GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : Really reaching now. Both subs were lost at sea were Naval castrophes had nothing to do with Nuclear research. To compare green energy to nuclear is a joke as is your argument.
    Posted by ThatWasMe[/QUOTE]

    But is it safe to say that the development of nuclear energy received a lot of Federal money?  If Governments hadn't financed research into nukes, would nuclear reactors been a viable energy source?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : But is it safe to say that the development of nuclear energy received a lot of Federal money?  If Governments hadn't financed research into nukes, would nuclear reactors been a viable energy source?
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover[/QUOTE]

    Again because you guys are so thick and in denial circling the wagons to protect your messiah.

    And in the case of poster 12 angry men without one brain with his unsubstanciated fabricated story of american history, obstinate.

    Nuclear energy was developed by the military budget to power submarines to keep the country safe, not by  some private startup companies headed by Democrat donors funded by the President with miilions of play money tax dollars given to his donors.

    Nuclear power always was and still sixty some odd years after the USS Nautilus was launched still a viable potent power source now providing cheap energy to countries all over the planet.

    Green energy has no such record, never has, pixie dust, is a gamble at best a wet dream of the left, that the current President of US Barack Obama took billions of taxpayers stimulus money (borrowed from China) and invested in companies of which 80 percent are run by his friends and donors is not only wrong and a big waste of money but a crime that the liberal drive by media would be all over if it was a Republican sitting in the Whitehouse.

    The 535 million taxparer dollars given to failed bankrupt Solyndra, gone, the Democrat donors were paid off first in the bankruptcy proceding before the Government. This Obama is an example of Obama looking out for us.

    But this is his way of doing business differently, draining the swamp as Pelosi would say, hope and change.

    Nothing but a failed scheme to enrich his Democrat friends.

    Both Rasmussen and Gallup polls yesterday has Romney up by 2 points.

    At this same point in time in 1980 Carter was up 15 pts over Reagan, I can't wait until November to show this lying corrupt loser the door..
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    You can tell the left is circling the wagons.  they are back to the war on women.  Evidently we live in a world where women like Sandra Fluke can afford daily $5 lattés, but are being impoverished by having to cough up $7 a month for contraception.

    This is the battle ground the left has chosen, not because it is the best battlefield, but it is the only battlefield that they think will work for them.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]You can tell the left is circling the wagons.  they are back to the war on women.  Evidently we live in a world where women like Sandra Fluke can afford daily $5 lattés, but are being impoverished by having to cough up $7 a month for contraception. This is the battle ground the left has chosen, not because it is the best battlefield, but it is the only battlefield that they think will work for them.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    I think Akin, a G.O.P. contender for Senate sparked this latest controversy concerning the conservative social agenda.  Or do you think he was put up to it by the "Left"?  And did the "Left" also manage to generate the G.O.P.'s platform that seeks to ban all abortions, a plank that even Romney and Ryan reject?  No.  The Republicans have done this all on their own.  The Democrats have merely taken advantage to highlight the idiocy of the "Right".

    The real problem is you agree with these efforts and want to halt any attempt to derail them, including getting people to think about their implications. Thinking does not help with your viewpoint. Quite the distraction...
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : Hey ya freakin ignoramus why don't ya freakin read once in awhile. I guess it's just easier for you to lie like a dog than actually read what was posted. One more time for the intellectually impaired; The Historical Role of Federal Subsidies in Shaping America’s Energy Future From land grants for timber and coal in the 1800s to tax expenditures for oil and gas in the early 20th century, from federal investment in hydroelectric power to research and development funding for nuclear energy and today’s incentives for alternative energy sources, America’s support for energy innovation has helped drive our country’s growth for more than 200 years. http://i.bnet.com/blogs/dbl_energy_subsidies_paper.pdf Now just shut up, you have some reading to do.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]


    Only an ignoramus trying to justify Obama's crony capitalism payouts to his friends and donors in green energy would attempt to make a leap to compare the infancy of green energy to the goverments use of of nuclear energy as a power source.

