A few items to wrap up for the weekend...
From the LJS:
Heineman signs ban on texting while driving.
Check us if we're wrong, but don't we now need a ban on the Governor signing bills while driving?
What did he have, one hand on the wheel and a grande mochachino between his legs while autographing that legislation on the dashboard?
***
The Unicameral passed the recent fetal-pain abortion bill the other day, making national news. It would seem that this is almost certain to hit the U.S. Supreme Court.
A few interesting notes: the vote was 44-5.
The five voting Nay:
Danielle Nantkes Conrad (Lincoln - Dist. 46)
Tanya Cook (Omaha - 13)
Brenda Council (Omaha - 11)
Ken Haar (Lincoln - 21)
Amanda McGill (Lincoln - 26)
And then Democrat Governor candidate Mark Lakers also called out the Governor, apparently, for signing this law. Is there another way to read the Lakers comments in the Sioux City Journal?
Lakers said he believes the state will spend millions defending lawsuits over abortion and health care reform.The article doesn't otherwise spell out Lakers position, but it would seem that he is against this bill that overwhelmingly passed the legislature, no?
***
In similar news, Nebraska Right to Life gave their endorsement to Governor Heineman in the upcoming election. They said his support for the recent abortion bills outweigh the issues on the illegal immigrant bills.
On the other hand, NRTL gave a lifetime ban to Senator Ben Nelson, after his support for the national Health Care legislation. Nelson had said that he was happy that the language in the bill was good enough that no taxpayer money would be used for abortions.
Then again, Nelson also probably figured that the new law wouldn't shut down his and his staff's health care coverage, and that they hadn't screwed up the language regarding pre-existing conditions.
But, whatever. Hope and change. Right?
***
An alert reader wanted us to note the Nebraska Democratic Party's lambasting of Koch Industries for contributing to, among other things, the Tea Party movement, Lee Terry and the evil George W. Bush.
They spend several paragraphs arguing that Koch is an evil polluter which is trying to buy influence in government.
Except they left out one particular recipient of lots of Koch money;
Senator E. Benjamin Nelson.
Turns out Nelson has taken over thirty grand from Koch in the past five years. There are plenty of lefties who hate him for it.
But hey Nebraska Dems, thanks for the input. Good lookin' research on your guy there.
***
In case you missed it, the OWH reports the fund raising numbers for the 2nd District Congressional race. Pretty clear that Terry's primary opponent will not be running any serious media.
Tom White seems to be raising some money to "get his message out".
Of course, his message of "I support the Obama/Pelosi health care bill" would seem to be, ehhhhhhh, a difficult sell to the voters in the 2nd. But hey, rock on, and all that.
***
For the time being we are waiting to give our analysis of the GOP Nebraska State Treasurer primary. However, we're not sure that it will have changed much from the way we looked at it a few months back.
More at a later date.
Posts
90 comments:
Looking over the Benator's Top-20 BFF list (link: over thirty grand from Koch) reveals who he really was supporting with his votes - Amgen, Pfizer, Blue Cross-Blue Shield, GlaxoSmithKline - all due to make billions from the new health care bill. Why didn't he then vote for the consolidation bill? Number one on the list, Nelnet.
Good old dependable Ben, always looking out for those that look out for him.
I thought you were listing the donors for Lee Terry, Boss. They're identical.
Interesting little snippet; one of the people who testified against the 20 week + abortion bill, and who also penned a passionate column in the Lincoln Journal Star claiming her medically necessary abortion would have been proscribed by the bill, now admits she 'erred' in stating the week of her gestation, and being at 18 weeks, would not have been affected by the bill at all.
This is the second blatant instance in the present session where someone testified on the leftist side of a bill and was discovered almost immediately to be lying through their teeth. There ought to be a law. Well, actually, there is, but they won't apply it.
12:58 PM, April 16, 2010.
