babies are piling up in hospitals and all you're
Posted By: worried about is a clear conscience? on 2008-10-09
In Reply to: As I am sure if Obama is elected.... - sam
Have you written or called your local representative? Have you written Congress? What about getting a group together to picket the issue on Capitol Hill?
So many people claim to care, but what they really want is a "clear conscience". Not voting for Obama does not clear anyone of this travesty. It only makes people like you think it does. Sam, you claim to be an independent, but you need to change your card to republican. That's how a republican operates. They only worry about if their hands are clean at the end of the day.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Hospitals/facilities double dipping....
x
Just today....and theboard is dominated by people piling on me every time I post.
What you don't like is anyone who disagrees with you. Sounds a whole lot more like Nazism than American democracy. But I don't suppose a socialist party would recognize that.
Cry babies
Your post is so true. Cry babies, run to the moderator and get the posts they disagree with deleted, even though they are posted on the LIBERAL board.
Cry babies
The posts that get removed are removed because they violate the rules for the boards posted by the administrator. Typical liberal response, follow only the rules you like, and to use your term, become a cry baby when the you don't like the rules. With all due respect, spend less time whining about who posts on what board and what posts are removed, and more time trying to figure out why you think it is more important to investigate Bush than it is to concentrate on terrorism. Still having a real difficult time trying to wrap my mind around that one. But..it does underscore why conservatives are so concerned and rightly so.
Cry babies
The two posts of last week were removed because a conservative who came on this board (you?) did not agree with them. Both were articles from journalists and printed in major newspapers, so obviously cleared and approved by the editors of the newspapers and read throughout America. However, the conservative did not agree with the articles, so whined and cried and ran to the moderator (flash back of junior high actions) and had them removed. My opinion is, if a conservative cannot handle an article that was posted in a newspaper and obviously cleared by its editor, dont read it, go back to the conservative board and leave the liberal board alone. I have never posted on the conservative board but have read some of the posts and some are definitely inflammatory and attacks on liberal/democratic politicians. Liberals have not asked to have those posts removed. Conservatives: Do as I say, not as I do.
How many babies do you think die in
the wars that Bush and McCain support? Or does it only matter when American babies die?
You say you think McCain is the lesser of two evils because he is against abortion, right? Well if you are against the concept of killing innocent life, you should be APPALLED at the number of innocent children the US has killed in IRAQ, and will kill in Iran if Mr. 'Prolife" McCain gets in power.
Let your "conscience" be your guide.
So were the babies
murdered. I don't see you making a case for them.
Anchor babies. sm
You mean to tell me, gourdpainter, that you don't celebrate this country's great cultural differences and rights for every American born citizen? I'm shocked!!!! 
Seriously, yes, I do see this as a problem, but doing away with the 14th Amendment is not the way to keep this from happeniing. I'm not sure what the correct procedure for handling this would be or even if it could be done as anchor babies are automatically citizens, but I would think writing your congressmen would be the place to start. This is one of the tragedies this country might face because of weak borders and law enforcement's seeming inabiilty to send illegals back where they came from. It goes deeper than that, though.
You know, you mentioned in another post that no Native American has ever run for POTUS. Actually, they probably have more right than Caucasian American citizens to hold this office as they were here first. 
anchor babies are ---
Anchor babies are babies born to foreigners on American soil. They by virtue of being born here are automatically American citizens even if their parents are not and even if their parents are here illegally. Thus, one day, we could very well have a president whose parents are here illegally, whose parents do not speak English, and he will be legal to be the president! Think that's right?
