Top story: the Left only likes some women
The Left, including the media Left, isn’t angry or upset by Sarah Palin. They’re confused by her. She doesn’t fit in their weltanschauung, and they’re not willing to adjust it for the reality of her. Whatever you think of her politics, you have to admit that she’s broken most of the commandments of the god Polis. As Victor David Hanson suggests, “[W]e should all at least grant that Palin is intrinsically bright, energetic, savvy, and independent to have come this far at all, given the slanted and insider rules of the game she’s in.”
Sarah Palin is the emblem of what feminism was supposed to be all about: an unafraid, independent, audacious woman, who soared on her own merits without the aid of a patriarchal jumpstart, high-brow matrimonial tutelage and capital, and old-boy liaisons and networking.
Instead this entire sorry episode of personal invective against, and jealousy toward, Sarah Palin is surreal. Given the rising backlash, Palin Derangement Syndrome may prove to be the one thing, fairly or not, that sinks Barack Obama.
After all, even Oprah is acknowledging that she’d be a terrific guest, but is refusing to do an interview with her before the election. We wouldn’t want people thinking she was “endorsing” a candidate.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top217 Comments to “Top story: the Left only likes some women”
Let’s not go overboard on Ms. Palin. There still could be skeletons in her closet.
Besides if we fawn over her we are no better than the wine-and-cheese liberals who fawn over Obama without really knowing anything about him.
Report comment to moderator
The funny thing is, I know quite a few women just like Sarah Palin. They’re strong, independent, unafraid, and able to juggle multiple children and other responsibilities all at once. But they also are driven by their faith in Jesus Christ, so they have their priorities in line (just like Palin).
The more the Leftists (in the MSM and without) bash Governor Palin, the more endearing she will become to women of faith who are inspired by “McBrilliant’s” VP choice.
Report comment to moderator
“Let’s not go overboard on Ms. Palin. There still could be skeletons in her closet.”
Oh no. Dear me, no! That would never do. Let’s not get excited about the VP candidate, despite the fact that besides Palin, there’s nothing else encouraging about the whole campaign…
Let’s be doubtful and slanderous instead.
Report comment to moderator
The problem is that heretofore, the only female candidates offered to women have been the ones made in the mold of our mothers’ feminism: the shrill invective of the 70s. Feminism has grown up and unfortunately for the left, their brand of feminism hasn’t.
For the first time since I can remember, one of the parties has put forward a candidate that speaks to me and my issues, not my mother and her issues. The left is just miffed that they didn’t think of it first. Of course, it never occured to them that not all feminists aren’t angry. We are friends with our husbands and our marriages; we don’t see than as oppressors. Our children are not inconveniences to be gotten rid of or to be raised by others while we’re out fulfilling ourselves. We have figured out that it’s not all about us. We can be moms and we can have careers and we can (gasp!) give up those same careers and still be fulfilled by our husbands and our families, and some of us do both, but it’s our choice. The difference is we attend conservative churches, and we haven’t thrown God out along with our marriages and our children as some in the old school of feminism have done. We looked at that and said, “there’s got to be a better way,” and we’ve found it. And that tweaks them.
Report comment to moderator
No, I’m angry and upset. Understanding why Sarah Palin wants to give the patriarchal authority of the state rule over women’s bodies, destroy the environment, gut education, and kill Muslims is easy.
Sarah Palin is a slanted insider! Her election as mayor was the first time the GOP had bought ads in that town, she won with establishment backing and she has always had it. She was FOR the bridge to nowhere until it got national ridicule. She hired a lobbyist as a small town mayor to bankroll millions of dollars of pork!
It’s all of you how are confused. For some reason you think a down-syndrome baby and a pregnant teenager are fix-alls for inexperience and partisanship. Have fun with that!
Report comment to moderator
Randall Hovens nails why I’m going to vote for McCain/Palin this November. He gets it.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/mccain_haters_for_mccain.html
Luke,
You have sour grapes often?
Report comment to moderator
Considering the “personal invective” that’s come from the Republicans toward Obama, I think it’s laughable for them to complain about it coming back on Palin. The Republicans play down and dirty, but they cry a river of tears when it’s done to them.
This supposed embrace of feminism by conservatives is false. It only applies specifically to Ms. Palin, not to women in general.
Report comment to moderator
Klasko: “Of course, it never occured to them that not all feminists aren’t angry.”
I enjoyed reading your fine post, especially this sentence. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head, and I look forward to hearing more from Ms. Palin.
Remember those t-shirts: “a woman’s place is in the home and the house?” Now, it’s happening and as you say, they just don’t like the choices she’s made. I don’t know how a group of people (the left) can be for choice if they won’t let a person make a choice! Or more to the point, that they don’t respect that choice.
Report comment to moderator
First I had to stop laughing so hard.
“This supposed embrace of feminism by conservatives is false. It only applies specifically to Ms. Palin, not to women in general.”
Well, there’s Klasko, and there’s me, and we’re very different people, leading very different lives, but we’re in agreement. And surprise, surprise, women like us are all over the country. Women have been waiting for a woman leader who isn’t angry, doesn’t hate men, doesn’t hate children, doesn’t hate the home, but wants more for her family and the rest of the country. Sarah Palin is that woman — whether she wins this time around or not. She exists, and despite what some others believe, so do the rest of us. I might take exception to the word “feminist” being applied to me, but as long as it is modified with the word “conservative,” I’ll accept it.
Report comment to moderator
There’s only one group of people that feminists hate more than men; women who don’t hate and kill children like they do. I happen to love and speak up for children, therefore one feminist actually said right to my face that I am not actually a woman. I would have been angry for her, if I wasn’t so overcome with pity for her.
The feminists I know would rather have a man in power than a woman who doesn’t support baby-murder.
Report comment to moderator
MIM, thank you for the link. I especially liked the last line.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with NJL – I’m a Conservative Feminist. That’s almost an oxymoron.
We’ve coined a new phrase – you heard it here first, folks!!
Report comment to moderator
To Anlir
I realize you deal in hyperboles but what “personal invectives” have been used against Obama?
Report comment to moderator
In other words our women have been waiting for the epitomy of a real feminist- one who really knows what it means to be a woman. And I think you find that in Sarah Palin.
I’ve been looking at the numbers of viewers who tuned in to watch Sarah’s speech. It’s quite impressive at nearly 40 million viewers.
I am really having a hard time seeing how that Democrats and Liberals are spinning this choice as a mistake. Especially given that McCain is now in a dead heat with Obama. The Obama worship is wearing a little thin lately… If Obama doesn’t start pushing a positive message and quit whining soon he’s going to tank.
Report comment to moderator
NJL,
Feminism is a movement against sexism and sexist oppression. You might not, but I CERTAINLY take issue with it being applied to you or to Sarah Palin. Their is no such thing as a “feminist for life” or a “conservative feminist.” You had best stick to railing against the feminist agenda, because it includes irrevocably universal health care, equal work for equal pay mandated by the state not the market, freedom of choice, anti-racism, pro-union et al. In this instance my usual post-structuralism does not apply. It is our word and I’m hoping we will fight you for it.
P.S. – I am a feminist and a man! I’m not self hating; I save that for the Republican gay guys like Larry Craig.
P.P.S- MiM, I enjoy (on a strictly culinary level) sour grapes very much.
Report comment to moderator
You can add me to the list with Klasko and NJL. I am not a stay at home/homeschooling mother and I am not an attorney…I am right straight down the middle of the road. I do not hate homosexuals. I am against abortion (although I did say in the discussion about Bristol Palin that if my daughter came home pregnant it might just flit through my brain that no one would ever have to know). I love men…I just don’t like most of them right now. Don’t need one, especially since I learned to take out my own garbage and my father had forethought to buy a really nice lawn tractor that runs of straigh gasoline. I would have loved to have more children but God only gave me one. I faced the fact when I was pregnant that she may have Downs Syndrome. I am thankful that she didn’t, but when I saw her bat the needle with her little 18 week old hands on a sonogram machine I knew no matter what she was getting a chance, no matter who I had to fight for it. I am one of the “fall through the cracks” people I don’t make enough money right now to support myself to my standard of living. I look at my check before taxes and after taxes and get sick to my stomach. I also make too much to get any help from the government. I am looking for a change and I think McCain/Palin can deliver what I am looking for. Sometimes I share too much of my personal story on here and for those of you who find it boring I do apologize. I also cannot believe that Oprah won’t have Palin on her show.
Report comment to moderator
“I am thankful that she didn’t, but when I saw her bat the needle with her little 18 week old hands on a sonogram machine I knew no matter what she was getting a chance, no matter who I had to fight for it.”
And you didn’t have to fight anyone for it, Kim. Cause you live in the USA, where Roe v. Wade protects your right to choose when and how you will bear children. No public agency will ever step in and force a US American woman into an abortion. We’ll never have a 1 child policy, because we have Roe v. Wade.
Report comment to moderator
“I look at my check before taxes and after taxes and get sick to my stomach.”
Since I’m guessing you are not in the top 5% of income earners, Obama will cut your taxes more than McCain. Could you use another 1K a year?
McCain will continue spending 10 Billion a month in Iraq, barrowed from China. And if McCain-Palin get their way, you won’t have to worry about any moral dilemma should your daughter get pregnant before she’s ready, because neither you nor her will have ANY say in the matter, even if she’s raped!
Report comment to moderator
Luke,
Prithee, how is “irrevocably universal health care” or a “pro-union” position related to a fight against sexism and sexist oppression?
You described a standard liberal/socialist agenda; why bother with the “feminist” term if “liberal” or “socialist” will suffice?
Report comment to moderator
Man, homosexuals sure do love abortion.
Report comment to moderator
#4 Klasko,
Some of us are old enough to remember that the original feminists were just like and supposed to be – little Palin’s. After the woman’s movement was underway the women of the left hijacked it with their insane ‘Feminazi’ ideology making it into the mess it became – as it always does when the left takes control of anything. The original feminists got out as fast as they could because the movement went off in a direction 180 degrees from what it was founded on.
