KSFO's Rodgers: "[P]uckered-butt Democrat women hate Sarah Palin ... because her idea of choice was choosing not to have an abortion"
Returning to a previous claim he has made, KSFO's Lee Rodgers asserted: "I believe that the reason a bunch of puckered-butt Democrat women hate Sarah Palin is because her idea of choice was choosing not to have an abortion." Guest Steven Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute responded in part by saying: "[T]here is that very vocal segment of feminist opinion that celebrates abortion as a positive good in the same way that, you know, Southern slaveholders 150 years ago celebrated slavery as a positive good."
On the September 23 edition of San Francisco radio station KSFO's The Lee Rodgers Show, Rodgers said: "I have -- and I may be overstating for effect here, as I am wont to do from time to time. But I have a deep suspicion that the reason the liberals hate Sarah Palin is that she is a normal person. And they hate that, they just hate it. And I also believe -- and of course, the left-wing bloggers just went nuts when I first said this, but I still believe it, so I'll say it again. I believe that the reason a bunch of puckered-butt Democrat [sic] women hate Sarah Palin is because her idea of choice was choosing not to have an abortion." Guest Steven Hayward, F.K. Weyerhaeuser Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, responded in part by saying: "[T]here is that very vocal segment of feminist opinion that celebrates abortion as a positive good in the same way that, you know, Southern slaveholders 150 years ago celebrated slavery as a positive good."
As Media Matters for America has documented, on his September 17 broadcast, Rodgers said: "Look at these ugly skanks, who make up the female leadership of the Democratic Party." Later in that broadcast, Rodgers said: "Democrat women, admit it: You're nothing but a bunch of phonies. And I think we have to ask: Would you like Sarah Palin better if she got pregnant again and did have an abortion, because it's obvious, with a lot of liberal women, killing babies is the main priority they have."
From the September 23 broadcast of KSFO's The Lee Rodgers Show:
RODGERS: With Steven Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute. I have -- and I may be overstating for effect here, as I am wont to do from time to time. But I have a deep suspicion that the reason the liberals hate Sarah Palin is that she is a normal person. And they hate that, they just hate it. And I also believe -- and of course, the left-wing bloggers just went nuts when I first said this, but I still believe it, so I'll say it again. I believe that the reason a bunch of puckered-butt Democrat women hate Sarah Palin is because her idea of choice was choosing not to have an abortion. You think that enters into it?
HAYWARD: Yeah, the way you've noted. You touch on three or four important themes there. One is that there is that very vocal segment of feminist opinion that celebrates abortion as a positive good in the same way that, you know, Southern slaveholders 150 years ago celebrated slavery as a positive good. And so, that you would actually choose not to do so as to -- you know, with a -- with a child suffering from a birth defect is to them perverse, and in their upside-down world, you know, immoral. I mean, they just live in a parallel universe that's incomprehensible to, I think, most Americans. The other, broader part is that, you know, what I and others characterize as the establishment has invested a lot in their status. You mention the Ivy League schools. You really saw that in the kind of initial observations that, oh my god, Governor Palin didn't even have a passport until last year. She's never been to France. She's never appeared on Meet the Press. I mean, some of these things -- really, that this was a disqualification for office. I mean, it's just astounding that -- what's really happened here is their status privilege has been threatened, and that hurts more than anything else. I mean, you might take away their country club membership sooner than you can threaten their political status privileges.
Palin, the press, and her "no más" moment
Media Matters: Limbaugh's Off the Wall spin on Michael Jackson's death
Howard Kurtz's wasted opportunity
WZ, did you see Samantha Bee on The Daily Show trying to get Palin supporters to say "choice"?
No, I missed that. It must have been a classic.
That's what the link is in my previous post. The blue letters are a lot more subtle than they used to be with the old format.
Col.....I LOVED that segment, is was great wasn't it!
I saw it too. What a hoot. That show should replace reading Time or Newsweek for sure.
puckered-butt? I didn't know puckered-butt was a real term, let alone something you find in a gentleman's vocabulary...
Eh, he's just so used to puckering up to kiss the butts of the right wing powers that be, that keep him on the air.
lol
You need to take your television's advice then. Drink as much as possible and always remember confidence in the neocon world view.
Hic. !>)
"there are women who selfishly don't take advantage of their ability to have as many abortions as possible"
Don't worry, the liberals are trying their hardest to find a way for that to not be said any longer. They need to go back to the old coat-hanger method. At least that kept the requests down.
You are one sick bitch, Phil.