The law concerning anchor babies....sm
In 1898, the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark declared that the Fourteenth Amendment adopted the common-law definition of birthright citizenship. Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller’s dissenting opinion, however, argued that birthright citizenship had been repealed by the principles of the American Revolution and rejected by the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nonetheless, the decision conferred birthright citizenship on a child of legal residents of the United States. Although the language of the majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark is certainly broad enough to include the children born in the United States of illegal as well as legal immigrants, there is no case in which the Supreme Court has explicitly held that this is the unambiguous command of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Based on the intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, some believe that Congress could exercise its Section 5 powers to prevent the children of illegal aliens from automatically becoming citizens of the United States. An effort in 1997 failed in the face of intense political opposition from immigrant rights groups. Apparently, the question remains open to the determination of the political and legal processes.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/GovernmentReform/wm925.cfm
Where do babies come from? 1 man and 1 woman
I understand these relationships, but I don't think traditional marriage between a man and a woman should cover gays/lesbians. They have civil unions in my state and now they want marriage. Leave the tradition of marriage alone.
I am not willing to assume that 1.2 million babies...
would have horrible lives. I can't see killing them all just in case some might suffer. But how is our choice to decide whether or not someone lives based on what kind of life they might have? I think it should be the choice of the creator, myself. I am curious as to what you think your creator thinks about choosing to kill an unborn child? I think mine's heart breaks every time one happens...over 2000 times a day. Yes, that's what I think.
It's quick? It's horrible but its quick? Good grief!!
You keep discounting the right of the child to live. Who are you, the mother, or anyone else, to say that child has no right to live? Do you think your creator endowed you with that right? Just curious.
How many unwanted babies have you adopted, sam? (nm)
???
but there was already a law in place to protect the babies -
nx
wow -- that's as sad as 1/2 aborted babies being left
nm
No, most of those murder enough babies legally as well.....
@@
They cant stop having babies if they have no forms
Remember the babies in dumpsters?
We had a 17-year-old come in our hospital, full-term and in complete denial she was pregnant. She got mad and left when told she was pregnant. She came back a few weeks later and they could not save her - she never went into labor, the baby was stillborn in her for god knows how long and it subsequently killed her. This kid was living here and there - her parents did not care. The ills in society will remain regardless of the laws.
Obama is not saying he wants babies murdered -
Obama is prochoice - that means each person has the right to decide for themselves. You all amaze me when you say you want the government out of your life and to quit telling you what you have to do, but then it is okay for the government to tell the other person that they can't do something they want to because it does not go along with your belief system.
I would never ever have an abortion. I think it is wrong. However, I think that each person should have the right to decide for themselves if they do it or not. In this case I agree, government stay out of my business!
Nope. She can have all the babies SHE wansts to have.
It's a free country. Believers in pro-choice want to KEEP it free.
Sorry, but according to the law, anchor babies are US citizens - nm
x
Better 1.2 million dead babies a year?
I think we get where you are coming from.
GP..Exactly. And those "anchor babies" can sponsor their whole family and who know what else.
nm
You don't think you might hear the cries of aborted babies....
where were you? Why didn't you help me?
Anchor babies are natural citizens... sm
by virtue of being born on American soil, just as the babies of Chinese immigrants or German immigrants or any other nationality are citizens of this country if they are born on US soil. Granted, the influx of illegal aliens from Mexico has created a problem in that it has burdened the welfare system in this country, but that is not the issue here.
The issue is that Obama cannot produce proof that he is a natural born American citizen. The birth certificate floating around the internet purported to be real is a fake. You can find anything on the internet these days, true or not. Just the fact that liberals shoot down every article posted in support of a conservative's point of view as being "not a credible source" is proof of that.
Mr. Obama is well aware of the questions being raised concerning his birth certificate. If he had a REAL birth certificate, why would he just not produce it and put an end to all the speculation? Because he can't, plain and simple. He flew to Hawaii to see his ailing grandmother and "coincidentally" his "birth records" were sealed at the same time. Isn't that interesting?
Mr. Obama lived for 5 years in Indonesia, a country that does not recognize dual citizenship, therefore nullifying his American citizenship IF it ever existed in the first place. There are no records on file where he ever applied for citizenship after returning to the US.
