The Note, 1/23/09: Bye, Partisanship? — Maybe Not So Fast
EmailBy RICK KLEIN Where’s the most likely spot for a flare up in the early days of the Obama administration — the left, the right, or the press corps? Who will be most in demand among TV bookers Friday — reporters who can get you to $825 billion, or reporters who know how to pronounce "Gillibrand"? Who will be in most demand at the White House stakeout Friday morning — John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi? Here’s the thing about shattering the old kind of politics: Not everyone and everything is ready and willing to be broken. With Washington now made up of anxious liberals, coalescing Republicans, and an active new president who is turning symbols into substance, President Obama’s pledge of a new era in government gets its first major test Friday, with a 9:45 am ET bipartisan, bicameral meeting of congressional leaders at the White House. While the press shop figures out that e-mail system, and the president figures out his new Berry, taking stock of the first three days: The first major announcement of Obama’s presidency — the closing of Gitmo — ran into fierce and quick opposition from a Republican Party that’s finding its ways of testing the president. The first major legislative push — the stimulus package — is fast becoming a one-sided document, in what could end up as a narrow vote, not a sweeping one. (And good luck with stimulus/bank boost No. 2.) The record will reflect that the Obama administration was able to wait a full three days before pressing ahead on a divisive social issue that feels suspiciously like the politics of the past. (Plus — what should have and could have been a smooth move to replace Hillary Clinton in the Senate has turned into a made-for-the-tabs drama, with Kennedys and Cuomos and bruised egos and primary challenges. Another chink in the Democratic armor?) Battle lines drawn, bipartisanship is going to require give as well as take. Going into Friday’s meeting: "Just days after taking office vowing to end the political era of ‘petty grievances,’ President Obama ran into mounting GOP opposition yesterday to an economic stimulus plan that he had hoped would receive broad bipartisan support," Paul Kane writes in The Washington Post. "Republicans accused Democrats of abandoning the new president’s pledge, ignoring his call for bipartisan comity and shutting them out of the process by writing the $825 billion legislation. The first drafts of the plan would result in more spending on favored Democratic agenda items, such as federal funding of the arts, they said, but would do little to stimulate the ailing economy." Watching the goals shrink: "If it’s passed with 63 votes or 73 votes, history won’t remember it," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. (There are at least two different ways to read those words.) David Brooks labels the stimulus push the "first test": "President Obama is clearly going to have to show the hard way that he meant what he said about bringing change. He didn’t run for president just to sign whatever bills the Old Bulls put on his desk," Brooks writes in his New York Times op-ed. "He’s going to have to prove the hard way that he meant what he said about being pragmatic and evidence-based. . . . He’s going to have to show that his plans have credibility, that a stimulus bill is really a stimulus bill, and not a Christmas tree for every special interest desire." Your new kind of politics: The stimulus package may land on the House floor without a single Republican voting for it in committee. "Congressional leaders and President Barack Obama are having a hard time finding common ground on an economic recovery plan as Republican resistance to the stimulus package emerges in the House," the AP’s Jim Kuhnhenn reports. Better luck in the Senate? "On Friday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus was expected to unveil a Senate version of the tax cutting portion of the bill. The legislation could have a more bipartisan look in the Senate, where it takes 60 votes out of 100 to overcome procedural blocks," Kuhnhenn reports. It’s very possible Obama will be asking for more money — sooner rather than later. "The White House’s economic team is under pressure from Congress to finalize its financial rescue plan within a week amid a growing realization among lawmakers that they will have to find extra money to fund the new administration’s program," Jonathan Weisman and Deborah Solomon report in The Wall Street Journal. "The scale of the effort is almost certain to be larger than the $350 billion secured last week through the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Lawmakers say that means they need a proposal from the White House within days so they can appropriate more money." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is George Stephanopoulos’ headliner on ABC’s "This Week" Sunday. On Gitmo: "President Obama is facing growing criticism from Republicans over his order to close the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with his decision to fulfill a well-known campaign pledge bringing an early test of his promised bipartisan cooperation," per ABC News. "A group of House Republicans quickly filed a bill that would prohibit federal courts from ordering the transfer or release of Guantanamo detainees into the U.S." Poor timing: "The emergence of a former Guantánamo Bay detainee as the deputy leader of Al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch has underscored the potential complications in carrying out the executive order President Obama signed Thursday that the detention center be shut down within a year," Robert F. Worth reports in The New York Times. "The development came as Republican legislators criticized the plan to close the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp in the absence of any measures for dealing with current detainees. But it also helps explain why the new administration wants to move cautiously, taking time to work out a plan to cope with the complications." Plus, the Band-Aid comes off slowly: "On a day meant to demonstrate a clean break from the policies of his predecessor, Obama put off many of the most difficult decisions about what the U.S. will do with detainees, and left room to revisit whether the CIA still should have permission to use coercive methods when questioning captives," Greg Miller and Julian E. Barnes write in the Los Angeles Times. Sayeth the Maverick: "So, the easy part, in all due respect, is to say we’re going to close Guantanamo," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told Larry King. "Then I think I would have said where they were going to be taken. Because you’re going to run into a NIMBY [not in my backyard] problem here in the United States of America." The opposition comes into focus a bit more on Friday. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has a 1 pm ET speech scheduled for the National Press Club — taking on interest groups, challenging the president, and chiding the media a bit. "I think reporters too often confuse being conservative with being partisan," McConnell, R-Ken., plans to say, per excerpts provided to The Note. "The good news is that most people think ideas should be assessed on their merits, not on the senator or the president who proposes them. Our new President seems to think the same thing. And as Senate Republican Leader, I also pledge to make this is a firm principle in my dealings with the Obama Administration." Politico’s Manu Raju has more from McConnell’s speech: "Every decision cannot be made based on a political calculation — because the usual interest groups so seldom agree," McConnell is planning to say. "President Obama seems to understand this. His campaign was based on the notion that ordinary Americans would have a seat at the table in his administration. And broadening the old constituencies is, as he has suggested, one sure way to uphold that pledge." A new era over on that side of the Capitol? "Perhaps nowhere was the new dynamic more striking than in the Senate on Thursday. Here were members of both parties, proposing and disposing of amendments before they voted 61 to 36 to approve a pay equity bill in line to be the first