With a little luck, the real feminists, like Palin, will be able to take their movement back, or better yet start a new one since the original is too morally, ideologically and character corrupt to fix, and be able to realize what they had all dreamed and prayed for so long ago. Real feminism was put back decades by lefty Feminazis that hijacked the movement just like civil rights and economic rights of minorities have been put back decades by the Socialistic and Marxist whack jobs of the left.
In both cases, the left has claimed that they were ones who were looking out for their poor victimized constituencies of blacks and women but in reality they were just slave masters who talked big talk and did nothing while keeping their slaves in check and subservient. The left was doing all the discrimination and victimizing then and now. They are the only ones that discriminate now these are just a few of the many examples of it.
Those are the facts and they just keep getting in the way of the left – just like …..eeerrrr…..Palin does.
Report comment to moderator
Luke – Roe v. Wade did nothing to ensure that we would not have a 1 child policy. Roe v. Wade did nothing to ensure that no public agency will ever step in to force any woman in the US into an unwanted abortion. You are using scare tactics. A repeal of Roe v. Wade would have absolutely NO effect on those 2 situations you mentioned, and to link them is absurd. No one in the government will ever force any woman in this country to limit their children to 1 or force any woman in this country to have an unwanted abortion, even if Roe v. Wade were overturned and you know it.
Report comment to moderator
because neither you nor her will have ANY say in the matter, even if she’s raped!
Not just raped. Even if she’s dying she won’t be able to obtain an abortion. The Republican Platform explicitly says no abortions period – not even to save the life of the mother. Under their platform, a doctor would have to tell a woman who’s dying that he cannot lift a finger to save her life and he has to let her die. How much more “Orwellian” can you get – “pro-life” means letting women die.
Report comment to moderator
On the topic of how the old-school feminists really “missed it”:
I’m enjoying a good book penned by Tom Brokaw. He has interview vignettes of various semi-prominent folks who lived thru and were in some part changed by how they experienced the 60s.
A female physician who went to med school in the early 70s heaps deserved scorn on the Steinem-style feminists, ie those who celebrated abortion as liberation from marital imprisonment etc. The doctor’s remarks were significant; as a woman entering what had been primarily a male profession she epitomized the message of women shattering barriers/glass ceilings etc.
But any gals who venture into disciplines or careers where women have not been prevalent will only be celebrated if they join in the feminist shrieks against maternity, firearms, and Jesus.
Feminists will never celebrate a mom of 5 who is Christian and belongs to the NRA. Not the right kind of woman pioneer I’m afraid
Report comment to moderator
Funny how Luke and Anlir are so direly concerned at the prospect of thousands of women dying because they can’t get abortions if the GOP wins, and yet thousands of women are dying from being infected with HIV from their bisexual “down low” husbands and boyfriends, and they never seem to get around to worrying about that.
Gosh, I wonder why?
Report comment to moderator
Kim- “I look at my check before taxes and after taxes and get sick to my stomach.”
If you earn less than $111,645 a year you will see more of your paycheck under Obama than McCain.
McCain’s cut is intended to benefit those who make more than $111,646 a year the most. You do really well under McCain if your job pays 2.87 million or more a year. (remember he defines “rich” as making $5 million a year.)
Report comment to moderator
To be fair, McCain wanted exceptions in the Republican Platform for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. But the anti-choice extremists said “No way, no how”.
Report comment to moderator
Llama – I would be proud to be a member of the Conservative Feminist movement the way the original women intended it to be before it was hijacked by the left. I would be proud to be a Conservative Feminist.
Conservative Feminists for Sarah Palin!
Report comment to moderator
Feminism is no longer a dirty word?
Report comment to moderator
Again with the scare tactics, Anlir – You presume to speak for people against whom you rail regularly with sweeping generalizations. Really.
Report comment to moderator
The Republican Platform explicitly says no abortions period – not even to save the life of the mother.
Where exactly does it say this?
McCain wanted exceptions in the Republican Platform for rape, incest, and the life of the mother.
Absolutely there should be an exception for the life of the mother, but why the others? Or how about an easier question… Who is more to blame: the baby resulting from consensual sex or the baby resulting from rape?
Report comment to moderator
How much more “Orwellian” can you get – “pro-life” means letting women die.
Just to clarify…do you seriously think pro-lifers value the life of the baby MORE THAN the life of the mother?
Maybe I’m just ignorant on this one. Are there any pro-lifers here that think the unborn baby’s life is more important than the life of the mother?
Report comment to moderator
And Anlir, if you’re so all fired worried about women’s health, and women dying, how come you’re never railing against your fellow same sex enthusiasts who go home and give their wives/girlfriends the HIV bug?
Report comment to moderator
Obama will cut your taxes more than McCain.
You left out the part about Obama’s tax hikes on businesses that will force layoffs and lower wages.
So really, what’s the purpose of lower taxes on the middle class if their paycheck is lower to begin with, or worse, they don’t even have a pay check?
Report comment to moderator
I also cannot believe that Oprah won’t have Palin on her show.
Because Kim, Oprah doesn’t want to use her show to endorse a particular candidate. Well, except for that whole Obama appearance…
Report comment to moderator
My favorite news quotes vis a vis Palin (as a woman)…
“Phyllis Schlafly, only younger”
“Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton.”
“Twice the man Obama is” (Limbaugh, of course)
“To vote in protest [over Hillary's dem loss] for McCain/Palin would be like saying, “Somebody stole my shoes, so I’ll amputate my legs.”
“So far, the major new McCain supporter that Palin has attracted is James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Of course, for Dobson, “women are merely waiting for their husbands to assume leadership,” so he may be voting for Palin’s husband.”
“Thanks to the level of general esteem that greeted [Palin's] ascent to the podium, it seems we’ve all got to celebrate the fact that America’s Hottest Governor (Princess of the Fur Rendezvous 1983, Miss Wasilla 1984) could speak at all. Could there be a more thoroughgoing humiliation for America’s women?”
————-
“Why does this woman – who to some of us seems as fake as they can come, with her delicate infant son hauled out night after night under the klieg lights and her pregnant teenage daughter shamelessly instrumentalized for political purposes — deserve, to a unique extent among political women, to rank as so “real”?
Because the Republicans, very clearly, believe that real people are idiots. This disdain for their smarts shows up in the whole way they’ve cast this race now, turning a contest over economic and foreign policy into a culture war of the Real vs. the Elites. It’s a smoke and mirrors game aimed at diverting attention from the fact that the party’s tax policies have helped create an elite that’s more distant from “the people” than ever before. And from the fact that the party’s dogged allegiance to up-by-your-bootstraps individualism — an individualism exemplified by Palin, the frontierswoman who somehow has managed to “balance” five children and her political career with no need for support — is leading to a culture-wide crack-up.
Real people, the kind of people who will like and identify with Palin, they clearly believe, are smart, but not too smart, and don’t talk too well, dropping their “g”s, for example, and putting tough concepts like “vice president” in quotation marks.
“As for that ‘V.P.’ talk all the time … I tell ya, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me, What is it exactly that the ‘VP’ does every day?” Palin asked host Lawrence Kudlow on CNBC sometime before her nomination. “I’m used to bein’ very productive and workin’ real hard in an administration and we want to make sure that that ‘V.P.’ slot would be a fruitful type of position.”
And, I think, they find her acceptably “real,” because Palin’s not intimidating, and makes it clear that she’s subordinate to a great man.”
——————————————————————-
Whoo-eeh – them paper writers shore dew go on and on
Report comment to moderator
Are there any pro-lifers here that think the unborn baby’s life is more important than the life of the mother?
I can’t exactly speak for mothers, but the mother herself might think that about her unborn baby’s life.
Report comment to moderator
We’ve seen what the Bush Tax Cuts did…. yikes
Report comment to moderator
While Obama’s current proposal may initially lower my taxes more than McCain’s proposal would, I bet Obama’s proposal leaves me with a net loss of money after he gets through raising payroll taxes, capital gains, etc.
Anybody who thinks capital gains taxes should be raised obviously isn’t planning very hard for retirement.
Report comment to moderator
““To vote in protest [over Hillary's dem loss] for McCain/Palin would be like saying, “Somebody stole my shoes, so I’ll amputate my legs.”
Report comment to moderator
Many women, and I’m one of them have held professional positions without much difficulty – I’m a conservative Believer as well. Conservatives HAVE embraced women who have careers, but not the women who ridicule men, and make a mockery of feminism – There’s a big difference between a liberal woman who demands everything from a soap box, bullies other women around her and a woman who hasn’t forgotten she IS a woman, a real woman –
The aging feminists of the past, had one thing in mind and that was to compete with men, and win – In fact many of them disliked men, and made it obvious –
Sarah Palin has brought a fresh bloom to conservative women everywhere. She represents a woman who is energetic, passionate, and loving – a good wife and mother, interested in those around her, wanting to share her TALENTS, to honor the LORD.
Maybe for the very FIRST TIME, liberal women and men alike are looking upon a woman who is accomplished, a strong Believer in Jesus Christ, striving to use her talents as the LORD leads her. This special woman is also beautiful, and in love with her husband. This folks is a combination which the world is beginning to see first hand –
I don’t care for the term ‘feminist’ – I hope another can be substituted -
Report comment to moderator
Lance, it’s really quite simple. Conservative only rail against some-feminist dislike of sexual when sexual difference advantages men. Add any kind of economic x-factor to the equation and you are all more than happy to treat men and women as perfectly interchangeable. Since women are by far the largest users of the health care system, ideological positions stressing the burdens of individuals over group ethics assure that those payed the least income by markets also pay the most to remain healthy.
Klasko, it’s improbable; I’ll give you that. But Roe v. Wade makes it constitutionally impossible as well as lavishing a million other benefits on you and your babies. We are talking about basic bodily autonomy, and it didn’t exist in the constitution before Roe. Roe v. Wade made health care in America BETTER!
