rumitoid

If any of them vote Republican, they cannot be pro-life. Republicans and their followers want to convince you those on Welfare are free-loaders and bottom-feeders (the Reagan "big-bucks" and Welfare queens"). Like poverty and bad economic circumstances never existed before the "Great American teat" served up by Democrats, their "base" for free handouts to do drugs all day and eat Twinkies. Helping the poor, elderly, handicapped, and disadvantaged is an obligation of any decent government. It needs to come as a basic cost of good government, not as some questionable "handout" that can be cut or severely downsized. More important than the Military Budget. Yet these so-called "pro-lifers" consistently vote to reduce government care for "the least of these." And they agree with the death penalty. What? And with drone-warfare. What? Life does not really matter to most of them; it is their beliefs that take precedent. If abortion was not legal in America, every sane and religious person would vote Democrat.

Liberty Tree

You sure have a lot of hatred in you for one who is always preaching his version of true Christianity.

rumitoid

Hatred? How so?

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Pure poppycock.. Intellectualism of the Progs is the insanity of the demons..

rumitoid

Very catchy saying. Thank you. Oh, and thank you for your evidence.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

What we have here is a hard core party apparatchik, a gutter level ideologue, not an American citizen.

How much longer do you reckon before you'll see if a surgeon can pull that humongous cob out of your ass? Good grief, man, I'd have to look far and wide to find such a perverted indictment of my fellow human beings. Marx' Communist manifesto and the Quran might come within range. At least these writings are articulate in expressing a coherent line of thought.

rumitoid

Okay. Thank you for sharing. Get I get your pills?

bahmer

Amen and Amen

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Classic. Bait and switch. If (this) then (that), where the two are only loosely connected. Just like the old canard 'if you want to ban candy then you hate all children'. Yes, it is still possible to vote for a given political party and still be 'pro-life', for whatever that means. Interesting question, if one is not 'pro-life', then must they be 'pro-death'? After all, there is no 'in between', either there is life or death, right?



Some certainly are. That's a well-documented fact. Youtube is full of videos where these same 'welfare queens' give advice to 'newcomers' on how to make the most expensive welfare claims and what claims go with what circumstances for the highest and longest benefits. They have literally made a career out of gaming the welfare system.



'Poverty' and 'bad economic circumstances' are separate issues. Bad economic circumstances are generally a temporary situation that good people find their way out of. They take the hit, pick themselves up and go on their way. Poverty, on the other hand, is a way of life. People are born into poverty and have no ambition to improve their lot. They learn perpetual victimhood from their parents and that mindset never changes. This is further compounded by government taking from those who actually earn a paycheck and giving that money to those who refuse to get out of bed in the morning. Those are the ones who 'do drugs all day and eat Twinkies' (Twinkies, really?).

And by the way, Reagan's 'welfare queen' was real. She had a name and she was literally 'the queen of welfare'. Here she is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zvKJQ2r72g



The proper role of government in these United States is to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity". Helping the poor, elderly, handicapped, and disadvantaged is not an obligation of any government, decent or not. That is a burden properly borne by society, not government. 'Promoting the general welfare' is not akin to redistributing money according to some 'social justice' mantra.



It needs to come as a basic cost of a decent, caring and moral society, not as some enforced charity payment mandated by government thus making it some questionable "handout" that should never have been instituted in the first place. How dare they tell me or anyone else how their money should be spent or otherwise allocated.



Again, inconsistent priorities. It is a proper role of government to provide for the common defense ("Military Budget"). It is not a proper role of government to steal my money at gunpoint and give it away to their pet charities. And where do these 'pro-lifers' fit into all of this? Isn't that an abortion argument?



I believe most people view the death penalty as a last resort, for application when all else fails. It is extremely rare to see an inmate on death row who has not seen the inside of a prison before and generally for some highly egregious crimes. Remember, time spent in prison is meant not only to punish a criminal offender, but to rehabilitate that offender to ensure that such crimes (or others) are not repeated. Also, the list of crimes attracting the death penalty is very short, they are treason, terrorism, espionage, federal murder, large-scale drug trafficking, and attempting to kill a witness, juror, or court officer (in certain cases). That's it. Now, if you knew that you may well be put to death for committing any of these crimes, how enthusiastic would you be about committing them in the first place?



That was an Obama thing. Drone assassinations were his forte. Instead of sending live humans to apprehend a terrorist or other malcontent, he would order a drone strike and the death sentence was carried out without the application of legal proceedings or even warning by some guy sitting on an airbase in Arizona or wherever. By the way, those drone strikes killed the wrong people more often than not. Or just as bad, they got the correct target and anyone else within 100 yards or so.



If you're referring to government, I'd have to generally agree. If you are referring to the Muslim extremists currently flooding into these United States and the rest of the world, ditto. If you're referring to the average workaday American citizen, I'd have to take exception to that, I find the majority of Americans to be both moral and caring people. By the way, the saying 'let your conscience be your guide' is based on moral beliefs.



By that logic, all the Democrat party would need to do to ensure eternal hegemony over the US would be to disavow abortion and everyone would vote for them. As a hypothetical, it just might have some merit. I would certainly like to see such an experiment just to find out what would happen in reality. I imagine some of the more 'liberal-minded' among the sane and religious populations would be inclined to consider assigning their support to a Democrat party that disavowed the murder of the unborn, but then what about those who support them now? Would they continue to be active supporters or would they simply 'stay at home' on election day? Or even better, start their own political party. Who knows?

But then there's the rest of the Democrat platform to consider. In the aggregate, I think they would probably lose more votes than they gained, but that is only an opinion and not based on any solid evidence.

So, yeah, that's my two cent's worth.

Your turn; feel free to call me names and attack me with silly memes and baseless arguments. I'm used to it by now.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Sir, you are found lacking in more sense than, I am qualified to provide..
You absolutely drive my point home...of what a stumbling block, gaining 'intellectualism' as a religious belief can be..
The onlyest thing I can hope, is somehow you gain on your 'ground game in the real and now..
If my recollection is correct, you were or are an educator of sorts...maybe that's a chink in your practical sense armor..no offense..good job..

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Really?

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Deputy Festus Hagen on Gunsmoke always used that word...

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Oh, well, if Festus used it then it's good to go. Carry on!

currahee

Science is on the side of pro-life.

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Is that what Science said? How's he doing anyway?