measure signed by President Obama," Carl Hulse reports in The New York Times. Elections have consequences: "President Barack Obama will issue an order restoring U.S. funding for international family-planning groups involved with abortion. But he chose not to do so on Thursday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade," The Wall Street Journal’s Laura Meckler reports. "His timing was unclear, though several advocates expected it soon." As in very soon: "ABC News has learned that later today President Obama will sign an executive order overturning the ‘Mexico City Policy,’ which prohibits Non Governmental Organizations that receive international family planning assistance through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) from providing or actively promoting abortions as a method of family planning in other countries," ABC’s Jake Tapper reports. Pledges have consequences, too: "Experts and watchdogs say they cannot fathom how President Obama’s choice for the Pentagon’s second-in-command, currently a lobbyist for a defense giant, could be nominated under the principles of his new ethics rules," ABC’s Justin Rood reports. "Obama’s executive order, which he signed Tuesday, would appear to ban lobbyists like Lynn from working in executive branch jobs related to the work of their former employers. Moreover, it would force appointees to recuse themselves from any business their former employers might have an interest." The AP’s Jim Drinkard: "Already, there have been two prominent exceptions made to Obama’s no-lobbyists rule. William J. Lynn III, his choice to become the No. 2 official at the Defense Department, was registered until July as a lobbyist for defense contractor Raytheon. And William Corr, tapped as deputy secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services, lobbied through most of last year as an anti-tobacco advocate, according to public records. Corr has decided to take no part in tobacco matters in the new administration." Among those confused by the new policy: Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin. "The committee will await the administration’s assessment as to whether the new rules will preclude Mr. Lynn, who was a registered lobbyist for a defense contractor, from participating in key Department of Defense decisions, and if so, whether a waiver will be forthcoming and what the scope of the waiver will be," said Levin, D-Mich. "As the Pentagon’s number-two official, Lynn, now Raytheon’s vice president for government operations and strategy, would have wide influence over decisions affecting the company, which relies on Defense Department contracts for much of its business," The Boston Globe’s Bryan Bender reports. It sparked the first real testy exchange between the president and a reporter in the briefing room: "President Obama made a surprise visit to the White House press corps Thursday night, but got agitated when he was faced with a substantive question. Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a Deputy Defense Secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face," Politico’s Jonathan Martin and Carrie Budoff Brown report. "Ahh, see," the president said, "I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can’t end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I’m going to get grilled every time I come down here." (Think he’ll be back anytime soon? And would most of the reporters there rather have an answer or a handshake?) Dana Milbank critiques the first Robert Gibbs White House briefing: "For the voice of an administration that came to office promising openness and transparency, he instead sounded, well, abundantly cautious," he writes. "The abundantly cautious spokesman referred regularly to notes as he worked his way through the questions. Gibbs uttered the name ‘Obama’ not once, instead slipping into the press secretary habit of saying only ‘the president’ — 70 times." It’s "JIL’-uh-brand," and she’ll be announced as Hillary Clinton’s replacement by Gov. David Paterson, D-N.Y., at a noon ET press conference in Albany. "Gov. David A. Paterson has selected Representative Kirsten Gillibrand, a 42-year-old congresswoman from upstate who is known for bold political moves and centrist policy positions, to fill the United States Senate seat vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to a person who spoke to the governor early Friday," Danny Hakim and Nicholas Confessore report in The New York Times. They write: "If Mr. Paterson was hoping to quiet the tumult over the selection process by picking Ms. Gillibrand, there were indications that he may not get his wish. Ms. Gillibrand, who has been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, is controversial among some of the party’s more liberal leaders downstate." "Representative Carolyn McCarthy, a Long Island Democrat and ardent gun control activist, said Thursday that if Ms. Gillibrand got the job, she was prepared to run against her in a primary in 2010." New drama for New York Democrats — and a pick that has to be seen through the Paterson lens. Meet the new senator: "Gov. Paterson, defying the liberal wing of his Democratic Party, has chosen little-known, NRA-backed, upstate Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton as New York’s junior senator, it was learned last night," Fredric U. Dicker reports in the New York Post. "Sources said ‘at least five’ members of the state’s Democratic congressional delegation called Paterson to protest the possibility of Gillibrand’s selection." Ugly: "A nasty war of words erupted Thursday between loyalists to Gov. Paterson and supporters of Caroline Kennedy after she abruptly dropped out of the scramble to succeed Hillary Clinton as New York’s junior senator," Kenneth Lovett reports in the New York Daily News. "The Paterson camp contended Kennedy withdrew her name because of a ‘tax problem’ and a ‘potential nanny issue’ — while adding that the governor never really intended to name her because she wasn’t ready for ‘prime time.’ " ABC’s George Stephanopoulos: "A source insists that the ‘private matter’ that caused Caroline Kennedy to withdraw from Senate consideration is NOT related to her uncle, Sen. Ted Kennedy’s health. It is a ‘very private family matter’ that came to light this week, after Sunday, a source tells me." Checking in on the RNC race: "Republican leaders’ efforts to select a new national party chairman are stirring concerns among a vital constituency: Republican voters," Bloomberg’s Heidi Przybyla reports. "Rank-and-file Republicans are telling their leaders they want more ethnic, gender and age diversity in a party that is dominated by white males. They also want party leaders to cooperate with President Barack Obama, according to surveys." Stu Rothenberg judges it too close to call: "This year’s RNC race increasingly appears to be a three- or possibly four-person contest, with the current RNC chairman, Mike Duncan, holding a tenuous but not insignificant advantage over former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, with Michigan GOP Chairman Saul Anuzis and South Carolina GOP Chairman Katon Dawson fighting it out for third." Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, at her state of the state: "2008 was the year when America looked to Alaska, and one of our own sprang to national attention," said Palin, per ABC’s Kate Snow and Teddy Davis. "There was political drama, controversy, lively debate, a few awkward moments, and, in the end, some disappointment. But what a glorious debut for a unique Alaskan — and we congratulate our former Senator Mike Gravel." Nancy Pelosi’s morning headache: "Federal agents raided two small Pennsylvania defense contractors that were given millions of dollars in federal funding by Rep. John Murtha, chairman of the defense appropriations committee and one of the most powerful men in Congress," per The Wall Street Journal. "Kuchera Industries and Kuchera Defense Systems shut down for the day after the raid by officers from the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and an Internal Revenue Service criminal unit." From the hometown Johnstown Tribune-Democrat: "U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said in a statement that the locations were searched as part of an ongoing investigation led by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Pennsylvania." A win (along with that new job) for Norm Coleman: "Al Franken’s effort to block Norm Coleman’s lawsuit over the U.S. Senate recount was rejected Thursday by a three-judge panel, setting the stage for a trial to begin Monday on the Republican’s claims," Pat Doyle reports in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. "State election law doesn’t undermine the Senate’s constitutional power to later judge the qualifications of its members, the judges said in denying Franken’s request to dismiss the election contest, as the lawsuit is called." Obama gets his Berry: "There is one addiction President Obama will not have to kick: his BlackBerry," Jeff Zeleny writes in The New York Times. The rules: "First, only a select circle of people will have his address, creating a true hierarchy for who makes the cut and who does not. Second, anyone placed on the A-list to receive his e-mail address must first receive a briefing from the White House counsel’s office. Third, messages from the president will be designed so they cannot be forwarded." Part of the Bush legacy that isn’t: "It’s no secret that President George W. Bush never inserted himself into Washington’s social culture. So it should also be no secret that when his term lapsed Tuesday, he became the first president never to dine at The Palm since it opened during the 1970s," Jeff Dufour and Patrick Gavin report in the Washington Examiner. The Kicker: “We will be having a press conference at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys — that’s all I was trying to do.” — President Obama, to reporters trying to do their jobs. “We had Greg help you guys understand a little bit of that.” — Robert Gibbs, accidentally providing the first name of a senior White House official who was not to be named after briefing the press on Gitmo. (Later, he added: “I’m tempted to ask you to see if you can get one person’s name into the papers so people will think he might be a Brazilian soccer star.”) Bookmark the link below to get The Note’s daily morning analysis: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/the_note/index.html For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/ Follow The Note blog on Twitter: http://twitter.com/thenote
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
It’s on the Republicans to be receptive and willing to work with the White House on the stimulus. Pelosi may play hardball, but everything still stops with Obama. The GOP can’t confuse the House or Senate leadership with the president.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | January 23, 2009, 9:18 am 9:18 am
Just heard on NPR one suggestion for solving the problem of what to do with the Guitmo detainees is to return them to their homelands for trial there. That would surely take a burden off our judicial system. It would also pinpoint which nations are truly convicted to fighting terror while firming up diplomatic relations with other national governments. Only thing is terrorists are connected to a radical religious movement, not a country or government. Since there are only about 250 detainees left, they would probably only start up a hundred or so new terrorist training camps. Terrorists…they just blow up so fast these days. Problem solved in a bipartisan manner.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 9:35 am 9:35 am
I am well pleased with my President. I feel like a load has lifted off my shoulders. Let the Republicans and press stew and whine and try to cause trouble, we have an A+ administration and I support them 100%.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 9:48 am 9:48 am
Wow,finally an even handed article that doesn’t fawn all over the messiah and actually makes him look bad in spots.
Articles like this are almost, not quite but almost, restoring my faith in journalism. Unfortunately, there remains a long road to travel to get true bias free reporting but I applaud the author for taking one small step.
Posted by: James | January 23, 2009, 9:54 am 9:54 am
For our new president to call for bipartisanship is to be expected. To get it is another story. The left can’t legitimately point a finger at the right for their resistance to leftist politics because the left has opposed everything the right proposed for the last two years and more. That’s politics. There are still fundamental differences between the ways the left and right think we should handle foreign relations, domestic programs, size of government, spending, taxation and the best way to grow an economy. There will be discussion, rejection of ideas, questioning of policy, questioning of appointments, etc. and that is a good thing. What’s bad is to totally ignore everything the opposition has to say and forge ruthlessly ahead with partisan objectives. Both parties have constructive input that should be heard, considered, and applied. Only then will there be bipartisanship. Ultimately the house and senate are to blame for our problems and they’re the only ones who can fix the problems they’ve created and/or ignored. All we can do is hope and pray they will.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am
I think the Republicans should be just as receptive as the Democrats were during the good days when the Republicans ran the House and Senate. Remember those good old days when we could afford to go to movies and buy a luxury once in a while, then the Dumbocrats took over and look where we are now. A President who gives an evil stare at a reporter who dared asking a difficult question. Going to be a long 4 years.
Posted by: Illinois | January 23, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am
ROFL cant say people didnt warn you that this man was not ready for this job. ROFL…
Wonder what a world leader would say if he went in and acted like a spoiled child.
So far Obama’s orders have all been dumb. Not one intelligent thing has come from the White House with the new owner.
Posted by: ChicagoBob | January 23, 2009, 10:19 am 10:19 am
His biggest problem will be Nancy Pelosi. The D’s in the house need to play nice and listen to the Republicans.
Posted by: kseyetie | January 23, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am
According to the Dems, the reason Geitner and Clinton and what’s his name, the attorney general, are confirmed or to be confirmed, in spite of some serious integrity and ethics questions is that they are simply “the right people for the job right now.” Seriously that was the official reasoning. That pretty well excludes any validity of objections. If it’s true and if you’re willing to settle for proven corrupt politicians and assuming there’s no other person who could fill the position satisfactorily out of hundreds of millions of other US citizens, then they’re the right choices, politically speaking.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am
Plan for cleaning up Washington politics…put the lobbyists on the government payroll. Streamline our government by cutting out the middlemen.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Illinois; That’s the transparency we were promised. Obama looked right through that dumbfounded reporter.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 10:43 am 10:43 am
America – the champion of human rights thoughtout the world, we stand for life, liberty and justice for ALL — yet we are seriously failing to stand strong against the most defensless citizens of own country – unborn babies that will be killed, not just “aborted” but killed. I wonder if the rest of the world sees us as hypocrites?
I wonder why many of the special human a civil right groups discriminate by not representing our most defensless citizens – unborn,unwanted, babies. Why do we speak out on genocide in other countries when it is happening right here in our own country. Perhaps the people in those countries allowing genocide feel that it is somebody’s right to do so. Is that what many in this country try to tell themselves.
Life is sacred. We have vowed from the beginning of our country’s history to protect and honor life. We have been blinded and mislead to think that individual right’s are more sacred then life itself.