And while you're at it, you sick bitch, we could just execute women who have abortions. I mean, since you want to use government to impose your believe that life begins at conception, you might as well be consistent, you hypocritical pig. You could also go ahead and give rapists the right to pick the mother of his child with Palin's no abortions, no excuses, rapist's bill of rights.
Punk.
"Punk."
Any time, bubba. You talk awful loud on a keyboard
My feelings are that women who choose to get pregnant then choose to off the child should have restrictions placed on their ability to choose to get pregnant. If they want to be baby-machines for whatever reason, that's ok. If they want to get pregnant over and over again, while using tax payer dollars to have abortions each time, that should be stopped. If you feel that murdering a defensless child is ok, then that is your choice.
Screw you, punk.
You just keep filling yourself full of those bs stereotypes so you can convince yourself that you have the right to tell me when life begins. You just keep plugging away, phil, keep voting for cons and someday you will be able to live out your authoritarian wet dreamworld in which women are so subjugated to your strict moral order that you can execute them for having the audacity to get raped.
And cry me a river about talking loud on a keyboard. I ain't hearin' it. Not from you. Barbs like that don't mean much coming from a hateful bastard like you, phil.
"Screw you, punk." + "Barbs like that don't mean much coming from a hateful bastard like you"
Ah ha ha ha ha. Any time, bubba...any time!
The stereotypes you whine about are factual. I don't need to convince you of anything, your precious scientists are the ones proving (over and over) when life begins. You just won't accept what they say, since it sounds to realistic for your murderous wants and needs. You just can't handle the truth, so you whine about my being "hateful". Typical liberal
Factual my ass. In fine con fashion, you think your opinion is fact.
And don't try to play innocent with me, with your woe is me victimhood cries. "Boohoo, you think I'm hateful, bubba. How dare you get angry with me when I talk shit. Only I have the right to call you murderous. WAAAHHHH. You can't get mad at me, you just hate me because I'm rightwing Christian fundamentalist."
Don't play, phil. You are so full of anger, you disdain everything this, "typical liberal," stands for. I'll at least be honest, jackass, it's mutual. I think you are utterly sleazy. I think people like you have destroyed the Republican Party and now you want to ruin the country with your dominionist views of religious rule.
You authoritarian thugs might just succeed, too. Get McCain in there and Palin might not be far behind. Then you can rejoice as you bask in glorious public executions of women and doctors. Hell, you can even rape and impregnate women with impunity, then if your lady friend decides she doesn't want to carry your violent seed to term and aborts it, you can send her to the gas chamber. Win-win for your vicious world-view, phil.
"You are so full of anger, you disdain everything this, "typical liberal," stands for."
I'M the one full of anger??? Is your mirror broken, again? And, yes, I do not like liberal ideas. None work for the majority. They only work for the whining minority.
"I'll at least be honest"
When?!? Why don't you start by answering my assertion that scientists believe life begins at conception. Will ANY scientist tell you those cells are 'dead'? Or, will they tell you they are alive? Of course you won't argue FACTS! Facts are a liberals worst enemy.
Alright. Now i know you're just plain flippin' rock ignorant, but at least I know why. You apparently only read partial sentences and take whatever meaning from them that suits you're ridiculous angle of attack.
So listen up. Idiot boy. I'll write. Short simple. Sentences. You know? To make things. Fair. I know. You are. Used to. Liberals. Who lean back. On their heels. And. Try. To answer. Your charges. Point by point. As if. Your charges. Had some. Merit. I'm not. Like that. I reject. Your. Bull. For what. It is.
You need. To post some. Studies. That support. Your, so called. Assertion. Because. As I. Pointed out. Your opinion. Is not fact. No matter. How hard. You try. To pretend. It is. Still just. Your opinion.
...puckered-butt Democrat women hate Sarah Palin is because her idea of choice was choosing not to have an abortion.
Maybe Sarah was hoping for a miscarriage. She hid her pregnancy until she was seven months pregnant. She took about an eight or ten hour airplane flight to Texas. Her water began leaking. So she hung around to give a speech and then took another eight or ten hour plane ride...then drove another couple of hours, until then eschewing any medical care save for a telephone call to her doctor in Alaska. I would call that wreckless and careless behavior for a 44 year old woman with a high risk pregnancy.
I would call that wreckless and careless behavior for a 44 year old woman with a high risk pregnancy...who was over eight months pregnant!
Don't forget selfish, and mean spirited, and she wears $400 IMPORTED spectacles. Oh, she is just such a lame choice for so many reasons. I am still willing to make a wager that she will not be on the ticket come Nov. 4th. Her selection is part of some devious scheme cooked up by Rove, just you wait and see. It may be my imagination but I see this look of "if you only knew the whole story my friend" on McCain's face when they hug.