How so? Can't you read? The information for the past several years is available on Street Sweeper's link. "Identical?" I think not. Here are their Top-20s of the 2010 cycle for comparison:
REP. LEE TERRY
2010
1 American Assn for Justice $10,000
1 Freedom Project $10,000
1 Every Republican is Crucial PAC $10,000
1 First National of Nebraska $10,000
1 AG Processing $10,000
6 Mutual of Omaha $8,750
7 American Bankers Assn
8 National Community Pharmacists Assn $7,000
9 National Beer Wholesalers Assn $6,500
9 Union Pacific Corp $6,500
11 Hawkins Construction $5,800
12 Verizon Communications $5,750
13 Qwest Communications $5,700
14 Baird Holm Law Firm $5,550
15 American Chiropractic Assn $5,500
15 Koch Industries $5,500
17 Experian plc $5,000
17 AT&T Inc $5,000
17 Continuing a Majority Party Action Cmte $5,000
17 National Electrical Contractors Assn $5,000
17 Berkshire Hathaway $5,000
17 International Assn of Fire Fighters $5,000
17 National Assn of Home Builders $5,000
17 AFLAC Inc $5,000
17 National Rural Electric Cooperative Assn $5,000
17 Growth & Prosperity PAC $5,000
17 National Assn of Health Underwriters $5,000
17 DuPont Co $5,000
17 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $5,000
17 National Auto Dealers Assn $5,000
17 American Dental Assn $5,000
17 American Crystal Sugar $5,000
SEN. BEN NELSON
2010
1 NelNet Inc $63,100
2 Berkshire Hathaway $61,400
3 Union Pacific Corp $49,750
4 Level 3 Communications $46,100
5 Amgen Inc $43,250
6 Pfizer Inc $42,700
7 Blue Cross/Blue Shield $39,700
8 WR Berkley Corp $37,500
9 GlaxoSmithKline $36,750
10 AT&T Inc $36,250
11 Omaha Steaks $36,100
12 Travelers Companies $34,500
13 Schering-Plough Corp $34,000
14 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $32,500
15 Koch Industries $31,500
16 American Optometric Assn $30,000
16 Comcast Corp $30,000
16 Target Corp $30,000
19 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp $29,900
20 Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance $29,500
Boooo Paul Reiser!!!!!
Why would support of the health care bill be such a "difficult sell" to the voters in the 2nd, where there are more Ds than Rs?
Not saying you're wrong, just don't get the logic.
Sarah doesn't want the title so, Mike Kennedy for Tea Party Leader!!!
Wow!! Follow the link to the NDP article SS posted. It's hilarious. I especially love when they say
Koch Industries has given Lee Terry $14,500 in just two years time. Surely these donations have nothing to do with the fact that Terry is a member of the influential House Committee on Energy and Commerce
Hi pot meet kettle. How stupid can that party leadership be? They attack Lee Terry for taking LESS money from a company than their only statewide elected official has. The OWH & LJS better run with this.
Can somebody who knows more about the intertubes than me screencap their blog before they take it down?
That Koch Industries hypocrisy is a huge, huge story. Great work SS! I can't wait to see the NDP leadership explain that away. This should be a story all by itself.
You might as well throw Omaha Steaks into the mix. I hope people will stop supporting that liberal organization.
No article on sending the National Guard to patrol North Omaha? Brad Ashford's best idea yet!
Thanks SS for the abortion issue coverage - it's been largely (and all too conveniently) absent from state and local political dialogue.
I know prolife folks like to think that you can't put a price tag on the life of a fetus, but seriously, how much will this measure and the associated (and inevitable) overturning of the new time constraints cost Nebraska taxpayers?
Answer: too much. All personal feelings aside - It's too bad that the fear of political repercussions for prolife legislators lead to the passage of this empty shell of a bill. I'm sick of conservative politicians picking and choosing with matters of decided law. Either you respect federal law or you pass this crap. And no one is taking away your guns so don't come back with that crap.
It'll cost us less than Ben Nelson did as Governor by refusing to issue permits that were required by contract and allowed by law to be issued.
As far as the price of a baby? I bet I could go out on the street and find five couple that would give their life saving to be able to raise a child.
Oh Mander: If you are referring to LB 1103 as "an empty shell of a bill" I will remind you that millions of pro-life citizens do not accept Roe as settled law and are simply working through the legislative and judicial process afforded to us to enact change. What other issues/areas would you ask citizens to sit down, shut up and tune out? Is it just abortion? LB 1103 does seek a new bright line, away from the outdated post viability statute with the broad health exception which has allowed LeRoy Carhart to thumb his nose at Nebraska and continue to abort late term babies. These outdated post viability laws went on the books in States all over the country before the advent of 4-D ultrasound and in-utero surgery which now give us an amazing window into the womb and provide medical documentation on babies feeling pain at 20 weeks gestation and beyond. None of that knowledge was there in 1973 when the Roe Court foisted all of this upon our nation.
Yes, Julie, while you pontificate about LB 1103, you ignore LB 1110 and your role in not calling out the Governor. Hope those kids or their mothers don't die due to lack of care because you played nice with Davey.
I don't want to start a "right vs. wrong; fetus vs. baby" debate, because they never go anywhere . . .
My point is, now the state of Nebraska will be expending an enormous amount of time and resources that we don't have to take on the US Supreme Court. Lemme know how that one works out for you Julie.
Julie,
I suggest you do not post on this blog. The intellectual capacity of many of the posters is far below the likes of you. You are simply dignifying them if you come back here consistently. Get an intern of something. You know?