Pray. Let’s practice what we preach as a nation. Let’s have the courage and strength to support and defend all our citizens.
Posted by: Marianne Burger | January 23, 2009, 10:51 am 10:51 am
Let the Jimmy Carter era of governance resume. It’s a good thing too, cause I miss the ’70′s, Don’t YOU!
Posted by: hmn... | January 23, 2009, 10:57 am 10:57 am
America,
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. You can change the faces, but the system that is washington isn’t changing. Expect the same ole yada yada.
Posted by: Why are we in this handbasket? | January 23, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am
Marianne Burger
We need to break down the causes of unwanted pregnancies and address these issues face on. I have seen babies born with drugs in their systems or fetal alchohol syndrome and unstable mothers, and that’s a tragedy too. A blanket law outlawing abortion will not stop the practice, or address the issue of ill prepared mothers, as a look back to the ’50′s will attest. I think we are long overdue for an examination of how young women are pressured to be sexually active before they are emotionally ready to bear the consequences. Why did Bristol Palin become pregnant at age 17? She came from a conservative family, yet she had unprotected sex in high school. Thank goodness her family supported her, but I’m glad my nieces waited until their twenties and thirties to have children in stable homes.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 11:22 am 11:22 am
Marianne Burger; The Chinese limit their births to only one child per family in the interest of population control. Here in America we have enough expectant mothers who don’t want their child that we don’t have to impose child limits on families. Our mothers volunteer to abort. All the government has to do in America to affect population control is to keep abortion legal. Legalized abortion also keeps the welfare scrolls more manageable. Also prevents bad dads from having to pay child support. Besides, we only execute a million or so innocent unborn babies per year. No biggie.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 11:23 am 11:23 am
The republican”GOOD” ideas on the economy and the world got us to this end-If you have new ideas-speak up and be heard-if you are just a cronic complainer-go take it out on your wife. I thought the greatest symbolism of the inaguration was a crippled Cheney leaving the country he helped to cripple- I still have no sympathy for any republican who contributed to this mess-or democrat for that matter
Posted by: cowgirlblues | January 23, 2009, 11:42 am 11:42 am
“Besides, we only execute a million or so innocent unborn babies per year. No biggie.”
“Let’s have the courage and strength to support and defend all our citizens.”
A fetus is not a citizen.
Posted by: Silky | January 23, 2009, 11:44 am 11:44 am
Monroe-the lobbists have been on the government payroll for the last 8 years-they controlled the politicians we elected-we cut off the head of the snake now we dispose of the body-then we have to manage the partisans on both sides by constantly staying on our elected state officials-which is-a more productive use of our time than blogging each other
Posted by: cowgirlblues | January 23, 2009, 11:49 am 11:49 am
cowgirlblues; Your attitude, that of admitting no culpability on behalf of your party, makes it impossible to intelligently discuss issues and solutions. Save the blame game for campaigning. Both parties have good ideas and both parties have bad ideas. Stop pointing fingers, come back with an open mind and then the two parties can co-operate. Even if our legislators can’t do that, there’s no reason why we the people can’t rise above them. Party politics are the biggest obstacle we have to overcome to become 50 states united as one.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm
I’m just sayin…if it can’t bowl, it’s not a citizen.
Posted by: Silky | January 23, 2009, 12:22 pm 12:22 pm
Marianne Burger, idealistically, I too would believe how you believe. Realisitically, it is bull. I have seen too many children abused and negleted and completely ignored by social services. They supposedly have their hands tied.
I used to complain about five small children, who lived only yards away from my house. They were locked upstairs in their rooms, ages ranging from a small infant to 7 years-old. They would stand naked in the upstairs windows, clawing at the screens and tearing holes in them, trying to get out and screamed all day. Nothing ever happened. I had death threats from their mother and was afraid to go out because of it.
Are you going to take those children and help them. They have been gone from that property for over 5 years. I have heard from their aunt that they are now separated from each other and the mother still gets the check from welfare each month even though they are with other people. They don’t know how to read, write and socialize. How about those children that are BORN AND RIGHT HERE?
Just what everyone needs is to go back to card tables in the back rooms and even more children left in dumpsters. I want my three daughters to have the choice to decide and not their abusive partners or the goverment.
I would support them in any way, I only hope because they are informed young women and responsible, that would never happen to them.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
1.9 million people at his inauguration and only 5 people lost a day of work!
Posted by: LongT | January 23, 2009, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm
Do we not as a nation have issues with China’s policy on population control? We don’t have to abort babies to control the population. If we funnel our resources and passions to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies starting with the roots of drug and alcohol addiction, then we can avoid the “quick fix” which happens to destroy human life. We have far too much education and resources available to all citizens of this country to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.
Whatever the challenges around unwanted pregnancies is, abortion is the wrong answer because ALL life is sacred whether it “perfect” by society’s definition or not.
To the person that says that a fetus is not a citizen. Whether that is a legal position or just your opinion, it is still a LIFE. The action of abortion exist only to terminate a LIFE. If a fetus did not represent a life, then abortion would not exist.
Posted by: Marianne Burger | January 23, 2009, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm
Silky my friend; Never forget that the reason an unborn fetus is not a citizen is that one, yes one supreme court justice didn’t want an unborn fetus to be a citizen. One man broke an otherwise deadlock vote. The whole abortion issue isn’t about whether an unborn infant is a life, it’s about that infant’s rights vs the mother’s rights. By the way, how would you define life?
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 12:31 pm 12:31 pm
“By the way, how would you define life?”
Can it bowl?
Posted by: Silky | January 23, 2009, 12:35 pm 12:35 pm
“If a fetus did not represent a life, then abortion would not exist”
It “represents” a potential life.
Hey…I’m anti-abortion. But firmly pro-choice.
Posted by: Silky | January 23, 2009, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
Scents of Roses,
I understand the frustration and fears around the failure in our social services and parental neglect.
However, two wrongs do not make it right. Instead of us having the strength, and resolve to fix the issues that you mentioned, many see abortion as the easy way out.
I think the lack of respect and responsibility to human life that you witness when you hear of babies left in dumbsters is the result of a culture that legalizes killing unborn babies. If the proposed FOCA law goes into effect, can we hold woman who bear children and leave it to die accountable since we will open the doors wide for partial birth abortion and not sustaining a baby if it is still alive after being aborted? Ask yourselves where we are headed.