It just strikes me as odd that someone as rabidly "pro-life" as Sarah Palin would demonstrate such wreckless disregard for the life and welfare of her unborn child.
Rumor has it the child is really Bristol's, who incidentally missed several months of school at about the time of the birth for "mono". Seems kind of fishy to me.
That's the 'old school' way of doing things. A teenager who gets pregnant would be shipped to a relative 'out of state' at birthing time and return a few months later. Today's preferred method (liberals mainly) is to kill the baby and throw it in the trash. Now THAT would never be considered "wreckless disregard for life and welfare of [an] unborn child".
Seems to me that if someone whines about "wreckless disregard for the life and welfare" of an unborn child when having a baby, but supports killing an unborn baby, that person would simply be a hypocrit. How else would you excuse that mentality?
$400 glasses isn't all. Her "soccer mom" coat cost $2700.
Her "soccer mom" coat cost $2700.
But is it roomy enough to hide a pregnancy? ;>)
Just remember, Irony...
BTW, I meant to type reckless...not wreckless. Gotta lay off this meth while I'm in Wasilla. ;>)
Don't laugh.. We will win the election unless you guys boot Biden and add Hillary to the ticket.
I’d like to go on the record as predicting exactly this: Barack Obama will in fact jettison Joe ‘Roosevelt-on-TV’ Biden and replace him with Hillary Clinton.
It’s going to happen, so prepare yourselves. (However it will be couched as Biden stepping down for [fill in the blank] reason.)
Been listening to Sean Hannity, eh, Max...? I think it's more likely that Sarah Palin would have to step down before Joe Biden considering how little digging the McCain campaign did into her background. I love October surprises...
Then it's a bet?
I'm not saying I think either Biden or Palin will go. I'm just saying that IMO the odds are more likely that Palin would be forced to step down before Biden would be. Obama will not can Biden for political reasons...unlike the way John McCain selected Sarah Palin. And we know everything there is to know about Joe Biden. On the other hand, every day there is a new revelation about Sarah Palin...and the picture of her that is emerging is one of someone with more baggage than people expected from such a chirpy little adorable gal.
“I'm just saying that IMO the odds are more likely that Palin would be forced to step down before Biden would be.”
You may be under the false impression that what you are saying is actually plausible. Let me set the record straight; while the Liberal Democrats that post here on MMFA have nothing but (ill placed) contempt for Gov. Sarah Palin, you must understand that the rest of us think she’s the bee’s knees. She has brought so much excitement to the Republican Party (and more correctly the conservative movement) that she would never be replaced.
Nope, it will never happen.
On the other hand, Joe Biden is a huge yawn. No one cares about him in the least.
you must understand that the rest of us think she’s the bee’s knees.
The rest of us? You mean among the 42% who support John McCain. I wouldn't assume that everyone who plans to vote for John McCain is that crazy about Sarah Palin. I understand how giddy some of you more extreme folks are about Sarah Palin...I just think we're not talking about the same Sarah Pailin.
okay, but I'm taking your bet anyway :P
The Colorado Independent 9/22/08 Evangelical Leader Smacks McCain for Lack of 'pricinple'
http://coloradoindependent.com/8807/evangelical-leader-smacks-mccain-for-lack-of-principle
Richard Cizik, the chief lobbyist for the National Association of Evangelicals, was named one of TIME's 100 most influential people.
"Richard Cizik is one of the country’s most powerful and outspoken Christian evangelical leaders. He happens to be a Republican, and he has known the GOP’s presidential nominee for many years. “I thought John McCain was a principled person,” Cizik says. “But John McCain has backed off, not just on climate change but on torture and a sensible tax policy — in other words, he’s not the John McCain of 2000. … He seems to be waffling on issue after issue.
“It’s not illogical for someone to conclude that John McCain is going to be more like George Bush than John McCain is going to be like John McCain in 2000.”........
.....[...]........
In an extensive Colorado Independent interview shortly after his Colorado stop, Cizik spoke more specifically about his views of the presidential election,including his thoughts on McCain’s pick of Sarah Palin — who rejects the science of human induced climate change — as his running mate.
Cizik tells of an encounter he had with McCain a year ago, after the candidate had been the target of loathing from evangelical leaders — most notably from the very same James Dobson who has gone after Cizik. In McCain’s case, Dobson let it be known in no uncertain terms: “I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances … he’s not in favor of traditional marriage and I pray that we don’t get stuck with him.”
