Moderate Voters: We’ve Been Punked by Obama

117 responses so far

• 1 Morning Conservative Reading List - August 11, 2009 - AIP Blog - American Issues Project // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:16 am

  [...] Moderate voters were punked by President Obama. [...]

• 2 SFTor1 // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:38 am

  “It appears the president didn’t fully understand that the election wasn’t a complete denunciation of conservative policies.”

  Really? So the ravaged economy, the two wars, the abdication of Constitutional responsibility were examples of liberal policies?

  This is a joke, sorry.

• 3 BA McCormick // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:59 am

  “The old white guys just aren’t going to get the GOP back into the majority in the governors’ mansions, Congress or the White House. The Republican Party should be seeking more youth, more color, better messages.” (Crystal Wright)

  I agree that the GOP needs more young leaders. The problem with the “seeking more color” idea is that blacks and Hispanics generally always vote for their ethnic interests. Why would a working class Hispanic person vote against the party that gives him affirmative action, quota’s, and illegal immigration (which brings in more numbers which = more Hispanic power)? What people need to understand is that the Hispanic population of today is not the Hispanic population of even 20 years ago. The Hispanics who voted for Reagen in large number were Cuban elites (or related to the Cuban elites) who escaped Castro. Today’s Hispanics are working class Mexicans.

  If the GOP does wish to “seek more color” it should be for East Asians and Indians. These groups tend to be upper middle class and generally loose out from affirmative action and high taxes. The key here will be to tone down the “America is a Christian country” rhetoric.

  The GOP should also try to increase the Jewish vote (maybe someone can tell me why Jews don’t vote for the GOP in larger numbers?).

  Of course, if the GOP can win 5% of white voters from the Democrats, the GOP would win the Presidency for the next 50 years.

• 4 RLHotchkiss // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:30 am

  B A McCormik

  You really don’t get it do you. It is Republicans like you that would give me hope of Democratic dominance if I was younger and more naive.

  Quotas, and Affirmative action play very little part in the life of the average African American or Mexican. Most African Americans and Hispanics attend schools in the neighborhoods and never receive any affirmative action at all.

  Americans of Hispanic decent have very complicated views about immigration. Republicans could easily fineness this issue, especially if highlighted the concerns of Americans of Mexican descent.

  The real trouble Republicans have is that conservatives have been in control for 12 years and did nothing but let things get worse /

• 5 greg_barton // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:34 am

  If Republicans are so good at managing the deficit, why didn’t they?

• 6 midcon // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:51 am

  Crystal,

  I personally know Chris Ann and I understand her frustration as a real estate agent her business has been all doom and gloom. Plus Chris Ann is in a relatively new home whose value has decline significantly and I believe she is upside down on it. She is correct neither Bush, Obama, or Congress have done anything that truly helps those now owe more than there home is worth. Additionally, if you are just scraping by paying the mortgage your lender does not want to talk to you, rather they want you to continue scraping by paying the mortgage. The majority of the help has gone to those who deliberately received a loan they could not pay. The rest are left swinging in the wind. The people have not benefited from the billions of get well funds that have been spent on the financial industry. But the GOP has to get off the non-government horse and instead ride to the people’s benefit rather than corporate benefit.

• 7 BarbD // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:02 am

  Reality check: the new administration is not yet 7 months old. What Ms. Wright’s conversations with disappointed voters tells me more than anything else is that (with lots of encouragement from media pundits), the usual American expectation of instantaneous results is hard at work.

  Our culture builds expectations that no matter what we face, personally or as a people, we can resolve it quickly and cleanly. Just like the technology we embrace, we think everything should happen *right now.*

  Real life is much messier. Things still take time, whether it’s emotions following a death or divorce or complex policy issues that have to go through the byzantine legislation process and the court of public opinion.

  It’s clear people disagree about a host of issues the current administration and Congress are grappling with. There will be time enough to scream “I was right!” where they fail — or to calm down and bring Obama’s polling numbers up again if they don’t.

• 8 dacookson // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:38 am

  Wow. You’ve surpassed yourself Crystal. I’m beginning to think we’ve got the birthers and the doulethinkers in the GOP. So people are being alienated by his radical left of centre policies like bailing out big business, an extension of Bush policies? The right always bail out big business, whether its tax breaks or removing regulation or bailouts, always for the stated reason of protecting or creating jobs. Or is it Obama’s watering down of the proposals on which he got elected more to the right, like those on healthcare and climate change, just to pass them through Congress? But then again this kind of nonsensical hysteria and flag-waving works in America. It doesn’t have to make sense, it just has to be provocative and said with conviction, that’ll do it. About the only thing that makes sense in this article is dropping the abortion and gay marriage issue but that’s pie in the sky considering the demographic of the GOP. Just pure fantasy.

• 9 balconesfault // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:05 am

  The questions for Crystal and her acquaintances are … do they believe the economy would be better off today had the federal government simply done nothing over the last 7 months? No stimulus package, no pumping money into Detroit, nothing that would have increased the deficit … simply, nothing?

  Or would we already be seeing a massive turnaround with swarms of new homeowners buying up real estate in Prince William County at 2006 prices plus 10%/year appreciation had Obama simply pushed $700 billion in tax cuts into the economy, rather than spreading the money out in a time-released bundle of tax cuts and payments to local and state governments and targeted infrastructure spending?

  And Obama was quite clear and deliberate during his election campaign that he believed an overhaul of the healthcare system was a critical portion of any long-lasting economic recovery for this country.

  What Crystal seems to wish is that instead of electing someone who spoke like Obama on economic issues last fall … and he’s been pretty spot on in following the economic agenda he outlined back then … she had elected someone who spoke like John McCain. Or Sarah Palin.

  I have no idea why Crystal considers the McCain/Palin ticket pathetic – because her economic insight seems perfectly in line with theirs.

• 10 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:54 am

  …………The president was elected on a pledge to overhaul the entire healthcare system and make access at economic cost available to all…..it was one of his central planks…..75%+ of the country wants it and the vast majority of his own party and democratic leaning independants are expecting him to deliver on his promise and will be very unhappy if he doesn’t…….Furthermore it’s completely clear the president and his admin are committed to this goal…..If Ms Cleland wasn’t expecting this I’m not sure what she was expecting

  ………..When the president took office he inherited the worst financial crisis and economic recession since the great depression………He’s taken decisive action to deal with this against concerted resistance from the right whose only wish was for him and the rest of America to fail……..the financial system has been stabilized and the economy is clearly starting to respond to the stimulus program and other actions……we’re almost certainly going to see positive growth numbers this quarter……Crystal with her silly little quote from one voter must think the American people are fairly stupid……by the summer of next year the economy will be in full recovery mode and a healthcare bill will have been passed……they are going to take stock in the heat of an election campaign and ask themselves the question to we want to embrace Limbaugh, Gingrich, Palin and co and return to the status quo ante of January 2009 when Bush left office or are things better now with a more competent administration……no prizes for guessing the answer.

• 11 sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:37 am

  The honeymoon of Obama is over.

  It was over the moment he opened his mouth and out came the word “stupidly,” with respect to the Gates issue. There went the older white vote–down 7 points in the polls.

  Obama lost the white vote to McCain by 10 points. If you subtract out the youthful white
  “”netroots” from the total white vote, Obama lost the older white vote to McCain by even larger margins. They NEVER bought into Obama’s social welfare schemes.

  Then Obama opened his mouth and out came the word “stupidly,” and by the following week Obama was down another 7 points. The Black Activist President was revealed to all.

  Obama never sold older whites before, so it’s not surprising that they are putting up quite a fight now. They don’t want any part of what he’s selling, so they’re committed and active.

  And the Left coalition of blacks, Hispanics, the poor, and the young that got Obama elected is disheartened. They still love Obama–but they always wanted single-payer, and they see the public option as the penultimate step before single-payer. But now they’re forced to go before the American public and reassure them that it isn’t “really” single-payer. They can’t square that circle. You can’t get activists pouring into the streets to tell lies. They have to believe what they’re saying.

• 12 Bulldoglover100 // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:45 am

  Simply sad. While it might make some feel better to say something outloud, even when it is not true, it hurts us as a party to continut with magical thinking. It hurt us during the election and it will hurt us in 2010.
  Obama has suffered a SMALL degree over the health issue but hurt him to the point that it is going to help us in the face of the lunatics who are hogging the air waves? Not hardly.

• 13 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:45 am

  sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:37 am

  “The honeymoon of Obama is over.”

  …….yep he’s down 56% in Gallup…..3% more than he won by…..while the Republicans are at 35% of thereabouts….the sky is falling on him without question….the public can’t wait to re-elect Bush and DeLay and return to Republican rule

• 14 balconesfault // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:52 am

  “Then Obama opened his mouth and out came the word “stupidly,” and by the following week Obama was down another 7 points. The Black Activist President was revealed to all.”

  LOL … instapolling in response to a massively overpublicized gaffe is ridiculously short lived. If someone listens to Rush and watches Fox all day, I’m sure they’ll be reminded of this incident enough times in the next few years to think Obama hates whitey … but that particular audience weren’t going to vote for Obama anyway, were they?

  The takeaway for the rest of the public has been that Obama could sit down with the policeman and Dr. Gates and broker an open discussion, that would hopefully lead to further dialogue. Bomb defused.

  And I say gaffe not because I am convinced that the policeman did not act stupidly … if you switch “black professor” with “white gun collector” and everything else had been the same, you’d have had the entire right wing in America screaming at the “liberal Cambridge police force” for targeting a white 2nd Amendment conservative for political purposes in his own home … and the real question here wasn’t racism, but creeping authoritarianism by police forces.