Julie the day you really get rid of Roe vs Wade is the day I buy you a steak dinner. The law is more than a generation old. So many people are against abortion in public. But in private that is a different story. The Supreme Court is a majority of Catholics. The majority of the Supreme Court is Republican. It has been like that since the 1980's I bet many people on this blog know some one who has had an abortion. They have it and they go on with thier lifes. If the GOP really wanted to get rid of it they would have done that years ago. But they need abortion. When you have a really bad borrow and spend policy with the American's people money. When you have been wrong on Civil Rights , Social Security, and Medicare. You need something to stir the pot. Abortion does that. 100 years from now, abortion will be legal. Everyone really knows that. Maybe the zealots don't. But no one really cares enough to really get rid of Roe vs Wade. If they did they would have by now. Even if they got rid of Roe vs Wade. Then you would have States saying if they wanted it. Most of the 50 states would make it legal. I doubt if Nebraska would But it is too valuable for the GOP to have this tool to complain about. I grant you they use that weapon very well.
You people are disgusting and not all people (iI assume you actually mean young girls/women) go on to live their lives. Many (I would suspect the vast majority) live with an enormous guilt that can take several years to surface and identify.
The "ease" of the "choice" is what make the guilt of the action fester. So, Bud, until you've had one and are still happy as a clam about your choice 10, 20, or even 30 years later...Keep it zipped (mouth and pants!)
As far as LB1110, "those kids and their mothers"? How about their fathers take them back to Mexico where they can receive healthcare for free because they are citizens of Mexico.
Just because they got knocked up in America, doesn't mean the baby is a U.S. citizen. That be like saying if I got pregnant in Cancun then my kid would be eligible for scholarships given to only hispanics.
"Just because they got knocked up in America, doesn't mean the baby is a U.S. citizen."
Umm...don't really know what to tell you here. Other than you are 100% wrong. I mean like you couldn't possibly be more wrong.
Also, regardless of how anyone feels about abortion I think Bud is basically correct in that a ban would actually be detrimental to conservatives from a political standpoint. The issue now serves as a rallying cry and provides a semblance of unity, and can always be used as a prop in a national and statewide election.
It's one of the few consensus building issues for either party, and it attracts independent voters. Obviously the issue has passion coming at it from all sides and the fervent nature of pro-lifers getting a ban would, in their mind, override the political costs but it certainly has to be a consideration.
Without the abortion issue, what WOULD the one big Anti-Democratic Party issue be? Hmmmmm? Maybe:
Those Democrats are all about Tax & Spend. (We're for Borrow & Spend.)
Those Democrats are a bunch of Socialists. (We're a bunch of Corporatists.)
Those Democrats want to take away our guns. (We want to shoot anyone that disagrees with us.)
Those Democrats are all a bunch of fags. (See the above comment in parentheses.)
Those Democrats are all heathens, this is a Christian Nation! (Yup. Jesus said to hate your neighbor, didn't He?)
The list could go on, and on ....
I've been raising hell with my fellow Democrats on a listserv reserved for Democratic Party Leaders (I'm a county chair) most of this afternoon. And I thought YOU guys hated dissenters! Whew!
Notice to any potential new members of the Nebraska Democratic Party: If you don't like the taste of Kool Aid you can always become one of my "henchmen," or start your own faction and be ostracized for having unauthorized opinions.
Is the Nebraska Republican Party like that too? Really. I want to know. How do the members of your State Central Committee handle Republicans that get "out of line?"
I'd have posted this on NNN, but I'm not carrying any more water for Michaelis. Anyone tuning in to listen to him and Lisa play with one another on his little "blogtalkradio" program tonight?
Anonymous 12:01 In the year 2000. My wife and I were advised that my wife should have an abortion. They said the child would not live very long because of the health problems he would be born with. Both of us believe in choice. The choice we made was to take a chance and let our son to be born. He had super bad health problems. He is the 5th youngest heart transplant person in history. 50 hours old. He was born with very bad club feet. But in one month he will be 10 years old. But that was the CHOICE we made. I don't have the right to tell others what CHOICE they can make and neither do you! Yes I know more than a few woman ( family members) who decided to have an abortion. They did nothing wrong or against the law. Their reasons for doing what they did are their reasons. Not YOURS! And no one should ever tell them different.
So then I should be able to make the CHOICE and get my hip replaced at the time of my own CHOOSING without the government interfering. Soon, however, I will be forced into a back-alley hip replacement or have to drive to Mexico if the federal healthcare utilization board decides I have not met criteria.
Not any more 8:16 PM.
Our new health plan administrators will be checking your voter registration and all postings you've made to internet web sites. Your priority for surgical procedures will be determined by the results of your political compliance evaluation. I suspect your aplication may end up in the file along with the frost warnings for hell.