McCain, says Cizik, wanted to know what to make of these declarations. Cizik’s response? Where else are people like Dobson really going to go? Ultimately, he says, the criticism may have given old-guard leaders like Dobson leverage over McCain’s vice presidential choice. And lo and behold, since Palin was picked, Dobson has been gushing over the ticket, indicating he will in all likelihood “pull the lever” for Palin, er, McCain.
“It is pretty obvious that the Palin nomination plays to identity politics and cultural war issues,” says Cizik. “Her selection is more than an acknowledgment that evangelicals are an important part of the Republican base, and everyone knows that John McCain is not that exciting to religious conservatives.”
Palin, Cizik says, has certainly excited the Republican base, and picking her was certainly a deft, if cynical, political move by McCain — at least in the short term. However, in the longer view, his running mate may do just as much to energize the opposition and prove a turn-off to independents.........
“Not everyone in the evangelical movement is fawning over Sarah Palin,” Cizik says.....
........[....].......
Gray, read this...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-waldman/was-sarah-palin-sent-by-g_b_128408.html
Apparently there are those who believe that Sarah Palin has been sent by God. The insanity of it all...
"
Apparently there are those who believe that Sarah Palin has been sent by God. The insanity of it all..."
Yup.. same level of insanity tgat stands right beside all the libs who act like Obama is the messiah- "and a light will shine down on you.. you'll have an epiphany and say- 'I have to vote for Obama!' " LOL
The entire Obama is the Messiah thing is a right wing construct designed to ridicule Barack Obama. Libs don't literally believe that Obama was sent by God. On the othe hand, and as the article I cited illustrates, there are right wing Republican religious zealots who literally believe that Sarah Palin has been sent by God on a divine mission. To save what, though? Humanity? The world? The country? Or, more likely, the chances of victory for the Republican Party in 2008? Therein lies the insanity...
That Obama messiah thing was created by the Republican National Committee and Karl Rove.
Your analogy is really asinine. Irony's post stated that some people "BELIEVE" that Sarah Palin has been sent by God. Your response says that some "libs act like Obama is the messiah".
There is a big difference between believing in and acting like. Unless you're going with the concept that belief in God is belief in an imaginary figure.
If that's your contention, please disregard this response.
you'll have an epiphany and say- 'I have to vote for Obama!' "
Miss Dee Boat -
Some day, hopefully YOU will have an epiphany and realize how wrong you are on so many subjects.
I find these comments particularly funny as the "right-wing" calls the "left" atheists most of the time.
Truly a bunch of light weights when it comes to thinking..and to remembering what they stand for.
You think 'she's the bee's knees' based on just that fact that she says the talking points you want to hear? Even after some of those talking points have been proven to be plain old lies?
You hope that she will be the President and not McCain, right?
I’d like to go on the record as predicting exactly this: Barack Obama will in fact jettison Joe ‘Roosevelt-on-TV’ Biden and replace him with Hillary Clinton.
I’d like to go on the record as predicting exactly this: we will not see any more posts from Max Dharma after Gramps McCain and Caribou Barbie get swamped by the Democratic Landslide on November 4th.
I'd like to go on record saying this; liberals are scared of Palin and know their hopes and dreams of 'change' won't be coming from Barack (57 states, I'm in Kansas, above my pay grade) O'bama.
Uh, Gramps chose a very STUPID and INEPT woman. The only thing to be 'scared' of is if this loser becomes president EVER.
Want evidence of her immense stupidity? Just watch her interview with Couric. Of course, you rightwing scum will fidn any way to rationalise how 'biased' and 'tough' Couric is on your precious piece of s**t Sarah. Typical indeed. You rightwingers relish ignorance and mediocrity.
"Gramps McCain"
You're going to have to refer to Biden as gramps from now on. He's so old he can't remember when TV started, or who was president during the depression.
That's gotta be the funniest thing, you people whine about McCains age and lack of memory, but say nothing about Biden's age and lack of memory. Doesn't it just tear you up inside knowing McCain has the balls to select someone 'outside the loop', but O'bama follows the orders that are given him and chooses a true political scoundral? O'bama promises change, but delivers status quo. McCain says he will bring change and does.
Oh, I hear O'bama won't be allowed to use the teleprompter during the debate....how will he know what to say if he isn't told?
Well, let's just see if Gramps is man enough to even show up. Seems to me he is wussing out here... 'country first' my ass. Someone needs to remind him that he has no play in the bailout negotiations. He isn't on the damn banking committee.
BTW, Obama doesn't have an apostrophe in it but, voila, I didn't think you were intelligent enough to know that.
