ANY country huh?

yeah, okay.

I'm sure your child is wonderful. Maybe the neighborhood you live in is wonderful and all you see are wonderful little children who work hard and skip grades. In the school my daughter goes to - a very expensive new school that's holding 4000 students - it's quite a different story. The kids skip school, not grades. They beat up other kids because they bump into them in the halls. The teachers quit because many of the kids won't stop talking, and the school won't allow them to discipline other than to give them detention. The first week of school there, 2 years ago, my D18 had a phone and an MP3 player stolen. Later that year, she had a purse and a camera stolen.

And this is the rich school in the district, where the parents earn 6 figures. In the poor school, the teachers keep weapons to protect themselves.

So, yeah, I think there are a heck of a lot of kids out there who aren't getting the same kind of raising that kids for the past several thousand years have gotten for whatever reason, where they're taught to respect adults, use manners, and try not to hurt anyone. Whose parents put them in front of a tv from the time they're old enough to look at it, so they'll have a babysitter, so the parents can do what they want.

Forced military service? Ummm...basically what more countries have than don't. Like we had until 40 years ago, when people started thinking they were more important than their country. And yeah, I do think we owe a debt to a country in which we were born, which protects us, gives us roads and prisons and hospitals and freedom. I guess that's a silly notion these days.

"I will stand with the Muslims should the political
winds shift in an ugly direction."



Barack Obama, in his book: 'Audacity of Hope'


"should the political winds shift in an ugly direction"...

either he doesn't count 9/11 as evidence of that having already happened and therefore is an idiot who will just hand our sovereignty over because he thinks it's the nice, pc, and oh so trendy thing to do...

or he does acknowledge that 9/11 is evidence of such an ugly wind shift and is running for president in order to maximize his potential to "stand with the Muslims" in a way that would benefit them the most.

Exactly. I said people should have their own choice. That one group shouldn't have the right to dictate to another group. The pro-choice group allowed the courts to decide, as it's supposed to be in America.

Nowhere in there did I say I wanted anyone to have an abortion - just that I don't want you to be able to tell me I couldn't, because you don't believe in it. That it's a court decision, to interpret our laws. And I've never heard of a pro-choice playbook, so if it is 'straight out of' it, it's coincidence.

A great example of the smear campaign being run. The actual words are:
In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.

source: snopes.com

tell that the Chinese who have zero freedom of religion

tell it North Koreans that are starved by their government

So, keep your laws off my body, that is unless you want to wage war.



And you think this stuff is NEW? Please...every old person thinks the current generation is the worst. My father told me stories about his high school that make today's schools seem tame.

Let me guess...you are over 50(or darn close to) right?

hey, just because you don't believe in child abuse...well, don't infringe on my beliefs to have sex with children...same with infidelity...if I want to screw your wife...well, that's between her and me...keep your nose out of it. While we are at it...drunk driving is my right...drugs too...

:crosseyedcrazy:

btw, the people pay for this stuff...ALL OF IT. The people are the country.

Yes, but they could be in China or North Korea, where they may not get the option to get those things.

Whatever. And no, I'm not over 50.

Well the truth is that very few women are allowed the so-called right to choose whether or not they will abort free of coercion, there ARE others who greatly influence that decision. The influence pro-lifers have on preventing women from having abortions is miniscule when you compare the hard-sell tactics, deception, false advertising, and assmebly-line methods the abortion industry employs to 'encourage' and rush women into buying abortions. Plus the societal and media influences that portray 'free sex' as the norm, pregnancy as some sort of disgusting 'disease', and abortion as 'empowerment' and 'responsible' is not exactly anti-abortion influence.

MOST of the changes that the voting citizens would bring about if the right to choose the legal status of abortion was given back to the state legislatures, or better yet decided more directly by the citizens by referendum vote, would be putting into place the safety and patient protection rights that are women were falsely assured would come with Roe v Wade. Also, late-term abortions for non-medical excuses would become illegal. The only changes that would happen are the ones the citizens already favor (or falsely assume are in place because they're ignorant about the current legal status of abortion).