The "blogtalkradio" over at NNN reminds me of Kukla, Fran and Ollie except it's twice as childish and not nearly as amusing.
Anonymous 8:16 PM
Where does it say in any parts of the new health care law about you not having the right to get a hip replacement? What government health care board are you talking about? I know many Private health care insurance companies do limit you on things you can get etc. But that is your choice of how good of a plan you want to buy. You have a right to your opinion. But you don"t have the right to make up facts.
Bud, thank you for sharing your son's story. For those who have received a troubling prenatal diagnosis I would encourage them to google Be Not Afraid (with a dot net since I know Sweeper doesn't like links.) This website has stories of families who have faced very difficult situations but chose life and were blessed by the time they had with their children.
Dear Pete,
You have to actually take your first breath of air in America to be an American citizen. If your mother is in a foreign country when you are born and you don't happen to be born on a U.S. military base, you have to apply for naturalization to be legally declared a U.S. citizen.
Being conceived in a country does not make you a citizen of that country. Being born their does (in most cases.) Rights and privileges given to U.S. citizens are not given to people from a foreign country that are hanging out in our country illegally.
Just to be simple, if a guy was squatting on my property, he is not entitled to the food in my fridge.
Was that simple enough for ya'?
Don't you just love the weekends that they let you off your meds for a few days? I feel liberated!
I can understand the anchor baby situation;
If the guy on the next place over has a cow that sneaks under the barbed wire into my pasture and drops a calf there, IT'S ALL MINE.
OK. So, if to be an American citizen you have to take your first breath of air in America, then logic dictates that you are not a legal being until that breath is taken and therefore have no rights. The flip side of that coin would be that, if you are a being with rights at conception, then we must change all the laws. You should be able to get your driver's license at 15-1/4, get a drink at a bar at 20-1/4, vote at 17-1/4, etc.
I find it interesting that the Jewish faith dictates that a life begins with that first breath, not at conception. Why is it, then, that only the Christian definition is acceptable in this country? Shouldn't Buddhists, Hindus, Great-Spaghetti Monster followers, and others, be able to decide, based on THEIR beliefs when and if an abortion should be permissible?
BTO, the problems in the Nebraska Democratic Party started when they tried the lobotomy thing several adminstrations ago when Ben Nelson first became the savior. We're dealing with the consequences now of the NDP's passion for selecting employees without regard to their qualifications. The fool they hired to do the lobotomies was a former bartender at a bar on P Street in Lincoln that was housed in the old Sam Lawrence Hotel. The guy got carried away and instead of using the stir setting he kept turning it all the way up to frappe'.
Brian...Congrats on putting a Republican's sign in your yard. You really are a Democrat we can support!
If Sen. Ben can vote against everything the Nebraska Democratic Party has passed publicly in State Central Committee resolutions, and our CD3 Congressional candidate can tell us that she'd support Republican bills when it suites her, then I guess it must be OK for me to put a sign in my yard supporting a Republican candidate for mayor of Holdrege - especially when that candidate is, by far, the most qualified person running for that office.
Besides, I'm not the only one living in that house. If Trish wants to support a fellow teacher for the office of Mayor, I believe she still has that right. Go find something else to bitch about.
The Federal Government dictates that a person is not a citizen until the first breath. I am sure there are millions of people in this country and all over the world that would love to see the U.S. government acknowledge that life begins at conception, therefore, no death can be put upon another's life without due process (yes, I am one of those freaks that believes innocent lives should be spared and guilty one's taken).
Go ahead and advocate for the life at conception thing, many would be proud of you.
Our governments must adhere to our laws. If you don't like the laws, that's a different story, but until they are changed, they must be enforced.
Hey Brian, what are ya doing up at 2:39AM blogging? Good posts.
Brian, let's leave religion out of it for a moment (and thanks for speaking on behalf of all Jews as to when they believe life begins) ...
... and you tell me when you think life begins. I'm not asking for what you understand the law to be or what Hindus believe or anything like that. I want to know when YOU think life begins.
Idiot at 8:16 4-18-2010.
Its not a government insurance option. There isn't one, you guys didn't want a public option so now there the only options left are from private companies. Go ahead and check for yourself, I will assume you are at least a partway competent individual and can look something up using a computer and maybe (its just a thought) read something and learn something. But you might not be partway competent, I have been wrong before.
A-11:29,
You tell me who you are, and I'll tell you what I think.
BTO says, "You tell me who you are, and I'll tell you what I think."
No you won't. You'll just find some other way of weaseling out of it. You'll just claim it's above your paygrade or something equally evasive.
If you weren't afraid of having to defend an answer, you would have just given one.