We have to produce birth certificates for our children to attend school today. Why shouldn't the man who would be POTUS have to show his?
Barack Obama is not even legally a black American. He only has one black great-great-grandmother on his father's side while the other 7 were Arab.
That makes him 50% white, 43.75% Arab, and 6.25% black. 12.5% is the minimum required to legally claim any racial status in America.
Obama would qualify as the first Arab-American president, NOT the first black president. That is why they keep saying "African-American" and NOT black because they know he is African Arab and not African black.
Why would you want anyone who has any kind of questionable background leading our country? Would you allow persons of questionable background to teach your children in school? What if that person was suspected of having an inappropriate relationship with a child but it could not be proven? Would you want to run that risk?
I agree that America has more pressing problems that whether the man about to take the helm is a natural born citizen, but do you want someone who is not even an American leading us through these problems?
Murdering near-term babies isn't violent?
nm
Thou shall not kill applies to unborn babies. sm
They are alive, no matter how many pretty pictures you try to paint about it. They are life, God's life.
Ridiculous post. Quit your whining, big babies
nm
Oldtimer, it is used in late-term abortions. To get rid of babies.
nm
Obama values life of babies AND their mothers.
I am not in the habit of debating with brick walls, but I will address your issue directly just as soon as you come up with something that will convince me that McCain's air quotes demontrate high regard for human life. Kill the mom, save the baby, then watch while it pulls itself up by its bootstraps, lest we turn our beloved country into a welfare state. P-U.
We murder 4000 innocent babies by abortion each
and every day, 50 million total so far in this country and counting, and now we will pay for abortions worldwide. Social Security is bankrupt but would not be if those 50 million innocent children had had a choice for life. No one can deny that fact.
Add it up: Abortion kills 4000 innocent babies each day. Queers do not populate.
I would definitely say we are practicing population control, and Obama gonna see we practice worldwide.
British Government Says Mothers With Babies New Terror Threat sm
British Government Says Mothers With Babies New Terror Threat
You're either with us, or you're with the babies.
British government security advisors and the national media are doing their level best to strike rampant irrational paranoid terror into the hearts of UK citizens by identifying the latest targets of the war on terror as pregnant women and toddlers.
Absurd delirious fearmongering continues in the British media with the Sun tabloid, Britain's most braindead and unfortunately also most popular newspaper screaming, HATE-filled mums willing to sacrifice themselves and their BABIES are being hunted in the war on terror.
Yes that's right you haven't slipped into an upside down parallel universe - pregnant women and mothers with young babies are the new Al-Qaeda.
The evidence?
The nightmare is that mums carrying tiny tots would provide “very good cover” and not raise suspicions among even the most alert security guards.
The Sun cited a senior Government security adviser as their source.
So let's ignore that guy with the turban who looks like Mohammed Atta and instead focus our magic screening wand on Mrs. Smith and her newborn infant.
Extra pat downs for young mums and making toddlers take their shoes off - boy do I feel safer now.
What's the next threat? Barney the purple dinosaur?
Of course we know what this is all designed to accomplish - it's about broadening the terrorist definition to the point where everyone's a suspect and everybody's behavior is under preposterous and suffocating scrutiny.
The implication that the most benign, harmless and innocent members of our society could in actuality be terrorist suicide bombers is a sick ploy crafted to ensure that absolutely no one is allowed to escape the self-regulating stench of being under suspicion.
It is also intended to brainwash the population that terrorists are potentially hiding under their beds, that they are everywhere and that only by a system of reporting suspicious behavior and unquestionably trusting the government will they too avoid the accusing finger.
This is classic Cold War style behavioral conditioning and the Neo-Fascist architects know exactly what they're doing.
Despite the status of alert returning to previous levels in both the US and the UK, ridiculous restrictions on travelers remain in place. Every time a new bout of fearmongering washes over a stupefied public, they are more pliable to new ways of being shoved around by government enforcers, even after the alleged plot has been foiled.