Your response to O'bama not knowing what to say without a teleprompter is just classic! "Well.......". O'bama is a loser and he's a loser with no experience to be president. BTW, just WHY is O'bama in Washington if not to be a part in the "play in the bailout negotiations"?? O'bama isn't on any banking committee either. Although Democrat Barny Frank is, perhaps that's why all this crap is happening...because democrats are just plain dumb. They couldn't figure out the plan was bad in the beginning and they can't control the problem when it happens. Their idea of fixing it is to pay off rich people who orchestrated the problem to begin with.
More stupid rightwing talking point garbage from you, I see. "Obama's a loser", "democrats are dumb", blah blah blah. Typical garbage with zero backup, as always. Check yourself in the mirror before casting the 'dummy' card, asshole.
And again... Obama's name isn't spelled with an apostrophe, yet you continue to misspell it even after it has been pointed out to you. What the hell is your IQ - negative 100? Are you that stupid to not understand a simple concept such as spelling a person's name correctly? Are you trying to be like the moronic Freezer Queen?
Maybe Sarah was hoping for a miscarriage. She hid her pregnancy until she was seven months pregnant. She took about an eight or ten hour airplane flight to Texas. Her water began leaking. So she hung around to give a speech and then took another eight or ten hour plane ride...then drove another couple of hours, until then eschewing any medical care save for a telephone call to her doctor in Alaska. I would call that wreckless and careless behavior for a 44 year old woman with a high risk pregnancy.
Which is why the rumor was flying all around Alaska that her fifth child was actually her first grandchild...
And the Obama crowd is accused of starting a smear campaign aginst Sarah Palin when, in fact, it was Alaskans who questioned whether she or her daughter was the mother of the child well before she was cynically selected as John McCain's running mate.
This post by you two are a perfect of the utter hierocracy liberalism.
Look at what you two are saying? Wanted a miscarriage? Her granddaughter?
You guys are the first to scream “Rove!” Or “right wing construct” (just a little less paranoid way of saying “right wing conspiracy”), when all the while you guys market this self-serving tripe to one another ease your own anxiety about your beliefs and candidates.
The Liberal Hierocracy is sickening.
Women’s rights (unless they are Republicans)
Right to choose (unless the choice is “pro-life”)
PS. The Saturday Night Live skit where they were saying the Gov. Palin’s husband Todd was “doing his girls, you know because it’s Alaska” is rock bottom in my book.
You and your party have no room to talk about anyone else … you, your party, and the ideology you hold dear is the skankiest of all.
Have a nice day.
This post by you two are a perfect of the utter hierocracy liberalism.
Look at what you two are saying? Wanted a miscarriage? Her granddaughter?
I guess part of your problem, Max, is Reading Comprehension. No one said anything about a granddaughter - Trig Palin (the baby in question) is male.
There's no hypocrisy here, Max. Just you grasping at straws as your side goes down in flames. And for the record, the GOP is rotten through and through.
"PS. The Saturday Night Live skit where they were saying the Gov. Palin’s husband Todd was “doing his girls, you know because it’s Alaska” is rock bottom in my book."
Oh sure.
I bet you giggled your friggin ass off when Johnny mocked Chelsea Clinton for having Janet Reno as her Daddy, didn't ya? Yeah, thought so. Sso do not sit there and spew bs fake outrage over some SNL skit, moron.
Calling something "choice" does not imbue the action with immunity from public scrutiny.
Koreans choose to eat dogs; does that make it any less distasteful?
PS. "Puckered-butt Democrat women" Haha!
(which is exactly right btw.)
And calling something pro-life does not imbue it with immunity from public scrutiny either. If Sarah Palin treasures life so much why was she so reckless with the welfare of her "unborn child" during her high risk pregnancy?
Your argument=fail
Pro-life is imbued with immunity from public scrutiny because it’s a non-action. It’s simply allowing nature to take its course.
Pro-abortion (deceptively called “pro choice”) is a proactive action against nature and is therefore fair game for social review and moral judgment.
I’m sure you will agree with that ;-)
Pro-life is imbued with immunity from public scrutiny because it’s a non-action. It’s simply allowing nature to take its course.
Oh, you mean like sending young Americans off to war to die for bogus reasons? Or jeopardizing the environment in which we live in favor of business interests? Or by opposing health care and dignified living conditions for the poor? I can go on, if you like...
um, no. Nothing like that.
Please try to stay on-topic.
I thought we were talking about life... Not wasting precious human life by sending people to die unnecessarily... Not jeopardizing life by polluting the environment in which it lives... Preserving the dignity of kife... Hell, I'm more PRO-LIFE than you are...
Max, you people on the right forget that you don't own the exclusive rights to define terms and shape issues to suit you...as you have been accustomed to doing for the past 15 years.
lib Maxim 11: When loosing an argument, redirect the topic to something irrefutable, then cross your arms and look self-righteous .. gj IRONY!