A-12:55, That's always been my policy. Nothing new here other than that you are just one more idiot that thinks he can boss me around. Come out from behind your mommy's skirts and I promise I won't hurt you.
Thanks Brian for the information. You have a good solid reason for your beliefs!
BTO says: "A-12:55, That's always been my policy. Nothing new here other than that you are just one more idiot that thinks he can boss me around. Come out from behind your mommy's skirts and I promise I won't hurt you."You might not but some SEIU thug might. Of course, as quick as you are to fling epithets around, I doubt it would be productive even if it were possible to engage you in any kind of discussion.
Okay, BTO. I'll go ahead and say who I am, just because I want an answer to your question. I'm not the anonymous who posted before, and I've never actually posted here before, but I am curious as to when you think life begins. And I'll even tell you that I'm a Catholic and fully agree with the Church on abortion. My name is Andrew and I'm a psychology student at UNL. If you want more info than that, I'll just send you an e-mail with it I suppose. And only cowards ask questions without giving some form of name to respond to.
"Andrew" - I'll give you an E for effort since your name links to nothing, but then you have to answer a question for me.
Life begins at 4:00 p.m.
Why is the Catholic Church opposed to abortion but they think ritual cannibalism is perfectly normal? Seriously ... eating the flesh and drinking the blood? Isn't that just a tad grotesque?
There, now I've pissed off the Catholics too. Tune in tomorrow and I'll insult another major worldwide religion.
In all truth, I think the Jews are on to something. That first breath is the all important one, but even then it ain't legal until you get the doctor's signature. My father was adopted and didn't have a birth certificate. That didn't stop the government from allowing him to enlist in the Navy before Pearl Harbor, pay taxes all his life and be licensed for various things. But, when it came time to retire, they told him he didn't exist because he didn't have a birth certificate.
Anonymous at 9:39:
Oh, that's what we're talking about? Babies conceived in America but not born in America? Why would anyone care about that? Is this a problem? If so, for who? What a weird thing to focus on.
I'll choose to focus on the approximately 99.8 percent of babies conceived by immigrants and born in America that will be US citizens while you figure out how we're going to round up all these preg-o illegal immigrants in time to get them back to Mexico in at most 9 months. Good luck with that.
Anonymous asks, BTO, tell me when you think life begins.
BTO says, you tell me who you are and I'll tell you what I think.
Anonymous says, no you won't. You'll just find another way of weaseling out of it.
So Eric says, yeah BTO, I want to know when you think life begins.
And BTO answers: 4:00 p.m.
Looks like anonymous can spot a weasel a mile away.
I'm just glad to hear the Phelps County Democrats Chair said a Republican is the best candidate for mayor.
A-10:09, I guess you need your mom to read the WHOLE thing to you.
A-10:33, I've gotta play with the cards I'm dealt. I've been suffering some serious dents in my Yellow Dog Democrat armor of late. It really is tough being a Socialist in South Central Nebraska.
BTO, friendly peace of advice-
Don't piss off Catholics. You need their votes. Even Obama relied on them. They are the single most influential non-governmental organization in world history, and everything you write on these blogs can be traced back to you.
I am not going to reveal who I am because it is a private matter...but I will tell you I have had two abortions and regret both. I wish I would've been given more information about the possible emotional after effects I would go through. The pro choice Planned Parenthood and the doctor's clinics give you the required information which is basically next to nothing. They glorify abortion.
What happened to empowering women to say NO, to take proactive steps to not become pregnant. And what happened to empowering women to let them know it is okay to be a career mom, or a single mom...and there is help out there. People just expect it to be handed to them, instead of seeking it.
I do support abortion when it comes to saving the mother's life (the fetus is not viable then), and I am torn about killing one to save another.
But, I do now believe that life begins at conception...and I pray that someday I have the strenght to share my story
A-9:16, You regret what you have done. There are things I have done in my lifetime that I regret, but that doesn't mean that I want to make those things illegal for everyone else.
Jamie, If there is anyone out there that I haven't pissed off at one time or another, then I haven't been doing it right.
BTO: A-9:16, You regret what you have done. There are things I have done in my lifetime that I regret, but that doesn't mean that I want to make those things illegal for everyone else.
Brian, it's none of your business who I am (I'm not A-9:16) but you and all other pro-abortion folks leave an essential element out of the abortion discussion. You cannot have any meaningful discussion about this issue without answering the question about when you believe life begins ... and then defending that answer.
As to your "regrets," I don't go around stealing from others but I have no problem making that an illegal choice for everyone else; I haven't murdered anyone but I have no problem making that an illegal choise for everyone else.
A-10:44, Do you anonymii REALLY have to have EVERYTHING spelled out for you specifically to understand it? Geez!!