AND instead of each individual pregnant woman being ISOLATED and TARGETED by abortion industry sales tactics, pro-abort societal influences, plus pressure from pro-abort friends, relatives, bosses, and sex partners, they will have the protection of the state legislatures and the voting citizens looking out for their health, safety, and consumer/patient rights. Currently because of a 3-decade-old decision made by a few male judges, women are endangered and bullied while being falsely assured they are 'safe' and 'empowered'. Dudettes - it's time to acknowledge the emporor does not have new clothes - he's butt naked!

The right to choose the legal status of abortion was illegally taken away from the citizens by a handful of judges overstepping their authority, under the influence of a handul of abortionists and abortion industry lobbyists telling lies (perjury BTW). One VERY SMALL group decided the legal status of abortion and indeed did NOT technically have the right to dictate to the voting citizens of each state, what the legal status of abortion should be.

BTW I assure you there are indeed 'pro-choice playbooks' whether or not you've ever heard of one.

Besides it's no more 'coincidence' that all choicists chant the same thing than it is that all adulterers speak the same fog-babble. Complicity and justification is the common denominator. Even the choicists who've never gone to a 'pro-choice' meeting or seen the playbooks themsleves chant all the same stuff because they've heard it so many times from the biased media and biased government school system. It's called indoctrination. AFTER you start questioning and challenging the abortion industry, after you stop believing and repeating what you want to believe, you are free to form your own unbiased, well-informed POV.

I used to be a 'pro-choice' advocate and was guilty of chanting choicist slogans... until I learned the facts behind the rhetoric. The abortion industry holds conferences with workshops on how to cover it up when they kill a woman with so-called 'safe' legal abortions. When a woman is maimed or killed by abortion the abortion industry and 'pro-choice' groups provide legal assistance and support, not to the woman or her surviving family, but to the abortionist who harmed her. But hey, I certainly don't expect you to take my word for it, I encourage you to do your own investigaton of the abortion industry and 'pro-choice' groups. Why don't you start with trying to find a single piece of legislation that the 'pro-choice' crowd has sponsored that would actually make legal abotion safer than illegal abortion, passing health and safety standards that abortion clinics would be required to follow. Also, try to find any 'pro-choice' efforts to make it mandatory for abortionists to report it to the CDC when they injure or kill a woman so that when pregnant women ask about the safety of abortion there are at least accurate statistics to refer to, and then try to find an example of so-called 'pro-choice/pro-women' groups supporting legislation to grant pregnant women the patient protection right of informed consent so the abortion clinics would be required to tell the women the truth about abortion-caused complications and deaths.

It's one thing to chant that women are safer and have more freedom of choice because of Roe v Wade. But coming up with the evidence of any safety standards, and protection from pressures to abort, that are actually provided by Roe v Wade or 'pro-choice' groups is another matter altogether. THE goal and THE effect of Roe v Wade was to allow abortionists to operate legally/openly, and more safey (for themselves - not the women), and more profitably. Roe v Wade, the abortion industry, and the 'pro-choice' groups have done absolutely nothing to actually make abortion safer. Their sole intent was to make women FEEL safer, and therefore more likely to buy an abortion.

Did you guys know that Hispanics in America hold conferences (well, classes actually) for all the legal and illegal immigrants to teach them how to apply for all the free benefits they can get from America? One of the guys who does this knows my H. He told my H that the book they give these people is about 1 or 2 inches thick, with places to go, how to fill out forms, how to get fake IDs, how to apply for benefits...

He said that their general attitude is if we're (gringos) stupid enough to let them have all this, they might as well take it. LOL, he also told H that it's their intention to take back Texas through sheer numbers; so far, so good - Hispanics are scheduled to outnumber Caucasians in Texas by the year 2035.

Another excellent post by you, Mere!

I just wanted to add how monstrous I think Joe Biden's position on abortion is. Yesterday on Meet The Press,he said that he believes that life begins at conception!