• 15 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:52 am

  Bulldoglover100 // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:45 am
  ” Obama has suffered a SMALL degree over the health issue ”
  ………..I’m not sure it’s that…..any softening has really been about the economy…….the Republican dancing in the streets because he’s in the mid fifties when they’re in the mid thirties isn’t very rational but they are clinging to the wreckage…….as the economy regains momentum and the healthcare bill regains mojo he’s going to creep back to around 60…..balcones fault has already pointed out elsewhere the fact that those big whitey numbers Sinz is so excited about are all concentrated amongst an aging southern contingent

• 16 raygun // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:59 am

  Frum… really? this is what you’ve got. (*barf*)

• 17 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:02 am

  He also seemed to suggest that “social wedge issues” like abortion and gay marriage wouldn’t be a part of the GOP’s new and improved agenda for 2010.

  Could it be that the GOP is finally waking up?!

• 18 sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:08 am

  ottovbs: Oh, wow, has “ottovbs” suddenly decided to start quoting polls now? Has “ottovbs” suddenly gotten interested in polls now?

  OK, let’s put aside Obama’s personal likability, and talk about ObamaCare in the polls. The following is from RasmussenReports, 7 August 2009:

  Last week’s polling showed that 47% at least somewhat favored the (ObamaCare) plan while 49% are somewhat opposed.

  Though voters are torn about reform, there is intensity among the opposition. Just 25% strongly favor the reform effort, while 41% are strongly opposed. And that gets back to the very first point: 68% currently have good or excellent coverage. It’s going to be hard to generate passionate support for change among this group of voters.

  Those opposed to Mr. Obama’s reform appear to have momentum on their side. Polling last weekend showed that 48% of voters rate the U.S. health-care system as good or excellent. That’s up from 35% in May and up from 29% a year ago. Only 19% now rate the system as poor, down from 37% a year ago. It appears that the prospect of changing health care has made the existing system look better to a lot of people.

  Beyond the intensity of the opposition and its momentum, there is also a huge partisan gap that puts congressional Democrats in a very difficult position. Currently, 76% of Democratic voters favor the health-care reform plan proposed by Mr. Obama and the congressional Democrats, and they are counting on their representatives to deliver.

  But delivering for the Democratic base has the potential to hurt the party’s standing among independents. Among the unaffiliated, 35% are in favor of the Democrats’ health-care reform initiative, and 60% are opposed. Notably, just 16% of unaffiliated voters strongly favor the legislative effort; 47% strongly oppose it.

  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970204313604574330442429438938.html

  ObamaCare is losing the moderate and Independent voters. Most of them already have insurance they’re happy with. They wanted a version of health care reform that worked to reduce their costs, not raise taxes and bust the Federal budget just to insure the uninsured.

  Instead, ObamaCare is welfare for the uninsured. If it weren’t for that, ObamaCare would cost a fraction of what it’s projected to cost now.

  And that’s why it’s not selling.

• 19 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:17 am

  sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:08 am

  ……..I think Rasmussen polls on narrow issues indeed most polls on narrow issues have about as much credibility as you Sinz……….When I see a poll giving a fairly decisive answer on a broadly drawn question(right way/wrong way, appros etc) that is very easy to understand then the poll has some cred with me…… otherwise I regard them as what they are which is media generated entertainments intended to excite folks like you and sell newspapers…..they’re nonsense buddy…..Sorry

• 20 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:22 am

  ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:17 am

  sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:08 am

  “they’re nonsense buddy…..Sorry”

  ……..Sinz this attitude is the consequence of looking at market research numbers for years……a lot of which turned out to be completely wrong………these finely parsed numbers are bs man

• 21 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:58 am

  If the GOP does wish to “seek more color” it should be for East Asians and Indians. These groups tend to be upper middle class and generally loose out from affirmative action and high taxes. The key here will be to tone down the “America is a Christian country” rhetoric.

  Completely agree. I have several friend who are Indians and they should be a natural for the GOP. But the are turned off by the overly evangelical Christian tone by so many GOP elected officials. Also, I hope the GOP realizes that social issues will not win AA and Hispanic votes. Faith based initiatives did nothing to increase the GOP share of said vote. I think that most people understand the concept of separation of church and state and appreaciate it.

  The GOP should also try to increase the Jewish vote (maybe someone can tell me why Jews don’t vote for the GOP in larger numbers?).

  I am involved in the Jewish community. The biggest obstancle the GOP faces is the perception that it is dominated by evangelical Christians.

• 22 brutus1791 // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:07 am

  Crystal, sounds like someone is having a little bit of buyers remorse….

• 23 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:11 am

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:57 am

  “This is absurd… If you voted for Obama but didn’t think that he would push through his policies and instead impraced the amorphous “promise of change” (which every candidate running as an outsider claims to be in favor of) than you are sucker.”

  …….Oddly enough on this point I agree with you……As I said above Obama’s platform was very clear and involved some radical change…..which was what the country wanted and still wants although as ever it’s ability to express this is fairly inchoate.

• 24 BA McCormick // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:14 am

  “I am involved in the Jewish community. The biggest obstancle the GOP faces is the perception that it is dominated by evangelical Christians.” (Chekote)

  In the South this may be the case? But Evangelicals are highly supportive of Israel and Jewish interests in general?

• 25 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:19 am

  ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:11 am

  ” I am involved in the Jewish community. The biggest obstancle the GOP faces is the perception that it is dominated by evangelical Christians.”

  ………This may be a factor but in my experience of dealing with members of that community both lapsed and practicing is that (issues of Israel aside) they have a fairly intense attachment to reality and empirical evidence……they are just not the sort of people who suspend belief…..this tends to make most of them very pragmatic and fairly liberal and tolerant in their outlook…….I have not just described prevailing orthodoxies in the Republican party!…..most of Jewish community votes Democratic and if it wasn’t for Israel I suspect even more would!

• 26 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:24 am

  BA McCormick // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:14 am
  “In the South this may be the case? But Evangelicals are highly supportive of Israel and Jewish interests in general?”

  ……….You miss the point…..outside of extreme Zionists and some of extreme orthodox sects Jewish people are not bigoted on the whole….probably because they have been its victim…..The Democratic party always welcomed Jews and elevated them while Republicans rejected them…..It’s no accident that during the thirties Franklin D. Rosenfeld was a standard demon figure in Republican propaganda

• 27 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:26 am

  they are just not the sort of people who suspend belief…..this tends to make most of them very pragmatic and fairly liberal and tolerant in their outlook…….

  This has to be a record for setting up strawmen. Even for you Otto.

• 28 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:30 am

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:26 am

  “they are just not the sort of people who suspend belief…..this tends to make most of them very pragmatic and fairly liberal and tolerant in their outlook…….”

  ……You did pluck just a line from my general observation but don’t consider this true then?…..Just my personal observation…..no strawmen involved

• 29 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:31 am

  That is prejudice. Substitute another racial or religious group for evangelicals and I think you would see this..

  Perhaps if the evangelical didn’t go around telling people that they are bound for hell unless they believe they way they do, there would not be such a resistance to them. Also, evangelicals have a tendency to blur the separation of church and state and push for policies like banning Plan B. No embryonic stem cell research. Abstinence only education. No rights for same sex couples. Their whole agenda is at odds with most people who believe in separation of church and state and limited government. Regardless of what faith they belong to.

• 30 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:33 am

  Otto

  You keep on suggesting that everyone who is a Republican is intolerant, anti-science and ideological. That is not true. Yes, there are some elements that would fit that description but the same could be said about the Democrats.

• 31 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:36 am

  BTW, Otto. You keep saying that Bush needs to apologize to the world for his policies. Can you please tell me how the world was harmed by removing Hussein and the Taliban? I can see why Americans would be upset since it was our blood and treasure that was spent. I will even say that Afghanis and Iraqis may have a bone to pick with the Bush policies. But the world? How were they affected?

• 32 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:38 am

  28 ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:25 am

  “The biggest problem that Republicans have with African-American and Latino voters (specifically Mexican-American and Puerro Ricans) is its opposition to affirmative action.”

  ……….Nothing to do with the mass nativism and xenophobia on display during the immigration reform controversy?……the attacks on Sotomayor?…….Republican appro among hispanics is in single figures and they are losing their hold on the Hispanic community in Florida as Cuba loses it’s potency…….when Obama brings forward his immigration reform legislation next year as he promises to do (it will be essentially Bush/McCain II) it’s going to split the GOP wide open

• 33 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:38 am

  ireign

  In case you haven’t noticed, Obama got a record share of the Hispanic vote. He is not exactly a social moderate. Most people maybe socially conservative in their private lives. That does not mean that they want government to impose their values on everybody else. Bush won the Hispanic vote because of his policies on immigration. Nothing to do with social issues.

• 34 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:41 am

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:33 am

  …….Why don’t you answer my question on my broad description of the Jewish outlook ….if you disagree with me by all means say so

• 35 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:45 am

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:33 am

  “Otto

  You keep on suggesting that everyone who is a Republican is intolerant, anti-science and ideological. That is not true.”

  ……..It’s both widely perceived to be true and in many respects is if you look at their attitudes ot global warming, stem cell research, evolution etc…….it’s the reason only about 6% of scientists identified them as Republicans in a recent poll

• 36 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:56 am

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:36 am

  ‘BTW, Otto. You keep saying that Bush needs to apologize to the world for his policies.”

