Obama Campaign Theatrics --- woman faints @ rallies a scam?

[benDASHDASH]

As a Libertarian, I mostly agree with what you have to say. I don't agree with your stance on privacy though. Although I really don't have anything to hide, it is simply within my constitutional rights to expect my personal belongings and information to be kept private from anyone, including the government. Sure, a quick baggage search here, or a quick search of some medical records there may seem harmless but what is next? At what point does it stop being about protecting us from terrorists, and start being about keeping us in check. We are all part of a very sophisticated economic machine and the government has a lot of interest in knowing who we are, where we are and what we are doing at all times. Privacy = freedom. Without privacy, you don't have freedom.

tom, we agree on something!

[h0lmes]

tom, we agree on something!

I am no longer the flaming liberal I used to be.

[LINUS]

- do NOT associate the conservative party with the bible thumpers soley, PLEASE. They are just as nuts as the lunatic left. You are a self-proclaimed demo, but you're obviously not a fringe lune. I'm a conservative, but I'm not thumping my bible, screaming kill the fags beause they are evil and sinful. You know what I mean? It's an extreme example.

I felt this was a point that needed re-emphasis. Seems most people refuse to take the time to see the division. Extremely good point to bring up.


As for the abortion stuff - good idea, separate thread. Looks like Heeter is spearheading that one, in one form or another. We'll let him start that thread.

[Hallen]

a: Sorry for being unclear, that's not what I intended.
b: adoption IS a very worthwhile choice... kind of.
There is still a surplus of orphans that do not get adopted, and honestly, I question the REAL values that the adopters hold.

No worries, I figured that is where you were going with it. I think we have basically the same views on the subject.
There is a "surplus" of older kids, problem kids, and foster kids, but there really isn't a surplus of newborns needing adoption. Most families want to adopt a baby. I have friends that waited for years and spent thousands of dollars trying to adopt (through the normal, government legal channels). They finally gave up and went to China and adopted a baby girl... twice. I personally know two families that have done the same thing. It is a sad commentary on the government run adoption programs and how inefficient they are. I think it also points to how hard it is to give up a baby, even if the mother and father (if he has not bailed) do not want a child and are in no position to take care of one.

I do agree that the "I have nothing to hide" argument on privacy is a very weak argument. Protection of our privacy is a very important and delicate thing. Like the abortion issue, where do you draw the line. I think you have to look at the good of the Nation and balance that against the individual. If the invasion of privacy is controlled and small and there are sufficient checks and balances to insure that the scope of what gets flagged is specifically targeted to the specific needs of law enforcement, then I am mostly OK with it. We all have to make some sacrifices to insure that we stay free. However, I have no problem with pushing back against this kind of thing to make sure it stays in check.
The part I don't like is that opponents have blown the current "Patriot Act" stuff out of proportion and make it sound much worse for personal privacy than it is. The chances of the government actively monitoring your emails and phone conversations is ridiculously small. Some of your emails may get fed through a government filter somewhere, but at the point that email leaves your computer, it is in the public domain. It may be intended for a single other person, but it is in the public domain at that point. The chances of it getting flagged is even smaller. Even if it does get flagged and reviewed by a human, it will be read and ignored. Don't give more credit to what the FBI can do than what is due. They are just human like us and there are not that many of them. Especially with the Internet, don't ever assume that anything you put out there is private.

I love the way politicians change words around to suit their needs. Last night, Obama kept referring to Illegal Aliens as "Undocumented Workers" as if it were synonymous. What? Are you kidding? You are trying to imply that all illegal aliens are just people looking for legitimate work? And even if they are, using that term gives them some semblance of legitimacy when they have none. Of course they were in Austin, Texas, so he had to pander to the large illegal population there.

[uofom3]

As a Libertarian, I mostly agree with what you have to say. I don't agree with your stance on privacy though. Although I really don't have anything to hide, it is simply within my constitutional rights to expect my personal belongings and information to be kept private from anyone, including the government. Sure, a quick baggage search here, or a quick search of some medical records there may seem harmless but what is next? At what point does it stop being about protecting us from terrorists, and start being about keeping us in check. We are all part of a very sophisticated economic machine and the government has a lot of interest in knowing who we are, where we are and what we are doing at all times. Privacy = freedom. Without privacy, you don't have freedom.