What does his that say about the value he places on human life?

It is bad enough when people try to delude themselves over the question of when life begins.

But, Biden knows it begins at conception and just doesn’t give a damn.

Obama's position is worse than Biden's. He doesn't give a damn that he doesn't give a damn.

"It's above my paygrade." ~Obama.

So he even supports infanticide.

You're not getting it...
If Obama doesn't think 9/11 is already an indication that the political winds have shifted in an ugly direction, if in his mind they will not have shifted until/unless he sees fear-based discrimination (BECAUSE the winds have actually already shifted so far to ugly that U.S. citizens indeed fear for their lives and our nation's sovereignty and rights being lost) against Muslims, if Obama is so naively unaware of the fact that Islamic terrorist cell groups have infiltrated our nation with the ability and intent to harm us, if Obama's major concern regarding 9/11 is that it causes some citizens to be afraid of Muslim citizens, if it doesn't get ugly to Obama until/unless some Muslims may be discriminated against... then obviously Obama is ALREADY alligned with Islam.

I don't disagree that the Japanese internment camps were an ugliness. Where Obama and I disagree is that he doesn't detect anything leading up to that as also being ugly.

One of my neighbors had a son and a grandson who were on one of those jets flown into the World Trade Center. I happen to think it got ugly the day Islamic terrosists killed my neighbor's son, grandson, and thousands of other innocent citizens. Obama sides with the Islamics, wants to talk to them to find out what we supposedly did to them that was so heinous that they were somehow justified in carrying out that cowardly and horrific crime against humanity. I don't give a cr@p what 'mean' thing Obama presumes my neighbor's INNOCENT 4 year old grandson did to Muslims. That Obama doesn't count that child's death as 'ugly', that Obama is more bothered by the mere possibility that someday some Muslims may be detained (but not flown into a building to die a horrible death) is abhorant to many, many U.S. citizens! My neighbor, the grieving father/grandpa, is a U.S. citizen too, and he votes. Has Obama met with him? Nope. Does Obama care that HIS senes of security has been shaken? Nope? And believe me IF the Islamic terrorists ever do succeed in threatening our security so much that it does result in Muslim citizens being rounded up and put in detainment camps the way the Japanese-American citizens were, my neighbor would much rather his son and grandson go through THAT than what those Islamic terrorists did to them!

Obama deems himself in a position to preach/chastise that Americans learn the right lesson from the Japanese-American internment camps when he has so callously and stupidly failed to learn the right lesson from 9/11? His sense of urgeny is ALL ABOUT the Muslims he is ALREADY alligend with and not at all about those killed on 9/11. My neighbor's 4 year old grandson burned to death in a nightmarish crash and explosion... that prompted Obama to a sense of urgency about protecting Muslims from Americans... hmmm...

I'm sorry the life of that one innocent 4 year old boy being so brutally taken matters MUCH MORE to some of us than the remote possibilty that maybe some Mulsims may someday be detained for maybe a little while...

Newsflash to Obama: It aleady got ugly.
And your failure to notice that, BECAUSE of your myopic focus on Muslims as the ONLY potential victims you're worried about, is a whole 'nother level of ugly. The U.S. citizens who now have a valid fear for their safety (because of 9/11) may indeed eventually become so fearful, BECAUSE of ongoing and future attempts by Islamic terrorists, that they will resort to putting more and more Mulsims who are terrorist suspects in detention, or even into putting all Muslim citizens in detention (IF things get ugly enough to cause the citizens to be THAT afraid). Instead of chastising Americans for something they haven't even done yet, instead of meeting with Muslims to assure them of your alliance with them against the rest of the U.S., why not meet with the victims of Islamic terrorism and assure them you will protect them (and their grandbabies) FROM Islamics?

In Obama's Muslim-alligned mind if an Islamic kills a 4 year old boy in a very terrifying and torturous way, while screaming "death to America", he wants to go talk to the Islamic terrorists to find out what we mean Americans did wrong to cause the poor terrorists to resort to such a thing...
but if scared U.S. citizens ever get so desperate and scared that they might resort to detaining Muslim as a way to protect themselves and their grandbabies, Obama won't be motivated to therefore talk to us to find out what we think the Muslims did wrong to cause us to resort to such a thing.