    Before any federal money was spent to build nuclear power plants it had demonstrated it's value to the world and to the US navy powering Nuclear subs and later battleship and carriers.

    The world witnessed the potential of Nuclear power when WW II brought to an abrupt halt by leveling Nagasake and Hiroshima, then the defense department launched the USS Nautilus the first nuclear powered sub in the mid 50s.

    So there was a proven track record for Nuclear power and a very good reasons for any government invest into nuclear for cheap, low cost civilian power.

    Now dolt please explain to me what wind, solar power and recycled bacon grease have done to date to lower power costs to power a naval vessel or an entire city as nuclear power does?

    There is no comparison with the rise, application and the success of Nuclear power to provide cheap low cost energy to civilian life with the billions of tax dollars flushed down the toilet by this complete idiot in the WH on green energy.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : Hey ya freakin ignoramus why don't ya freakin read once in awhile. I guess it's just easier for you to lie like a dog than actually read what was posted. One more time for the intellectually impaired; The Historical Role of Federal Subsidies in Shaping America’s Energy Future From land grants for timber and coal in the 1800s to tax expenditures for oil and gas in the early 20th century, from federal investment in hydroelectric power to research and development funding for nuclear energy and today’s incentives for alternative energy sources, America’s support for energy innovation has helped drive our country’s growth for more than 200 years. http://i.bnet.com/blogs/dbl_energy_subsidies_paper.pdf Now just shut up, you have some reading to do.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]


    How stupid are you?

    Lumber, coal, hydro-electric, nuclear, all sources of low cost robust cheap energy which solar and wind are not.

    Again Einstein how many of these industries that you mention that you know of in their infancy failed?

    Coal-no
    lumber-no
    hydro-electric-no
    nuclear-no
    natural gas-no
    oil-no

    Green energy-big flop

    Evergreen Solar
    SpectraWatt
    Solyndra (received $535 million)
    Beacon Power (received $43 million)
    AES’ subsidiary Eastern Energy
    Nevada Geothermal (received $98.5 million)
    SunPower (received $1.5 billion)
    First Solar (received $1.46 billion)
    Babcock & Brown (an Australian company which received $178 million)
    Ener1 (subsidiary EnerDel received $118.5 million)
    Amonix (received 5.9 million)
    The National Renewable Energy Lab
    Fisker Automotive
    Abound Solar (received $400 million)
    Chevy Volt (taxpayers basically own GM)
    Solar Trust of America
    A123 Systems (received $279 million)
    Willard & Kelsey Solar Group (received $6 million)
    Johnson Controls (received $299 million)
    Schneider Electric (received $86 million)

    That’s 19 (that we know of so far). We also know that loans went to foreign clean energy companies (Fisker sent money to their overseas plant to develop an electric car), and that 80% of these loans went to President Obama’s campaign donors.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : BWAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Ya, sure thing spanky. Just like the military isn't part of the federal gov't...right spanky? Gawd you idiots are hilarious. Now run along and blabber on someone elses shoulder for awhile...mkay.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    All arguments aside Nuclear power has proven to be every bit the low cost energy source that it is.

    The development and current use of Nuclear power has saved our government billions in the long run since the 1950s.

    Please tell me what compells you to compare Obama and his taxpayer investments in the bankrupting green energy market to the use and development of nuclear.

    You just can't admit that this guy has been a dismal failure as has his foray into green energy which has been proven to be a big waste of tax money..

    Wait until the debates.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : So now you're saying that no other energy company in history failed? Oh man you really are a freakin whacko wingnut. Actually probably more of a tbagger type. Now run along back to your alternate reality. See ya in the funny papers, spanky.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    If you can't win on the issues resort to name calling and insults.


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : Not everything that is legal is a right. Posted by GreginMeffa[/QUOTE]

    That may be true.

    In this case, however, the constitution, legality AND women's rights in general result in the right to terminate a pregnancy.