The fearmongering never subsides, it is always ratcheted up another peg in anticipation for future manufactured threats.
The future of airport security?
Why don't they just ban any luggage, clothing or personal accessories whatsoever and have done with it? Better yet - why not strap every passenger into a straight jacket from the moment they enter the airport?
In Knoxville, TSA officials are testing a biometric scanner device which interrogates passengers about their 'hostile intent' by asking a barrage of questions. If you thought the current delays and blanket 'everybody's a criminal terrorist' attitude were annoying enough, you ain't seen nothing yet.
In a similar example to the mothers and babies mindlessness, the London Guardian reports that located in the tranquil and peaceful rural surroundings of the British Lake District and Yorkshire Dales are terrorist training camps where Al-Qaeda devotees are preparing for their next big attack.
What's next? Bomb making factories under the Atlantic Ocean? Islamo Fascist brainwashing schools at the North Pole?
The sheer stupidity implicit in the Guardian article is bewildering. If the police haven't even questioned the alleged terrorists, allowing them to gather evidence of terrorist activity, because they're conducting covert surveillance of the group then why in God's name have they told a national newspaper, who in turn have splashed the story all over their front page?
If these supposed terrorists didn't know they were under surveillance before then they sure do now!
I live on the edge of the Peak District nearby the kind of areas being fingered as terrorist training areas. The closest thing to Al-Qaeda like activity up here is when a discourteous rambler leaves a farm gate open.
Again, it's about people who live in the country being smothered with the same raving paranoia and cockamamie fearmongering city-dwellers are subjected to. Woe betide anyone living in a converted barn house in the middle of miles and miles of wilderness think they can escape the war on terror - it applies to anything!
Baby formula, lip gloss, mothers and toddlers included.
Okie dokie. We agree to disagree. Someone should speak for the babies...
and I would be one of those. Because I think they deserve a shot at life just like you do. You don't. Your prerogative.
You sound irrational...killing ethiopian babies with your money? ???
nm
If we are going to rule abortion wrong, then we must support these babies and mothers who cannot do
Everyone says that there is no circumstance where an abortion would be validated, and that may well be very true, but....if we then say no to social programs to pay for food, clothing, lodging, education, warmth, etc. that the baby and mother will be needing for years, money for daycare if the mom needs to work, money for work programs for more jobs, money for educational programs like CETA for job training so the mommy, and then her child, can affod to be trained in something they can use to be employable, and of course the money it takes to give prenatal care, postnatal care, hospititalization, NICU if needed, and pediatric and well care, ...... if a woman is not in the circumstance to do this and she has no family that can provide for her and the baby, then where is the money to come from, if we are not going to put our $$$ where our collective "mouths" are and find judicious, accountable social programs to fund this all???????
You're entitled to your opinion. I guess it depends on what side of the spectrum you're on.nm
x
We're not defending Bush we're pointing out the obvious
All you see in your view is Bush, Bush, Bush. Nobody else exists. You have yet to answer any of the questions I posed yesterday. We're not the one obsessing about Bush. I'm sure you'll counter that with I don't owe you any answers! It's really telling that for five or six days this board was mute about the Israel/Lebanon situation. You were too busy posting trash news about Bush like nothing was even happening, but I know that the left has wait for its talking points. You all cannot formulate opinions on your own. You have boilerplates ready to go though. *This is Bush's fault because _____________ but you have to wait on Howard Dean, Bill Clinton, etc. etc. to fill in the blanks for you. It's not just a phenomenon here but with all the left. You can count on at least two days of silence when something unforseen breaks out in the world, because they have to retreat to their bunkers to get their talking points straight, but it will always start with *This is Bush's fault because....
Hey, if they're smoking cigs, they're paying for SCHIP.
xx
They're too lazy to show patriotism......they're waiting
xx
So you're not racist but you're most definitely SEXIST and AGEIST!!!
"Someone more in our age group..."