  ………..It’s completely off topic but I didn’t actually say that but suggested some modesty and self effacement rather than the self destructive arrogance and hubris of the last eight years was probably in our national interest

  “Can you please tell me how the world was harmed by removing Hussein and the Taliban? ”

  ……….I had no problem with removing the Taliban….invading Iraq was a costly failure and Afghanistan is turning into a costly failure partly because of the obsession with Iraq…..how was the world affected…..we aided terrorist recruitment…….pissed all over Western ideals of humanitarianism…..sowed dissension in the western alliance and therefore strengthened China and Russia……several European countries also spend a bundle on this fiasco……and at the end of it we still have a state where a couple of hundred people a month are being killed in terrorist acts and could turn totally unstable if we leave……otherwise a big plus for the world

• 37 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:53 pm

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:26 pm
  “As for your comments about evangelicals, those are simply prejudiced remarks and offensive ”

  ……..Actually his comments were 100% on the button and partially account for the problems the GOP currently finds itself in

  “Given that I suspect you are not a constitutional law scholar, I would refrain from making comments regarding church and state. ”

  ……..Sorry Chekote since you’re presumed not to be a constitutional scholar you’re disbarred from commenting on constitutional matters of church/state separation……we’ll all shortly be receiving a list from irreign of what we are allowed to comment upon

• 38 Jim Pier // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:53 pm

  ottovbvs said:

  “……….I had no problem with removing the Taliban….invading Iraq was a costly failure and Afghanistan is turning into a costly failure partly because of the obsession with Iraq…..how was the world affected…..we aided terrorist recruitment…….pissed all over Western ideals of humanitarianism…..sowed dissension in the western alliance and therefore strengthened China and Russia……several European countries also spend a bundle on this fiasco……and at the end of it we still have a state where a couple of hundred people a month are being killed in terrorist acts and could turn totally unstable if we leave……otherwise a big plus for the world”

  I don’t believe it would be accurate to describe this assessment as ‘objective.’

• 39 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:58 pm

  Otto

  Jihadists were recruiting terrorists and conducting attacks BEFORE the Iraq and Afghanistan invasion. They are still carrying on attacks now that Obama is POTUS and he has a completely different approach to foreign policy. The jihadists do what they do because they believe they are following God’s orders. Good try in scrambling to find how Bush damaged the world. Too bad facts are not on your side.

• 40 Jim Pier // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:02 pm

  ottovbvs said:
  “Otto

  You keep on suggesting that everyone who is a Republican is intolerant, anti-science and ideological. That is not true.”

  ……..It’s both widely perceived to be true and in many respects is if you look at their attitudes ot global warming, stem cell research, evolution etc…….it’s the reason only about 6% of scientists identified them as Republicans in a recent poll”

  Here’s the thing about ‘their attitudes about global warming’ — it is Al Gore and his ilk who refuse to engage in open-minded exchange and debate about this issue. “The debate is closed!” Those of us who are unwilling to drink the Kool-Aid of the alarmists (including, perhaps, you?) — a large group armed with a lot of factual Scientific information — demonstrate a greater willingness to be objective, greater financial independence, and less ideological ossification than those who are ready to put a halt to economic growth based on a couple of dozen jury-rigged atmospheric models.

• 41 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:05 pm

  ireign

  What exactly did I say about evangelicals that was incorrect:

  1) they believe that you go to Heavens only if you accept Jesus Christ as the Lord and Savior. And you must believe that you are save by the grace of God to get into Heaven and not good works. The latter is the reason they say Catholics are not really Christians. As far as their support of Israel, it is motivated by their belief that the state of Israel is necessary for the Second Coming of Jesus. I can see why some Jews are not particularly excited about the evangelical support of Israel.

  2) I said they have a tendency to blur the line between separation of church and state and provided some examples. They oppose comprehensive sex education because the Bible orders that people only have sex if married to each other. Using the Bible or any religious book to dictate public policy is in violation of the doctrine of separation of church and state. I don’t have to be a constitutional lawyer to figure that out.

• 42 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:11 pm

  whether government actions would state actions would amount to government endorsing a particular religion faith. It has nothing to do with whether your personal beliefs can dictate how you feel about abortion, gay marriage, or stem cell research.

  I agree. However, the evangelical agenda of people like Bauer is about using government to impose their religious views on others. Let’s start with abortion. They want to criminalize it. What about people who don’t believe personhood begins at conception? Why should they be deprived of practicing their views? And please drop the charge of people having a prejudice against evangelicals. I am stating facts. You labeling is about as effective as Cynthia Tucker accusing people who oppose Obamacare of being racists.

• 43 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:12 pm

  Jim Pier // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:53 pm
  ” I don’t believe it would be accurate to describe this assessment as ‘objective.’’

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:58 pm
  “Jihadists were recruiting terrorists and conducting attacks BEFORE the Iraq and Afghanistan ”

  ………..Of course they were…….. it’s just become a much bigger problem as even the combined chiefs, Petraeus, and all the national security agencies have acknowledged

  ………okay we didn’t increase terrorist recruitment……we strengthened the western alliance……our obsession with Iraq didn’t weaken our effort in Afghanistan…..we didn’t strengthen Iran regionally……..our prestige and diplomatic clout around the world were enhanced….respect for American moral values was increased everywhere…..and there isn’t a simmering problem in Iraq….If that’s you guy’s version of events its fine by me but it largely explains why many think Republicans have lost touch with reality

• 44 Jim Pier // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:14 pm

  re stem cell research, I have a question: Back at the time of the founding of the US, a black man was not considered fully equal to a white man. I think we can agree on that. Looking back, we find that belief to be an appalling injustice. What has changed since then is not the reality, which is that all men are created equal, but the beliefs held about that idea.

  Well, I contend that the same is true with regard to embryonic stem cell research. Some of us believe that an embryo is a human being, entitled to all the rights and protections incumbent to a human person. Some clearly believe otherwise. What is important here, is that if I do believe that embryo is a human, then that makes the destruction of that embryo seriously wrong, and therefore it behooves me to advocate for the protection of that class of human being. This does not in any way make me anti-science. Your use of that denigrating term reflects a lack of understanding of the argument, and a desire to close off the argument with something less than a solid case. I would argue that the best up-to-date science strongly supports the case for an embryo being considered a human being, and someone who would deny that less enlightened.

  Someday, there will be a definitive understanding of this dispute. I believe it will come down on the side of the embryo, just as it did on the side of the black man.

• 45 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:21 pm

  ireign

  What about the opposition to comprehensive sex education? Would that be a violation?

• 46 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:22 pm

  Jim Pier // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:02 pm
  “Here’s the thing about ‘their attitudes about global warming’ ‘
  ………The vast mass of respectable scientific opinion, world organizations like the UN, domestic agencies like NASA etc etc believe there is a problem……because I’m totally unqualified to debate it one way or the other (as I suspect is the case with you but you clearly consider yourself an expert) I’m willing to take their word for it over that of various energy industry front groups and buffoons like Inhofe…..you’re welcome to go with this crowd if you want but it’s their attitude on this matter as on the others I alluded to that largely explain why the GOP is regarded as anti science not only by a majority of the public but also by those best qualified to know…namely scientists!

• 47 DFL // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:25 pm

  First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievences.

  Abortion rights is part of William Brennan’s “living Constitution”.

• 48 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:26 pm

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:06 pm

  ‘40-Ottobs, another stupid post by you. I take it you are also prejudiced against Evangelicals. ”

  ……Just extracting some mild humor from your continuing pomposity and superiority complex

• 49 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:27 pm

  opposing sex education because of your particular beliefs is perfectfully constitutional.

  So adopting a law that bans comprehensive sex education based on the belief that the Bible only sanctions sex within the boundaries of marriage, is not a violation? Wow! If we follow your logic, we can implement Sharia and still follow the spirit of the Founding Fathers. BTW, I am no constitutional lawyer but it seems to me that SCOTUS struck down prayer in schools because of the separation of church and state.

• 50 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:36 pm

  “The separation between church and state has to do with freedom to practice one’s religion from state interference and whether government actions would state actions would amount to government endorsing a particular religion faith. It has nothing to do with whether your personal beliefs can dictate how you feel about abortion, gay marriage, or stem cell research.’

  ……….De juris perhaps but hardly de facto……in reality all these beliefs are implicit in the evangelical practise of religion……and the last 20 years are replete with examples of evangelicals attempting to use the political system to impose them on wider society……..Since you know this as well as I do I’ll put it down to fundamentalist ideology although you disclaim being a fundamentalist

• 51 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:40 pm

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:27 pm

  …………irreign is playing games…..pretending all the beliefs that are implicit in a particular religious practice whether it be sharia law or contraception are not going to spill over into the holders of those belief’s practice of politics……it’s a totally naive view but since it’s clear he thinks we’re all stupid he probably thinks we can be convinced.

• 52 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:56 pm

  Otto

  ireign says that opposing comprehensive sex education is not a violation of separation of church and state. True enough an individual can personally oppose it. However, what the Focus on the Family crowd is trying to do is make comprehensive sex education illegal. Same with Plan B. Same withe embryonic stem cell. If Bauer got his way, it would be banned period. For people who think like him it not a matter of whether the federal government should be in the business of funding it. He would ban it because his religious beliefs dictate that personhood begins at conception. The Founding Fathers were religious themselves (well, actually most were deists but I digress) but understood the importance of establishing a secular state.

• 53 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:05 pm

  I would argue that the best up-to-date science strongly supports the case for an embryo being considered a human being, and someone who would deny that less enlightened.

  I disagree. What makes humans different from animals is the soul. Or consciouness of self if you are an atheist. Science will never be able to address when does the soul enters the human body. It is matter of religious belief. As far as self consciouness, clearly it is not possible until the later stages of fetal development when the nervous system is developed.

• 54 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:10 pm

  The constituional right to abortion is predicated on privacy grounds not on the establishment clause.

  True. However, the belief that personhood begins at conception is based on religious grounds. I am sure that even pro-lifers have no objections to the concept of the right to privacy.

• 55 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:30 pm

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:56 pm
  ” The Founding Fathers were religious themselves (well, actually most were deists but I digress) but understood the importance of establishing a secular state.”