It's obvious who Obama is alligned with already.

How do you align the above statement with how he feels about the 9/11 attacks? He says nothing about them in that text. I'm sure if you wanted to, you would find plenty of his opinion on how horrible the attacks were et al., just like every other American citizen.

This statement, however, had nothing to do with that.

My neighbor the grieving father/grandfather needs and deserves assurance that HIS citizenship means something to Obama!

He hasn't gotten any such assurance from Obama.

Obama is too busy worrying about the remote possibility that maybe someday some Muslims may be detained for a little while...
BECAUSE people like my neighbor have justifiable fears that need to be dealt with decisively in order to protect us from the Islamic terrorists who indeed have as their goal to "kill all Americans".


And guess what? Those like Obama who care more about the theoretical possibility of some Muslims being detained than the actual reality of a 4 year old boy and thousands of U.S. citizens actually having been brutally killed are the very ones failing to protect and assure U.S. citizens so that it never comes to putting Muslim-Americans in detainment camps SO THAT the rest of the U.S. citizens can be safe. The best way to ensure it never comes to detainment camps is NOT to chastise non-Mulsim citizens for something they haven't even done yet, and probably never will, NOT to assure Muslims that you will side with them instead of non-Muslim U.S. citizens! The things Obama says, Obama's agenda, is the sort of thing that increases fear of Muslim-Americans. Obama's efforts, if successful, will not merely prevent Muslim-Americans from maybe temporarily ending up in detainment camps; it will likely result in the rights and safety of all U.S. citizens being dangerously reduced. Apparently Obama naiveley ignores the much more ugly possibility that all American citizens could someday be under Islamic dictatorship and/or dead - THE declared agenda of Islamic terrorists.

One can only conclude that possibility/agenda is NOT 'ugly' to Obama.

Obama's words:

"But bottom line, I now vote for whoever will protect the environment, because once it's gone, it's gone. All the rest can right itself after whomever leaves the office. But the forests and animals will be gone forever."

Today in the U.S. alone thousands of innocent human lives will be brutally taken by abortion.

Those innocent humans lives will be gone forever.

BTW - after observing the destruction, aftermath, and regrowth afterwards, of the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, which environmental extremists predicted would prove that the nature could not easily/quickly come back from, I no longer have the sort of extreme and 'sky is falling' environmental views that I used to have when I was younger. It was predicted that Mt. St. Helens was going to be this vast lifeless wasteland of devastation for decades or longer... we've visited the place several times and it was litterally teeming with plants and wildlife. The guides pointed out several times that it was coming back at an astronimically faster pace than predicted.

One of my brothers, after going on a motorcycle trip across the country on the back of my father's motorcycle, was amazed at how EMPTY most of the country is. He had been indoctrinated in public school into believe that the whole planet was literally littered with people, buildings, and crowded intersections LOL. He thought because everywhere he went, on roads lined with stores, homes, schools, and maybe an occasional cornfield, there was evidence of human development, that the whole planet looked pretty much like what he'd seen so far. Oh sure he knew that there were emptier places like deserts and rainforests and the planet's polar regions... but he thought most of the land was as developed as towns and suburbs. (He hadn't flown in a plane yet either.)

A little 8 year old girl we knew was told by her teacher that babies had to be aborted because there were so many people overcrowding the planet AND that's why we need to have so many McDonald's!!! I assured the girl that baby's don't need McDonald's, that overexpansion of fast food chains is not related to human needs or overpopulation (my parents town is teeny tiny but has 3 McDonald's already, all struggling to stay in business all winter until the tourists pass through on their trek to the beach each summer - tourists who've driven 3 hours through nothing but skinny pine trees after leaving the city). I drew a large circle on a piece of paper and had the little girl draw a circle showing how much of the planet was not overcrowded with overpoplation. She drew a crescent sliver of an arc for a few degrees inside the edge of the circle. That little girl was in for a big surprise too if she ever ventured outside of town (um Atlanta).