"She should be taking care of her family."
Your true colors are showing, and they're truly ugly.
Just because they're LOSING doesn't mean they're VICTIMS.
What is it with people these days? You think that just because Hamas is getting its fanny handed to it that that magically makes them victims, and we should all weep and throw cash at them?
From the dawn of time, lesser civilizations have fallen to stronger ones.
It's why the human species survived and the neanderthals didn't.
It's why Rome conquered the Celts.
It's why the Barbarians conquered the Western Roman Empire.
It's why the British conquered the American Indians.
It's why the Spanish conquered the Aztecs.
It's why the Muslims conquered Israel the first time. But, since their societal progres seems to have permanently parked in the Stone Age, now Israel is conquering them right back.
Deal with it.
You're right. They're simply not worthy of a reply.
They're not tax breaks....they're tax credits
xx
I'm snotty, you're rude...we're even....
My dearrrr....not everyone in this country pays taxes. So you are wrong there. Obama said "spread the wealth." From his own mouth. The interview in Canada...economic parity and redistribution. Words from HIS mouth. If you believed those words from his mouth as much as you believed other words from his mouth, you would know he is a socialist. Selective memory is a wonderful thing ain't it??
You're right. They're all wack-jobs... nothing
so they try to make themselves feel important by standing around on street corners with their posters and their dollies.
Most of them are just buffoons, good for nothing other than being laughed at by the rest of us. But the ones that totally lose all reason, and go so far as to shoot people (in a church of all places...) is pretty off the deep end.
You're a liar. GT didn't curse. You're a filthy liar, but you are a gift from God.
God sent you here to as a constant reminder of the kind of person I DON'T want to be and if I ever have a bad day when I feel temporarily stupid, all I have to do is read your posts, and I realize there are those out there who are much worse off than I am and for them it's not temporary.
They're doing to this board what they're trying to do
to the whole country. They're trying to take it over. They want to control which God you believe in, who you love and what you do with your body, be it regarding life or regarding death. If you don't voluntarily agree to turn your free will over to their control, they will hunt you down and nag you to death (since they can't do anything more violent on a message board). It's obvious they are sick, sick people and need major help.
But they ARE like watching a car wreck and are sometimes hard to ignore.
I've thought about it, and for me personally, the very best thing to do is ignore them and for 2 reasons:
1. Ignoring them and not reading their posts makes my visit on this board much more pleasant. I already know I'm not missing anything because there isn't one post on this entire board written by them that has contributed anything of value or intelligence.
2. If we all refuse to read and respond to their posts, they might give up and go find another board to terrorize. I doubt that, though, because they've taken over this board and simply don't have the CLASS to leave. They take pride in their bully on the playground mentality and are proud of their ignorant behavior. They will probably just continue to pat themselves on their backs on this board. The only thing that might startle them and cause them to stop is that the NUMBER of posts on the Liberal board are starting to increase heavily as a direct result of their posting. In the past, they've used the Liberal board's lower numbers to trash us for not being as interesting, when, in fact, the CON board must be pretty boring if they are always choosing to be HERE instead.
Like I said, I've decided that I'd like my visits here to be pleasant, so I'm just going to stop subjecting myself to their cesspools of attacks. They've proven their posts aren't worth wasting time reading, so I'm just going to stop and will feel much better as a result of stopping. 
Your not you're. I hope you're not an MT. nm
.
They're children, though. They're not
adults. Mom and Dad need to know these things even if only to possibly prevent problems later.
You're welcome.
If I find anything, I'll be sure to post it, but I doubt he's going to be saying much. I think he understandably wants to distance himself as far away from this administration as he can.
I wish he would run for President. I'd very proudly vote for him in a heartbeat! I'd finally be able to vote for the best candidate instead of the least worst one.
I agree with you, and I admire and respect him very much.
So I take it you're on your
so you don't mind your grandchildren paying their fair share, right?
