wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59702
it seems that the tyrannical left’s favorite son “I don’t want her punished with a baby” has been an advocate in the illinois state senate for murdering living babies after they are born… this will be fun…
-Imp
A lot of people spoke out against the federal version of this bill. A major concern is the overarching implications. “Congressional Research Service reported that the bill would amend about 15,000 provisions of the U.S. Code and 57,000 provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations.”(ReligiousTolerance) Though this isn’t commenting directly on the Illinois version of the bill, the same situation likely applies.
I think that it is legitimate to point out that this is political maneuvering. It is an unnecessary bill because living births are already considered alive. All this is doing is expanding the ways that that statement can be interpreted by adding more language to it. Imp, how can you rail against ‘totalitarians’ and support legislation like this in the same breath?
Carleas, it is simple:
More money in the hands of fewer people = freedom.
Legislating morality and using the law to prevent actions = freedom.
See?
no, obama advocated killing babies after they were completely born outside the mother… I do not support this legislation at all…
-Imp
money in the hands of those who earn it=freedom
why do you think laws against murder and theft are there? legislated morality indeed…
-Imp
Good, so you agree that the government should and ought play a role in creating laws to maintain the well-fare of its people. After that, the rest is haggling over price.
Mmm… Perhaps because we live in a system that uses english common law? And Murder and theft were part of the common law system… Perhaps, call it a guess. My point is in fact your conclusion that these two crimes are legislated is wrong. They aren’t exactly legislated (only in Louisiana, which elects its laws).
I also have one other question. Don’t you think the phrase “tyrannical left” is, at this point, irresponsible? After thirty years of the Reagan trope where government = bad, and where the left signifies government, therefore signifying bad, don’t you think that the trope is a.) played out b.) simplifying to the point of ridiculousness c.) pernicious. It is point c.) that I would like to question the most. If you believe that government is bad, then you will spend no time learning how to govern. If anyone can hold government office and there is no respect given to people who would learn to govern well, then is it not a positive feedback loop where in fact government will become bad, because it only attracts people who could not get employment elsewhere? For the sake of brevity, I will only illustrate the performance of Michael D. Brown, the one-time head of FEMA. It was not important for the Bush administration to position people who were competent in positions of power. So, they positioned buddies and cronies, and we get Michael D. Brown, Harriet Miers (as a unqualified supreme court candidate) the utter worthlessness of the FDA (that’s kind of random, I know). Just as examples. Or We could get into the hack manner in which Iraq was invaded. It was completely unimportant for anyone to actually act with competence at any point in the pre-invasion, period of invasion, or post-invasion world of 2002-2005. To continue to harangue the Left as being tyrannical is now empty rhetoric, seeing as the Bush administration started out as the Right’s dream come true. They had nearly six years of complete control over the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branch. And what have we to show for it? A country lurching from one crisis to another, that supports torture, that is stuck in a no-win situation in a land war in Asia, that has seen the constitutional checks on the Executive branch badly eroded. A country that has no leadership, because the fine and patriotic Right has spent thirty years telling us that government is bad. Yet, they missed the point that leadership acts through government. Those do not respect governance will not know how to lead when their time comes. And they have not. Tyrannical Left indeed…
Secondarily, World Net Daily? Really? that’s like posting criticisms of cats written by dogs and declaring it universal
P. J. O’rourke made the observation that Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work, then go out and get themselves elected, and prove it.
Well from what I read, I have to agree with Obama. Nonviable fetus is pretty clear. A fetus that must recuire Herculean efforts to keep alive because of a premature birth is a fetus not a child. An infant that survives such a birth wil be a harsh burden to any that raise it. Its health will be very to extremely poor. Sever or midrange mental retardation, to severe to very poor physical health. Even with extreme care the odds are not good that it would survive its first year or even make it past the fifth year. The Gov’t will be supporting that rare human that makes it to adulthood. Sorry, hate to sound cold blooded but, I have to agree with the dude. I love kids too much to want to see a child live like that because, someone decided it was kinder to let them suffer.
that’s not what I said at all… well-fare has nothing to do with it… private property does…
-Imp
no, tyrannical left fits well… tyrannical right fits almost as badly…
you don’t see me in here saying bush is always right or that republicans can do no wrong… they simply do less damage than the democrats…
-Imp
that’s only because you will not see obama’s advocation of the murder of children as expressed by his voting record in illinois in the msm…
-Imp
Either way, you are limiting individual freedom for something that you deem “good”.
Mmmmm tasty rhetoric. Sooooo good. MSM, huh? Do you guys buy whole chunks of the ideology or can you break it off retail? The great independent Right, striking blows for self-reliance, independent thought, and freedom, and yet they all use the same tropes over and over again - murder of children, “mainstream” vs “independent” media (as if world net daily’s status as “not mainstream media” therefore grants it epistemological staus beyond what it is - one of a hundred propaganda organs of the Right), guns make you free. All the usual package. But you know what, all I ever see is trade show/convention/circus rhetoric. The whole movement has ground down into nothing more than a mass of Protestant White people afraid of the 21st century.
Since we have entered into the furor of becoming, I will be respectful and take the time to go through the WND’s article and underline some points. My hypothesis is that the vast majority of Obama’s points are procedural and stem from a desire to not spend time writing law that is redundent or ineffective. I will answer with this shortly. (I got some stuffs to handle…)
Unpack two things, please.
“tyrannical left fits well.”
“republicans do less damage”
thanks
-Imp
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … 4Jul8.html
cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/21/ … index.html
The activity of the Republican party seems to disagree with your thesis . . .
But in a practical, day to day sense, what does “slavery to a totalitarian socialist state” mean? I mean I don’t see Harry Reid out there with a whip beatin’ down the law abidin’ white folks. In fact, I don’t see any of the elected Democrats doing that. What does this whole totalitarian state slavery mean, exactly?
Secondarily, I really appreciate you rephrasing your original attack in new language. That was real cool. What does “erode freedom” mean? Is that like the whole thing where the Executive branch of the government doesn’t have to obey rules just cause they think it’s not right/cool/patriotic? Or is it something different? What is “erode freedom” exactly? Because, I’ m willing sit here and forgo cute girls, drinks, and a good time to make my point that in fact, your Bush Exec Branch has done more to erode freedom and democracy, at least in so far as the exact constitutional checks and balances that have been spelled out over two hundred years of case law, than any other presidency since perhaps FDR, and at least that crippled bastard meant well…But you know, I mean, hell, if you’re fighting totalitarian leftists, then, by all means, rape the Constitution. It’s cool. They’re Totalizing. And Leftists. And therefore, well, Evil…