Godlumps, lets dole out the specifics here.
Kim, I’m going to take a guess and say you’re income is between 18 & 37K. Which means that under McCain’s plan your taxes would be cut by .7% and under Obama’s they would be cut by 3.6%. That would equate to you having between $522 and $1073 more for your daughter if Obama wins the presidency than if McCain wins.
More resources on Obama economic policy: http://tinyurl.com/55rrdh
What I like about this article is it doesn’t just give you numbers to compare. It interviews Obama and others familiar to figure out how Obama thinks about the economy. He’s a thoughtful and very bright listener who has been surrounded by differing opinions his whole life. He is a liberal who spent time at the Chicago School (home base of economic conservatism) and believes in the utility of markets and the state! He has a well polished nuanced understanding that can help everyone! Especially you, Kim!
Report comment to moderator
This special woman is also beautiful, and in love with her husband.
Oops – you mean her wife. Todd’s the helpmeet of the family.
Report comment to moderator
#23 “The Republican Platform explicitly says no abortions period – not even to save the life of the mother.”
Anlir,
I was surprised by this statement, as most if not all conservatives I know would consider it the mother’s decision whether to risk her life for the sake of the child, and would want the doctor free to do what he needed to do to save the mother’s life, so long as the mother wanted it that way.
I looked up the Republican party platform (which, oddly enough, I realized I had never read before or even realized I could easily find the text of the platform to read it). I plan to read it in its entirety later, but for now I did a search on the word “abortion” to see what it says. I found the following:
oppose using public revenues for organizations that promote or perform abortions.
lament that judges have denied the people their right to set abortion policies in the states.
oppose school-based clinics that provide referrals, counseling, and related services for abortion and contraception.
parental rights to consent to medical treatment for their children including mental health treatment, drug treatment, alcohol treatment, and treatment involving pregnancy, contraceptives and abortion.
prohibitions against the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion.
infants who are born alive during an abortion should receive all treatment and care that is provided to all newborn infants and not be neglected and left to die
Every effort should be made to work with women considering abortion to enable and empower them to choose life
So the platform says abortions should be paid for by private parties, abortion law should be set by the states, school clinics don’t provide them, parents should consent for minors to get abortions, a baby that is born or partly born should not be killed, and women considering abortion should see how giving birth would be a better choice. Where do you see anything restricting what a doctor can do to save a woman’s life?
Report comment to moderator
Lance #37,
I know a woman who was advised to have an abortion in order to be able to have chemo for breast cancer. (The chemo would have certainly ijured the baby.) She declined the abortion, and put off the chemo till the baby was born. She’s alive and well.
However, I would never tell a woman this was a good idea. She has to choose for herself. But I do consider this woman both brave and faithful.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria – Maybe for the very FIRST TIME, liberal women and men alike are looking upon a woman who is accomplished, a strong Believer in Jesus Christ, striving to use her talents as the LORD leads her.
For the very FIRST TIME?. Isn’t that rather insulting to other women believers?
Well love is certainly blind, and apparently, Victoria’s in love!
Report comment to moderator
A capital gains tax cut isn’t likely to benefit or hurt for people living paycheck to paycheck.
Report comment to moderator
“Well love is certainly blind, and apparently, Victoria’s in love!”
It’s a ‘new’ love, and we’ve all been in love like that where it starts off great.
Report comment to moderator
If Obama cuts taxes for people, he raises them for business, puts small business out of business, and those that survive have to raise the cost of their product, which we can pay for with our reduction in taxes courtesy of Obama. That’s how Obama’s “tax cut” works.
Report comment to moderator
“Under their platform, a doctor would have to tell a woman who’s dying that he cannot lift a finger to save her life and he has to let her die. How much more “Orwellian” can you get – “pro-life” means letting women die.”
Ummmm…wow…
Do you watch House? There was an episode about a pregnant single woman in which Dr. House wanted to kill the “tumor” (referencing the baby) in order to save her life. The woman refused. House ended up saving both of them.
And thats my point. A doctor’s responsbility should be to do everything he can to save BOTH mother and child. Not pick or chose, or differ the choice.
No conservative or christian advocates killing the mother. Thats poor logic.
Report comment to moderator
“We’ve seen what the Bush Tax Cuts did…. yikes”
I dont know if your in the right tax bracket so maybe it didnt affect you, but I was and it was nice having an extra 600 bucks for starters
Report comment to moderator
We are talking about basic bodily autonomy, and it didn’t exist in the constitution before Roe.
You are aware, of course, that it isn’t exactly IN the constitution now, aren’t you? Are you admitting here that the SCOTUS invented Roe principles out of their own preferences, and not from the constitution itself, or am I misreading you?
Report comment to moderator
Spin – 45
We’ve never had a strong Believer running for one of the highest offices in this country – So YES it is the first time.
Sarah Palin has overnight, become one of the BEST EXAMPLES of a woman who exhibts what men and women admire -
Report comment to moderator
NJL – 48 – I’m amazed that people cannot grasp your simple explanation, its been given hundreds of times, but it escapes almost ALL the liberals -
Report comment to moderator
Abortion really is the sticking point and is a completely corrosive subject to rational thought for many people.
Why is that?
Because 40 million abortions have taken place in our country. The numbers of people whose lives have been touched by abortion is even larger when you consider the father of the fetus, parents of both mother and father of the aborted child, siblings, grandparents, the whole shebang.
Many, of course, never knew of the aborted child, but they’re lives often are affected because many women never get over it.
Pro-life counselors have been trained for years to watch for Post-Abortion-Syndrome (which many deny occurs; that’s not what the research said when Koop did the studies–there wasn’t sufficient evidence at the time to make a determination). Post-Abortion-Syndrome in part means the woman can’t accept her choice to terminate her child’s life was a poor decision. For that reason, many devote themselves to ensure other women will be able to make the same choice, thus validating their own decision.
Can you see how convoluted and heart-breaking this is?
That’s, in part, why anti-abortion folks are treated so virulently–and women who depart from the “official” “feminist” “party line” are traitors.
It’s not about truth. It’s not about what’s best for a woman. It’s about politics and the inability for some to admit they’ve made a mistake, sinned, erred, whatever word you want to use, and need justification for their horrific choice.
That’s why so many of us working at crisis pregnancy centers try to reach out with love and understanding and not be offended or nasty in return. These are hurting souls and they need our help, not our blanket condemnation.
Report comment to moderator
Luke – How is healthcare better when abortion clinics escape the regulation – due to “privacy concerns” – that every medical clinic in the same grid square must submit to? Oh, wait – that’s so they can cover up the ones they botch. We hear “safe and rare,” but abortion is not as safe as the pro-aborts would have us believe, and informed consent doesn’t always happen. Rare? Not when it’s such a big business for providers.
“…and it didn’t exist in the constitution before Roe.”
You are absolutely right! It wasn’t in the constitution, as you so astutely pointed out, because it was legislated from the bench, and not by the lawmakers whose purview it is.
All Roe v. Wade did was make it legal for me to murder my unborn child. Please don’t try to candy coat it.
Report comment to moderator
Read page 52 of the Republican Platform dealing with abortion. There are no exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother. John McCain specifically asked for those exceptions to be included. The anti-choice extremists said “no” and they were left out.
Report comment to moderator
Of course liberal Feminists don’t support all female politicians simply because of their gender. They will obviously support only those politicians who further their ideology.
Feminists have made Pro-choice a foundation for their politics will certainly reject a Pro-life female candidate. I don’t see anything unusual about this.
Report comment to moderator
Now the National Right To Life is condeming James Dobson for endorsing McCain/Palin.
Report comment to moderator
“Read page 52 of the Republican Platform dealing with abortion. There are no exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother. John McCain specifically asked for those exceptions to be included. The anti-choice extremists said “no” and they were left out.”
And they should be left out. Two wrongs dont make a right.
Report comment to moderator
Kim, I know exactly where you are, and I want you to know that I am very, very proud of you! No one wants you to succeed in your new job more than I do. As long as you have a roof over your head, food on the table, God has provided what you need. And we can’t ask for more.
I must laugh at Luke’s post addressed to me. (I imagine that avatar of his stomping his feet while he types.) Luke, dear, I have not married, I’ve gone to graduate school. Most women think I’m the “usual” definition of a feminist — until I open my mouth. What you, and others like you, can’t stand is that women throughout the country took the feminist mantra — that a girl should be able to do what she wants — and put that into practice in a way that doesn’t comport with your death culture and socialism.
I have never railed against equal pay for equal work — ever! That is just the most preposterous thing I have read in a long time. The real truth is you and people like you say they believe in choice, but when a woman like Palin makes a choice you don’t like, she’s … well, she’s a Christian.
And yes, Spinny, for the FIRST TIME on a national level, right up there in your face.
Report comment to moderator
It doesn’t matter so much whether the Republican platform allows exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother. McCain is his own man. If he is elected, his opinion is the only one that matters when choosing supreme court justices. By extension, should McCain retire, Palin’s opinion would be what mattered. She would be her own woman, independent to decide what qualification she set for Supreme Court Justices.
Of course, they would all have to be confirmed by the Senate. That might not be an easy task for a Republican president in a Democratically controlled senate. Especially if the Democrats smelled Roe vs Wade decisions in the future.
Report comment to moderator
“McCain is his own man.”
Tom Ridge says John Bush is his own man too.
Report comment to moderator
The CCR’s tied the Democratic Platform to Obama, so it’s only fair that the Republican Platform be tied to John McCain. Irregardless of John McCain’s personal beliefs, he is required to run on, support, and promote the Republican Platform. If he’s such a “maverick” why didn’t he fight the anti-choice extremists?
Report comment to moderator
Thorn 59
Do I understand correctly that you would let the mother die rather than save her if the only way to save her was to abort a fetus?