  ……The general thrust of your comments I agree with entirely……irreign is trying to pass off a narrow legal definition as political reality when in fact all the things he dismisses are actually core parts of the evangelical belief system and Bauer and co have tried to impose them on the rest of us using politics as a vehicle

  ……..The founding fathers insisted on a clear separation of church and state because they realized how dangerous and divisive religion was……remember this was the late 18th century and huge religious wars had been a feature of European life for the previous two centuries…….and when you look at the activities of the christinists who can say they were wrong about its divisiveness

• 56 DFL // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:34 pm

  When an egg is fertilized, a unique human life is formed. You don’t have to be religious to understand that.

• 57 balconesfault // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:12 pm

  dfl – considering the number of “unique human lives” that meet your definition that are regularly sloughed off by the body via natural processes, it’s a stretch to immediately conclude that this zygote immediately requires protection from the will of the woman whose body it resides within.

  Or perhaps not a stretch … but an act of faith, that somehow some greater purpose or higher power wants us to do whatever we can to protect these fertilized eggs.

  I assume that you must be in favor of banning the IUD as well?

• 58 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:23 pm

  The founding fathers insisted on a clear separation of church and state because they realized how dangerous and divisive religion was……

  Coming from Europe, I fully appreciate the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. Too bad that many SoCons don’t share the same appreciation. They insist on a strict interpretation of the Constitution (e.g. there is no right to privacy in the Constitution!); however, would blur the line of separation of church and state in a second if it meant pushing through their pet projects. They rail against Obamacare because they don’t want government bureaucrats to get in between the doctor-patient relationship. However, they have been advocating for the government to get involved between a woman and her ob-gyn for decades. I said it once and will say it a thousand times. Much of the SoCon agenda undercuts the limited government/individual freedom argument.

• 59 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:25 pm

  When an egg is fertilized, a unique human life is formed. You don’t have to be religious to understand that.

  A liver cell contains the unique DNA of an individual. Yet none would argue that a liver cell is a person. For you a blueprint is probably the same as a building.

• 60 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 4:34 pm

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:23 pm
  ” Much of the SoCon agenda undercuts the limited government/individual freedom argument.”

  ……..That’s the problem…..evangelical christianity is riddled with contradictions…..ultimately religious fundamentalism is a loser for the GOP because as Max Weber pointed out modernity is going to result in the rationalisation of all human activities……and religious belief is ultimately irrational……thus believers are continually forced into compromises with their beliefs….catholics practice birth control……..unwanted pregnancies are widespread among young female churchgoers who don’t practise abstinence….most women insist on control over their own bodies ….etc etc…..the GOP has attached itself to a ship that is sinking

  ……..Btw you never did tell me why you disagreed with my characterisation of most Jews (outside of questions surrounding Israel) as very much governed by reality and empirical evidence, tolerant and broadly liberal in their outlook………you wouldn’t have been dodging the question would you?

• 61 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:33 pm

  Re: BA McCormick // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:59 am (#3) –

  “If the GOP does wish to “seek more color” it should be for East Asians and Indians. These groups tend to be upper middle class and generally loose out from affirmative action and high taxes. The key here will be to tone down the “America is a Christian country” rhetoric. … Of course, if the GOP can win 5% of white voters from the Democrats, the GOP would win the Presidency for the next 50 years.”

  You’re right. Still, we must be clear. The GOP needs to bring ALL Americans into the fold (try to, that is) and put NATIONAL identity (as AMERICANS) above color, ethnicity, language, and religion.

  Re: RLHotchkiss // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:30 am (#4) –

  “Quotas, and Affirmative action play very little part in the life of the average African American or Mexican. Most African Americans and Hispanics attend schools in the neighborhoods and never receive any affirmative action at all.”

  And you’re right too… to the extent that you’re talking general population. When you narrow down further for social-economic variables in line with other demographic factors and of course occupation the message from the top down is that quotas and affirmative action (in the form of reverse discrimination, not in its original conception as basically a marketing tool) are not only a positive but are actually necessary and that anyone who disputes this does so out of racist motivation.

  (*SHRUG*)

  Unfortunately, RLH, lies a propaganda work – especially when reinforced by not only “black leadership,” “Hispanic leadership,” “whatever leadership,” but also by one of the two political Parties which between them share power in this nation – regardless of which one is “on top” at any particular point in time.

  Re: Midcon // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:51 am (#6) –

  “…the GOP has to get off the non-government horse and instead ride to the people’s benefit rather than corporate benefit.”

  God bless Midcon! Ride, jockey, ride!

  Re: Balconesfault // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:05 am (#9) –

  “…do they believe the economy would be better off today had the federal government simply done nothing over the last 7 months? No stimulus package, no pumping money into Detroit, nothing that would have increased the deficit … simply, nothing?”

  (*RAISING MY HEAD*)

  I do!

  Re: Sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:37 am (#11) –

  The honeymoon of Obama is over.

  “It was over the moment he opened his mouth and out came the word “stupidly,” with respect to the Gates issue. There went the older white vote – down 7 points in the polls.”

  Right and right. (*WINK*)

  Re: Sinz54 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:08 am (#18) –

  (*THUMBS UP*)

  Re: Brutus1791 // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:07 am (#23) –

  “Crystal, sounds like someone is having a little bit of buyers remorse…. ”

  Ha! Ha! Leave it to Brutus to say out loud what I was thinking!

  Hey… Brutus… you notice I don’t even address Crystal’s “contribution” but go straight into commenting on the comments. (*SMILE*) This frigg’n chick is something else; yeah… we can all see why she’s gravitate to David. (*CHUCKLE*)

  BILL

• 62 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:35 pm

  * Gravatated!

  BILL

• 63 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:40 pm

  Re: ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:25 am (#28) –

  “If you had friends who wouldn’t vote for the Democrats because they thought it was dominated by Jews or Blacks, I think you would confront those people about their prejudices rather than cater to it.”

  JEEZ…! Way to go, Ireign! You just kicked Chekote’s ass from one end of cyberspace to another!

  And, hey… I’m not cheering because it’s Chekote (I actually believe Chekote is teachable!), I’m cheering because it was a BRILLIANT comeback and an absolutely right on target critique.

  Hell… I’m gonna post this one as a stand-alone!

  BILL

• 64 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 6:30 pm

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:40 pm

  ” Otto, you are correct about one thing — I do think you are dumb”

  ……..I’m sure you do….that would go with your Adler problem and propensity for name calling…..one wonders how I made it through life…..and of course religious fundamentalists as you so clearly are have made no attempt whatever to use the political system to enforce their beliefs on the rest of us from teaching intelligent design to passing the Schiavo law……of course I’m dumb….none of this happened how silly of me

  “Most likely in the future, the US will have a policy on abortion that represents some sort of compromise from a complete ban and abortion on demand such as abortion is legal up until the 2nd or third trimester and children under a certain age would need parental consent”

  ……And pigs might fly

• 65 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 6:34 pm

  72 ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:43 pm

  “Thanks Bill”

  ………Yes I’d agree you and Baarking are about at the same intellectual level….Congratulations

• 66 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 6:36 pm

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:42 pm
  “Be careful what you wish for.”

  ……..Appealing to Chekote’s neocon Israeli position for moral support?……..might work?

• 67 balconesfault // Aug 11, 2009 at 6:49 pm

  Ireign: “Most likely in the future, the US will have a policy on abortion that represents some sort of compromise from a complete ban and abortion on demand such as abortion is legal up until the 2nd or third trimester and children under a certain age would need parental consent.”

  The wikipedia entry on Section X of Roe v Wade:

  Section X explained that the trimester of pregnancy is highly relevant to the weight of the factors in this balancing test. Thus, during the first trimester, the state cannot restrict a woman’s right to an abortion in any way; during the second trimester, the state may only regulate the abortion procedure “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health”; during the third trimester, the state can choose to restrict or proscribe abortion as it sees fit when the fetus is viable (“except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother”).

• 68 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 6:56 pm

  ireign

  Our support for Israel should be based on whether it fits our strategic interests. It shouldn’t be based on whether a constituency believes the state of Isreal is a necessary ingredient for the Second Coming. There a secular case to support Israel. If the Republican Party focused on that instead on indulging the Left Behind crowd, they might get more support from the Jewish community.

• 69 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:05 pm

  Btw you never did tell me why you disagreed with my characterisation of most Jews (outside of questions surrounding Israel) as very much governed by reality and empirical evidence, tolerant and broadly liberal in their outlook………you wouldn’t have been dodging the question would you?

  I am not disagreeing with your general observation about Jews. I disagree with your view that Republicans are not tolerant, not grounded in reality. The problem with the Republican Party is that it has attached itself to a constituency which is not tolerant, is anti-science when it comes to certain issues. They are the loudest faction and thus have contributed to the perception of Republicans being “anti-science”, etc. Bottom line. The Reagan coalition is not enough to win. It is time to form a new coalition. The people who are SoCons in their private lives and also believe in limited government, strong defense and individual freedom should stay in the new coalition but they cannot drive the Republican agenda as they do now.

• 70 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:18 pm

  “If you had friends who wouldn’t vote for the Democrats because they thought it was dominated by Jews or Blacks, I think you would confront those people about their prejudices rather than cater to it.”

  How would I do that? By lying and telling my Jewish friends that Evangelical DO NOT believe that Jews are bound for Hades? Or should I lie about the fact that Republican evangelicals by in large don’t support embryonic stem cell research; want to teach religion in science class? It is the agenda of Republican evangelicals that keeps many Jews from even considering the Republican party. It has nothing to do with prejudice.

• 71 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:20 pm

  Re: Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 11:31 am (#31) –

  “Perhaps if the evangelical didn’t go around telling people that they are bound for hell unless they believe they way they do…”

  (*SIGH*)

  You simply can’t help yourself, can you?

  “…policies like banning Plan B. No embryonic stem cell research. Abstinence only education. No rights for same sex couples. Their whole agenda is at odds with most people who believe in separation of church and state and limited government.”