I completely understand your point here. It sounds like you are making this similar to taxation; if you tax one more good/commodity/activity/etc... that's just another step twoarsd taxing everything. So, if the government takes away one more "freedom", it's just one more step twoards removing all privacy.

The problem that I see with this viewpoint regarding privacy is that I believe we are too fearful of what it is that they are truly after. They aren't looking for people who have DL'ed music off of the net for free, or people who smoke a little bit of pot, etc. They are after the truly "bad" guys. They are also collecting information on the population as a whole and tracking the flow of information to have a better handle on whats going on.

So, the ultimate reason why I think this is OK (and I am NOT for government inteference in my life) is the reason they are being allowed to do this; our national security. Again, they can look at anything that they want of mine, and even drag me in for questioning. If they are going to rake me over the coals, I am only imagine what kind of scrutiny they put on people who a really up to no good. If this information keeps us as a society safe, then that is fine with me.

As a side note - you have to understand how un-private your life is already. Have a grocery "club" card? You think that is for your personal savings? Shit no it's not - it's to data mine what age groups buy what, average purchase size, time of day they shop, etc. Safeway probably has a better handle on what I eat and drink than I do. The "savings" that you are experience is a built in cost to make you think it's for your benefit - when really it's just market research. This is just one example; CC data mind, so do banks with their checking accounts, anything that has your address will put you in a database for PRIZM marketing. I can go online and get your criminal history, address, phone number, place of employment, the works. So to think that your privacy is really private - think again. I'd rather have the government know all of those things than private citizens.

I think things like the Patriot Act are essential for a national security. You can't be all pro-government programs (i.e. intervention in your life) and I'm not saying you specifically are but some here might be, while at the same time saying "No no, we won't have the government knowing about what I search on line... that's not fair". If you're going to support government programs that are deisgned to help people and make life better - a person would be pretty hypocritical to not feel the same way twoards national security.

[Funkmasta]

the only thing safeway knows about me is that I'm a cheap ass and only buy what is on sale. If they were to make any other conclusions, they'd be wrong. :)

[uofom3]

I don't really want to go there.
a: is silly. Are you trying to say that if I don't agree with abortion, that I should lock my kids in a closet so they can't possibly ever have sex? That is obviously unrealistic and since it really only applies to female children, it becomes even more absurd.

b: adoption is a very real and very worthwhile choice. Also, you may not want a child, but once the inevitable happens, it is your responsibility to care for and love that child. Trust me when I tell you that if you are a good person with a sense of responsibility, you will do just that.

The decision comes down to if you believe that the instant an egg is fertilized, it is human and has a soul. That is something that is non-provable one way or the other. Either you believe it does have a soul and is therefore a living breathing human being and therefore to abort it is to commit murder. Or, you don't believe it is human until it is born... er or is it 6 months, or anytime after the first trimester or ... what. Anyway, somewhere in there it becomes human and should not be killed.

That is why I don't want it to be a political debate. There is no answer for this question. Only personal belief. If you push the government to make a decision on this kind of thing where there is no answer, don't be surprised if the decision that comes back is not what you wanted. If the government errs on the safe side, there will be no abortion. If they say it is allowable, you might not like the terms.

I guess it is cowardice on my part, but trying to determine if abortion is murder or not is something that I just can't answer. My preferred stance is that abortion should be avoided as much as possible and abstinence and prevention promoted as much as possible. But I am also unwilling to make that decision for someone else.

Good post. I'm going to try and use this as a framework to respond to Joe's post as well.

A) It's on the parent to "keep them out of the gene pool". This society is bass-ackwards when it comes to sex education and keeping sexuality behind closed doors. I don't want people push overtly sexual ads on me at all times or anything like that; but there needs to be a more open dialogue about sex. Kids are bonin, and they will keep bonin as long as the human race exists. Things like birth control, condoms, etc. need to be very easily accessable, and completely OK to have. when that happens, the need for abortion will go down drastically.

- to note: in some eastern european states - abortion is basically their form of birth control which is scarry; I think most specifically Poland.

