Obama sends his minions to silence critics...

[Vedubin01]

What makes you so sure all of a sudden? No one even knows this ladies name. She's a nobody in the GOP, and the Dems are going to push hard on that fact. The only reason she was picked was because she's a women. I imagine this will hurt more than help him.

IS that a yes or no you will take the bet?

[CorvallisBMW]

Why should I? Give me one good reason why I should humor your delusions of superiority over me.

[Vedubin01]

Why should I? Give me one good reason why I should humor your delusions of superiority over me.

No superiority complex, just stand up for what you believe in. You and others like you spew utter crap with no personal backing. Time to stand up!

[markseven]

What makes you so sure all of a sudden? No one even knows this ladies name. She's a nobody in the GOP, and the Dems are going to push hard on that fact. The only reason she was picked was because she's a women. I imagine this will hurt more than help him.

She is aligned with McCain's pro-life convictions.

[AndrewBird]

Do you guys really think that McCain and other higher political figures don't have connections with shady people?

The only thing Obama did wrong is not hide his connections like everyone else. Politicians are shady regardless of their color/religion/nationality. They have to be. It's sad, but it's true.

[CorvallisBMW]

She is aligned with McCain's pro-life convictions.

But so is every Republican. So why pick this one?

[CorvallisBMW]

No superiority complex, just stand up for what you believe in. You and others like you spew utter crap with no personal backing. Time to stand up!

Ha ha, and you don't? How many political trolling threads have you started in the last month? 10? 12? You do more spewing than anyone else on this board.

Oh, and how does taking a bet equal standing up for waht you believe in? All those gamblers out their must have some really strong convictions about Blackjack then.....

[Vedubin01]

Ha ha, and you don't? How many political trolling threads have you started in the last month? 10? 12? You do more spewing than anyone else on this board.

Oh, and how does taking a bet equal standing up for waht you believe in? All those gamblers out their must have some really strong convictions about Blackjack then.....

actually I have not started any political threads in the last month. I told someone here that I would not. So the answer is 0.

And the betting would not be black jack but more like poker! ;)

I just figured that you think your so right in your posts and personal attacks that you might like me silenced, I figure it was a good way to silence one or the other and Im willing to take that bet based off of the political stance I take. Again if you ever read my posts I am not a fan of Mccain. But Obama has not proven one time how all this change is going to happen.

[BenM]

Just wanted to throw this into the mix -

http://www.peteyandpetunia.com/VoteHere/VoteHere.htm

I lol'ed.

Ben

[CorvallisBMW]

But Obama has not proven one time how all this change is going to happen.

Apparently you didn't watch TV last night. Go down the list of EVERY issue facing America today. He touched on every one of them and explained his methods/solutions. He even explained how he would pay for the ones that cost money.

Just wanted to throw this into the mix -

http://www.peteyandpetunia.com/VoteHere/VoteHere.htm

I lol'ed.

Ben

That's hilarious!

[Vedubin01]

No not really, it was a play on words. How is he going to get the government to do what he wants them to do...... thats what you dont get. He is nothing but a puppet that is using what everyone wants to hear to gain the presidency.

[uofom3]

But so is every Republican. So why pick this one?

That's not true at all. I thought the liberal party was against social stereotypes (or is that a stereotype?).

[uofom3]

"before anyone goes off"
i only said that because i wanted the first word lol!
i know what you mean. i am not saying that everyone should be pro choice or the other. i just don't think that people should be able to tell other people what to do with themselves. i also know it's very complex, no doubt about that. so many different things to think about and take into account. i really understand arguments against pro choice as much as i do the ones for it. my mom had 5 kids and my big sister has 3 and she took care of me a lot while i was small and my mom was working. being an uncle i also have started looking at the issue differently.
now we come into the territory of "when are you truly alive." when is it a person and at what point does the child have rights? that's the hard part. i would be interested to see what other people have to say about this! i love hearing what other people think! keep it coming uofm3!

Well... I think people have to take the abortion issue in two parts:

1. When does "conception" take place and the life form becomes human
2. The morality/right/etc. of what courses of action to take AFTER that has been assessed and the pro's and con's of each.

I personally think conception and creation of human life takes place immediately after the "act" has taken place. To take a humerous quote from a source I can't site, "If conception didn't take place immediately, why would people use condoms? take the pill?" that makes a great point IMO. So that's my stance.. the life is human at conception. Now, there is the second half.

I think there are several different ways in which people can look at it. I think you can look at it through several lenses:
1. Morality/Religion
2. Economic
3. Personal Freedom
4. The rights of women

I think morally it's a pretty questionable act once the baby has really become a growing human being. I don't have an issue if someone were to abort a pregnancy virtually immediately after the pregnancy was discovered or at the first possible date. You are killing a future human life, no doubt, but for some reason that is something I can stomach. I'm also not overly religious in the least, though I will identify my religious background as being "christian" in nature.

My previous statement primarily comes from the second point; the economical cost of that life on the society at large. Say a single mother has yet another child that she can't afford. This child is going to be a burden on the state, statistically more likely to engage in crime, and will in many cases just perpetuate generational poverty. Is that baby better off dead? Well, maybe not. I'd like to think that no one is really better off dead. BUT, the benefit to society by aborting that baby is huge - the mother could live a normal life, the pre-existing chilren can have a better shot, etc.

The real problem is, momma needs to stop being a "ho" or "weekend waffleswaffleswaffleswaffleswaffles". She needs to figure out that if she's going to jump up on that pogo-stick, there needs to be some sort of barrier for her to prevent pregnancy. People MUST be smart about their sexual activity/promiscuity. I also think that teaching abstinance is basically worthless. Kids are going to fuck like rabbits regardless - so equip them to do it safely. I would encourage girls to "keep it in their pants" and hold themselves to a higher standard... but right now I don't think that is going to happen. Abortion is a problem, but it's a bi-product of a bigger problem. I don't really care enough about this issue to go grab the statistics again, but last I saw there were certain sectors of the population that had a larger problem with this than others - and it's up to people in those communities to want to change to stop these problems. When "the folks" in America in general get real about not wanting people to have unplanned pregnancies - this will be a minute issue.

Something I've thrown out there (which would never happen) is to put girls who have started their menstration cycle on state sanctioned birth control. Then, create some sort of reasonable financial incentive - say a 10k$ bond given to the girl at birth - that they can claim (with accompanied interest) after the age of 21 and is applicable twoards debt/school/etc. IF they can manage to make it that far without getting pregnant outside of marriage. If they pop one out - no cigar. The net cost to society of shelling out a few grand vs. taking care of a child on WICK, state health plans, education, etc. is a drop in the bucket. This would also allow more people in at-risk communities to pursue education, etc. This also still leaves these people in a situation where they can make the decision for themselves... they can follow the rules and get the money for their future or they can do whatever they want and forfeit it. I know this sounds a bit out there, and this isn't a finished thought or platform or anything, but I think some sort of strategy like this will need to be developed to help eliminate the abortion issue from one of the "major topics" by significantly reducing the need for people to get the procedure.

[markseven]

That's not true at all. I thought the liberal party was against social stereotypes (or is that a stereotype?).

Yup. There are fiscal conservatives - they vote Republican.

[Pinepig]

Why should I? Give me one good reason why I should humor your delusions of superiority over me.

You can have a two for one, I'll go in on that if the Messiah wins I'll take a ride along with Vedubin01 and never come back.

You are all puss.