Report comment to moderator
Well if it isn’t Oprah and her statement:
OPRAH REFUSES: PALIN WON’T BE ON
Here’s an excerpt -
“Oprah Winfrey may have introduced Democrat Barack Obama to the women of America — but the talkshow queen is not rushing to embrace the first woman on a Republican presidential ticket!”
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3os.htm
_____________Why would that surprise us? A liberal can’t stand the idea of a conservative woman running for Vice President -
Report comment to moderator
So now we have COMPETITION -
Report comment to moderator
If Obama cuts taxes for people, he raises them for business, puts small business out of business,
FYI, Obama also cuts taxes on small businesses –
McCain & Co. make false claims about the effect on small business.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/mccains_small-business_bunk.html
Report comment to moderator
A liberal can’t stand the idea of a conservative woman running for Vice President –
Ummmm – sorry to point out the obvious, but gender doesn’t particularly matter here – liberals don’t want conservatives in office any more than conservatives want liberals in office. Duh!
Report comment to moderator
Here is indicted congressman Tom DeLay’s endorsement of Sarah.
Report comment to moderator
Here is indicted senator Ted Stevens endorsement of Sarah.
Report comment to moderator
What is all this crap about CCR’s demanding that Oprah put someone one her show? I thought the CCR’s were opposed to the “Fairness Doctrine”. Or are y’all attempting to re-calibrate your moral compass? (Hint: you can’t re-calibrate a broken compass).
Report comment to moderator
Still searching for Jack Abramoff’s endorsement. The lobbyist she hired worked to Jack, and he is expected to endorse her too.
The crooks love Sarah!
Report comment to moderator
71-
Report comment to moderator
Do I understand correctly that you would let the mother die rather than save her if the only way to save her was to abort a fetus?
It should be the mother’s decision, Lumpy. It’s called “freedom of choice.”
Report comment to moderator
“Oprah Winfrey may have introduced Democrat Barack Obama to the women of America — but the talkshow queen is not rushing to embrace the first woman on a Republican presidential ticket!”
I have new found respect for Oprah. She refuses to be bullied into pandering to the Celebrity Sarah fan club.
Report comment to moderator
Hmm, Bill O enthusiastically invited Obama on his program, yet the “O” refuses to allow Palin on her show. “Fair and balanced,” indeed.
Report comment to moderator
SPINY
The libs can’t stand Palin, she’s too smart, accomplished, and she’s beautiful – Liberal women have nightmares over women like Palin and so do the men, it’s in their genes’
Report comment to moderator
She [Oprah] refuses to be bullied into pandering to the Celebrity Sarah fan club.
Yet Oprah enthusiastically is drawn into the Celebrity Obama Fan Club. Sigh . . .
Report comment to moderator
Outkast,
Oprah’s afraid of Palin, if she weren’t she’d invite her on the show. Palin’s to quick and TOO SMART – if Oprah said or did anything out of line, it would be FRONT PAGE and center for the ole gal -
Report comment to moderator
Outkast -”It should be the mother’s decision, Lumpy. It’s called “freedom of choice.”
According to Anlir, page 52 of the Republican Platform dealing with abortion says there are no exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother.
Do you have other information Outkast?
Report comment to moderator
What is all this crap about CCR’s demanding that Oprah put someone one her show?
Is anyone demanding it? I know I’m not. It’s Oprah’s show and she should do whatever she wants.
It’s just interesting that Palin is exactly the type of person Oprah would normally have on her show, but she just can’t do it because she’s already endorsed someone.
By all means, don’t put Palin on your show. She’s free to make all of the bad business moves she wants.
Report comment to moderator
The libs can’t stand Palin, she’s too smart, accomplished, and she’s beautiful
Which is pretty much the same exact thing liberals used to say about conservatives vis a vis Hillary.
Report comment to moderator
Obama is more mainstream America than Sarah.
Report comment to moderator
“By all means, don’t put Palin on your show. She’s free to make all of the bad business moves she wants.’
Oprah is putting the country ahead of her own ambition.
Report comment to moderator
It’s not true that “The Left Only Likes Women.” See our homosexual posters for Exhibits A, B, C and D for examples.
Report comment to moderator
NT,
I don’t remember ANYONE saying Hillary was accomplished and beautiful – she was a President’s wife, that’s how she got to be a Senator, LOL – and all those black pantsuits -
Report comment to moderator
“It should be the mother’s decision, Lumpy. It’s called “freedom of choice.””
Outkast-
Are you pro-choice?
Report comment to moderator
I don’t remember ANYONE saying Hillary was accomplished and beautiful – she was a President’s wife, that’s how she got to be a Senator, LOL – and all those black pantsuits
I didn’t say you remembered it. Nor did I say I share the sentiments. I simply said that they used to say it, which is the truth.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, Lumpy I’m for the right of the baby to choose whether it will live or die. And I’m sure the baby would choose LIFE every time.
Report comment to moderator
Outkast, what did you mean when you said, “It should be the mother’s decision, Lumpy. It’s called “freedom of choice.”
Report comment to moderator
NT,
Well here we go again -
Find an article that says Hillary is beautiful – Liberal feminists can’t stand a beautiful woman, it’s against everything they burned their ‘bras’ for! LOL
Report comment to moderator
Thank for the link, MIM! Excellent. Nixon was “before my time,” so that part was eye-opening. (Ford-Carter is the first presidential election I remember.)
Report comment to moderator
Hillary looked beautiful tonight…
Report comment to moderator
Oprah is putting the country ahead of her own ambition.
You’re exactly right. Oprah is torn in a lose-lose situation. She knows that a lot of her fans will be upset for refusing to have Palin on her show, but at the same time she can’t bring herself to do something that would hurt Obama’s chances.
Report comment to moderator
A true feminist would have something besides “Jail!” to say to the 90% of women who chose to terminate their pregnancy when they learn their fetus has Down syndrome. Palin had the status and the resources (i.e. the Republican welfare state of Alaska) to assist her and to ameliorate the fate of the Down syndrome child. Probably most American women don’t. In a real sense, Palin had a choice they don’t, and she blames them first. That’s not feminism, it’s smugness, if not hypocrisy, becuase her party believes in leaving women’s medical care up to the kindness of strangers while taking away their choice about what they carry in their uterus.
Report comment to moderator
94-
I agree. It shows great character to put all that money aside and support what you know is best for the country.
Report comment to moderator
Re: 64
Do we abort Luke and Leia Skywalker to save Natalie Portman?
Post 49 referenced your scenario. If you havent watched the House episode, you should. I dont let anybody die, nor should any doctor. Their job is to protect BOTH lives. Its not their job or mine to tell who lives and dies.
I imagine youd be hard pressed to find any actual example of fetus abortion being the only way to save a mother.
Report comment to moderator
Palin also line item vetoed a bunch of funding pregnant teen housing.
Get beat and raped by your step father and beome pregnant, just stay at home?
Report comment to moderator
There you go, Vicky, in #93.
Thanks, Godlumps. I refuse to play Victoria’s game most of the time. And I was referring to the early 1990s, when Hillary was quite a bit more attractive than she is today. Conservatives hated her, and liberals said it was because they hated the idea of a strong, accomplished, beautiful woman. It was a constant refrain, as pretty much everyone who was politically aware at that time knows.
Report comment to moderator
Top story: The Right only likes one woman!
Report comment to moderator
Ah! Theo makes the case for divided government in post #61. How refreshing!
Spinny writes: “…but gender doesn’t particularly matter here – liberals don’t want conservatives in office any more than conservatives want liberals in office. Duh!”
Well, then, what’s all this stuff about Palin not being able to do the job and have kids? Duh!
And then there’s Obama is mainstream. Really? How many Americans spend time with the likes of Rev. Wright? Ayers?
I agree with Victoria regarding Oprah! But the mere fact that she refuses indicates the fear they all have of Palin. Can you imagine an ad mocking Oprah for being such a coward? I can. Oprah’s refusal is good enough for me. I can see Palin elsewhere. In Oprah’s defense: can you imagine how she’ll tank if she does put Palin on and McCain/Palin wins? She’ll be blamed.
And Victoria is right about beautiful women. Less beautiful women (liberal or not!) have real problems with beautiful women. Real big problems. Always have, always will.
Report comment to moderator
The most crowded event at the Republican Convention was the men’s bathroom stall at the Minneapolis airport. That’s why the Right only likes one woman!
Report comment to moderator
Lump: By “freedom of choice” I mean the baby should be considered in the decision. And if the baby were to have a choice, I’m sure he/she would never choose to have his/her skull cracked open and brains vacuumed out.
Report comment to moderator
NJL
You bring up a good point – Oprah will be labeled a ‘COWARD’ if she doesn’t invite Palin on her show – she’ll deserve the label, won fair and square -
Report comment to moderator
Scroop 95-
Pregnancies aren’t always convenient. A Downs syndrome baby will likely demand additional resources, but that’s the risk that having sex brings. And before you suggest such, a baby is never punishment. I frankly don’t care what the circumstances are for the conception of a baby. It’s still a person as far as I’m concerned. It’s not the baby’s fault that the mother can’t afford to raise it.
As for medical care, I’d love to see every mother have access to good medicine, but the minute that medicine becomes a RIGHT rather than a PRIVILEGE, the quality of that medicine drops for everyone. As with any service, if it’s something that government is required to provide, it’s quality will greatly suffer as opposed to a service that you have to to earn.
Report comment to moderator
Scroopy, before they could do DNA testing or sonograms, before they could “predict” that a child would have Down’s, the children were born and raised. It was done, and it was done with a lot of love.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir: “The most crowded event at the Republican Convention was the men’s bathroom stall at the Minneapolis airport. That’s why the Right only likes one woman!”
A little desperate, are we?
Report comment to moderator
Victoria, I missed your reaction to #93.
LMBO!
Report comment to moderator
Contented Joy said: There’s only one group of people that feminists hate more than men; women who don’t hate and kill children like they do.
