Thank you "Mr. O"

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Thank you

    "And this is the revered braniac?"

     

    Revered as a braniac by whom?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Thank you

    So you really believe that the "cost" of contraception explains the 73% out of wedlock birth rate among poor African Americans in the inner cities? The supposed "lack of easy access" to contraception?

    The attitude of liberals is apparently that these girls in inner cities are too stupid to prevent pregnancy, when the evidence is obvious they want to get pregnant!

    Peer pressure and the welfare system encourage it. The losers for this attitude are the women themselves, their babies, and also the taxpayers.

    O'Reilly is talking about peer pressure and a change in attitude. Having Planned Parenthood hand out free condoms and free birth control would be useless.

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    Yet the federal government's welfare policies are undeniably encouraging having babies out of wedlock.

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    So you really believe that the "cost" of contraception explains the 73% out of wedlock birth rate among poor African Americans in the inner cities? The supposed "lack of easy access" to contraception?

    The attitude of liberals is apparently that these girls in inner cities are too stupid to prevent pregnancy, when the evidence is obvious they want to get pregnant!

    Peer pressure and the welfare system encourage it. The losers for this attitude are the women themselves, their babies, and also the taxpayers.

    O'Reilly is talking about peer pressure and a change in attitude. Having Planned Parenthood hand out free condoms and free birth control would be useless.

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    Yet the federal government's welfare policies are undeniably encouraging having babies out of wedlock.

     



    Wow, that is really, really dumb.

    Girls everywhere want to have sex.  Some want to have kids, true, but they are not just in the "inner cities"; some are in the sticks, too...with zero prospects or possibly a b/f going into the service.

    But there is a tremendous leap in logic to say govt policies "encourage" more illegitimate births; same could be said of conservative policies that want to keep women at home to "raise the kids".

    It's not about money.  It's about education and empowerment...opportunities for a life beyond 'broodmare'.

    Realistically, everyone wants teenage girls to have fewer children whenever possible.  Don't they?  And if they don't, then why the &*%$ not...?!

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from GregoryFromMeffa. Show GregoryFromMeffa's posts

    Re: Thank you

    Always liked Carville.  My kind of crazy.  I don't have a problem with making contraception available, covered or even free.  Just not to kids with out parental knowledge and/or consent.

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    Ding!

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    Ding!



    Knowing that, it's time for Plan B: contraception/education.  

    (no pun intended, of course)

     

     

     

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

     

    With 94% of deaths of African Americans committed by African Americans,  

     



    Really?!  I'd like to see that source.

     

    Only 6% combined of cancer, heart attack, smoking, diabetes, anemia, etc...?!?

     

    In 2009, 41% of children born in the United States were born to unmarried mothers (up from 5% a half century ago). That includes 73% of non-Hispanic black children, 53% of Hispanic children(of all races), and 29% of non-Hispanic white children.[14][15]

     

    So, does that mean hispanics and whites are having less sex??  Hardly.  There are way more hispanics and whites, anyway.  Point being is that the preventive measures of contraception clearly aren't reaching enough people (at least for those who want to be married...numbers of which go down every year.)

    Waiting for the next gross generalization....

     

    Thanks for the fix.  

    Most murders of white people are also committed by white people, btw.

     

     

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Thank you

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

     

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    Ding!

    Knowing that, it's time for Plan B: contraception/education.  

     

    (no pun intended, of course)



    Hey, perhaps giving all young males a James Carville mask to wear would be 100% effective !


    Knowing the track record of failed liberal government programs over the past decades, this isnt Plan B, but "Plan 987"..A new Federal Department of Contraception Services!

    The first 986 plans havent done so well ..but the liberal delusion that the next bureaucratic government agency will actually solve problems will never die...especially since many liberals can get useless lifetime fat-pensioned jobs in such agencies...

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Thank you

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Most murders of white people are also committed by white people, btw.

     




    For the most part, people kill people they know; so whites kill whites and blacks kill blacks.  This is a reality that jmel cannot process.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

    [QUOTE]O`Reilly is a "Republican/Conservative"........he isn`t.  Registered Independent



    Well that settles it. Are you going to stop referring to me as a "liberal" or "progressive" or "Democrat" now that you know I'm independent as well?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    you an independent?

    I just about spit out my beer.

    tell me to have another beer. Come on. Do It.

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

    Re: Thank you

    Posted by WDYWN:

    Well that settles it. Are you going to stop referring to me as a "liberal" or "progressive" or "Democrat" now that you know I'm independent as well?

     

    Independent? Bwahahahahahahaha...

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

    [QUOTE]O`Reilly is a "Republican/Conservative"........he isn`t.  Registered Independent



    Well that settles it. Are you going to stop referring to me as a "liberal" or "progressive" or "Democrat" now that you know I'm independent as well?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If you are an independent, wouldn't you be labelled equally as liberal or conservative? You are definitely a left leaner. Not extreme, but definitely leaning and having difficulty defeating gravity.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Thank you

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]O`Reilly is a "Republican/Conservative"........he isn`t.  Registered Independent

     



    Well that settles it. Are you going to stop referring to me as a "liberal" or "progressive" or "Democrat" now that you know I'm independent as well?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If you are an independent, wouldn't you be labelled equally as liberal or conservative? You are definitely a left leaner. Not extreme, but definitely leaning and having difficulty defeating gravity.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bingo!