We can overcome the many issues in our society that make abortion seem like the right answer if we rise above the obstacles – like our current President just challenged us to do.
Posted by: M. Burger | January 23, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
While I agree with some of the stands on the economy crisis plan, I do not agree with their real agenda and that is to do as much harm as they can to the President. Let’s get real here and discuss the real problems. The Republicans do not want Obama to suceed. If that means they attempt to throw up road blocks? They will.
Then come 2010 when they have to own the economy that is in the tank? They can and will be replaced because as a Republican? I will be one of MILLIONS out here making sure they never serve another day.
I want this economy fixed and I don’t really give a rats behind which party does it! MILLIONS don’t.
Posted by: Grissom | January 23, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
A “potential Life” is one that has not yet been conceived.
Posted by: M. Burger | January 23, 2009, 12:47 pm 12:47 pm
“We can overcome the many issues in our society that make abortion seem like the right answer if we rise above the obstacles”
Like ending the abstinance only education programs that have proven to delay the start of sexual activity but resulted in more teens having unprotected sex, just later?
Wider distribution of the Morning After Pill? Offering the pill to rape victims – not the current policy in many states?
What specifically do we do to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancys? If all you can suggest is outlawing abortion it seems to me you are claining the high ground without winning it.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 1:07 pm 1:07 pm
MB, two wrongs don’t make a right. Correct. I too am not pro-abortion but pro-choice. Education is what is the most important vehicle to use. However, I don’t want my daughters to have to go back to the archaic ways before Roe v Wade. I want them, who by the way are now grown women, to have the choice and the support that everyone should have. I hope that women of all ages choose NOT to have an abortion, but I still want them to choose.
God gave us one major difference from all other mammals. A brain. He wants us to make choices! I would venture to say he was the ORIGINAL pro-choicer. He only hopes that people make the right one. He still loves murderers.
How about those who (it’s on the rise) murder people? They chose to do it. That doesn’t make that right either. Where do you stand on the death penalty?
Choices. People make them right or wrong. It is our God given right. Laws are there to protect us, but they will never correct all of the wrongs in society. But there has to be priorties. People should not have to be condemned because of every choice they make. The prisons are just too full. Probably because of unwanted pregnancies and the population explosion.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 1:09 pm 1:09 pm
Silky; My question was how would you define life. What I’m asking for is a definition of life in general be it plant or animal. Obviously tulips can’t bowl but they are alive.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
Amy; Isn’t the answer to your question about how to avoid unwanted pregnancies obvious. What we must do is elevate our national level of sense of personal responsibility. Birth control devices and methods are readily available and free from any local health dept. Seems to me prevention is more practical than fixing the mistakes, not to mention cheaper.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm
Also social services can’t handle the problem because of the humongousness of the size of the problem. I guess I didn’t make my point well enough. I am sorry. That was entirely my fault.
Can you imagine this world now, especially in our country, with the over-blown size of population, if there hadn’t been Roe v. Wade? Society is very different now, and that had nothing to do with abortion. It has to do with a lot of reasons.
We have to worry now where we put our trash. Our oceans are becoming cess-pools. I am extremely worried about the future for my grandchildren. I have done many things in my past that I am really sorry about. None of them illegal. I had four children and my husband had three. We helped contribute to the population explosion. I wouldn’t give any of them back. But when they tell me they don’t want to have any children, even though they love them, I tell them o.k.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 1:26 pm 1:26 pm
Scent of Roses,
You are correct in saying that God gives us choices. The choice between right and wrong, good or evil, human will or His Will. God’s commandment is clear that “Thou Shall not Committ Murder”. And, yes God loves us all just as we as parents love our children no matter what.
The issue is not about whether we are free to make a choice, it’s about consequences when we make the wrong choice. Abortion is a “wrong” choice. If we simply go by the fact that we should be free to make our own choice with no regard to right or wrong, then if we make the choice to kill another person, should we be in our rights to do so? Should we not legalize prostitution? Should we make it legal to commit suicide? Should we have the choice to abuse our children? Where does the consequences to protect the right of individual choice end?
I have two wonderful sons, one conceived out of wedlock and one conceived during a time when I was at one of the toughest points in my life. I understand challenges. However, I believe above all else, even ourselves, we should work to protect life.
As for the death penalty, I don’t like it. Interestingly, people who face the death penalty have far more rights and protection then an innocent, aborted baby has.
It’s a tough task which seems impossible but we should give it our best because it is the “right” thing to do.
Posted by: M. Burger | January 23, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
monroe, while we Disagree on MANY points, lets not be Disagreeable here at the end of the week. “Kings X.”
Pro-Life or Pro-Choice, what’s the ‘Law of the land?’ It’s Roe -v- Wade. What we’re confronted with here is; “the minority party attempting to force their will” (and their politic) on the majority party and the political process.
My feeling is; “Most folks on The Right …. yes, and on The Left too. They all take themselves and their politics Far Too Seriously!” (Their politics are Their Opinions – and you know what they say about Opinions; “An Opinion is like an A** H*le, everybody’s got one.”
“Truth be told”; most of us “play our politics like a parlor game!” I wonder how much dissention would be avoided, if our politics had to be followed by this type of statement; “I would place my life on the line for ………….”
Posted by: bobj72 | January 23, 2009, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm
Yes, we should legalize prostitution and marijuana! Duh! The jails are full of those people. They are going to do it anyway. We might as well make them safe and keep them monitored. Prostition is the OLDEST profession. Jesus himself befriended them.
You can make the choice to take them or do them or not. I don’t smoke and that is legal.
Suicide should be legal also. People have more compassion for dying animals than people who are suffering.
I was married to a very evil man who never worked. I had four children by him and supported them all. Don’t talk to me about having it tough. I can beat you in every story. My father beat my mother, she gave him nine (9) children. And she still loved him.
Yes, we have choices. God gave us all of our choices. I chose to marry the men that I married. One when I was young and when I used to be stupid, and now to the greatest, most loving and the best father and human being I know. Who just so happens to be a non-believer. I don’t hold that against him. It is his choice. We debate it often. He also chose a different candidate than I did in 2000 and 2004. Again I still respect him.