B) Adoption has good stores, but I hear a lot more nightmares than success stories. I can't say that terminating the pregnancy is better than keeping the kid, but I can say that it sounds to me like the adoption process and the lives of a lot of those people who get adopted are not that great. These people will, in many cases, end up having psychological or social problems. It's a tragedy, but it's what goes on. That much instability in developmental years would really hurt anyones ability to develop cognitive abilities, empathy, and sane reasoning.

There is not solution. I personally break it down into three ways of seeing it:

1) You believe that killing the fetus, at any point, is murdering a human being. This is the more straightforward, and easy way to view it.

2) You have qualms about it, but can see the benefit that it would have on the mother/situation/society in various cases. It is less a hard-core killing issue and more of a ? mark for the people thinking about it.

3) You look at the net-benefit for society. Particularly in minority communities where teen pregnancy is rampant, finding a way to stop a pregnancy would be the best thing for the mother. Without a child, these people can go on to school, jobs, any a productive life. Having the child will be a burden on her, and society will foot the ball. Also, in many documented cases, the father isn't around - this leaves the child being raised by a single mother or other family members. It is pretty clear how not bringing that child into this world economically, and socially makes sense.

I'm fairly pro life, but the realist in me just can't justify denying a woman a right to choose. I am CERTAINLY NOT ok with late term abortions. You had 6 months to think about it - either take care of it at conception or keep the child. I can see how bringing some of these children into the world only has a net-downside to society, and ultimately their life. In these cases, I really cannot argue against the greater good by saying that abortion is not an option.

This may seem a bit out there - but here is my proposition to help solve this problem. Take at-risk teenage groups who are just becomming sexually active, and have the state offer free birth control (similar to Planned Parenthood - which is a fantastic organization and does this country a great deal of good). This WOULD NOT BE A MANDATED PROGRAM; it's completely up to the individual - it's just an option. So - the state is funding the BC for these women along with other forms of contraceptive - but here is where my proposition might strike some as being off base. For every one of these people who sign up, say at 14, on BC... when they turn 22 they get X amount of money from the state if they don't have a child. Say (and this is an arbitrary number - it could be adjusted) $10,000.00 Tax free dollars as an incentive. I feel that ultimately, including the cost of the various contraceptives, this would equate to a HUGE net savings for society. Between single mothers getting on state health plans and associated medical costs, the loss of productivity for the parents, the loss of having a direct shot at school because of the child, ect... the net gain would be very large. Plus - they have the incentive because of a cash value at the end. By not getting pregnant, this person will have the time and theoretically ability to move into the future with money to start with and their stability at least some what more intact.

There is more that I could add to it I guess - but that was my thought process in a nut shell for possible solution to a large problem. To bring it full circle, a program like this would also reduce the number and need for abortions.

[uofom3]

Death Penalty and Abortion

Given my previous post regarding abortion, I can say that I support capital punishment and not feel like a hypocrite.

The only rationale I can give for being pro-life, but pro-death penalty is this: The unborn child is a blank life; a tabula rasa. The person who is convicted of murder and setenced to death murdered a human being - not a fetus?

This is a hugely contradictory stance - and honestly, I'm pretty shocked how many people who are religous take this stance. We can't all be non-hypocritical all the time... but this is a pretty glarring error in thinking.

[Ral]

Here's my contributions on abortion/adoption, FWIW. I wasn't adopted, so this is just one isolated case and I'm sure there's others on the board that have experienced things much more directly, so I'm not claiming to be an expert or use this example to apply it across the board. I'm sure there's people that have lived through much, much worse. (end disclaimer)

A girl I dated a while ago was an unwanted baby, but (obviously) her mom didn't have an abortion. She grew up in bar stools watching her mom leave with guys for a night then they'd have money for the next few weeks until she was placed in foster care and adopted by another lady in middle school, where she somewhat abused. (I think the girl exaggerated a lot, but not entirely.) So, after living through that (and the other things that happened to her early in life- I'll let you use your imaginations) she had no foundation of self-worth. She eventually started stripping, and is now a porn star with some serious mental issues. (shortly after we broke up, she asked me to come over to help her with something then had me jumped by 3 other guys. Fun stuff.)