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    For serving as a live example of the Repblican/Conservative hypocrisy of railing against single motherhood while railing against contraception (ie, defending viagra coverage but not contraception coverage, insisting on abstinence-only sex ed).

    Instead, he thinks we can fight single motherhood and teen pregnancy by paying Jaz-Z - he whose pimping is big - to tell women not to have sex out of wedlock.

     

    _________________________________________________________

    O'Reilly: 73% for African Americans. 52% for Latino families and 26% for out of wedlock whites. It's a catastrophe at 73%, so I want a big public campaign, funded by the federal government to go in and tell the girls and the young ladies, "Don't do this. This condemns you to poverty. It is destructive to your child. Wait until you have a stable situation to become pregnant. Would you get behind that campaign?"

    "The big one is the collapse of the family, traditional family in the African-American precincts," he told Democratic strategist James Carville on Thursday.

    [O'Reilly continued] ". . . 73% for African Americans. 52% for Latino families and 26% for out of wedlock whites. It's a catastrophe at 73%, so I want a big, public campaign funded by the federal government to go in and tell the girls and the young ladies, 'Don't do this, this condemns you to poverty, it is destructive to your child, wait until you have a stable situation to become pregnant.' Would you get behind that campaign?"

    "I would get behind if it had comprehensive sex education and had easy access to contraception," Carville replied.

    "That's all adjacent," O'Reilly said.

    "No, it's not," Carville insisted. "I think the idea that the federal government is going to tell a 17-year-old that you just wait and you don't have sex, I don't think that's going to be effective."

    "It has nothing to do with sex, it has to do with getting pregnant," the Fox News host quipped.

    "Well, you know, one leads to the other," Carville pointed out. "Let's really fund Planned Parenthood."

    "So, you don't want peer pressure brought, you want to fund, fund, fund!" O'Reilly exclaimed. "More money, more money."

    "Absolutely. I want easy access to contraception," Carville said.

    "Why don't we just have the Good Humor man have contraception on the ice cream truck?" O'Reilly wondered. "Come on, James, it's all about a societal attitude."

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    "It's going to discourage! Actively discourage! Peer pressure!" O'Reilly shouted. "Jay Z, the multimillion dollar man, have him get out and do a couple public service announcements."

    _________________________________________________________

     

     

    And this is the revered braniac? Out-of-wedlock children have nothing to do with sex? Jay-Z will peer pressure the problem out of existence?

     



    O'Reilly and Carville two over the top blowhards. That being said:

    Viagra treats a medical ailment.

    Contraception has to do with preventing pregnancy, not an ailment.

    Planned Parenthood; besides providing much needed womens health and contraception services also is the biggest purveyor of abortion

    Moral decay and lack of societal mores against unwed pregancy has led to a rapid rise in unwed mothers

    Contraception and education is good, Plan B used sparingly and for emergency OK, abortion after 1st month troubling, after 1st trimester should be regulated, after 2nd trimester should be against the law unless health of the mother is at risk.

    If you go on a reality TV show called I Didn't Know I was Pregnant and have a baby it should be taken away and put into a good family.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from GregoryFromMeffa. Show GregoryFromMeffa's posts

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

    [QUOTE]Where`s the rest?  Carville was on for an 8-minute segment........where`s the rest of the interview?



    It's the fullest transcript I found in a quick search. Post the full thing if you care so much.

     

     

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]Carville agreed that the "breakdown of the African America family" (the topic of the interview) is somewhat responsible for the ongoing problem.

     

    With 94% of murders of African Americans committed by African Americans, and 73% of African American children born out of wed-lock (only 20% a mere 40 years ago), who in their right mind wouldn`t suggest that the breakdown of the family could be a cause?

    [/QUOTE]

     


    Neither of which has even the slightest thing to do with the hypocrisy in railing against single-motherhood while railing against things that help prevent it.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you know anyone railing FOR single motherhood?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from GregoryFromMeffa. Show GregoryFromMeffa's posts

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

    [QUOTE]Do you know anyone railing FOR single motherhood?


    I think you misinterpereted my point.

     

     

     


    There are people who want to convince us that single mothers are immoral slags who don't deserve welfare and should have instead done the right thing and just not have had sex.

    There are other people who don't think single mothers are inherently bad or evil, and want to take a pragmatic approach to help reduce the problem.

    There are yet other people who think it is immoral but still want to take a pragmatic approach.

    The distinction most often comes down to a straight-up religious belief that sex out of wedlock - and even worse, pregnancy - is inherently immoral.

    [/QUOTE]


    I'm close to number 3.  I'd change "immoral", to irresponsible

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]Do you know anyone railing FOR single motherhood?