Yeah right. I am frequently baffled by the funhouse-mirror caricatures some of the WoW faithful carry around in their heads apparently thinking they have an accurate picture.
Feminists don’t “hate and kill children,” and most of them don’t hate men. Many of them are men.
I’m really tired of seeing people with legitimate and respectable mainstream poliitical opinions reduced to such grossly inaccurate stereotypes.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, but Oprah won’t be able to live with herself if she does and Obama doesn’t win. And she’ll lose her base. Let’s leave it the way it is and work with the fear.
Report comment to moderator
Top story: The Right’s emblem of Christian womanhood is a mannequin. Pull the string, and she acts like a talking head. Ask her a question and . . . wait, you can’t ask her a question! The campaign won’t let her take questions, because she’s in use by Joe Lieberman and her Republican programmers. Besides, she’s being victimized by reporters who just don’t want to transcribe her prepared remarks.
BTW, during McCain’s speech, Palin patted her baby too quick, like she didn’t really want to be doing it. Like a replicant!
Report comment to moderator
“Feminists don’t “hate and kill children,” and most of them don’t hate men.”
If you favor partial birth abortions, in particular, and abortion on demand, you sure do hate and kill children.
“Most of them don’t hate men.” A lot of them do. I distinctly remember that part of the platform. A lot of the leading feminists who caused this mess had deep problems with their fathers, and because of that, men have been unfairly treated in the past 40 years whether you admit it or not.
Report comment to moderator
The Right claims that the Palin family is out of bounds, yet they referred to them in their speeches and paraded them repeatedly across the stage at the Republican Convention.
The Right only wishes they had a woman as influential as Oprah. You can see the jealousy and hatred dripping from their words.
Report comment to moderator
Scroopy doesn’t spend a lot of time burping babies and relieving them of gas. I can say this with certainty despite the fact that I am not a mother, merely an auntie.
Report comment to moderator
No, Anlir, even YOUR candidate, Obama, has said that the children are off limits. Get it together!
Report comment to moderator
“Of course liberal Feminists don’t support all female politicians simply because of their gender. They will obviously support only those politicians who further their ideology.”
Feminism is a MOVEMENT AGAINST SEXISM AND SEXIST OPPRESSION! When female politicians stand up for misogyny, what are feminists supposed to do?
Thorn,
Natalie Portman was going to die anyway. It wasn’t the babies killing her it was injuries inflicted by a crazed Vader (and mostly likely a “broken heart”). Plus we could just as easily assume she made her choice. But in any event, in the real world we have nothing like a “Deathstar Contingency” that seems like a realistic interest in constraining a woman’s autonomy.
Report comment to moderator
“Most of them don’t hate men.”
Remember this little feminist gem? A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.
They don’t hate men. It’s all in your head.
Report comment to moderator
“No, Anlir, even YOUR candidate, Obama, has said that the children are off limits.”
You argument has now become that our candidate has more integrity and class than yours? Fine, the force of the better arguments has won. Congratulations!
If that isn’t and accurate discription of your argument, than it seems reasonable that Anlir can agree that the children are out of bounds and still take exception to the way the Palin’s have used their pregnant daughter to motivate the right!
Actually…I think David Shuster just spoke too soon, and about the wrong politician’s daughter!
Report comment to moderator
“Remember this little feminist gem? A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.”
You think fish hate bicycles?
Report comment to moderator
Luke, when are you going to start speaking out against all your fellow same sex enthusiasts on “the down low” who go home and give their wives/girlfriends HIV?
Cat got your tongue?
Report comment to moderator
I’m ignoring you, NT, because I just can’t beat you! That’s just TOO GOOD of an argument. I just can’t compete with your indomitable intellect.
Report comment to moderator
It’s not an argument. It’s a legitimate question. You keep on going about these mythical thousands of women who are going to die if the GOP bans abortion, which is never going to happen anyway. But you never say a word about the thousands of women in this country who have been given death sentences because their husbands/boyfriends like to have sex with men on the sly.
Why don’t you speak out about that very real tragedy?
Report comment to moderator
Ok, than my answer is that it’s not a big priority for me.
Report comment to moderator
What isn’t a priorty Luke?
A man giving another man or woman HIV/AIDS?
Who’s priorty should it be?
Report comment to moderator
Exactly. When women all over America actually are dying because of men who have sex with men, and then infect them with HIV, that’s not a priority. Real women actually dying isn’t “a feminist issue” when it’s gays/bis/downlows doing the killing. But you’ll rant all day about the completely non-existent prospect of thousands of women dying from back alley abortions because of Christians.
Your parents must be real proud. Your gay lover, too.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know, ask all those Republican delegates who were hanging out in the men’s bathroom at the Minneapolis airport with Senator Larry Craig. It was the hottest ticket at the Republican Convention.
Report comment to moderator
Was Mitch McConnell there?
How about Lindsay Graham?
Maybe Patrick McHenry?
Report comment to moderator
Anlir
YOU WRITE:…. “I don’t know, ask all those Republican delegates who were hanging out in the men’s bathroom at the Minneapolis airport with Senator Larry Craig. It was the hottest ticket at the Republican Convention.”
Anlir how do you know about Republican delegates hanging out in the men’s bathroom? You might be up for libel on this one Anlir, unless of course you can prove it!
Report comment to moderator
Oh I knew granting NT that indulgence was a giant mistake. Alright, since you see fit to connect it to feminsim…this will be my LAST post concerning men on the down-low…
First I seriously question your characterization of this issue. You claim to speak of specific thousands in a situation that is not easily counted up. They are on the down-low after all! So the way your talking about it just screams PROPAGANDA piece. I think you’re crying crocodile tears! BUT…
The LGBT-social project will reduce the pressure that otherwise gay men might feel to lead secret lives with women (and likewise the other way). Those same social forces, not burdened by restrictive sexual dogma, will also make it easier for married bi men to be honest with their wives before the marriage, which is really what these couples need if they are going to make rules they can both follow. Institutional change like partner benefits will also help because lesbians and gay men won’t be forced into heterosexual facade relationships by financial circumstances. AND…
The larger social movement for awareness, prevention, and treatment of HIV infection will generally make it safer for all people having most types of sex, and if given support not opposition can reduce HIV infection at large and benefit the women you are talking about.
These movements are large social projects with benefits to lots of people, not to mention- they have great import as a feminist project.
But NO. SPECIFICALLY, targeting men on the down-low is not a high priority for me, especially for the of admonishment tactics your incredibly offensive tone implies you are advocating.
There you go.
Report comment to moderator
“You might be up for libel on this one Anlir, unless of course you can prove it!”
What makes you assume he can’t?
Report comment to moderator
Let’s see him do it – We’re all waiting for the PROOF!
Report comment to moderator
That was very moving, Luke. I feel bad about the tone I took with you earlier. Say, I know! There’s a church down the street with a Christian school, and every year their third graders put on a play based on one of their favorite books they’ve read over the summer. This year it’s E. Lynn Harris’s Invisible Life. Why don’t you attend the play as my guest?
RSVP
Report comment to moderator
Auntie, why would you need to burp a baby at 10:30 p.m.?
Report comment to moderator
The excuses offered are pathetic – HIV/AIDS will continue to spread if homosexuals don’t use protection, OR ABSTAIN from the practices –
The numbers of those with the disease are staggering, there is NO CURE.
Report comment to moderator
Moth,
Babies need to be burped after they eat – Every baby has different feeding times –
Are you having a problem with a mother holding and patting her childs back? – its done all the time
Report comment to moderator
ABC NEWS
Is Oprah Biased? Host Won’t Interview Palin
Republican VP Nominee Sarah Palin Isn’t Welcome on ‘Oprah’
By EMILY FRIEDMAN
Sept. 5, 2008
She may have let Tom Cruise jump all over her couch, but Oprah Winfrey says that Sarah Palin can’t even sit on it.
At least not until after the presidential election, that is.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=5736716&page=1
Report comment to moderator
Obama hates conservative blacks. He could only name one justice he despised. Guess who?
Gloria Steinem hates conservative women and children who choose life.
Howard Dean, the head of the DNC, hates all conservatives period.
Any Republican who achieves a liberal goal is despised by liberals.
It’s sad, because if we learned to work together we might accomplish something. Instead, the Left is “All hate, all the time”.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
LGBT people represent a very small percent of the GLOBAL population living with HIV/AIDS. But it’s good that you support safer sex practices like condoms which significantly reduce the risk of infection. Keep telling everyone you know about the importance of properly employing barrier methods and making wise choices about who to have sex with.
Look, we can agree on something!
Report comment to moderator
#136 I wanna know why she won’t have Biden on her show?
Report comment to moderator
Luke, I don’t make it my business to tell homosexuals about safe sex practices – if any homosexual is so un-educated that they haven’t realized what this disease means – how to avoid it, then it’s their loss -
Report comment to moderator
Leftists loved minority preferences, until Clarence Thomas came along.
Leftists loved welfare, until the possibility of government funding going to conservative groups became a possibility.
Leftists loved women’s rights, until Sarah Palin came along.
The times, they are a changin!
Report comment to moderator
As I said Vicky,
LGBT people are a small percentage of the GLOBAL population living with HIV/AIDS. Please tell, EVERYONE you know about the importance of staying safe.
Report comment to moderator
Luke,
You might think that HIV/AIDS is a small population in the USA, but the vast numbers, and the high cost of medical care is enormous – nothing small about it.
Estimate of AIDS Cases In U.S. Rises
New Test Places the Rate Of Infection 50 Percent Higher
By David Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 1, 2007; A01
New government estimates of the number of Americans who become infected with the AIDS virus each year are 50 percent higher than previous calculations suggested, sources said yesterday.
For more than a decade, epidemiologists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have pegged the number of new HIV infections each year at 40,000. They now believe it is between 55,000 and 60,000.