Bush Tax Cuts = Tax Shifts
UFE Report: Tax Burden Shifting off Wealthy onto Everyone Else
$197 Billion in Tax Cuts to Top 1% of US Taxpayers as Big as States’ Budget Shortfalls of $200 Billion
BOSTON — A new report, entitled “Shifty Tax Cuts: How They Move the Tax Burden off the Rich and onto Everyone Else,” from United for a Fair Economy (UFE) indicates that between 2002 and 2004, the Bush tax cuts to the top 1% of US income earners redirected billions of dollars in revenue that could have eliminated virtually all of the budget shortfalls in the states.
“Congress had the option to send aid to the states to prevent $200 billion worth of service cuts and regressive tax increases,” said Chris Hartman, UFE’s research director. “Instead, they gave tax breaks totaling roughly the same amount to multi-millionaires and the rest of the top 1%.”
The report identifies five main areas of shifting tax burden:
FEDERAL TO STATE — a 15% shift in tax burden between 2000 and 2003
PROGRESSIVE TO REGRESSIVE — at the federal level, a 17% decline in the share of revenue from progressive taxes and a 135% increase in the share of revenue from regressive taxes since 1962
WEALTH TO WORK — A tax cut on unearned income — such as inheritance or investment — of between 31% and 79%, but a tax hike on work income of 25% since 1980
CORPORATIONS TO INDIVIDUALS — a 67% drop in the share of federal revenues contributed by corporations and a 17% rise in individuals’ share
CURRENT TAXPAYERS TO FUTURE GENERATIONS — record deficits that shift the tax burden to our children and grandchildren
“When President Bush and Congress trumpet, ‘Here’s a tax cut', we say, ‘Taxpayer beware!’ said Chuck Collins, United for a Fair Economy co-founder. “Unless you are super-rich, it’s a tax SHIFT, not a cut. Non-wealthy taxpayers will pay for these tax cuts with increased state and local taxes or cuts in public services.”
“Between 2002 and 2004, a full $197 billion in new tax breaks went to the top 1% of American taxpayers,” Hartman commented. “This is money that has disappeared into the pockets of the very wealthy, making it unavailable to solve ongoing budget crises at the state and local levels.”
“I got a rebate check last summer for $400,” said Collins. “Then my eight-year-old’s public school asked me to contribute money to replace worn-out chairs for the students. At the same time, I found out they laid off the librarian because of budget cuts. What good is a $400 tax cut when parents have to cough up additional money for chairs and books or else see their children go without?”
The report concludes that the total federal, state and local tax burden has become increasingly the responsibility of middle-and low-income families in recent decades, and that revenues being generated by taxes are not sufficient to pay for existing public services. Work in particular is being taxed at a higher rate than investment. “I do a lot of work in predominantly Latino areas of Boston,” said UFE Education Specialist Gloribell Mota. “Residents there are the working poor — they have jobs and pay taxes — yet are getting pennies in tax cuts and seeing health care services they depend on slashed.”
“The Bush administration has followed a strategy of starving public services by pulling tax money away from education and housing and giving it away to multi-millionaires,” said Karen Kraut, UFE’s State Tax Partnership director. “States are suffering as a result, and people are going without essential services in order to fund the lifestyles of the rich.”
The report calls for tax reforms to improve the fairness of tax distribution and ensure adequate revenues. Concerned Americans are urged to pass resolutions in their cities and towns to stop the tax cuts and restore local services that have been affected, to call and write their congressional representatives to take action to stop the cuts, and to sign the Tax Fairness Pledge at www.ResponsibleWealth.org/taxpledge.
The co-authors of the report are Chuck Collins, UFE Co-founder; Chris Hartman, UFE Research Director; Karen Kraut, Director of UFE’s State Tax Partnerships; and Gloribell Mota, UFE Education Specialist.
United for a Fair Economy is an independent national non-profit that raises awareness of growing economic inequality.
|