I haven't talked to this girl in over a year, despite her attempts to get in touch with me. And last night, I get this series of texts that I'm going to quote:

"just curious if the fact I had an abortion ever crosses your mind"
"there isn't a day that passes that I don't think about it"
"I do. I think about it every day. That I took the easy way out and it was your baby!"
"I assume it doesn't cross your mind ever does it?"

I'm putting this out there to show that there's really no good answer to the question, and to give it more personal applicability. She's had a really, really shitty life through adoption/state care. She's also wrecked inside by her decision to carry out the abortion. I asked her not to at the time, but I'm not sure I would this time around. What i can say is that, however painful the abortion was to me, in the long run I'm ecstatic that the baby wasn't born into the life it would have led, but that's assuming a lot about the life of that kid.

[Ral]

Soo... on a lighter note, anyone see the Obama/Hilary war?

Obama's apparently been knocking socialized... I mean Nationalized... health care, and Hilary's up in arms about it.

[Dave]

Soo... on a lighter note, anyone see the Obama/Hilary war?

Obama's apparently been knocking socialized... I mean Nationalized... health care, and Hilary's up in arms about it.

Actually, he is knocking her version of it, as opposed to his.

And Hillary called him out on some lies in his recent mailers.

He is running a Rove-style campaign, just as a Dem.

[Hallen]

I am going to repeat something I said at the end of an earlier post. I was listening to portions of the debate the other night. I love the way Obama used different words to refer to something trying to change its status and make you feel guilty about not wanting these people here. He kept calling illegal aliens "undocumented workers". Excuse me?

First, it implies that all illegal aliens are just honest workers that have come here to try and make some money. This is of course not true.

Secondly, it gives them some status, some legitimacy here when they have none. It just really irks me that Obama is pandering to these people and that there is enough of these "undocumented workers" out there that have managed to get enough ID to be able to vote that politicians think it's worth the time to pander to them.

NavyE30, what you were talking about there was not adoption. It was neglect and then into the foster care system. Some foster parents are great and do it because they love children and want to help. Others simply do it for the money they get from the state. Those ones typically do a lousy job. I don't think examples like this are a good argument for abortion though. I think that it is a good argument for sterilizing some people. Some people just shouldn't be allowed to breed. And the text she sent you was just bloody cold and spiteful. Stay far, far away from that thing... it isn't human anymore.

[Funkmasta]

I am going to repeat something I said at the end of an earlier post. I was listening to portions of the debate the other night. I love the way Obama used different words to refer to something trying to change its status and make you feel guilty about not wanting these people here. He kept calling illegal aliens "undocumented workers". Excuse me?

First, it implies that all illegal aliens are just honest workers that have come here to try and make some money. This is of course not true.

Secondly, it gives them some status, some legitimacy here when they have none. It just really irks me that Obama is pandering to these people and that there is enough of these "undocumented workers" out there that have managed to get enough ID to be able to vote that politicians think it's worth the time to pander to them.

I would say that they are more illegal immigrants than aliens... they don't have plans to go home anytime soon. Home is the US.

they should be taxed like everyone else.
I don;t mind that they are here, the youth of today has something to learn of their work ethic.

[Ral]

And the text she sent you was just bloody cold and spiteful. Stay far, far away from that thing... it isn't human anymore.

very true. And I'm most likely going to delete my previous post, there really isn't a whole lot it brings to the thread.

As for the rest of your post, I absolutely agree.

[joshh]

I'm sorry but this is worthless. Hillary IS a joke, but more sensible than Obama. Obama can speak like a preacher, but his speach means nothing. McCain is a flaming liberal in direct comparison to the incumbant. This post just really doesn't solve anything, or add anything to an otherwise informed discussion. I guess it's not my place to be the judge/jury/executioner on what is sound.... but please contribute something more than cliche and obligatory comments.

I see you've completely missed the point. My post shows that none of the three proposed peoples will lead this country.
Post their production records and you will see. You can start with McCain fighting the cable companies so the lazy can remain more lazy.
Next, can you find me where any of the above have answered a single question regarding anything directly.
Billary is a talking hole of bullshit. She can't even answer where all the money will come from to get all Americans Healthcare...her biggest socialistic idea we have ever heard of in the last 100 years.

Time for our politicians to help enforce the laws they passed. Starting with all the illegals draining our system.