You're welcome to your opinions, as I am mine, mm. You can choose to champion unborn fetuses, as millions/billions of other people do. I'll take on preserving what's left of our species.
We both are happy, 'k?

I just wondered - has there ever been an election where two potential presidents shared a view on abortion? Both Pro or Both Anti? Or is it a given that if one of the candidates takes the pro stance, then automatically the other will choose to go against? Has John mcCain actually stated that he will outlaw abortion or just that he is personally against it?

I can't vote. I'm just curious.

"And this has been true for those of us who looked on the rubble and ashes of 9/11, and made a solemn pledge that such an atrocity would never again happen on United States soil; that we would do whatever it took to hunt down those responsible, and use every tool at our disposal – diplomatic, economic, and military – to root out both the agents of terrorism and the conditions that helped breed it."

Detaining Islamic terrorists IS part of 'whatever it takes' to 'root out the agents of terrorism'.

Obama may have said he supported military efforts to fight terrorism... but he apparently didn't mean it.
His emphasis is OBVIOUSLY on the 'diplomatic' as in 'the conditions that help breed it' as in blame the victim mentality.

He wants to know what my neighbor's 4 your old grandson did to cause Islamic terrorists to commit 9/11?

Nothing.

And neither did his neighbor and his son, OR any U.S. citizens.

Islamic terrorist hate democracy, hate the U.S. because we do not FORCE all our citizens to be Muslim. The ONLY way to appease Islamin terrorists enough so that they won't have "kill all Americans" as their stated goal, is to hand America over to them and force all Americans to become Muslims. They will continue to pursue that goal until they either accomplish that or we defeat them.

Oh, and guess what? Islamic terrorists hate 'pro-choice' Americans even more than they hate pro-life Americans.
Most of what the Islamic fundamentalists despise about the U.S., the "evil" they want to abolish, is the liberal lifestyle. Those under Islamic rule don't exactly live in a 'pro-choice' society! They don't even have FREEDOM OF SPEECH or FREEDOM OF RELIGION, you know REAL constitutional rights. If the Muslims ever succeed in taking over the U.S. there will be no turban-wearing women driving to abortion clinics - women won't be allowed to drive period. My WXH worked for a while in Saudi Arabia; if a woman drove a vehicle there she could be put to death.

Hmmm.... maybe it IS possible that Muslims DO commit violent acts against people even when there is no valid reason to blame the victim?

Obama wants to root out the agents of terrorism so he can sit down and chat with them about what it is about us U.S. citizens that they don't like, what it is we supposeldy did wrong that caused them to want to hate and kill us all? What a stupid (and traitorous) waste of time. We already know what they hate about us: that we have freedom, and citizens' rights, and that we're not all Muslim, and that we don't want them to become our dicatators, and that when/if they become dictators over us we won't easily give up our freedom of speech, freedom to vote, freedom of religion, we don't want to be forced to dress like they do and worship like they do. And oh yeah they also hate us because of all our pornography, "free sex", abortions, sexually explicit movies and music, and liberal lifestyle. THAT is why they hate us so much - They are very open about why they hate us, no liberal therapists need to talk to the to help them achieve the courage to confront their supposed abusers.

So since we aleady do know why they hate us so much and therefore feel entitled to kill us all or to at least put us under their dictatorship, then instead of liberals wasting time talking to terrorists why dont liberals take the lead in appeasing to them so they will hate us a little less? If the liberals stopped fornicating, aborting, and financially supporting the sort of music and movies the Islamic fundamentalists despise, that woudl probably go along wat towards placating the Islamic terrorists. If that isn't enouth them all the liberals could convert to Islam and start wearing turbans or veils. Of course the liberal women would have to give up their jobs too, keeping in mind that it's for natioanl security, so that the Islamic terrorists won't be so upset bybus that they might 'need' to kill us all.