Comments on: The Con Delusion

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:01:22 +0000

****crickets***

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:01:13 +0000

strike last setence
insert;

btw, you dismiss as irrelevent, that which you have no response to.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:01:11 +0000

Frank;

Are you the only commenter here who doesn’t horn in on a conversation?

The very last exchange we had was the result of your inane comment in response to what I said to someone else. Frameone disease?
Is that worse than Frank disease?

And btw; you dismiss as irrelevent, that which to you have
response to.

By: frameone

frameone — Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:01:04 +0000

Frank, the Dems have directly asked Alito his position on Roe and he has demurred and deflected even as he has offered his opinion on other issues and rulings that may also come before the court. The Dems on the judiciary committee and Democrats in general, with few exceptions, can some right out and state their position on abortion: They’re for keeping it legal. It is the Republicans and conservatives who seem to have trouble speaking clearly about their position. Most of them can’t or won’t come out and say that they want to see abortion made entirely illegal. They can’t run on banning abortion because the American public is in favor of keeping abortion legal, period.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:01:55 +0000

Perhaps you failed to notice frameone’s comment, its last paragraph, and the fact that it was that paragraph to which I was responding.
I think some of the people on these threads have contracted “mad frameone disease,” an affliction which causes commenters to attack other comments with irrelevant comments.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:01:14 +0000

No Frank. It is a little more complex than that. Roe v. Wade
is just one element of what possibly could be the larger issue
of individual rights vs. the power inherent in big business and
abusive government. Has he cast off his old views as he says
he has? Or is he cleverly avoiding answering the pivotal questions
on this issue? I am not going to argue it with you here. I
am asking the question because I have doubts. I am glad
the dems are not just signing off on him to avoid a fight.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:01:02 +0000

Speaking of “balls”, frameone, and explaining the motives of others, why don’t you treat us to one of your grand 1,000 word treatises that will explain why the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee won’t come out and say, “Judge Alito, we are really opposed to your nomination, because someday, you might be the swing vote that makes Roe v Wade null and void?”

By: frameone

frameone — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:01:54 +0000

Because while we all know that the hard core right wing would like to see abortion completely banned it is the political desire that dare not speak its name in mainstream debates. We all know that a guy like Rick Santorum opposes legalized abortio. Or am I wrong? Does Rick Santorum support legalized abortion? Reading this I just can’t tell. Santorum opens up his little screed with the same bullshit put forth here: The the majority of Americans oppose abortion. He writes: “Thirty-two years after the legalization of abortion by the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, the majority of Americans consider themselves pro-life.” Surprisingly, however, Santorum doesn’t seem to have the courage of his convictions even when they are so backed up by the majority. At no point in the rest of his essay does he once assert or even suggest that now is the time to over turn Roe and make abortion illegal. Indeed, Santorum goes so far as to write that, “Women need to know that they have a choice and that people are there to help.”

Please. Santorum is arguing for choice? Talk about semantic games, Jay C.

Someone just tell me why, if he believes that the majority of Americans are pro-life, Santorum didn’t just come out and say that he wants to make abortion, all abortion, illegal? Has he no balls?

By: frameone

frameone — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:01:49 +0000

Democrats NEVER use the word abortion, Jay C? Someone should have told that to the people who wrote the Democratic Party Platform for 2004: "Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare." That phrase concludes this paragraph: "We will defend the dignity of all Americans against those who would undermine it. Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman's right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare." http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf Would one of the right wing idiots here please direct us to that portion of the 2004 Republican Party Platform that so clearly and directly states Republican opposition to legalized abortion? Bet you can't.

By: frameone

frameone — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:01:44 +0000

If the Republicans want to run for office on the platform of ending legalized abortion in all cases they’re welcome to. Have fun in political Siberia guys.

By: frameone

frameone — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:01:24 +0000

Bottom line the Dems are on the right side of the issue and the right side of public opinion. Right wing republicans on the wrong side on both counts.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:01:28 +0000

JayC;

Stop. Would you want to be a supporter of the war in Iraq and
have your picture taken with some marine who’s just had his
head blown off?

Abortion is ugly and no one likes the idea. You want the pro choicers
to show whole hearted support for the practice by seemingly
reveling in the gore? Please.

By: Jay C

Jay C — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:01:54 +0000

Get George Bush to say that. He won t.

He has and we’ve done this before and showed you proof.

Democrats are in favor of the right to choose an abortion.

No, they are in favor of “the right to choose.” They NEVER use the word abortion. And that right to choose comes without exceptions which puts them out of the mainstream.

nd accused me of spinning on a topic I wasn t even discussing.

Oh please. Stop being so pedantic. You took two sections of a poll, combined the numbers and used it to refute somebody else when those numbers broken up, tell a much different story. Deal with it.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:01:45 +0000

You took two sections of a poll, combined the numbers and used it to refute somebody else when those numbers broken up, tell a much different story.

JWG and I were discussing public opinion. You quoted my comment and accused me of spinning the Democratic position. Can you really not understand the difference, Jay, or are you just ignoring the difference to be a jerk?

By: Oliver Willis

Oliver Willis — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:01:52 +0000

Republicans are in favor of banning abortion. Get George Bush to say that. He won’t. Democrats are in favor of the right to choose an abortion. Every Democratic presidential candidate of the last thirty years or more will say that, because a) it’s the right thing to say and b) most Americans agree.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:01:51 +0000

We need to be careful about our definitions

Exactly my point, JWG.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:01:49 +0000

You should note that while a majority want abortion in general to remain legal, a majority also wants to see more restrictions.

That majority includes those who support abortion, but want more restrictions, and those who want to restrict abortion “in most cases,” right?

To me, that segment of “legal, but with more restrictions” is the most interesting. I’d like to see additional polling on what restrictions they favor and what exceptions they would allow.

You have to get past the simple questions to make good policy.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:01:46 +0000

I merely tied it back to what Oliver is saying about public opinion regarding abortion and the position on it vis a vis Democrats and Republicans.

And accused me of spinning on a topic I wasn’t even discussing. Once again, JWG commented, and I responded, on the subject of public opinion, not the position of Democrats. As I said, you’re welcome to introduce any topic you wish. However, please don’t pretend that what you want to talk about and what I want to talk about are the same thing.

You’re excused.

By: qkslvr_wolf

qkslvr_wolf — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:01:33 +0000

Because the restrictions usually aren’t as simple as on partial birth abortions, they’re usually like the shit thats coming out of mississippi where the woman is required to wait a ridiculouosly long time, there is only one clinic available in the state so they’re losing pay and having to pay for a hotel while they’re waiting, at which point they’re trying to get them to be forced to “listen to the heartbeat” no matter which trimester they’re in.

And for the jackass who was talking about torturous methods…how about we just make birth control mandatory until someone was actually ready to have a baby? You cool with that? That should make abortions unnecessary. Hows that sound?

By: SaveFarris

SaveFarris — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:01:47 +0000

Fine then. Let’s put it to a vote.

Oops. Libs don’t want people voting on the issue. Because they fear gay-marriage-referendum-like landslides voting against them.