HIV infections each year 55,000 and 60,000
Report comment to moderator
Luke, I don’t instruct people on how to sin -
Report comment to moderator
Scropy asks: “Auntie, why would you need to burp a baby at 10:30 p.m.?”
I don’t know this particular baby’s feeding schedule, but even I know a baby can have a gas pocket any time of day and need to be burped.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria, it comes naturally, you know that. No instructions needed. Smirk. Smirk.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, those little ones have strange habits – we hold and comfort them – it’s just a natural built in thingy –
Report comment to moderator
Palin scared them so much, the donated 10 million dollars in a day.
Report comment to moderator
SteveG,
Almost every feminist I know does hate men, and they support killing babies in a brutal fashion – that’s the epitome of hate. These women are all leftist/socialists. These women were in the majority at university. Also, as a whole these women were angry and or depressed, certainly not contented or joyful.
However, to be fair, I do know a few who call themselves feminists who aren’t leftists. These don’t hate men, they just mistrust them. I have few feminist sisters who would never think of committing abortion.
God made us male and female on purpose, and there are blessings and peace for those who embrace His design and purpose.
Report comment to moderator
Well said, Contented-Joy!
Report comment to moderator
You don’t know the same kinds of feminists I do, then.
Report comment to moderator
Scroopy,
Babies eat every 2 to three hours. Some babies eat more often (ask me how I know!) Babies often need patted on the back.
They also spit up a lot, more when they are not patted, but they do it regardless.
Somehow, my oldest ALWAYS managed to spit up when my sister took him.
Still, you’re off on the wrong track. Any mother will tell you this.
Report comment to moderator
So, we simply define the terms to be what we want them to be. Feminists MUST believe all these things, according to Luke, and they are all highly Liberal things. sigh
I don’t really like the term anyway. It is imbued with hatred and rabid Liberalism.
But, if we can’t come with a better, I’ll take (rather begrudgingly) the title of Conservative Feminist.
Report comment to moderator
There’s an awful lot of female Conservatives. Do Anlir and Luke REALLY think we’re all misogynists, “exceptions,” and unable to think for ourselves?
Wow. They’re in for a surprise.
Report comment to moderator
Ladies,
You’ve done a fine job of standing up to the feminists and their appeasers today. Lumpy’s right for once, “feminist” is a cuss word. How about we call you the “Womenist Movement”?
Luke said;
“The LGBT-social project will reduce the pressure that otherwise gay men might feel to lead secret lives with women (and likewise the other way). Those same social forces, not burdened by restrictive sexual dogma, will also make it easier for married bi men to be honest with their wives before the marriage, which is really what these couples need if they are going to make rules they can both follow. Institutional change like partner benefits will also help because lesbians and gay men won’t be forced into heterosexual facade relationships by financial circumstances. AND…”
WOW!! I mean WOW!!! I’ve heard Anlir and your bunch often say we just want to be like straight couples and get married, and have visitation and inheritance rights. It’s only fair you say. You say you want to change the definition of marriage to include gays.
You got your way in 2 states, although one is still iffy. And yet here you come out boldly and admit that it’s much more than that you seek. Already you are seeking to add third parties to the equation? OK, let me see if I got this? We have married bi-men, with wifes, and we’ll seek a third for fun. Now does this third party get to share in these benifits as well? I mean it’s hardly fair to them if we don’t.
And you guys stand there with a straight face and say there is no slippery slope to the gay marriage issue. Yeah, right…..
Report comment to moderator
There is indeed a slippery slope, AJ, and that’s why we’re working to ensure that the one “gay” (not happy) couple that was “married” in Iowa last year finds themselves in a different situation after the next major court ruling.
Report comment to moderator
then it’s their loss
That statement sums up the self-righteous, judgmental, hate-filled attitude of the CCR’s.
Here’s the message that Jesus Christ gives to gay people: you queers deserve everything you get, including AIDS!
No wonder gay people want nothing to do with Christianity.
Report comment to moderator
A Letter to the Editor that expresses a large body of response to the Palin Speech -
To the Editor:
As an independent voter, I have been listening very carefully to the candidates. On Wednesday night, I watched the Republican convention, and I ultimately had to leave the room.
Between Rudolph W. Giuliani and Sarah Palin, the level of mockery, ridicule and poison left me almost speechless. Sadly, not only was this rhetoric acceptable, but it was also applauded and cheered.
I need not watch John McCain’s speech on Thursday night. Decision made … I need no more.
Kathy Franklin
Sparks, Md., Sept. 4, 2008
As OUTKAST or Harrison would say, “The GOP must really be runnin’ scared to be so hateful”
Report comment to moderator
53 & 81 = Oh, on a “national level” then. Why didn’t you say so in the first place?
Isn’t it great that the first time a “strong believer” is in the public limelight, she comes off as an acerbic spewer of “mockery, ridicule, and poison.” Great witness!
Report comment to moderator
p.s. A news brief of today’s McCampaigning described McCain as responding (lamely, I might add) to the new unemployment numbers while Palin “mocked Obama’s role as a community organizer.” I guess Palin will have nothing new to say until somebody writes her some new lines … they’d better do it quick.
Report comment to moderator
Here’s the Republican strategy for defending vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin from probing questions: Cast her as the victim of a media “pile-on.”
And when Palin’s supporters are pressed to explain the experience or foreign policy credentials of the Alaska governor who only obtained a passport last year, the media are accused of being sexist and demeaning to women.
Report comment to moderator
A Letter to the Editor that expresses a large body of response to the Palin Speech . . .
According to the polls, the “large body” you refer to is actually not so big?
Report comment to moderator
I hit post too soon. More of the story above:
“By saying these things are sexist, they’re hoping that the media will be paralyzed and not be able to do its job,” Joyce said. “It’s not sexist to ask about (Palin’s) experience, because she has only been governor of a very small state for only 1 1/2 years.”
Report comment to moderator
Godlumps: One more arrow in their quiver: Try to <a href=”http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439/page/1″squelch investigations.
Because conservatives and Christians are devoted to fair and thorough justice.
Report comment to moderator
Sigh.
The link from above, done correctly.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah. McCain is up big to 42.3% chance and selling for 42.3 at inTrade tonight.
Obama is down to 57.2% chance at the presidency there.
It is interesting that the inTrade market, where people buy shares toward what they believe will happen in the future, was correct on EVERY house ad senate race in the 2006 election. Better than polls or pundits.
And http://270towin.com where they base their calculations on the electoral college system we actually use in our elections, instead of national popularity contests:
Obama 84%
McCain 14%
Report comment to moderator
Good find SteveG.
Amazing how dirty they are getting,and it’s only September. Stealing Heart’s song against their wishes. Trying to quiet the information and step on an investigation to keep Sarah pure.
“Key Alaska allies of John McCain are trying to derail a politically charged investigation into Gov. Sarah Palin’s firing of her public safety commissioner in order to prevent a so-called “October surprise” that would produce embarrassing information about the vice presidential candidate on the eve of the election.
In a move endorsed by the McCain campaign Friday, John Coghill, the GOP chairman of the state House Rules Committee, wrote a letter seeking a meeting of Alaska’s bipartisan Legislative Council in order to remove the Democratic state senator in charge of the so-called “troopergate” investigation.”
Report comment to moderator
Sounds like more of the McSame John Bush as the old John Bush.
Report comment to moderator
The bi-partisan commission investigating Palin’s Troopergate scandal issued this today. They are no backing down so far.
“We also discussed and agreed amongst ourselves that no subpoena will be issued for the Governor,” said
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, R-Eagle River. “She has told the public that she intends to cooperate with
the investigation, indeed, she has told the public that she welcomes the investigation and I have every faith
that she means it. If necessary we can send Mr. Branchflower to wherever the Governor is, or she can give
her statement to him over the telephone, whatever is most convenient for her. We recognize that her
schedule is extremely busy, and we want to accommodate that.”
Report comment to moderator
TRS
And you write this one “Babies eat every 2 to three hours. Some babies eat more often (ask me how I know!) Babies often need patted on the back.”
Yep, and patted, and patted and patted, till your arms fall off LOL – women know about such things, we’ve done if often enough – their so cute when they fall asleep, FINALLY!
Report comment to moderator
This may be as good a place as any to recall Nick H. Peters’s advice in this thread’s first post–a little moderation in assessing Mrs. Palin’s qualities. Of course, I haven’t looked through all the posts discussing her (I counted, and there are 4.2 million *on this site alone*) , but I’m yet to see even a neutral thing said about her by the conservatives here, let alone anything with a tinge of skepticism. Is she really *that* perfect? Do *none* of the concerns raised by her detractors here raise an eyebrow?
I also believe that an objective take on the Palin speech would bear out the “mockery” and “ridicule” analysis Spinoza refers to at #159, although “poison” seems a little strong. Parts of her speech had me recalling (without any fondness) Ann Richards’s keynote address at the ‘88 DNC, with a little lesser degree of snide-ality on Palin’s part. Palin didn’t really take the *low* road, in my view, but she didn’t take the high road, either. But maybe the campaign’s intention is to take the “preach to the choir” approach.
Report comment to moderator
Klasko: Great post at #4. You make a fellow former Stuttgarter Strasse resident proud! (Insider comment.)
Report comment to moderator
Just goes to show what kind of person Oprah Windbag really is….
Report comment to moderator
Funny, Yeah. It’s interesting that even the MSM has been noting that one of the duties of the VP nominee during an campaign is to serve as a “pitbull” or “attack dog” against the opposition party’s lead nominee. We saw that duty being performed by Joe Biden the week prior during his speech. But when Palin goes after Obama with grace and humor, you accuse her of “mockery” and “ridicule.”
That’s truly funny.
Report comment to moderator
“a campaign”
I can spell but just not type this morning.
Report comment to moderator
GL – The real question is, “Why anyone would wait so long to fire a state trooper as bad as this?”