  Wow. Where to start…??? Hmm… Bill the Christmas Time Christian responds…

  “Plan B?” — Intended to prevent pregnancy after known or suspected contraception failure or just plain irresponsibility. Sounds fine to me. Just give the manufacturer legal protection from lawsuits by idiots who ignore the warnings and usage (and non-usage) instructions and it’s fine with me.

  (*SHRUG*)

  As to people who adhere to (or rather, pay attention to all the tenets of) a faith which prohibits contraception… they have their rights to believe what they want, I have mine.

  “No embryonic stem cell research.” — You mean no FEDERAL FUNDING for embryonic stem cell research. Hey… they’re citizens…they have as much right to oppose funding of embryonic stem cells for whatever reason as I do for opposing buying an additional 200-300 F-22 fighters.

  “Abstinence only education.” — Not my ideal, but again… (are you seeing a theme here, Chekote?)… citizens have a right to favor or oppose government policies and public schools are… er… public entities.

  “No rights for same sex couples.” — (*BUZZ*) No quite. While I – for example – support gay marriage, those who don’t have a right to their opinion and frankly… history is kinda on their side.

  (*SHRUG*) (Wait for it… wait for it… the comparison to slavery… it’s coming…)

  (*CHUCKLE*)

  Oh… and just to go back to “telling people that they are bound for hell unless they believe,” they’re only trying to save souls as they see it and rather than take offense perhaps you should appreciate their selflessness (from their perspective) in spending their time, effort, and money on trying to “save” others whom they believe are otherwise bound for eternal damnation.

  You know what, Chekote… when these folks come to my door (perhaps once or twice a year) to hand out their literature and promise to pray for me I’m as polite to them as I could possibly be.

  They’re trying to HELP me (as they see it)! They’re concerned about ME – a total stranger.

  They’re not asking for money. They don’t get mad when I make it clear that we’re not exactly on the same page. They’re damned nice folks.

  You know, Chekote… a little tolerance and the ability to look at issues through another’s eyes wouldn’t kill you.

  (*SHRUG*)

  BILL

• 72 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:23 pm

  Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:05 pm
  “I am not disagreeing with your general observation about Jews.”

  …….Ok so you agree with my general perceptions about Jews ….so it wasn’t really a strawman after all

  “I disagree with your view that Republicans are not tolerant, not grounded in reality. The problem with the Republican Party is that it has attached itself to a constituency which is not tolerant, is anti-science when it comes to certain issues. They are the loudest faction and thus have contributed to the perception of Republicans being “anti-science”, etc.”

  ……….What you’re missing is that constituency is as you concede, sort of, the dominant voice in the party…….er……..but the Republicans ARE tolerant and grounded in reality……don’t you detect a little contradiction here?

• 73 ottovbvs // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:26 pm

  barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:20 pm
  ” You know, Chekote… a little tolerance and the ability to look at issues through another’s eyes wouldn’t kill you”

  ………you mean the sort you invariably exhibit…..you are indeed a role model in this respect

• 74 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:46 pm

  Re: Ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 12:26 pm (#39) –

  * Chekote… pay attention to what we’re trying to get across to you.

  Re: Jim Pier // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:02 pm (#43) –

  “Here’s the thing about ‘their attitudes about global warming’ — it is Al Gore and his ilk who refuse to engage in open-minded exchange and debate about this issue. “The debate is closed!” Those of us who are unwilling to drink the Kool-Aid of the alarmists (including, perhaps, you?) — a large group armed with a lot of factual Scientific information — demonstrate a greater willingness to be objective, greater financial independence, and less ideological ossification than those who are ready to put a halt to economic growth based on a couple of dozen jury-rigged atmospheric models.”

  EXACTLY!

  Re: Ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:16 pm #50) –

  “Criminalizing abortion would not violate the separation of church and state…”

  Exactly right. (*NOD*) Again… just to throw this out and not to be “mean” to Chekote… but it constantly amazes me what some of my fellow posters DON’T understand about basic issues – what facts and knowledge AREN’T at their fingertips.

  (*SHRUG*)

  Re: Dfl // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:25 pm (#53) –

  Right! Exactly the kind of knowledge one would expect most of us to possess. (*SHRUG*)

  Re: Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:27 pm (#55) –

  “So adopting a law that bans comprehensive sex education based on the belief that the Bible only sanctions sex within the boundaries of marriage, is not a violation? Wow!”

  (*HEADACHE*) (Ireign… Dfl… ya can’t make this stuff up!)

  Yes, Chekote – that’s EXACTLY right!

  Jeezus… I asked Balc this the other day and I have to ask you: WHERE did you attend middle school and high school? WHERE did you attend college…???

  Chekote. All this is stuff you should KNOW… stuff you should have been taught. I fear you’ve been educationally shortchanged.

  BILL

• 75 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:20 pm

  What you’re missing is that constituency is as you concede, sort of, the dominant voice in the party…….er……..but the Republicans ARE tolerant and grounded in reality……don’t you detect a little contradiction here?

  The strawmen was in reference to your assertion that ALL Republicans are not tolerant, etc. A constituency – which by the way does not even constitute a majority of Republican voters – is not the whole party. We have a problem and we are in the process of addressing it.

• 76 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:23 pm

  I haven’t advocated the teaching of intelligent design or “Schiavo law” on this blog.

  But the constituency you are defending has. They are driving the agenda of the GOP and have driven us straight into electoral oblivion.

• 77 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:25 pm

  If you think a relatively secular person such as myself is a “religious fundamentalist”, you should really get out more.

  Sorry. You don’t come across as secular. In this I have to agree with Otto.

• 78 Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 8:30 pm

  The US has one of the most liberal abortion policies out of western democracies despite being one of the most socially conservative countries. It is inevitable that eventually public sentiment will be reflected in our laws.

  Have you seen the results of recent ballot initiatives to ban abortion in Colorado and South Dakota? The ballot initiative in Colorado was a mirror image of the the GOP pro-life plant i.e., it declared a fertilized egg a person entitled to 14th amendment rights. It was defeated 73%-27%. In South Dakota, the initiative would have banned abortion except for life and HEALTH of the mother, rape and incest. It was defeated 55%-45%. So forget the polls. Look at how people ACTUALLY vote on this issue. In the privacy of the voting booth, Americans don’t want the government to get between a woman and her ob-gyn.

• 79 anniemargret // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:13 pm

  I played with Jewish kids, went to school with Jewish kids. I dated some Jewish men while in college. They were our neighbors, our friends, and in one case, part of our family. No one can speak with authority about another ethnic group or religious group with a broad brush and certainly I cannot either. But…

  The Jewish people I came to know intimately were deeply concerned about social issues. They tend to humanitarianism, and harbor a general concern for the unfortunate and poor. Because of their history, they are very sensitive to suffering in humanity. They are deeply concerned about education, and education is one of the highest priorities for their children. The are big supporters of the arts, and a large percentage of Jews go into science. They dislike anti-intellectualism. And they dislike the roar from the fundamentalist wing of the GOP that tells them while they ‘love Israel’ their Jewish faith is not on par with theirs.

  These are generalizations I know, and there are always exceptions to the rule.

  Yes, they appreciate support for Israel from the Christian wing of the party, but many can separate this ’support’ given the Christian propensity for proselytizing, and understand there are strings attached, since most Christians want to convert them.

  Not all religions proselytize – certainly the Jewish faith does not. And Roman Catholicism, in which I was raised, does not . They welcome converts but no one goes around asking if you need a ‘church home’ or persist in trying to get you to see it their way. I had twelve years of Catholic schools and there isn’t anyone I knew that did anything like that, even though we lived among people of other ethnic groups and religions. It just isn’t proper.

  Evangelicals are good people at heart, but their ‘faith’ requires them to increase the numbers . This is a huge problem for Republicanism, and I said before elsewhere on this blog, perception is everything.

  The average American outside of your party believes the GOP is dominated by anti-intellectualism, anti-science, anti-environmentalism (did anyone catch the Pentagon’s warning that climate change will be causing more wars and economic upheaveal?), and an intolerate view of separation of church and state.

  The majority of Americans find abortion abhorrent but are not willing to allow the government to mandate it out of law. The majority of Americans do not believe stem cell research to alleviate suffering and diseases equates to using a fully grown human’s body parts. There is a difference – especially when thousands of these cells are discarded everyday.

  I had two uncles, both brothers, who died from Lou Gehrig’s disease in its most acute form, one at the age of 52, the other at 70. I am solidly in favor of stem cell research but then again, you can see why I am biased.

• 80 anniemargret // Aug 11, 2009 at 9:47 pm

  No way are you going to compare the active in your face proselytizing of Christians vs Catholics. There is no comparison. I have never met a Jewish person who asked me to join his/her faith . I have literally met dozens of Christians over the years who have asked me if I have a ‘church home’ and even when I tell I do, they ignore what you say, and continue to press you and pursue you. World of difference.

  If you have never experienced this, then you haven’t a clue what I am saying here. Catholic charities, yes, of course, are in countries around the world, and yes, probably some encourage converts, but I have never met a Catholic who pursues the convert the way Christians in this country do, and I have been immersed in Catholicism for most of my life, and have lived in many places around the US so I am not speaking idly about just one part of the country.

  The Crusades occurred in the Middle Ages and is not relative to this discussion.

  Of course ALL religions want converts, but the Christian community in this country has been very verbal and very outspoken, thereby causing some people who might be more moderate, to back off. I don’t think I’m alone in thinking the GOP has a problem because of it.

  The point I was trying to make was that Jews have voted Democratic more often than not, because caring about the poor, education, science, environment, etc…are liberal issues. And I suspect that the issue with Israel is becoming less important to them than worrying along with what the average American is worrying about these days.

• 81 anniemargret // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:03 pm

  btw, for the record…I am no longer a practicing Catholic, although my religious principles and beliefs still are an enormous influence in my life. I have a healthy respect for all views, religious or not and that is why any overt show of religiosity repels me, especially in politics.