And people on the right just pretend they haven't lost the argument...because they live in an alternate reality anyway.
Hypocrisy maxim 1: Accuse your opponent of doing what you do all the time. (see Dharma, Max, everyday occurences.)
They get flustered when they're not allowed the exclusive right to define terms and issues, either...
Let's not forget how fond they are of changing their definition if their first definition is proven false.
Please try to stay on-topic.
Max has trouble grasping more than one concept at a time.
MAX: Pro-abortion (deceptively called “pro choice”)...
MAX was the one who interjected self-serving semantics and then he complains when he's called on it. The notion that anyone promotes abortion, or is PRO-ABORTION, is an absurd right wing argument. I suspect most people find abortion personally repugnant (ANTI-ABORTION) but yet still believe that it's a woman's right to make that difficult decision based upon her own circumstances. ANTI-ABORTION and PRO-CHOICE are not mutually exclusive terms. And, unless a person favors the protection of all human life and dignity, aside from the abortion issue, then PRO-LIFE is nothing more than a right wing misnomer created by the rabid ANTI-CHOICE crowd to make them sound morally superior.
Your argument=fail
Max's brain = non-functioning
So is being anti-choice (so called "Pro-Life") about "allowing nature to take its course"? Is that why risking the health of live children by reducing SCHIP funding is OK? Depriving them of health insurance coverage is simply allowing nature to take its course! Spending our money on preventive healthcare would also be a bad idea because that would be "a proactive action against nature". That's why it's acceptable from an anti-choice standpoint to deprive the living of care - medical care is "a proactive action against nature"!
<i>Is that why risking the health of live children by reducing SCHIP funding is OK?</i>
See, now globalRower is doing the weak redirect !
It’s really funny when all you guys (acting like 7th grade girls) run around slapping each other on the back and congratulating each other on:
1. How Dumb Max is
2. How you showed him.
The truth is that you guys loose in the arena of ideas and use these kooky redirects when you have no argument.
My argument trumped IRONY’s, and you guys cannot stand it. Then IRONY tried to change the topic from ‘pro-choice’ vs ‘pro-life’ and Nature to some lame <i>“Oh, you mean like sending young Americans off to war to die for bogus reasons?”</i> argument.
You all sucked it up like he was really on to something. *sigh*
We now here globalRower doing the same thing, changing it from my original argument (‘pro-choice’ vs ‘pro-life’ and Nature) to <i>Is that why risking the health of live children by reducing SCHIP funding is OK?</i>.
It’s really funny how you guys cannot simply admit I had the better argument and move on. You must make something up, then you all circle the wagons and begin the 7th-grade-girl style nattering.
Of course Max, it could be that several people reply to your posts in similar veins because they independently see the same logical inconsistencies in your language. Taking "a proactive action against nature" is something we do every time we use a refrigerator, turn on a heater, switch on a light in the dark, accept medical treatment, wear clothes, and on and on. Claiming that being anti-choice means you are against taking "a proactive action against nature" makes it laughably easy to point out the inconsistencies in that stance, even from over here on the other side of the world.
gee max, no one ever said it did:
"Calling something "choice" does not imbue the action with immunity from public scrutiny."
of course, would you like it if the public scrutinized your prostate exam?
lots of things are distasteful (though i understand dog makes a fine meal!), that doesn't, by definition, mean the public should have anything to say about whether or not and individual chooses to participate in them.
if cindy mccain isn't "puckered-butted", she really needs a new plastic surgeon! lol
of course, would you like it if the public scrutinized your prostate exam?
I’ll thank you to keep your digits to yourself!
I think people are missing the underlying point of the blowhards on right-wing radio. What if we talked about men like that? Like SMALL WEENIE RIGHT WINGERS WHO FEEL MANLY POSTURING ABOUT WAR? How would THAT go over? Puckered Butt Dem WOMEN? And HILARIOUS the are complaining about sexism now against Miss NOT THAT THIN Palin, btw. Just amazing.
-- prochoice gym going nice butt Dem
Because I hate babies and the thought of a woman giving birth to one makes me sick. I was absolutely disgusted when my sister had her second child. </heavy sarcasm>
Bleh. Not for nothing, but who does he think he's fooling here? Other nutjobs like him?
Because I hate babies...
They taste like chicken... ;>)
Only fried. Grilled, they yaste like steak.
yaste makes taste...
...they (t)aste like steak.
More like veal...if they're bottle-fed. ;>)
"They're very good, with mustard"
- W. C. Fields
"Democrat [sic] women hate Sarah Palin is because her idea of choice was choosing not to have an abortion."