I can’t change your mind about abortion. You have it already made up. I can tell you that those of us that don’t agree with you, also have good reasons not too.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
My mother died of cancer. I had the distinct view of being so close to her and watching my best friend and mother suffer very badly. I couldn’t have helped her commit suicide but I sure wouldn’t have been upset with her if she had.
People who commit suicide, don’t feel like they have any choices any more. Gosh, there we go again using that word. They are ill. So let’s put them in jail. It IS illegal. That sounds sooOooooo stupid to me.
I have been a shoulder that many people have cried on when they were at the end of their rope and didn’t feel like they had choices any more. I did what any human with a heart would do. I pointed out what their choices were and how much different life will be next year if you give it a chance. Or medicine is a alternative for those that have a chemical imbalance.
I have a son also. He is a mensan. Top two percent IQ in the world. He needs a antidepressant. I have seen him suffer. My heart was breaking with the agony of it. He is the greatest and the sweetest 27 year old. My husband who only just met him 5 years ago, said he was easily the nicest person he had ever met. My husband is 60 years-old. The best thing is…He’s right.
Choices are for the individual. I would NEVER recommend a abortion to any one. But I would never condemn them for it either. The only way I would be judgemental about it, is if they had more than one!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm
S O R,
I hear you about watching those you love die. I watched two people whom were very much a part of my life and who I am die from the disease; my grandmother this past August. They did suffer however, I have to say that they died with as much dignity as one can have in dying. As difficult as it was, I would have been very upset if they chose to end their own life. We had a very close friend who did that last year and it is far more devasting then losing someone from the natural death.
I think you said suicide is legal, it is not unless I’ve missed a change in laws.
My 2nd son was in and out of the hospital for the first 2.5 yrs. of his life and ended up having pervasive developmental disorder on top of some congential issues. He, like all children, is a BLESSING! I am happy to hear that you and your husband feel that your son is a Blessing also despite his challenges.
I have to say that although it may not seem like it, I don’t want to condem anyone that has made the decision to abort. The sad fact is that the overwhelming majority suffer silently and deeply from having made that choice. I am speaking out against the act itself. I know that we all just one step away from making the wrong choice.
Posted by: M. Burger | January 23, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
I can understand being against abortion, but when people who want to outlaw it don’t address the fact that desperate women will continue to seek it, then I have to question the validity of their position. If its so “obvious” when life begins, then what does it say about the women who seek abortion, and the people who feel it should remain legal? Are we sub human? Immoral? Dimwitted? Then surely we shouldn’t be trusted to raise the baby that develops from the “rescued” fetus, no?
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 3:26 pm 3:26 pm
Did I say that suicide was legal? Again in my passion for what I believe, I was incorrect.
Did I also imply that my mother who died twenty years ago (Still not easy) died without grace and dignity? Everything she ever did was graceful, dignified and peaceful. Her middle name was Grace.
I have lost everyone that was important to me. My grandparents died thirty years ago. Both of parents, two of my brother-in-laws. They have all suffered greatly before they died. My best friend and two other close friends died with cancer 2 and 1/2 years ago. My own husband told me that he would commit suicide if he had no hope of survival. None of them except of dear friend of mine, thirty years ago have however.
No it is awlful. I do not want my husband to do it. I have had a horrible time recovering from my friend who had two children, and committed suicide. She wasn’t sick with a terminal disease. She had one that may have been prevented if it had been properly diagnosed. That was the horrible and most disgusting part of her death.
I am not trying to belittle your pain and your past experiences. But I did say not to try and compare your life with mine. I will blow you out of the water. I had a brother who drowned. It never ends. I kept going and going and going when everyone else thought it couldn’t get worse it DID.
I had a abortion 30 years ago. I have to live with that. My life, who knows, how different, but it would have been if I had chose to have the baby. I am so glad that you don’t choose to judge me. I am just glad it wasn’t illegal to have done so. I was in enough pain already! Enough to even myself think of suicide!!
Lady, just give up. People like you, don’t really have any clues about anything. God only gives really BIG challenges to people who have extremely big characters!
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
I think that all the detainees at gitmo should be dropped off in silky’s back yard. Let him figure out what to do with them.
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
bobj72; Choice is the law of the land. I can live with it but I don’t agree with it. Our discussion was about why it’s the law. I’m not trying to change the law. That one supreme court justice, or rather 4 of the 7 made a decision that will never be reversed because pro-choicers and the courts percieve their choice as a right. Those who think they can get it reversed are spinning their tires. Still there is a need to decrease the number of abortions performed. Families are hurt, mothers are damaged for life though sometimes it takes years to realize it, lives are being needlessly taken because two people with raging hormones couldn’t or wouldn’t take preventative measures. I’m not here to examine the legality, nor am I here to condemn people who have or do abortions. Amy posed the question how can we reduce the number of abortions. My response was to raise the public’s sense of personal responsibility. Have a great weekend. I think we are in agreement this time. I hope so.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
silky: If life doesn’t begin at conception why would we need condoms?
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm
Hence President Obama and his extremely huge challenges that he will have to face. And that is after he lost eveyone other than his wife and children. All I can say is he must have a great big wonderful character!
God Speed President Obama! Our lives are in God’s hands and he is using President Obama as his angel on earth.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
Condoms are also used to prevent disease. People who can no longer have children still use them!
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
scentofroses Isn’t that sad.
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
Amy; There are for openers some situations that arguably merit abortion such as rapes or conditions that would endanger the life of the mother. There are some people who have never been educated about religious considerations and others who have been educated but reject the morality that religious education offers. That’s each person’s choice and that choice is at the heart of the dissent about abortions. Earlier I challenged Silky to define life. I don’t think it’s possible to define life without mentioning God, the life giver. If everyone believed in God and understood that an infant is a gift from God with a purpose only God knows then there would be very few abortions. Without some form of basic moral instruction how can our people become personally responsible? Personal accountability and personal responsibility are God’s demands, not society’s.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
So therefore, it shouldn’t have anything to do with our goverment deciding what we should do with an extremely personal and sometimes detrimental decision. No matter what your morality is, people still can make the choice for whatever reason. In my case it was a matter of life and death, my own. I still was suicidal afterwards.
I have to live with that. I would never recommend it to anyone.