• 82 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:34 pm

  Re: Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:56 pm (#58) –

  “The Founding Fathers were religious themselves (well, actually most were deists but I digress) but understood the importance of establishing a secular state.”

  I wouldn’t be all that quick to declare as fact that most of the Founders were deists.

  http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/Spring09/deism.cfm

  Re: Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:10 pm (#60) –

  “…the belief that personhood begins at conception is based on religious grounds.”

  While it certainly CAN be that doesn’t mean it always is. It can also be – and often is – based simply on the scientific truth that conception is… er… conception. (Conception = Life; Prior to conception = Sperm and/or Egg – NOT Life.)

  And then we have the ethical (as opposed to religious) view which could place “Life” at all sorts of points, anywhere from conception to birth – anywhere in between. (Heck… certain religions do that as well.)

  Re: Dfl // Aug 11, 2009 at 2:34 pm (#62) –

  (*SHRUG*) See…? Case in point! (Jeez… I love reading and responding to thread postings in order!)

  Re: Balconesfault // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:12 pm (#63) –

  “dfl – considering the number of “unique human lives” that meet your definition that are regularly sloughed off by the body via natural processes, it’s a stretch to immediately conclude that this zygote immediately requires protection from the will of the woman whose body it resides within.”

  To equate a natural occurrence – a physiological response – to a conscious decision – a matter of deliberate action… (*SIGH*)… well… there’s old Balc for ya!

  (*SNORT*) (*ROLLING MY EYES*)

  Re: Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:23 pm (#64) –

  “Coming from Europe, I fully appreciate the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.”

  Ha! Ha! Well… being well educated, I appreciate the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.

  (Notice I didn’t write “Being from New York…”) (*SNORT*)

  Oh, Chekote… my arrogance, your ignorance… we could strike it rich with our own Reality Show!

  (*SMILE*)

  Re: Chekote // Aug 11, 2009 at 3:25 pm (#65) –

  “…none would argue that a liver cell is a person.”

  One would hope. (*SMILE*)

  BILL

• 83 barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:46 pm

  Re: Ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:40 pm (#69) –

  “Otto, you are correct about one thing — I do think you are dumb (I wouldn’t lump Chekote in there with you though).”

  No. Chekote isn’t dumb. Heck… as much as I decry her lack of factual depth when it comes to a number of topics compared to the average “Joe or Jane” Chekote is obviously a cut above.

  That said… Chekote isn’t nearly as knowledgeable as you, Ireign, or Brutus, or Mid, or Sinz, or to move “Leftward,” Spartacus. I’d put Chekote and Balc on about the same level.

  (Hey… just making conversation…!) (*WINK*)

  Oh… Dfl also belongs with the rest of “us.” (*WINK*) (*GRIN*)

  (Anyone I’ve missed… no offense – not attempting to create an “all-inclusive” tier listing.) (*WINK*)

  BILL

• 84 anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 8:36 am

  Yes, conservatives donate to causes to help the poor….I used to be a ‘corporate wife’ and we had many friends that we associated with, very wealthy and influential and many of them routinely donated to charities, etc… great people all of them.

  But we are talking about a national crisis of rising poverty and loss of benefits for millions of Americans, working class Americans and the problem needs a mandated one, instead of the ‘that’s their problem approach’ approach that Republicans prefer. We are seeing more poverty by the minute – donations alone will never solve the problem.

  I agree with you about teacher’s unions. I worked in the public schools for awhile and share with you disgust. Monies are being thrown about with useless abandon. Some unions are causing some teachers to become lazy and inefficient – there should be an across the board standard of efficiency that we find in business. Bad teachers are allowed to stay.

  Schools are failing because….drum roll please….. THIS liberal thinks the schools went too far to the left, allowing chaos to reign instead of focusing on education. A small but very vocal group in the schools are holding administration hostage, causing a dumb’down of education. One of the reasons I left the high school arena as a professional to go elsewhere, was because I got frustrated by the lack of attention given to the primary reasons our schools are failing – low expectations, irresponsibility on the part of students, and irresponsibility by those parents to demand excellence from their own children instead of making excuses from them, and an absence of authority to reign in all in. So on this issue I agree.

  Environmentalism across the board has been a liberal issue on the political scene. I have heard VERY few Republicans address this as serious concern, usually siding with the right wing talking heads (Limbaugh anyone?) who feel it is all due to ‘natural causes’ – or it is a ‘conspiracy’ ….please…this is not high on Republican lists; only now some Republicans in leadership positions are starting to speak more openly and favorably about doing something about it. Green energy is the wave of the future – it could be a whole new cottage industry for these young people getting out of college, and I would prefer the USA gets ahead of the curve before others do. I thought Thomas Friedman was right on (Hot, Flat and Crowded) about the need for America to lead the way, not stand at the sidelines. We ignore at our own peril…certainly our children’s generation will be handed that one. In fact, the NYT just ran a front page article about the Pentagon doing an analysis that climate change will be a major factor in future wars and subsequent economic crisis, due to pollution of water, flooding, rising sea levels affecting planetary equilibrium, etc….

  Saying science, the arts, education and the environment, or addressing the millions of uninsured Americans (and that is rising by day) are predominantly liberal issues is not a far stretch, by any means. During the eight years of Republicanism, very few of these issues were addressed in a serious manner by Republicans. They were too worried about Terry Schiavo, and then saying they didn’t want ‘government intrustion.’ Ergo…these issues are precisely why they were swept out of office in ‘06 and then again, in ‘08.

  If people want to push their religious views on another person, that is their right . I find it offensive, as do many people. I support their right to do it, but it doesn’t mean I like it. I think it is antithetical to promoting a healthy climate to debate serious issues and a mix of religion and politics has always been, and always will be, a insufferable mix. Perhaps we can agree on this one?

• 85 anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 8:46 am

  And in fairness to teachers….many of the good ones are thwarted every time, by both administrations that fail to support them for political reasons, and parents who are too lazy or crazy to recognize that their kids failing in school will ultimately hurt them for life .

• 86 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 8:54 am

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 7:53 pm

  “There is a decent chance that Roe v. Wade gets overturned.
  Regardless of Ottobs’ comment “when pigs fly” that is probably where the US is headed.”

  ……..There isn’t the remotest chance Roe will be overturned……even many pro lifers have accepted this reality……Furthermore various attempts by pro lifers to put abortion restrictions on state ballots have all failed including three in the November election two of them in fairly red states

  “(irreign replying to Chekote) Even assuming your premise is correct, that the constituency I am “defending” are religious fanatics, there is no guilt by association or advocacy. I am secular. You can believe that or disbelieve that. Given what you have articulated on this blog, your opinion does not really mean much.”

  …………..If it walks like a duck etc…….it’s awfully obvious you’re a) movement conservative and b) suffering from a severe Adler problem(one of the worst I’ve seen on this site)

• 87 sinz54 // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:09 am

  anniemargaret sez: “Jews have voted Democratic more often than not, because caring about the poor, education, science, environment, etc…are liberal issues.”

  Jews have always been left-wingers.

  In America, Jews were very active in the Communist Party USA and in various socialist groups. (Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were Jews.) And when the state of Israel was created, the kibbutzim were an experiment in total communal socialism. Though right-wing governments over the years have promoted free enterprise much more.

  Plus, a number of the early feminists were Jews, including Betty Freidan and Andrea Dworkin.

  Most importantly, Jews fell in love with FDR for standing up to Hitler; while many leading Republicans were isolationists who belittled the threat from Nazism. That cemented the relationship between Jews and Dems which continues to this day.

  But more than that, Jews have always pushed for government secularism and a total separation of church and state, which puts them at odds with the Christian evangelicals. Jews have done this because in their history, when they’ve had to live under a government that enforced Christianity, they’ve run into trouble.

  In recent years, Orthodox Jews have sometimes voted Republican on social issues. Orthodox Jews, unlike other Jews, are opposed to abortion and gay marriage. In 2004, some Orthodox Jewish districts, such as Borough Park in Brooklyn, voted for Bush over Kerry.

• 88 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:11 am

  ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:13 pm

  ……..Unfortunately irreign, not being quite as sharp as he thinks he is, has boxed himself in by denying that he is a jingoistic, fundamentalist, movement conservative…….thus in order to preserve this fiction he is forced to claim he is “secular” or just being “reasonable” while promoting extreme pro life positions, defending Palin as a serious political figure who has been “destroyed” by the media, accusing “liberals” of pollution, and so forth……I look forward with anticipation to further demonstrations of this contortionism or he can come out of the closet ……he does however have the consolation of knowing that he is regarded as a peer in intellectualism, sanity and condescension by Barker :

  barker13 // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:46 pm

  Re: Ireign // Aug 11, 2009 at 5:40 pm (#69) –

  No. Chekote isn’t dumb. Heck… as much as I decry her lack of factual depth when it comes to a number of topics compared to the average “Joe or Jane” Chekote is obviously a cut above.

  That said… Chekote isn’t nearly as knowledgeable as you, Ireign, or Brutus, or Mid, or Sinz, or to move “Leftward,” Spartacus. I’d put Chekote and Balc on about the same level.

  (Hey… just making conversation…!) (*WINK*)

  Oh… Dfl also belongs with the rest of “us.” (*WINK*) (*GRIN*)

  (Anyone I’ve missed… no offense – not attempting to create an “all-inclusive” tier listing.) (*WINK*)

• 89 sinz54 // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:16 am

  anniemargaret sez: “But we are talking about a national crisis of rising poverty”

  There is no “national crisis of rising poverty”.

  Poverty today is MUCH less than it ever was–as regards its long term trend. For every income group, from poor to wealthy, per capita real income is much higher today than it was 40 years ago.

  There are CYCLICAL changes due to the business cycle. Right now, we’ve got 10% unemployment–but that’s just a passing phase.