The Trooper ‘Wooten’ in the so-called TrooperGate scandal has been under investigation off and on for years (2001, 2005, 2006). He recently gave his union permission to release the entire investigative file, all 482 pages and hours of recorded interviews.
Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote the following in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days.
“The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession,” …
As the investigation got under way in 2005, Wooten was in the midst of a bitter divorce from Palin’s sister, Molly McCann. The couple was fighting over custody of their two young children. Accusations flew from both sides.
Troopers eventually investigated 13 issues and found four in which Wooten violated policy or broke the law or both:
• Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.
• He illegally shot a moose.
• He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.
• He told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.
Beyond the investigation sparked by the family, trooper commanders saw cause to discipline or give written instructions to correct Wooten seven times since he joined the force.
Report comment to moderator
A unbiased look at the necessary qualifications for vp (and yes Palin doesn’t meet it) and no sexism.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20080905.html
Apparently, the press is not welcomed to question Palin so I’m not sure what foundations the Orphan whining have — Palin won’t do interviews anyway
http://tinyurl.com/5qvs4w
I can understand her reluctance to talk to the press since many of her talking points contraidict her record. She was for the bridge before she was against. She was for earmarks before she was against it. She didn’t really take on big oil.
http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/08/29/palin-oil-champ/
Report comment to moderator
Outcast: “Leftists loved women’s rights, until Sarah Palin came along.”
How is Palin related to women’s rights? Isn’t she the one that wants to take away women’s rights? Saying she is a feminist just because she is a women is like saying McCain supports gay men because he is a man.
How is Palin going to keep gov’t small? Doesn’t she have a track record of millions of dollars of pork? Is she going to sponsor faith-based tax cuts?
What is her record on education in Alaska? Either abstinence only education is a failure or Alaska’s education system was really bad under her.
Report comment to moderator
That’s hilarious, Lumpy.
How is Palin related to women’s rights?
Why, by demonstrating that a woman can be a mother of five and work a full-time job with major responsibilities? By demonstrating that a woman can work with her husband and their other children to raise a special-needs child?
Isn’t she the one that wants to take away women’s rights?
I assume you’re referring to her opposition to killing unborn or just-born children. Do you believe women should have the right to have the brains of their children sucked out with a vacuum?
How is Palin going to keep gov’t small?
I assure you that between McCain and Palin, government’s control would be MUCH smaller than with an Obama/Biden White House!
Report comment to moderator
HRW She didn’t really take on big oil.
Actually, Gov. Palin took on big oil very astutely in the interests of the state of Alaska in a way that respected the interests of the oil companies. The former Republican governor, Murkowski, allowed himself to become financially dependent on the oil companies in a way that outraged many Alaskans.
The Wall Street Journal today has an excellent article on this,
How Palin Beat Alaska’s Establishment, including:
Throughout it all, Mrs. Palin has stood for reform, though not populism. She thanks oil companies and says executives who “seek maximum revenue” are “simply doing their job.” She says her own job is to be a “savvy” negotiator on behalf of Alaska’s citizens and to provide credible oversight. It is this combination that lets her aggressively promote new energy while retaining public trust.
Today’s congressional Republicans could learn from this. The party has been plagued by earmarks, scandal and corruption. Most members have embraced the machine. That has diminished voters’ trust, and in the process diminished good, conservative ideas. It is no wonder 37 million people tuned in to Mrs. Palin’s convention speech. They are looking for something fresh.
Sarah Palin has made her quantum of mistakes along the way, as is true of most ambitious and bold people in politics and business, though it is clear that she is a bright, determined charismatic leader with a proved record of substantial success in Alaska. She has the highest favorability rating of any governor in the nation. Those on this thread nitpicking her don’t have a clue as to her ability and accomplishment.
Report comment to moderator
I read HRW’s link to FindLaw — which is still one person’s opinion and that’s all.
“The Twenty-fifth Amendment Suggests the Primary Qualifications for Vice Presidents: Be Equipped to Serve as President Starting, if Necessary, on Day One”
Did you read the word “suggest?” And does it really say “day one?”
Well, sure, it could happen, but there’s that pesky thing called a Constitution that our elitist friends can’t get around.
All this FindLaw article is is OPINION! And if this opinion really carried weight or if the amendment(s) intended succession by a person who had X number of years of federal service, the amendmets would have been drafted that way. But the truth is, the Constitution itself does not have specific requirements for the position of VP and/or President, other than citizenship and an age requirement, and the drafters of the amendments didn’t change that.
It’s always good to read the Constitution. That’s what matters, not some disaffected, upset law professor. Really. It’s not up to them. It’s up to the American people. Isn’t it interesting that the left here and evidently at FindLaw wants to rewrite the Constitution to fit THEIR view of it?
And I disagree with you, Peter Leavitt, with respect to the nitpicking: they do indeed know what this woman is — someone who is capable of standing up to their candidate. They’re very nervous, and they don’t know what to expect next. Good job, McCain. I like people who rattle cages, and he did just that.
Report comment to moderator
I’ll buy that NJL. The nitpickers doth protest too much, a sure indication that their cages have been rattled.
Report comment to moderator
Outkast
By demonstrating that a woman can work with her husband and their other children to raise a special-needs child?
given the recent arrival of said child its a bit early to give her any credit in this regards. From what I’ve seen, Bristol is getting some good practice prior to her own arrival.
I assure you that between McCain and Palin, government’s control would be MUCH smaller than with an Obama/Biden White House!
Given the Republican record on gov’t size and waste, its highly unlikely. And her pork bonanza is proof she’s not averse to fighting her way to public trough.
Report comment to moderator
TRS — According to Mayo Clinic, 8 to 12 feedings a day, or every 2-3 hours, is a typical schedule for a newborn. The Palin baby is nearly six months, old enough to take solids. I don’t recall having to burp my baby at that stage. Therefore, I still think the Gov. was putting on a show for tv, typical of a mom to do phony things for her kid.
Report comment to moderator
NJL
I know its an opinion I just thought it was a reasonable well argued rhetoric free opinion. And yes I know American politics does not adhere to precedent as rigidly as other Anglo-Saxon nations which would enhance the argument presented. In the end, the constitution is rather short on qualifications, past practice just suggests otherwise.
Peter Leavitt
In 2002, Palin lost the lt governor bid. Her actions from 2003 to 2006 should be seen as an attempt to return to public office, hence exposing the corruption of her party rivals and her attendance. Despite her anti-corruption actions, Palin served at the same time as one of three directors of “Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc.,” a 527 group that was designed to serve as a political boot camp for Republican women. Her association with Stevens and her exposure of her Republican rival enabled her to win the Republican nomination. Her contradictory actions leave her motivations to be questioned. Her love for earmarks and pork were present before 2002 when she was mayor and returned when she became governor. Her preference for traditional Alaskan politics is more consistent than the reformer image she wants to portray.
Report comment to moderator
Moth – some babies are VERY cranky, they cry all the time, some of it is due to colic – holding patting are ways to calm a baby –
You might not have had a cranky child, but I have friends that sure put up with none stop crying little ones.
Report comment to moderator
The Palin baby is nearly six months, old enough to take solids.
Did you even realize the latest Palin baby is not “typical,” Scroop?
Report comment to moderator
The Palin baby isn’t cranky. It was a convention prop.
Report comment to moderator
HRW, the fact is that after all Sarah Palin took on both the corrupt Republican establishment and the oil companies that played the politics of crony capitalism. I note that you were not able, after baldly stating that Palin didn’t take on big oil, to refute Kimberly Strassel’s article, linked to at #181, that proves in spades that she defeated both big oil producers and the corrupt Alaskans politicians in their pay dependent on them. NJL is right that you and the other leftists on this thread are very nervous about this able lady who could well upset the Obama applecart.
In her speech Wednesday Gov. Palin made a compelling case for McCain and damaged Obama with such remarks as A small town mayor is kind of like a community organizer only you have actual responsibilities. He wrote two memoirs but never authored a major bill. They’ve hauled the Styrofoam pillars back to the Hollywood lot. She delivered these remarks with a verve and sureness that electrified the convention and energized the millions among the Republican conservative base interested in this election.
Report comment to moderator
GOVERNORS COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS
Pontius Pilate Jesus Christ
George Wallace Martin Luther King
Sarah Palin Barack Obama
Report comment to moderator
#185
My breast fed children continued to nurse at least every 3 – 4 hours at 6 months old. I’ve had three. So, please don’t tell me what the “Mayo Clinic” has to say. Talk to other MOTHERS.
Report comment to moderator
In Illinois, Obama helped to write the state Earned Income Tax Credit, expanded early childhood education, and required videotaping of interrogations and confessions in capital cases.
In the US Senate, Obama wrote laws to require online reporting of government expenditure, ethics reform, and helped begin the next-generation effort at nuclear nonproliferation.
Report comment to moderator
Republican showmeisters also use styrofoam, cardboard, plywood, plaster, and spray paint, but that is only the beginning of their phoniness.
Obama’s stage set wasn’t really marble and granite, but Obama’s sense of rationality and order were palpable and effective in the midst of 80,000 people gathered together.
Report comment to moderator
A small town mayor is kind of like a community organizer only you have actual responsibilities. He wrote two memoirs but never authored a major bill.
This morning as I was flipping through some blogs I came across an article that critiqued those very words and then provided to a series of links which were the actual bills he had authored. I’ve tried to find those links but have yet to suceed. In any event, there were at least four major bills he authored including one he co-authored with Hilary Clinton which had to do with Health Care.
I did however find a few more;
http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=336235
http://ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/pubact90/acts/90-0737.html
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/gop_convention_spin.html
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/gop_convention_spin_part_ii.html
Report comment to moderator
Although I’m sure you will discount Rachel Maddow, she calls McCain out;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft6u7OhWpDM
Peter Leavitt I do have a reply to your 190 but its in moderation because i provided four links. I suggest you check with factcheck.org
Report comment to moderator
An other post that explains Palin’s relationship to Big oil.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/288
I know its DU but she provides a series of links to “normal” media in a well written piece. This reminds me — somewhere I read a conservative commentator claim she negotiated with Canada, which of course is false she negotiated with TransCanada and if you read the links provided they took the state of Alaska to the cleaners.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, those who oppose aborting children may disagree as to policy in cases of rape and incest, but the Christian Church and Judaism have always recognized the life of the mother as primary in cases of true extremity.