    That you don't like it is beside the point.


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : I think Akin, a G.O.P. contender for Senate sparked this latest controversy concerning the conservative social agenda.  Or do you think he was put up to it by the "Left"?  And did the "Left" also manage to generate the G.O.P.'s platform that seeks to ban all abortions, a plank that even Romney and Ryan reject?  No.  The Republicans have done this all on their own.  The Democrats have merely taken advantage to highlight the idiocy of the "Right". The real problem is you agree with these efforts and want to halt any attempt to derail them, including getting people to think about their implications. Thinking does not help with your viewpoint. Quite the distraction...
    Posted by Reubenhop[/QUOTE]

    You have a point, but you draw the wrong conclusion.  The issue is not whether the Right wants to distance themselves from the comments by Akins, they do.  The press, however, simply won't let 'em.  The vast majority of the right believe that abortion is lawful, though not moral, and there are SOME that even disagree with this.  I don't see how this point is either a war against women or somehow incongruent with normal ethics and/or morals.

    My point about Sandra Fluke is that finding a liberal that sees paying for contraception for those that can otherwise afford it  as lunacy is a needle in a haystack effort.  The left is joined on this:  That there is a war on women, and the way to win that war is to make them kept women.  That's the ideology of how the left is fighting this war on women:  Subjugate them, make them subject to the wants of men, and when it goes wrong, pay for it with government dollars.  That's subjugation, not freedom, that's truly treating women like chattle.

    the right, on the other hand, want women to be free in this world, to pursue their own success or failure, something the left wants for no one.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]Typical skeetard; An elected official of the wingnut party makes a comment... not responsible. A twenty-something college student makes a comment and all libruls must atone. Freakin moron.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    Poor defenseless young girl just needs someone to pay for her monthly birth control pills.

    15 bucks is a lot to unemployed Democrats these days.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    Not asking for too much to ask for the productive working members of society to fork over for her birth control issue.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    The people who get up and answer the bell every morning are waging a war against unemployed women who need 15 bucks a month for birth control pills.
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]Todd Akin is a human "refresh button" for undecided voters who might have forgotten about the moronic and hateful comments made about women by Rush Limbaugh.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    Yeah Ed Schultz calling Laura Ingraham a sl*t was ok.

    Bill Maher who gave the messiah 1 mil. calling Palin the "C" word was ok too.



     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]The fluffed up conservative "social agenda" is nothing more than smoke screen to take attention away from jobs and the failing economy. A thinly veiled attenpt to further divide the country.
    Posted by NO MO O[/QUOTE]

    I actually think that the Republicans intend to impose their social agenda on the rest of us.  I take them at their word. A lot of people do. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : I actually think that the Republicans intend to impose their social agenda on the rest of us.  I take them at their word. A lot of people do. 
    Posted by Reubenhop[/QUOTE]


    Well, maybe we should give it a try.  The liberal agenda, which has been in place since the late 60's has done nothing but coarsen and degrade the human existence in our society, reducing us to chattel, as it is driven by a lowest common denominator standard, focusing primarily on the over-sexualization of our culture. 

    Maybe a social agenda that asks people to be all that they can be, not all that they want to do, could be a step up from the cesspool the left has created.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion

    In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: GOP clarifies its view on rape/abortion : Well, maybe we should give it a try.  The liberal agenda, which has been in place since the late 60's has done nothing but coarsen and degrade the human existence in our society, reducing us to chattel, as it is driven by a lowest common denominator standard, focusing primarily on the over-sexualization of our culture.  Maybe a social agenda that asks people to be all that they can be, not all that they want to do, could be a step up from the cesspool the left has created.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    Your dream is to use the government to force decisions on people.  You find this abhorrent when it comes to purely economic matters.  But you support it for personal morality issues.  Which do you think is more important to the individual?  But you don't care.  You are right, the others are wrong and you will force them to obey.  And you pretend to uphold freedom...  and pretend to support "small government"... Fraud.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share