Times are definitely different than they were 30 years ago. There are more choices out there now. However, young women are still having babies out of wedlock and then leaving them in dumpsters. They are young and not in their right minds. Not everyone considers abortion as a choice, but it is legal compared to leaving a baby in a dumpster.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
Chaos, why is that sad? Because there is disease out there that can be prevented with a simple condom? Disease can also be a deterrent for some people to not have sex in the first place. That is less abortions. And a smaller population.
Do you know what is really sad? YOU, go and buy a condom it’s Friday.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm
If you told someone in 1960 that abortions would legal in all states they would have said you were nuts. If I told someone in 1980 that you could pull a full term baby out by the legs and scramble and remove the brain then finish the birth they would have said I was nuts. If I told that in 1990 we would elect a president that argued that a baby born alive in a botched abortion could be left to die you would say I was nuts. If I told you in 2009 that we will be able to kill babies born with a birth defect (downs syndrome) you would think I nuts.
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm
I hesitate to say this, because I know it will offend people, but I believe that choosing abortion is sometimes a more responsible act than allowing the pregnancy to develop out of denial and passivity. Obviously, it would be much better if we, as a society, found better ways to initiate young people into adulthood, i.e. educate kids on how to prevent pregnancies, focus raising girls’ self worth, etc. I wouldn’t recommend an abortion to anyone, but I recognize that having one is sometimes a wake up call to girls to get their act together.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
If I told someone in 1960 that abortions would legal in all states they would have said I was nuts. If I told someone in 1980 that you could pull a full term baby out by the legs and scramble and remove the brain then finish the birth they would have said I was nuts. If I told someone in 1990 that we would elect a president that argued that a baby born alive in a botched abortion could be left to die you would say I was nuts. If I told you in 2009 that soon we will be able to kill babies born with a birth defect (downs syndrome) you would think I nuts
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
Amy, let’s do coffee sometime. LOL
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm
Chaos, you keep opening yourself up for a really cheap shot. I just can’t do it. It is just not worth it.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
If you told someone in the 1700′s that abortions would be illegal they would have said you were nuts. Abortion laws were not written untill the 1900′s, more to protect women from deadly patent medicines then because folks decided terminating pregnancies was immoral. Traditionally, “life” was recognized as beginning when the woman could feel the fetus move, at approximately three months. If you consider how dangerous child birth has been up until recently, you can understand why that “choice” was considered a reasonable action.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm
scentsofroses; You seem to be a good person with srong moral values. Don’t know if your are a person of faith or not. Perhaps if you are this will comfort you. God still loves you. Your sins can be atoned if you only ask for forgiveness. You obviously understand that there was something wrong with even an abortion that saved your life. Did that abortion not allow you to go on to produce more babies? Love them. God continued to entrust you with His gifts. Miss the one that was aborted, but don’t drag the guilt around any longer. Jesus is willing to carry the burden of guilt for you. He doesn’t judge. He simply says, “go and sin no more?” He’ll be there to defend you when you are called on to answer to God. He has already paid the price of atonement.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | January 23, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
amy: personally I don’t believe it is an abortion if it truly saves the mother’s life. it is a procedure to save the woman’s life. I would doubt that a partail birth abortion is ever performed to save the woman’s life, if it was wouldn’t it be done in a hospital setting and doesn’t pulling a baby almost all the way out and then performing a removal of a brain harder on the mother?
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
Thank you Monroe, excuse the sarcasm. I now can move forward with the rest of my life. You are wonderful. Thank you so much for not judging me. I couldn’t live with that.
Ha Ha, I am Catholic. I stayed married to a total evil person for 25 years because he was the father of my baby. I had four more. I never thought that I had any right to having a normal baby, let alone four gorgous and extremely intelligent children. I raised them in the church. I never lied to them. We kept the doors of communication open always. \\
Now, that we have that same level of communication, my life can finally move on.
What is between me and God is between me and God. I know HE FORGIVES, so did my sainted mother. The mother of nine children and a miscarriage that almost killed her in her 40′s.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm
I appreciate your honesty and strength, scent of roses. I had an abortion too, and it was awful, but I am grateful I was able to have it in a clinic, and not in a back alley, where I would have gone if it weren’t legal. I’m all for teaching adolescents that abortion is not a good choice, but not for withholding the procedure from desperate women. Preaching morality doesn’t seem to lessen the number of unwanted pregnancies. I know I had a strong sense of right and wrong as a twenty year old, which made it even more difficult for me to imagine raising a child with out a father. I’d been better off being educated about how easy it is to become pregnant, than being preached to.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
Chaos, You are the only one talking about partial birth abortion. From what I can see.
Our goverment does need a little more help and prayers in that direction.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:45 pm 4:45 pm
Amy, Amen!
Wow, I knew I liked you.
I am so on with what you said, about raising our young women’s self esteem.
My daughters are always fighting their self-esteem because they were raised not just by me, but a father that never cared for them. They were just in his way. Pray for them, Please. All of my children were thrilled when their father and I got our divorce. I am the only one in a family of nine children to have had the dubious honor.
My girls don’t want any children. And they keep making bad choices with their significant others. What can I say, it was what they were taught by me, until now. I just pray that the damage can be undone.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
“I would doubt that a partail birth abortion is ever performed to save the woman’s life”
Honestly, you think that this is a procedure that is done lightly? My understanding is late term abortions are very rare and only done to save the life of the mother, or because the fetus is doomed by horrific conditions, such as its organs growing on the outside of the body, or an infant without a skull.
Posted by: Amy | January 23, 2009, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
thank you scentofroses. reading your stories does show me that there are many situations that are different from my life and are obviously harder than I experienced. I do beleive we need to talk about it make abortions rare with education and faith.I have a 10,12 girls at home and my wife has to keep me grounded sometimes.
Posted by: CHAOS | January 23, 2009, 4:52 pm 4:52 pm
Thank you Chaos, no sarcasm here.
Please love your girls. You haven’t seen anything yet. The worst and best is yet to come. Please love them openly and unjudgementally. Young girls make really stupid decisions and they don’t want to disappoint their daddies, no matter what. That is what causes some high-school straight-a students to hide their pregnancies and then kill them.
My mother once said, “When they are young they tread on your lap and when they are older they tread on your heart.” I so wanted her to be wrong. But she NEVER was.
We can’t make their choices for them. There is THAT word again.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
God, of all of those times in therapy, I am now more drained.