OK ... more specifically ... I regret having done some things in my life that were PERFECTLY LEGAL and I would just as soon not make them illegal for everyone else. Examples: I regret having smoked cigars when I was younger, I regret some of stupid things I did at keggers in my youth, I regret having gotten involved with some of my old girlfriends. OK? If we have to get ridiculous, then I think it should be illegal for you to build nuclear weapons in your basement.
Abortion is LEGAL and I don't have the appropriate plumbing that would ever make that a choice for me. As a MAN, I will never impose MY will on what a WOMAN does with her own reproductive organs. If men have the right to decide what women do with their wombs, then women should have the right to decide what men do with their penises. I REALLY don't want to see that happen.
For me, life begins with your first breath, and it ends with your last one. There! Does that answer your freakin' question?
And how freakin' difficult is it for you to click on the Name/URL button and type in some kind of pen name? It's just above the "Anonymous" button and you don't have to register, pay a fee, or anything. Look for it - you'll find it. I don't pick on Sweeper for his anonymity because I know he's Sweeper. Everything he signs as Sweeper is written by Sweeper. When everyone goes by the name of Anonymous, we can't tell you fools apart!
Hey, BTO, Anon at 10:44 here. Thanks for the tip on the name/url deal. I'll look into it. Of course, now that I know it bugs you ...
Anyway, a few points:
1. Your comments about how abortion and the things you regret having done are all legal is interesting. Your argument, though, is circular: You don't want to make illegal those things you regret having done, because those things are legal. The fact that abortion is legal is not, however, justification for it being legal.
2. I don't want to impose my will on what a woman does with her reproductive organs either. I do, however, care what she does with the innocent human life that might temporarily occupy her reproductive organs. That little one can't speak for itself and make sure its choices are respected. It needs protection.
3. This is why the point at which life begins is important to this discussion. You say you believe that life begins with the first breath. Are you suggesting you would oppose any restrictions on the mother's choice to abort at any point up to the moment her child takes its first breath? How is a baby, moments from birth, really any less alive than the baby just born?
P.S. You can call me Chimney Sweeper if it helps you distinguish me from any other anonymous poster.
What kind of fool puts his real name in a blog?
Once he throws his real name out there, it is forever too late to take it back. Might as well publish his bank account nrs and credit cards too. What a dimwit.
Of course, stuck that way, the dimwit declares himself "brave". It is as brave as jumping out of an airplane without a chute.
If this is the best wit the donkey can squeeze out, there's little worry any elephant will trip over it.
Typical Republican "I'm scared" post. No one's asking for your social security number. Unlike Brian, you prefer to hide behind the Internet curtain.
A-1:56, So, "Chimney Sweeper," you saw the hint, why didn't you use it?
1. - My argument is NOT circular. Why would I want to criminalize something just because it is stupid? If stupid was a crime, a lot of you folks would be behind bars.
2. - The "innocent human life" inside a woman's body is hers to decide what to do with, not mine, nor yours. It is, after all, HER body.
3. - I am not saying the words you want to put in my mouth. Go back and read what I actually wrote.
A-2:52, You are one of the idiots that would be behind bars if stupid was illegal. And why the hell would I ever want to take back anything I've ever written? If you have to write crap that you can't defend, then your an idiot for writing it in the first place.
Brian, I'm trying to be as respectful in this discussion as I can.
1. You said, basically, that the fact of regretting having done something doesn't mean that thing should be illegal for everyone else. You then defended the doing of those things by saying they are legal. In effect, what you've said is that because those things are legal, they shouldn't be made to be illegal. That is a circular argument. And, as I said in reply, just because something is legal doesn't mean it should be legal.
2. "The 'innocent human life' inside a woman's body is hers to decide what to do with, not mine, nor yours. It is, after all, HER body."
This is different than what you said before. Before, you said she has the right to decide what to do with her reproductive organs. I don't disagree with that. However, I profoundly disagree that she has a right to kill a human being that happens to reside within her reproductive organs. That life inside her body is NOT her life but is its own. And she should have no more right to kill that baby than she has the right to kill any other innocent human being.
3. I didn't put any words in your mouth. YOU said life begins when you take that first breath. I simply asked a follow-up for you to explain the difference between a baby who's just been born and one within moments of being born. The fact you cannot defend your initial position is revealing.
Sincerely and with best wishes,
Chimney Sweeper
Look, I agree with Brian on when life begins. To me it is the time of ensoulment, and I can't think of any reason a fetus would need a soul until it separates from the mother. But unlike those who for some reason are convinced that life begins at conception, I don't claim infallibility. I am willing to compromise my beliefs and accept Rowe v. Wade as settled law which defines life as starting at viability. I challenge you to produce a scientific, theological or philosophical argument or document that supports your belief. "I believe", "it's obvious" or "it kinda looks like a baby" do not qualify.