Sarah Palin's idea of choice is not having the choice at all, unless it's her daughter, of course:
"We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents."
BTW, when are the two high school drop-out teenage love birds going to get married? Why not get married before their child is born, so the child will not be born out of wedlock? Are they waiting first to see if the child is born?
Why is it that whenever there's a discussion about Sarah Palin's whole family, including her sister who was married to the four-times divorced state trooper who Sarah had the vendetta against, I feel as though I'm watching a really bad TV series about an ignorant white trash family who come into a little money and power but have no class? I guess my elitism is showing... ;>)
Actually, she can probably thank a democrat that she had a CHOICE to choose from.
See how that works? She can "choose" to not have an abortion.....wow.
Now all you christians just remember that even "god" gives you a choice.
Weak Lorelei.
You also have a choice to murder your neighbor or not. That doesn’t mean it is justified just because it was a “choice”.
Please try again.
Max, get a life.....
If I chose to murder my neighbor....how does that equate with removing cells from my body.
Oh I know, you would have me tried for "murder".....if you had your way, that is.
See, it would be MY choice not yours.....does your god condemn YOU if someone you don't know has an abortion? Wow.....seriously messed up.
Pro-life is imbued with immunity from public scrutiny because it’s a non-action. It’s simply allowing nature to take its course.
How absurd. First, even if pro-life really were a non-action, that still wouldn't made it immune to public scutiny or arguments. Just because you believe in allowing nature to take its course doesn't mean it's inherenty right. Second, pro-life ultimately means using the power of govt. to restrict and limit a woman's right to choose. That's an action.
Of course Max's argument that because nature is morally neutral the decision to allow a pregnancy to run to full term is immune from public scrutiny is patently absurd. Any decision to allow nature to run its course, the non-treatment of disease, for example, would be immune from public scrutiny. Is allowing one's hair and fingernails to grow, both naturally occuring events, immune from public scrutiny? Max's argument ignores the fact that human beings are born with free will and the ability to alter natural occuring events for their own utilitarian needs or even by whim. These are choices human beings make, regardless whether it's a decsion of action or inaction. And the choice to terminate a pregnancy or not terminate a pregnancy is one that humans have made since as long as when they first learned a pregnancy could terminated.
But, what I find offensive is the practice of the right wing to hijack words to suit their arguments. Show me how many people who do not believe that abortion is personally disatesteful. I argue that anyone who finds abortion personally distasteful is ANTI-ABORTION. However, one may find abortion personally distasteful and yet still support a woman's right to choose to have the procedure for whatever her own personal reasons are. ANTI-ABORTION and PRO-CHOICE are not mutually exclusive terms.
But people like Max prefer to use the smokescreen appellation of PRO-LIFE to describe themselves even though their views regarding the protection of the the lives of actual people, not an undifferentiated cluster of human cells, may be questionable. It's a contradiction...nothing more than a convenient phrase designed to cast themselves in the highest moral light possible.
Irony, so well put. They don't even really have the religious argument. A read through the Bible will find wording that supports abortion. Taking scripture one way or the other on these things is a matter of interpretation, but the religious zealots want to put themselves way above their pay grade and declare what God thinks about the subject.
Meanwhile, here on planet earth: women as you say have been terminating pregnancies since they discovered ways to do so, either with or without help. The only way to cut down on the number of abortions is to offer alternatives, such as The Farm in Tennessee (Steve Gaskin) which offered to support any woman who doesn't want her child during the pregnancy, have expert midwives coaching them for the birth, and if they chose not to raise the child, the Farm would raise that child.
Oh, what a wonderful idea Mary! Be sure to teach this to your daughter .. tell her not to worry about love or family, because there is a human refuse farm happy to take your baby and, well, take it off your hands. And don’t worry about that human being you ditched, because it’s your right to destroy it’s life. When that baby starts to grow up and realize she had a mother that didn’t want her, and a father that didn’t want her, I’m sure it won’t be a problem; just look the other way .. besides we will have programs, programs, programs to deal with these human castaways.
You don’t get it do you? Family is everything. Your spouse, your children, your grandchildren are everything life is about.
Liberalism seeks to destroy the family which is the foundation of civilization.
Conservatism seeks to preserve it.
are you really believeing all that crappola you posted? "Everything"
Liberalism seeks to destroy the family?
Good God Man, get a grip!
Wow, Max, you really are over the top...!
Relatively speaking, I guess I am.
Um, yeah it does.
Its liberals that like to make up the rules; like men can have gay sex, get married and adopt a baby. That’s all against nature man, and it’s wrong .. liberal perverse thinking on parade.
