy Obama isn't going to have ****** up beyond all recognition before he's done. Not one. Oh Global Climate Warming Cooling Chane? You're up next, big boy.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/iran-says-finds-unexpectedly-high-uranium-104622948.html

 

[TheDonJiggy]

But what makes her interest paramount to the expected father, whos DNA makes up half the child?

The father's health isn't affected by a pregnancy.

Or to the unborn child - who should have the right to live?

Roe v. Wade explains this.

Plus I think abortion should not be allowed for any child who would be viable and survive, if delivered at that moment.

It isn't. Again, that's Roe v. Wade.

 

[starchief5]

That didn't take long....what's the o/u on when Iran gets a nuke again? 6.5 years?

There isn't a single segment of US foreign or domestic policy Obama isn't going to have ****** up beyond all recognition before he's done. Not one. Oh Global Climate Warming Cooling Chane? You're up next, big boy.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/iran-says-finds-unexpectedly-high-uranium-104622948.html

The US and Israel better spend a lot of time developing a bunker-busting bomb that goes deep enough and works in the next few years. Probably going to need it.

 

[starchief5]

Totally understand man. But the Roe vs Wade decision had to come. Women ER visits for self-abortions was the #1 reason why the decision had to come out the way it did. It was becoming an epidemic. Just telling a woman no, isn't going to be enough to stop it. History has proven this. No amount religion teaching guilt and self-shame is going to stop women from abortions. But you're right, it sucks that a man doesn't play a part in the decision, however, they aren't the one risking their life to get that baby born.

Regardless, this hot button topic always draws the emotion out, which is more funner than talking about budgets and gov't spending. Yet, it will never be changed. We're more likely to lose our right to bear arms than we are to outlaw abortions. To me it's kicking a dead horse, but I do understand that Pro-Lifers need to vent about it. But it ain't changing.

Using this logic, we might as well just undo most laws. People are just going to break them anyway.

 

[jamo0001]

Using this logic, we might as well just undo most laws. People are just going to break them anyway.

Not if the law minimizes collateral damage.

I'm beginning to wonder whether a certain segment of society just prefers endometrial debridement secondary to overwhelming sepsis become the contraceptive du jour. Punish those whores, amirite?!

 

[Willy4UK]

Using this logic, we might as well just undo most laws. People are just going to break them anyway.

Which laws should we undo then Starchief?

 

[KingOfBBN]

This migration issue in Europe is going to be a Trojan Horse. They already arrested an ISIS soldier in a Germany refugee camp who was trying to pass himself off as seeking asylum. Germany also confiscated boxes of Syrian passports which are apparently big on the black market now.

Pretty awesome that the countries with western civilizations are the ones who "must" take these people in or are always encouraged to be more "multicultural." That's rather interesting, isn't it?

 

[KopiKat]

Not sure If your being a wiseass or not. Just trying to add something other than Kim Davis, your party bad my party good, God is dead, wash, rinse, repeat...

wasn't trying to smart off one iota. Thought you made some interesting observations - obvious that you've been following the Iran-nuke deal. And yes, there's always more conditions than what's on the surface.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Interesting read about where a lot of migrants end up in the U.S. Author indicates the study shows migrants are mostly put in Republican states. Would not be surprised if true.

http://www.infowars.com/exclusive-obama-admin-resettling-refugees-in-republican-states/

 

[Deeeefense]

That didn't take long....what's the o/u on when Iran gets a nuke again? 6.5 years?

What's the O/U on how long it takes for Iran to get a nuke without this deal? 6 - 12 months by most experts estimates.

Any options we have on the table now will still be there in 6.5 years or 65 years.

 

[ymmot31]

 

[ymmot31]