Chimney,
You're the one twisting the logic and attempting to put words in my mouth. Just because I've done stupid things, especially when I was younger, does NOT mean that those things need to be criminalized. You can disagree, or not, but you don't get to make my mind up for me.
I believe a fetus is an integral part of the mother until it is born, just like an arm, a leg, an eye, etc. If I wanted to use the type of logic that you have been attempting to foist onto me, I would say that if that life inside her body is its own, then it should be able to survive without her, outside of her body.
What is it with you that you can't understand the words I have written. If I said life begins at that first breath, then that's what I meant. You can slice and dice that however you choose, but I'm not going to do it for you.
So what does that reveal? We disagree. Get used to it.
Brian, you don't get it. You defend the point that these stupid things should be legal on the argument that they're legal. In other words, they should be legal because they're legal. That's what you've said. I'm not twisting anything. You said all those things are LEGAL. You made a big point of it. You put it in all caps. And no matter how loudly you protest, it's still a circular argument.
Second, a baby in the womb is not at all like an arm or a leg or a hand or a kidney, etc. I know you can see that but you don't want to admit it. The baby in the womb is in a special position. It IS its own person but until a certain point, it CANNOT survive outside its mother's womb.
Based on what you've said, I'd ask you if you'd support prohibiting abortions on babies after they've reached the point of viability but I know that you'll just do the same thing you've been doing, which is to accuse me of trying to put words in your mouth and not understanding what you've said.
I understand very well what you've said. The problem isn't my ability to understand but your continued insistence on moving the target after every volley. You refuse to commit to a position and, instead, accuse me of putting words in your mouth.
You have said that life begins with the first breath but you've been completely unwilling (unable) to defend that position and explain why there's any material difference between a baby after it's taken its first breath and the same baby just moments earlier.
Unless you can justify why the one is alive and the other is not, then what you're saying is that you're OK with a woman choosing to kill a living human being just because it happens at that time to be within her womb.
It's like I said earlier, Brian: You cannot have any meaningful discussion about this issue without answering the question about when you believe life begins ... and then defending that answer.
Ted, I know a woman who was pregnant with twins. She had a complication with her pregnancy at about 19 weeks and went into labor. The babies were delivered but died a short time later. Before they died, they cried. Audibly. Outside the mother's womb. Non-living things can't do that.
Because of their development, and through no fault of their own, they weren't in a position to survive yet. But whether they were "life" and whether they could survive on their own are two different questions.
If you believe a baby doesn't get a soul until it separates from its mother, perhaps you can explain what Brian cannot evidently explain: What's the material difference between a baby that has taken its first breath and that same baby moments earlier, still in the womb?
Too easy! The umbilical cord is broken and the baby is now an independent being.
Ted, maybe you should have tried harder. The umbilical cord isn't cut until after the baby has been delivered. So, therefore, what you are saying is a) full-term baby delivered and outside the womb, but b) umbilical cord still intact = c) not yet "life" and therefore not yet worthy of protection, so therefore d) it'd be OK in your world to abort (a/k/a kill) it.
Heck Ted, babies take their first breath before the umbilical cord is cut. You've gotta be able to do better than that.
Again, Ted, how is the baby that was just delivered "life" whereas that same baby, moments earlier, was not? Cutting the umbilical cord doesn't cut it. Sorry.
Nothing will cut it for you. I cannot pinpoint the exact moment of life, and neither can you. I've told you why I believe what I believe. You haven't. But you want the legal system to codify your beliefs. I don't ask the same of mine. Because there may be a second or two between a breath and cutting the cord, that invalidates my argument? I know you types are completely black/white on everything, but this is a bit silly. And my daughter did not take a breath until after the cord was cut.
So, tell me Chimney, how do you feel about separating an Afghan mother from her children via an AGM-114 dropped from a Predator drone that was guided by a 20-something year old Air Force enlisted person that gets off work to go to his own kid's parent teacher conference in the evening?
Oh, that's right. Sorry, I forgot. Most of you Pro-Life folks could care less about the lives of those zygotes once they've entered this world.
You know what is saddest about BTO's comments? It's that he seems to believe that just because that baby happens to be "stuck" inside that woman's belly, then she has the right of ownership of "it".
Since when do mother's "own" their children right down to deciding whether they get to live or die?
It's been 40 years. Every argument has been made. No one is changing anyone else's mind with these divisive arguments. Only thing left to do now is vote.