• 90 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:20 am

  anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 8:36 am

  “THIS liberal thinks the schools went too far to the left, allowing chaos to reign instead of focusing on education. A small but very vocal group in the schools are holding administration hostage, causing a dumb’down of education.”

  ……..Entirely my position, I have a lot of respect for teachers but they have developed a hell of entitlement mentality which tends to result in them holding state budgets hostage and resisting efforts to get rid of the useless ones…….in the public mind they do seem to occupy a bit of a privileged position, a bit like doctors, so they need a bit more scrutiny of their attitudes and motivations.

• 91 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:24 am

  sinz54 // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:16 am

  anniemargaret sez: “But we are talking about a national crisis of rising poverty”

  “There is no “national crisis of rising poverty”.

  ………..Check the stats….poverty levels have been rising steadily over the last few years……is it a crisis….probably not……. but the numbers should be declining rather than rising although I know from your many postings you’re not particularly interested in the less advantaged……a fairly typical Republican outlook of course

• 92 anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:46 am

  Perhaps I should amend my statement about poverty stats rising….but I was thinking more explicitly about the present healthcare crisis, affecting millions of middle class people, who are working, then losing their jobs, then the subsquent decline into loss of healthcare benefits, and eventually for some….bankruptcy.

• 93 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 10:19 am

  anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:46 am
  “explicitly about the present healthcare crisis, affecting millions of middle class people, who are working, then losing their jobs”

  ………The usually quoted figure is 14,000 people a day, a day, losing their health insurance……even if this is a bit overstated although it may not be it’s an immense number……but screw them say the right

• 94 anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 10:35 am

  otto: I agree. And it is this reason, among others but high on my own personal reasons why I voted to change from Independent to Democrat. I DO expect Obama to make his best effort to amend the healthcare system as it now stands. I agree with those, however, that he hasn’t done a great job delineating it, but I think now with these ‘town hall’ screamers there is more backlash and more effort to effectively answer questions and deflect from the exaggerations, hyperbole and outright lies coming from Palin and company.

  And also because one of my three children has a ‘pre-existing’ condition,’ has no health insurance and fell through the cracks even though he has been working despite his chronic illness. Republicans are still not addressing this problem, as it is not a problem to them at all. You can’t wait 8 years of rule to then say they want to be ‘part of the process’ and think Americans are going to buy that.

  I hear it all the time…on radio, TV, from personal interactions with Republicans, and on the Net. As long as they ‘are OK’ they are OK with the status quo. All the lamenting out there is nothing but an effort to squash Obamas chances for reform (screw the people), and throw out some incendiary and irresponsible remarks to create a climate of fear. In that, they’ve done a great job.

• 95 barker13 // Aug 12, 2009 at 11:15 am

  Re: Sinz54 // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:09 am (#101) –

  “…Jews fell in love with FDR for standing up to Hitler…”

  Well… yeah… that was indeed the perception and yes, FDR fairly shines in comparison to most world leaders at the time, however…

  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/holocaust/

  BILL

• 96 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 11:24 am

  anniemargret // Aug 12, 2009 at 10:35 am

  “otto: I agree. And it is this reason, among others but high on my own personal reasons why I voted to change from Independent to Democrat. I DO expect Obama to make his best effort to amend the healthcare system as it now stands. I agree with those, however, that he hasn’t done a great job delineating it,”

  ……….I think a lot of Democrats and Democratic leaning independants feel like this, go and surf Kos where there are some people panicking, but you are if I may say so confusing the sizzle with the sausage…….as a corrective consider this……Obviously early in the game Obama made a strategic decision to let congress write the bills……this was probably a combo of the Clinton experience and as a means of defusing the “not invented here” factor……inevitably this was going to be a much more messy process than just presenting a bill and letting congress argue about it………meanwhile the MSM which reports every legislative process as a sort of single combat of Ivanhoe and Sir Bryan de Bois Guilbert sends out bulletins which either enthuse or depress either side particularly when they’ve been spun through the hands of partisan hacks…….So far we have four bills out of committee…..the Clinton legislation didn’t get out of a single one I believe…..Two of the house bills have had floor votes and the third will get one shortly after the return from recess…..they will all pass…….One bill is out of a senate committee and the other is on the clock……Once out a decision will have to be made if these can be passed without reconciliation…….the white house would like this and even if they don’t have all the provisions they want will support a 60 vote just so long as they are not circumscribed in what they can do going forward(that’s what Enzi was trying to do)…..if they are they’ll go the recon route ……the bills then go to conference……the white house and Democratic congressional leadership have much more power in this process than committee chairs and ranking members……they will thus cherry pick the five bills to come up with one to their liking……..I’m personally sure this is going to look indistinguishable in essence from any bill the white house would have written in the first place……they will then have to make a further decision about reconciliation…..and this is where the rubber hits the road……Again personal opinion but the white house cannot probably assemble a 60 vote for a bill to their liking…..if they do great…..if they can’t they’ll go recon as Obama made very clear yesterday……the Republicans will complain you promised bi-partisanship but he has loads of cover because the public clearly perceive who is reaching out and who is obstructing………Republicans think the Renta Mob screamfests are helping them but they are just reinforcing a generalized sense of irresponsibility and zaniness……..this is what’s going to happen, of course there could be speed bumps along the way but they are not going to derail it so I wouldn’t be too concerned about the WAPO’s latest dispatch from the tournament

• 97 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 11:30 am

  Re: Sinz54 // Aug 12, 2009 at 9:09 am (#101) –

  “…Jews fell in love with FDR for standing up to Hitler…”

  …….It was also because all through the thirties the Democrats were welcoming to the Jews while to the Republicans they were the “not real Americans” of the time…….Republican scapegoats just as today it’s the hispanics and blacks…..so Franklin Delano Roosevelt became Franklin Delano Rosenfeld in secret league with Justice Frankfurter and Secretary Morghenthau to subvert the American way of life and drain people of their bodily essenses……..some things never change

• 98 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 12:03 pm

  Ireign wrote: “Balconesfault — I am not sure if your wikipedia entry is designed to agree or disagree with me. ”

  Not so much to agree or disagree – but to note that pretty much the framework you were describing for the future … a “sort of compromise” … already exists in the much decried Roe v Wade decision.

• 99 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 12:11 pm

  more Barker:
  “dfl – considering the number of “unique human lives” that meet your definition that are regularly sloughed off by the body via natural processes, it’s a stretch to immediately conclude that this zygote immediately requires protection from the will of the woman whose body it resides within.”

  To equate a natural occurrence – a physiological response – to a conscious decision – a matter of deliberate action… (*SIGH*)… well… there’s old Balc for ya!

  I’m sorry that you are unable to master complex thought. I did not equate the natural process with the deliberate action – however I drew a parallel between them to challenge the implied equivalence between a 6 day old cluster of cells, and a living baby in the mothers arms in the delivery room.

  As I noted, natural processes routinely slough off fertilized eggs. Are they mourned? Not hardly. But if a woman decides to use Plan B the ejection of the fertilized egg at the exact same stage of development is considered a tragedy by certain members of the right.

  I’ll ask again, if you’d like to take it up – do you believe that IUDs should be legal?

• 100 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 1:06 pm

  “I feel politically closer to Barack Obama than to House Minority Leader John Boehner”

  I think that it is very possible to be a conservative and hold this opinion. That said, I do believe Obama to be considerably more centrist than most posters here do.

• 101 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 1:41 pm

  ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 12:56 pm

  “Otto once again you prove your ignorance. There is the “remotest” chance that Roe v. Wade gets overturned.”

  …………..Only according to you……in fact most commentators I’ve read believe the pro life faction has essentially given up on overturning Roe hence the resort to state ballot initiatives which as both Chek and I have pointed out have all failed miserably (the one in SD was the third attempt in a few years I believe)……not all the right are as sure of Roberts as you are ……if you can source me one reasonable legal commentator who think overturning Roe likely I’d most interested to read it…….Actually overturning Roe would be an enormous boost to Democrats…..I can’t imagine anything more likely to enrage the female vote than Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy throwing out this long time precedent

  “Calling someone repeatedly and falsely a religious fanatic ”

  ……….Perhaps you’d like to one single place where I have called you a “religious fanatic”……I said you were a jingoistic, fundamentalist. movement conservative……which others beside me seem to have noticed …….but deny away…..as I said I look forward to the future verbal contortions…….in the meantime thank you again for spreading enlightenment amongst the dumb and ignorant…..we really appreciate your solicitude

• 102 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 1:46 pm

  ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 12:59 pm
  ““The thought that I’m part of the G.O.P.’s fan base just gave me an unexpected cold blast, though it’s complicated. At the moment, I feel politically closer to Barack Obama than to House Minority Leader John Boehner (and that’s even while being greatly exercised about the current health care bills).”

  …….Just because he thinks his own party has currently lost its mind doesn’t necessarily mean he’s ceased to be a conservative…….Did Ernie Bevin cease to be a socialist when he joined Churchill’s wartime admin……however this rather superficial interpretation is not out of character with your usual analysis

• 103 barker13 // Aug 12, 2009 at 1:58 pm

  Re: Balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 12:11 pm (#113) -

  “…complex thought.”

  Ahh… so THAT’S what you call them! (*GRIN*) (*LOL*)

  “I did not equate…”

  Could have fooled me! (Hey… in fact… YOU DID!)

  (*CHUCKLE*)

  “I drew a parallel…”

  Of COURSE you did, Balc. (*WINK*)

  You might wanna stick to “coloring” from now on; I don’t think you’ve quite reached the “ready to draw” point.

  “As I noted, natural processes routinely slough off fertilized eggs. Are they mourned? Not hardly.”

  It depends! Hell… a woman who has been trying to get pregnant “mourns” each and every period!

  Balc. Are you frigg’n KIDDING me…??? Let’s get back to the point: There is no “parallel” between a spontaneous miscarriage and abortion. Wise up.