While some mothers do indeed sacrifice their lives for their children, this is an act of love, not moral obligation, and is a nonissue for prolifers. Politicians’ proposed exceptions for rape and incest are controversial because inconsistent with a life-affirming ethic, whereas an exception for saving the mother’s life is not; lumping these issues together is lumping two apples and an orange.
The actual Republican platform on life:
“Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life
“Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.
“We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity and dignity of innocent human life.
“We have made progress. The Supreme Court has upheld prohibitions against the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion. States are now permitted to extend health-care coverage to children before birth. And the Born Alive Infants Protection Act has become law; this law ensures that infants who are born alive during an abortion receive all treatment and care that is provided to all newborn infants and are not neglected and left to die. We must protect girls from exploitation and statutory rape through a parental notification requirement. We all have a
moral obligation to assist, not to penalize, women struggling with the challenges of an unplanned pregnancy.
“At its core, abortion is a fundamental assault on the sanctity of innocent human life. Women deserve better than abortion. Every effort should be made to work with women considering abortion to enable and empower them to choose life. We salute those who provide them alternatives, including pregnancy care centers, and we take pride in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.
“Respect for life requires efforts to include persons with disabilities in education, employment, the justice system, and civic participation. In keeping with that commitment, we oppose the non-consensual withholding of care or treatment from people with disabilities, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide, which endanger especially those on the margins of society. Because government should set a positive standard in hiring and contracting for the services of persons with disabilities, we need to update the statutory authority for the AbilityOne program, the main avenue by which those productive members of our society can offer high quality services at the best possible value.”
Report comment to moderator
Thanks to Kwerna for posting the section on abortion from the Republican Platform. It contains no exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. John McCain specifically asked for those 3 exceptions to be included, and the anti-choice extremists told him to take a hike, and that there would be no exceptions whatsoever. The language is absolute and unequivocal. Women will surely die under this extreme anti-choice agenda.
Report comment to moderator
Women will surely die under this extreme anti-choice agenda.
******Not likely. Women dying in childbirth is really, really rare anymore. It happens, but not all that often. This is just extreme rhetoric from the “right to kill” side.
Still, I don’t agree with the Republican platform on this. I do think there should be an exception for the life of the mother. I do not think so for rape, since it isn’t the baby’s fault. I doubt I’d agree with incest either, since it isn’t the baby’s fault. Naturally, it isn’t the baby’s fault with the mother either, but the mom has a right to choose her own life. No one can be required to sacrifice her own life. (Although, when my mother was given the choice, she chose me, and we both lived.)
I’d be willing to deal on these issues, though, since the VAST, VAST majority of abortions are elective procedures being used to cover a sin, get out of consequences, or simply for “convenience.”
If we could stop elective abortions, and put a strong hold on the others (i.e. make sure the mother’s life was REALLY in true danger, etc.) then I would think we’d won a great victory for children.
Report comment to moderator
WHERE does the Republican platform state that they will not support a woman’s right to choose her own life over that of the baby? I didn’t read it in what Kwerna wrote. In fact, I didn’t see anything about rape or incest either.
You can’t read in something that isn’t there.
BTW, Kwerna explained things very well. That’s what I get for reading from the bottom of the thread up!
Report comment to moderator
Thanks, Tychicus. It’s good to know that this late in the thread people are still reading all those earlier posts.
Report comment to moderator
TRS,
That’s the point – “rape, incest, and the life of the mother” were specifically left out, even though John McCain and others asked for the exceptions to be included in the Republican Platform. The anti-choice extremists said there should be no exceptions whatsoever, and they carried the day.
Tell me, TRS, how many women’s deaths does it take before it disturbs your conscience? 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000? I thought every life is precious to the CCR’s?
Report comment to moderator
Even if it’s just one woman, TRS, are you (or any of your fellow CCR’s) willing to go in and look her in the face and tell her that the law is more important than her life?
Report comment to moderator
Kwerna– the trouble with your quote from the Republican platform is that it fails to denounce abortion as murder or any other crime and therefore provides no justification whatsoever for government intervention.
Report comment to moderator
>>>>How is Palin related to women’s rights?
>>Why, by demonstrating that a woman can be a mother of five and work a full-time job with major responsibilities? By demonstrating that a woman can work with her husband and their other children to raise a special-needs child?
That’s all it takes to be for women’s rights? Don’t set the bar so high!! It reminds me of the Chris Rock monologue where he makes fun of guys saying stuff like: “I ain’t never been to jail.” or “I take care of my kids.”
She’s a mother and works a full-time job? Wow!! I’m so overwhelmed. Who could imagine a woman could do that???
Report comment to moderator
There are very few women these days who can raise five children and balance working a full-time job (such as mayor or governor) that has major responsibilities, DOG.
Sarah Palin has shown us all that it can be done, and by a conservative woman at that. Whoo-hoo!
You really need to get out more, DOG, and then read what the Bible says about those who use the Lord God’s name in vain.
Report comment to moderator
Sarah Palin has shown us all that it can be done, and by a conservative woman at that.
Indeed, her unmarried, pregnant, teenage, (still living at home) high school daughter is living proof that Sarah is showing America how to successfully raise a family and work full-time. Apparently, in “CCR Land” the more pregnant teenagers you have at home the more successful your family is considered to be. Yikes!
Report comment to moderator
17 – yeah, too bad Sarah Palin’s too busy doing a man’s job that she doesn’t have time to burp little Corky.
Report comment to moderator
Kwerna kindly gave us the unequivocal Republican Platform language opposed to abortion. Interesting to contrast that with the Democratic position as follows from a Slate article:
The Democratic Party platform of 2008 finally dropped its old abortion language (”safe, legal and rare”), which had asked that women not have abortions unless they absolutely must. The 2008 platform, just announced, says instead, “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.” Should a woman desire to bear her child, the Dems advocate prenatal care, income support, and adoption programs to help her there, too. But in the world of the new Democratic platform, it’s the woman’s decision to make.
Obviously the Palin family has made clear its views on this moral issue.
Report comment to moderator
Tell me, TRS, how many women’s deaths does it take before it disturbs your conscience? 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000?
******Tell me, Anlir, how many baby deaths does it take before it disturbs your conscience? 10,000? 100,000? 1 million? 1 billion?
Report comment to moderator
Answering a question with another question is being evasive. I asked a simple, straightfoward question. If you need to re-calibrate your moral compass, I’ll give you time.
Report comment to moderator
>There are very few women these days who can raise five children and balance working a full-time job
Even if that dubious claim happened to be true, what does that have to do with championing women’s rights?
>Sarah Palin has shown us all that it can be done
I think Angelina Jolie was there first with her 6 kids. She must really be a seen as a women’s rights champion, regardless of her position on the political spectrum!
>You really need to get out more
I have nowhere to go. The “bridge to nowhere” that Palin flip flopped on was canceled. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Palin_nowhere.jpg
>those who use the Lord God’s name in vain.
Is that near the part about shellfish being an abomination, or the part about blended cloth, or the part that deals with women being the property of their father’s until they are married and ownership is transferred to their husbands? Or the part about lying with a woman when she is “unclean?”
Maybe you should work on your self-righteousness before telling other people what to do.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir,
Perhaps you aren’t aware that a party platform isn’t a “law”? Nor does the platform say that “no exceptions will be made”; it simply affirms the value of human life. A platform isn’t an attempt to work out all the details, and perhaps they didn’t get into where a line is drawn because Republicans disagree on that specific issue. (For instance, if they said, “We allow abortion in case of rape or incest,” many Republicans can’t sign that. If, on the other hand, they were to say, “We won’t allow abortion under any circumstances, even to save the life of the mother”–which of course they do not say –then people like you would point out that they draw the line at a cruel place. So they don’t get into the details at all, and you pretend that they do.)
But again, a platform is not a law, AND no Republican would be in favor of a law that says doctors can’t do abortions even to save a mother’s life, so relax.
All right, now that this has been addressed, could you answer TRS’s question? Also, since you don’t have a “moral compass” (as addressed on another thread a few days ago, though you may not have seen my notes), it’s a little absurd to go around talking about other people’s moral compasses.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, here’s my post from the Albert Mohler thread regarding a moral compass, since I don’t believe you saw it….
Again and again you’ve repeated the assertions that CCR’s (whatever they are) have lost their moral compass. Now, without knowing what your abbreviation means, it’s a little hard to address it with confidence, but in context I’m going to assume you mean Christians, or Republicans, or both.
Many Republicans are wishy-washy people who hold their political fingers in the wind, and lack a moral compass. Many are not. You’d have to name an individual person before one could say whether this is a fair accusation. As a group accusation, it’s simply too general, and thus false.
The same is true of many so-called Christians–some have a moral compass and some don’t. Too general.
But true, Bible-believing Christians are about the only people in the world who even have a moral compass, so if you (who do not have one) are judging them by some perceived “loss,” you’re deceiving yourself. Why? A compass is pre-set. North is always north; it can never be south or east. And it means that moral issues don’t change with the times. In other words, it demands moral absolutes–most commonly, biblical absolutes. So, the concept of a moral “compass” cannot even be reasonably discussed by someone whose moral boundaries are set by what feels good or what is in vogue today. Every time you say this, I want to say, “Huh? A person who argues that homosexuality is OK simply because he says it is dares to lecture others (who believe in moral absolutes) about a moral ‘compass’? Does he have any idea how absurd this sounds?”
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl D (#215),
Excellent points.
Report comment to moderator
Trump endorses McCain on Larry King
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!