Everyday I pinch myself, is this really me? My life is so much better than I ever imagined it to be. I guess God does forgive me.
Posted by: scentsofroses | January 23, 2009, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm
Amy and Scentsofroses, you are both AMAZING WOMEN. Highly intelligent, with an openess and honesty that exceeds just “common folk.” Both of your testimonies are ‘life lessons’ for the ‘great unwashed’ here. I will not preach or proselytize – as my Friend Monroe has done an excellent job in offering the Invitation to “Trust In The Lord.”
Posted by: bobj72 | January 23, 2009, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm
No matter what you might think about abortion it is the right of every Individual because every situation is different, God even give us choices, God has said choose good or evil, choose right or wrong, choose here this
day whom you will serve,and no one has Stricter laws than God, so if God through his infinite wisdom give up that right and room to choice why can’t we allow other to have that same right.
Posted by: gman | January 23, 2009, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
I see the mindless Democrat/Republican sledging is alive and well, even to do with issues that should be of common concern
Couple of observations from Down Under- where on earth did so many of you get the idea that the American legal system is looked up to?
In humanitarian terms it lost all credibility with the legal murder of Terry Schiavo, which as I recall also became a Democrat/Republican football with in that case the Democrats clamouring for her death.
On a day to day basis it is viewed as an international joke with emails constantly circulating with the latest over the top decisions, the worst of which are listed 1-10 and annually circulated to millions if not billions world wide along with appropriate sarcastic comments (in most cases completely justified), and one can only assume these type of decisions will continue with respect to suspected terrorists if they are removed from military courts.
Only a couple on this extensive blog realised the best way to solve this clash of ideoligies, and that is to let the Military remove the need for all this angst i.e embark on a take no prisoners policy, which is after all exactly the same policy as your opponents.
We have leftist ideoligists too, but the average Aussie is pretty pragmatic which is highlighted by the true story of a local Mayor who was asked on a travelling radio show what he thought of reports that prisoners in Iraq were having electric shocks applied to their genitals, he answered thus:
“If it saves one Australian soldiers life I only have 3 things to say:-
1. Red is positive
2. Black is negative
3. Make sure his testicles are wet
The radio hosts (representing the ideoligical left)apologised to the radio audience & made him leave the stage.
The live audience representing normal people of all political persuasions, stood as one, cheered and gave him a standing ovation.
If you keep turning the other cheek, you either end up with a broken Jaw, or like the early Christians in Rome the subject of a newscast along the lines of “here is a flash score from the arena, Lions 10 Christians nil!”
Posted by: Gerry Sinclair | January 23, 2009, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
LOL….we have elected an absolute moron as president. He campaigns that the first order of business will be the economy. And that he will work on the economy in a bipartisan manner. And in his first comedy filled week it has been anything but that.
He starts off by closing Gitmo. But then oops, we haven’t any plan on what exactly to do with the guys we release. Wonder Dork then follows up with a bonehead order to eliminate innovative interrogation of suspected terrorists. Maybe BHO can persuade them with his wit and wisdom.
As if this wasn’t economic enough, he then moves to export our tax dollars to fund overseas abortions. Was this what he claimed would “save or create 4 million new jobs”?
Now, actually moving on to the economy, he has a bipartisan meeting where he lists new commandments such as “I won…I trump you” and “you need to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh” as if that is even remotely helpful in dealing with the current economic situation. And parades an economic stimulus package that his own (Democratic) Congressional Budget Office says is a disaster. And then gets some help from Queen Stretch Pelosi to boot.
In the meantime he sends his communication expert Robert “Bozo” Gibbs out multiple times to answer questions from the press. Only problem here is that Bozo can’t answer a blasted thing, and can only mumble and side step questions. It was quite comical to watch this guy! A true brain surgeon, minus the brain.
In case you guys still haven’t figured it out we have elected an absolute idiot as our next president! And just look at the apparent morons he has surrounded himself with. If this first week of “deer in the headlights” activity doesn’t scare the living heck out of you, then you will get what you deserve with King BHO. Get your popcorn ready….it’s gonna be a long four years.
Posted by: TxBoB | January 24, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am
Having relocated to TEXAS some time ago, I can say; “I understand ‘Rock-Hard Texans’ who are highly opinionated, lack logical substance, but see their ‘lopsided opinion’ as truth.” (Most of “the type” see Texas as a separate country.)
Posted by: bobj72 | January 24, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
mmonroeliveson—i am pro-choice but only because i am a man and feel i have no right over a woman’s body, thus her right to choose.
personally i think life begins at conception, the instant the egg is fertilized. so obviously i am in a moral dilemma.
why can’t children having children be tought birth control, condoms, abstinence. these girl and women are at risk for much more than just pregnancy. some std render women permanently infertile and hiv is always a risk.
so what to do?
i know questions are easy and answers hard. but at least it’s a dialog.
and my respect to you and some of your interlocuters for the respectful tone on this contentious issue.
Posted by: Paul Wall | January 24, 2009, 8:28 pm 8:28 pm
bobj72—i’m your kind of texan. AM radio scares the hell out of me. “The Rush Limbaugh Center of Advanced Conservative Studies”, ROFLMFAO! does it get ant better than that. that’s the heart of conservative texas. they use these little signs/gestures with their finger like quotation marks and talk in highly affected ways. it’s a cottage industry here. thank God i live in a big city. once i leave Dallas County i’m nervous, especially at night.
Posted by: Paul Wall | January 24, 2009, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
This administration has to do something to fix this economy. Lots of businesses are laying off people. The Republicans complain about the economic package that the administration has introduced. Republicans say that that is too expensive. That our children and grandchildrer will have to pay the huge debt. Why didn’t they object to George W. Bush’s requests to fund the wars we are still fighting? That is a lot of money as well that our children and grandchildren will have to pay back.
The administration must tell states to stop increasing property taxes to their citizens. Property taxes is a huge expense not to mention monthly payments of car debt; student loans; medical bills (health insurance is so expensive because doctors make lots of money and insurance companies as well).
Posted by: Patty | January 25, 2009, 10:04 am 10:04 am
Generic viagra.
Buy viagra online. Viagra. Free viagra.
Posted by: Viagra prescription price. | February 18, 2009, 11:51 am 11:51 am