     


    I think you misinterpereted my point.

     

     

     


    There are people who want to convince us that single mothers are immoral slags who don't deserve welfare and should have instead done the right thing and just not have had sex.

    There are other people who don't think single mothers are inherently bad or evil, and want to take a pragmatic approach to help reduce the problem.

    There are yet other people who think it is immoral but still want to take a pragmatic approach.

    The distinction most often comes down to a straight-up religious belief that sex out of wedlock - and even worse, pregnancy - is inherently immoral.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I'm close to number 3.  I'd change "immoral", to irresponsible

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Add the 'deadbeat dad' into that equation, and you might be onto something.

     

     

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

     

    "The federal government is not going to stop young people from having sex," Carville noted.

    Ding!

    Knowing that, it's time for Plan B: contraception/education.  

     

    (no pun intended, of course)

     



    Hey, perhaps giving all young males a James Carville mask to wear would be 100% effective !

     


    Knowing the track record of failed liberal government programs over the past decades, this isnt Plan B, but "Plan 987"..A new Federal Department of Contraception Services!

    The first 986 plans havent done so well ..but the liberal delusion that the next bureaucratic government agency will actually solve problems will never die...especially since many liberals can get useless lifetime fat-pensioned jobs in such agencies...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Non sequiturs, all.

    Planned Parenthood does the job pretty well.

    Or at least they did until the uptight moralizers and pew polishers started taking them to court and choking off their funding.

    Some of you conservatives even want to ban types of sex that don't result in pro-creation...!!  Talk about your logical fallacies...!!

     

     

     

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

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    O'Reilly and Carville two over the top blowhards. That being said:

    Viagra treats a medical ailment.

    Contraception has to do with preventing pregnancy, not an ailment.

     



    1. Viagra does not treat an "ailment" if it's being given to an 80 year old male who wants to get it on. In that case, it helps the male do something that nature decided should not happen. It does treat an ailment when given to a man of virile age who cannot perform due to a legitimate 'ailment'.

     

    2. Contraception in the pill form is regularly prescribed for hormonal ailments.

    Both of these share disease-related uses, and pro-sex related uses. But contraception is a two-fer because it helps prevent pregnancy. Way more than having government tell people to just not have sex. The latter is what O'Reilly supports.

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]Planned Parenthood; besides providing much needed womens health and contraception services also is the biggest purveyor of abortion

     

    Moral decay and lack of societal mores against unwed pregancy has led to a rapid rise in unwed mothers

    Contraception and education is good, Plan B used sparingly and for emergency OK, abortion after 1st month troubling, after 1st trimester should be regulated, after 2nd trimester should be against the law unless health of the mother is at risk.

    If you go on a reality TV show called I Didn't Know I was Pregnant and have a baby it should be taken away and put into a good family.

    [/QUOTE]

     

    1. "Moral decay": I do not see sex out of wedlock as immoral. That is something that comes from some stories men written down thousands of years ago, and I don't think religious fiction has any place in government policy no matter how many people died in its name.

    Pregnancy outside of a stable long-term relationship is reckless and foolish, but it has nothing to do with "moral decay". I'm for pragmatic solutions, so whatever helps reduce that - even if reckless and foolish - is worth doing so long as its costs outweigh the costs of not doing it.

    ie, the cost of contraception education and availability vs. the costs of all those babies on welfare vs. the costs of those who get aborted.

     

    But basically you are agreeing with me: O'Reilly's position seems foolish. Telling people not to have sex doesn't work.

    Therefore, do what works best .

    [/QUOTE]

    1. Viagra to treat a condition ie ED, is a medical condition and not age defined.

    2. BC pills for hormone treatments is a medical condition, and if treatment begets a twofer benefit good for them.

    On moral decay, responsible sex out of wedlock is hardly immoral.  A culture that thinks its OK to get knocked up to have another kid to increase ones EBT allotment is moral decay.

    Yeah in general we have a middle ground; I just have more of a traditional conscience and you more free and open.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Thank you

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to GregoryFromMeffa's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]Do you know anyone railing FOR single motherhood?

     


    I think you misinterpereted my point.

     

     


    There are people who want to convince us that single mothers are immoral slags who don't deserve welfare and should have instead done the right thing and just not have had sex.

    There are other people who don't think single mothers are inherently bad or evil, and want to take a pragmatic approach to help reduce the problem.

    There are yet other people who think it is immoral but still want to take a pragmatic approach.

    The distinction most often comes down to a straight-up religious belief that sex out of wedlock - and even worse, pregnancy - is inherently immoral.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm close to number 3.  I'd change "immoral", to irresponsible

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Then that is largely what I intended with category #2.

     

    I would add a caveat or two. For example, I don't think it is necessarily irresponsible for someone to become a single-mother if they are an executive and therefore can afford whatever childcare services she cannot provide while at work, etc.

    It's simply incredibly irresponsible to have unprotected sex if you cannot afford or are otherwise not ready to have a kid. And if you do use protection, you should at least be certain you can afford something like plan B.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ditto

     

Share