  “…if a woman decides to use Plan B the ejection of the fertilized egg…”

  ONE
  MORE
  TIME

  http://www.planbonestep.com/plan-b.aspx

  QUOTE:

  “Plan B One-Step isn’t RU-486 (the abortion pill); it won’t work if you’re already pregnant, and it won’t affect an existing pregnancy.”

  Balc. You idiot. Plan B is for use when the egg HASN’T been fertilized!

  My God… how do people like you stand living with yourselves? I mean the sheer stupidity…

  (*HEADACHE*)

  Why would you HUMILIATE yourself like this in a public forum…?!?!

  “I’ll ask again, if you’d like to take it up – do you believe that IUDs should be legal?”

  What do you mean you’ll “ask again…???”

  Again… WHAT IS YOUR MALFUNCTION…??? Since I personally favor legal (and pretty much unrestricted) abortion as long as we’re talking First Trimester WHY would I object to IUDs…???

  Balc. Again. Wise up.

  (*SIGH*)

  BILL

• 104 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm

  Bill, I’ll make it simple for your smirking, sighing, simple soul.

  Plan B is effective up to 120 hours post intercourse, according to its manufacturers.

  Human sperm lives potentially up to 48 hours after ejaculation within the woman’s body.

  Now, pray tell … what do you think is happening in that 72 hours between the last possible moment when a sperm could have fertilized an egg … and the Plan B is still effective?

  I could tell you, but you clearly wouldn’t actually learn anything unless you look it up yourself. So I’ll leave that to you.

  But feel free to feel abject shame in the phrase “Balc. You idiot. Plan B is for use when the egg HASN’T been fertilized!: … if you’re capable of feeling shame.

• 105 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:25 pm

  ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:04 pm

  ”Ottobs-Do you enjoy being uninformed? If McCain had won, at least two notable journalists who study the Supreme Court think Roe v. Wade would have been overturned.”

  ………Er…. but he didn’t win therefore, these are pure speculation…..leaving aside btw McCain’s own ambivalence on Roe ……and it remains likely Obama will be re-elected and therefore the likelihood of it being overturned in the next eight year is next to none
  existent….. who knows one of the conservative justices could fall off his perch

  “Clearly religious fundamentalist and religious fanatic are one in the same. ”

  ……..Ohhh are they……I’m sure Dr Land and all these other right wing religious leaders would be very interested to learn that they are “religious fanatics”……..Since Palin is a religious fundamentalist this would make her a religious fanatic also…yes?….. in fact according to you pretty much the entire christian right are “religious fanatics.”…. comparable with Khomeini or the Mahdi perhaps……..Glad we got that cleared up

  ” You really are stupid and uninformed.”

  ……….Thank you again for the compliments which are such a feature of your intelligent debating style…..it’s really admirable…..your mother must be proud she brought you up so well

• 106 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:31 pm

  balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm

  ” intercourse”

  …….perhaps a subject with which Barking is not very well acquainted?

• 107 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 3:00 pm

  ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:47 pm
  “Wow– parse words much”

  …….No confusion or parsing in my mind…..it seemed pretty clear what you said

  ““Clearly religious fundamentalist and religious fanatic are one in the same. ”

  ……..No amount of desperate flailing around could hide your meaning because actually there’s a huge difference between the terms “fundamentalist” and “fanatic” although you don’t seem to understand that…..however, I did enjoy the spectacle and look forward to future performances

  “The justices most likely to retire in the next four or eight years are liberal.”

  ……….And Obama is very likely to appoint justices that would overturn Roe….yes very likely….

  “Clearly, I am right and you are wrong and uninformed per usual.”

  ……..Why would anyone ever dream of suggesting otherwise when we clearly are in the presence of such a massive intellect as yours …..I’m almost ashamed to point out weakness in definitional skills…..but I’ll probably get over it

• 108 barker13 // Aug 12, 2009 at 3:42 pm

  Re: Balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm (#123) –

  Unfrigg’nbelievable.

  Balc. Remind me… are you a chick? If so… are you fertile?

  Because I gotta say… you’re definitely the type who would misuse (or perhaps not bother with) contraceptives.

  One more time…

  http://www.planbonestep.com/plan-b.aspx

  “Plan B One Step isn’t an abortion pill – it can’t terminate an existing pregnancy.

  Now… must I also define “pregnancy” for you…???

  QUOTING BALC (#113) –

  As I noted, natural processes routinely slough off FERTILIZED eggs. Are they mourned? Not hardly. But if a woman decides to use Plan B the ejection of the FERTILIZED egg at the exact same stage of development is considered a tragedy by certain members of the right.

  Jeez… (*GRIN*)… you know normally I’d just shrug and let it lay (get it…? LAY?) (*GRIN*) but I’m having so much fun demonstrating what a weasel you are… what a downright dummy you are… I just can’t help myself from continuing to beat the dead horse.

  (*WINK*)

  You really SHOULD follow the links I provide, Balc; it would save you so much embarrassment.

  (*SHRUG*)

  BILL

  P.S. – re: Ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 2:47 pm (#126) –

  Obviously you’re not a religious zealot, fanatic, or fundamentalist.

  Ireign. It’s depressing, isn’t it… (*SIGH*) And these people can vote… and drive… and have kids…

  (*SHAKING MY HEAD IN DISGUST*)

  BILL

• 109 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 4:11 pm

  Bill, you should quit shaking your head so much … you might actually be able to learn something when the hardware up there quits rattling around.

  If you’re just going to keep quoting the Plan B site – you’re tacitly accepting their definition that a fertilized egg, pre-implantation, does not constitute “pregnancy”.

  That’s fine. I have no problem with that. It still doesn’t make you any less wrong when you declare that Plan B has no impact on a fertilized egg.

  Shrug away. I’m pretty much convinced at this stage that your science comprehension is at an embryonic stage anyway.

• 110 DFL // Aug 12, 2009 at 4:54 pm

  Listening to the CSPAN call-in program in the morning should disabuse anyone that the average voter has much intelligence or even common sense. Many are paranoid or self-delusional. Woe democracy!

• 111 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 4:59 pm

  There is most certainly a reason why our founding fathers chose representative government. And the current inability of California to deal with their economic crisis in face of the contradictory charges given to government via the ballot initiative process is testimony to the wisdom of that decision.

• 112 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 5:44 pm

  ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 4:19 pm
  ” Churchill said it best (clearly Otto proves it), “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.”

  ….Preferably one who knows the difference between a fundamentalist and a fanatic

  ……..irreign you really are such a deliciously pompous twit

• 113 balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 5:48 pm

  “Preferably one who knows the difference between a fundamentalist and a fanatic

  And hopefully, one who will take the effort to understand basic scientific definitions before excoriating others for not sharing his ignorance.

  A little more humility (like asking questions when one isn’t sure?) and a little less bellicosity would be significant improvements to the process.

• 114 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 6:11 pm

  balconesfault // Aug 12, 2009 at 5:48 pm
  ” A little more humility (like asking questions when one isn’t sure?) and a little less bellicosity would be significant improvements to the process.”

  ………I’m the first to fess up to a propensity for bellicosity and acerbic humor when faced with bizarre demos of ignorance or condescension…… If someone proves me wrong I’ll turn on a dime…..I’m just not into denying reality but these last ditch defenses of it by some people like irreign who obviously isn’t a dope (the other guy is a somewhat different matter) are just an affront to the reasoning process…….denying gravity is never going to work out

• 115 ottovbvs // Aug 12, 2009 at 6:17 pm

  130 ireign // Aug 12, 2009 at 4:19 pm

  “That’s correct Bill. I knew there was a reason why I hadn’t posted on this blog for months or read the comments until a few days ago.”

  ………I can understand that you wouldn’t want to spend too much time amongst the ignorant, dumb and stupid of NM (Bill excepted of course)….it must have been very stressful for someone of your high intelligence and sensibility…….you really need to spend more time amongst the intense intellectuality at Redstate or Free Republic…..both are very challenging I’m told

• 116 Jim Pier // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:00 am

  Holy mackerel! This thread went off the rails nasty since the last time I checked in! I hope this is the exception and not the rule. If I wanted to wipe the floor with simpletons and endure a barrage of slurs and insults, I would go on Yahoo or something.

• 117 barker13 // Aug 13, 2009 at 11:53 am

  Re: Jim Pier // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:00 am (#137) –

  Don’t despair, Jimbo! (*GRIN*)

  You’ll get the hang of browsing the threads. Basically skipping over Otto’s posts is the key.

  Balc. He (she?) is challenging to deal with but not a total nutter.

  Staying on the “Left” I’d recommend paying attention to Spartacus. He’s not exactly “Left” in the “Otto” sense of Left, but he’s definitely one to criticize and counter c0nservative conventional wisdom. That said, he’s very intelligent and has a sense of humor. His links are always worth clicking on; you may not agree with their info, but it’s always worth considering within the context of the debate.

  Chekote… again, not “Left” in the sense Otto is Left… but anti-Palin… more of a “wet” Republican. Smarter and more instinctively willing to come down on the “right side” of issues than Balc, but not as broadly knowledgeable (history, nuts and bolts of “social issues,” etc.) as some of us.

  (*WINK*) (Yeah… I know… but it’s TRUE!) (*CHUCKLE*)

  Sinz? Kinda schizo at times. Knee-jerk “Right” on defense and foreign policy but knee-jerk “Left” on issues like climate change. Still… overall… VERY knowledgeable, well-educated, knows his history pretty well, “seasoned” in the sense of he’s lived through a lot… stubborn as hell though when he has his heels dug in.

  As to those on the “Right” (give or take)… I’ll leave you to make your own judgments.

  Basically – as sites such as this go – this is a fairly civil and sophisticated “mainstream” blog.

  BILL

You must log in to post a comment.