We just don't like what you stand for. You don't stand up for your country, you push god aside, and you indulge your physical body in anything that feels good, then claim it's your right.
Fortunately Darwin is on our side! Haha!
cArn: Just because you believe in allowing nature to take its course doesn't mean it's inherenty right
MAX: Um, yeah it does.
If a person contracts a treatable disease and dies because he refused treatment, allowing instead to let nature take its course, was it inherently tight to do so even though his five children are deprived of his support?
MAX, you seem to have a lot of issues that go beyond just politics...
lol, its no use....because that silly old Max takes medicene....you just know he she does. Max, every in your whole life ever ever ever took an aspirin??
Ever been to the hospital? You married with children.....hope they were born natural and not in hospital.
Hypocrite.
That's a lame argument. IF there is a forest fire, the forest creatures will run away from the flames to protect themselves, just like nature drives us humans towards self preservation (we’re a little smarter than simply running out of the forest.) There is a line though; when you kill that human essence within you, that’s crossing a line. There is no forest fire, no dire need .. just the most selfish action one human being carry out.
I don't care how much her glasses cost. She thinks women should by law have to deliver the child of a rapist or family member because SHE personally thinks they should have to, That I care very much about.
Plus they have to pay for the cost of the medical exam/rape kit. Way to cut costs, Barbie!
and raise the child for the next 18 years to boot!
She thinks women should by law have to deliver the child of a rapist or family member because SHE personally thinks they should have to...
And, ironically, this from the governor of a state that reportedly has the highest incidents of rape and incest in the country.
To be fair, to help defray the cost of her expensive eye glasses Sarah Palin sold her old pair on e-bay...along with her treasured dessicated moose liver that looked exactly like the image of Jesus. ;>)
To be fair, to help defray the cost of her expensive eye glasses Sarah Palin sold her old pair on e-bay...along with her treasured dessicated moose liver that looked exactly like the image of Jesus. ;>)
And when you turn the moose liver over, you'll see a panoramic view of Russia, as seen from Caribou Barbie's house.
You hit the nail on the head Dee, but left out one important bit of information:
She earned the money for those expensive glasses by being successful. By being a successful woman in a man’s world no less. Wouldn’t you think the so-called liberals on these forums would acknowledge her accomplishments? Would be excited that a woman is breaking the class ceiling?
Don’t hold your breath.
<b>The High Road:</b> Sarah Palin ‘the woman’ is a success! Woo!
<b>The Low Road:</b> Destroy Sarah Palin because she’s a threat to our guy.
" Wouldn’t you think the so-called liberals on these forums would acknowledge her accomplishments?"
Why? Are Republicans going around tooting Obama's horn as the first Black man to run a successful bid for President? I don't see most Republicans going around doing it so why would Democrats? If she doesn't believe in what you believe in it really doesn't make sense for folks to go around hyping up her nomination.
Also, as a puckered butt female who is pro-choice I have to say that I think it's silly to lump everyone together. I am also pro-life as in I would rather a woman chose to have the baby but I would also want to fix the foster care system to make sure that no matter what happens that kid isn't mistreated and is loved, I would want to make sure that the mom can get good prenatal care, I would want to make sure that she was aware that she could drop the kid off at a hospital and not give borth to it in some alley before leaving it in a trash heap, I would want to help the mom get training if she needed it in order to afford a nice place and good healthy food for her growing baby, etc. etc.
I would be all for the Republican stance if one could actually define when life actually starts, could make a mom not be a human incubator, and could work on how to help out when this "unwanted" kid is brought into the world. Until then I'm pro-choice all the way.
"That just says it all right there! "
Where the hell did that comment come from?
Were you replying to something someone else wrote or did you just imagine someone wrote something and decided to reply to an imaginary post?
What a vicious little troll you are.
One would think you feel threatened by your crude and hurtful remarks. Interesting.
Um, yeah it does.
Its liberals that like to make up the rules; like men can have gay sex, get married and adopt a baby. That’s all against nature man, and it’s wrong .. liberal perverse thinking on parade.
Your hypocrisy is amazing. First you chide others for making bad arguments or sidestepping the issue, and then you do the same exact thing. The idea that something is inherently right because one deems it natural is a classic logical fallacy called appeal to nature. I also see that you conveniently ignored the other part of my post where I stated that pro-life is in fact an action. Care to respond to that one?
I conveniently ignored it because it was a stupid argument.
Great response. Care to explain WHY?
Yeah, that Rush sure did well on the tube, huh? :)
Watch and laugh. Too hilarious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNK4byQkn7w