Chimney, I get it. You are anti-abortion at any cost. I am in favor of women deciding what they can do with their own bodies. As I have stated before, I am a MAN. I have a PENIS. It is NONE OF MY BUSINESS what a WOMAN decides to do with HER WOMB!!!! Sorry about the shouting, but obviously you can't hear very well.
And another thing. The point I made with all caps previously was about stupid things I did, it had nothing to do with the argument about abortion. If you can't read, I can't help you. Seek some remedial education. I'm sure there is someone in your community that can help you.
YOU do NOT get to make decisions on what I "see," think or believe. I am moving no targets; you just can't hit the broad side of a barn with your logic.
The difference between a "baby" that has drawn its first breath and a fetus that hasn't is that the baby that has drawn its first breath is no longer a part of the mother, but on its own. I don't need to "defend" a frikkin' thing. It is my belief, and NO ONE, not you, not the Pope, not the frikkin' Dali Lama gets to decide what I believe. That is my right alone.
You can say, "Then what you are saying ...," until the cows come home, but that is YOUR circuitous logic and that IS you putting words in my mouth.
My defense is what I have stated. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I haven't "defended" my position, since in this case any position is merely an opinion, it only means that you disagree with me.
A-9:55, Since when does Gov. Heineman get to decide which kids live or die? He's done it, but he's a Republican, so that makes it Okie-Dokie.
I always thought you are alive when you were born. And you are dead when you are not breathing any more. That is what the law says . I may be wrong but I think most of the world has thought that since Adam and Eve days. My birthday is when I came out of the womb. I don't know what day I will die. So if we go by the anti abortion people views, then those fetus in those people who Heinman denied pre natal rights are American citizens. Why would he do that then? Why is no one from the right screaming about American citizens being abused? Or is it like Katrinia. The wrong people with the wrong color? What is the reasoning?
The Governor made no such decision. He decided that if you are hanging out in our Country and State; have arrived here by means other than legally crossing a border with the right type of visa, then you must go back to your Country of legal status to receive your "free" prenatal care. If I were in a foreign country and discovered I were pregnant, then I would need to have private insurance, pay in cash or credit card, or go home to receive my care. Just check with anyone that has done mission work in someplace like the Dominican.
That is all we want. If you are not legally qualified to receive benefits that come from our federal gov't (through a program administered at the State level), then you don't get them. Period, end of discussion, that is what Federal law says..
Now, if the churches and the non profits want to spend their donor dollars assisting any pregnant woman that does not have the means to pay for her own healthcare, that is their decision. I would encourage them to help. However, they may want to set policy on this as eventually, even those philanthropic donors (as opposed to forced charity through government tax codes) may choose to spend their dollars on programs for folks that choose to abide by our Country's laws, rather than trample on them at will.
Oh, Bud. It is not about "people of the wrong color", Mr. Racebaitor.
It is about what the law currently states. Feel free to elect only Federal candidates this Fall and in 2012 that will vote to change Federal law to make it clear that life begins at conception. Then, not one single Governor or State Legislator across this fine country could deny prenatal care to any unborn child regardless of their parents' legal citizenship.
As I've said before, millions of people worldwide would be grateful to that designation.
Laws have unintended consequences. I guess the unintended consequence of life begins at first breath is that illegal immigrants to this Country don't get financial benefits until they produce a living, breathing citizen.
The unintended consequence of life begins at conception (or maybe knowledge of conception) is that abortion would definitely be illegal-since you can't take a life without due process (that is legally, anyway).
Bud, BTO, TedK, even Julie, which unintended would you prefer?
From now on I will assume that everyone using "Anonymous" as their name is one person. If they're too damned lazy to come up with a pen name so that we can tell the players apart, then they don't deserve answers to their questions.
How difficult can it be to click on the "Name/URL" button and type in a phony name? If they're too stupid to be able to do that, then I'm wasting no more time with them.
Holier than thou is your favorite defense.
Brian, I think that even with a fake name the anonymi are afraid their comments might be tracked back to them. Or like you say, it's just extreme laziness.
Ted,
If folks are afraid of what they write, maybe they shouldn't be writing what they do.
Make up a name, don't make up a name. Nobody cares but you, BTO. I would have thought you'd figure it out by now.
time for a new topic
You can freeze an embryo. You can't freeze a baby.
Hey Sweeper how about we talk about Sean Hannity ripping off his own charity? Or about the mine CEO who did not want his mine to have a union? But he did not mind people risking their lifes in the mind.
Tell ya what Bud, take it away in the comments section. It's all you, Bud-dy.
You can too freeze a baby. It's called murder and you go to jail for it. Anything else smarty pants?
4:23
All I'm saying is there are major differences between an embryo/fetus and an infant. If you can't acknowledge that, you're a hopeless case.
Yes, one has Hope and the other needs a Change.
Post a Comment