Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Have Republicans Finally Had Enough?

Have Republicans Finally Had Enough?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I was very interested to see the reaction of many Republicans to the over-the-top behavior of the extreme right in the wake of the assassination of abortion doctor George Tiller earlier this week. On The Next Right they quickly removed an offensive article, and comments had loudly condemned the author. On Little Green Footballs they posted a substantial article condemning commenters and posters on several other right-leaning blogs for their remarks about Tiller. These reactions give a clear impression that more and more mainstream Republicans are fed up with the fanaticism of the religious right, sickened by their behavior over the Tiller issue and just about ready to give them the boot.

Is it possible that this incident is the straw which finally broke the camel's back and has created an irreparable rift between rational conservatives and the extremists of the religious right? Even Republicans who are socially conservative seem to have had enough of the extremist rhetoric and support for violence coming from people like Fred Phelps and Randall Terry. They seem to have awakened to the fact that the fanaticism and terrorism they oppose in the Islamic world is not much different from the beliefs held by some they considered allies.

As Barry Goldwater pointed out many years ago, the one thing which Republicans ought to be extreme about is liberty, and on all other issues they ought to be rational and pragmatic. Maybe that lesson, which he spent decades trying to teach with his own actions, is finally sinking in.

The obsession with legislating morality and with opposition to abortion and gay rights is really not part of the core Republican agenda. These ideas, and the fanaticism they inspire, were brought into the party through its alliance in the post-Reagan era with religious conservatives. Historically, Republicans have had a laissez-faire attitude, not just on the economy, but also on moral issues. Republicans used to be dispassionate, leaving moral decisions in the hands of individuals and keeping government out of the picture. It seems like the pendulum might be swinging back in that direction.

As Abraham Lincoln said many years ago, our nation and by extension, the Republican Party, was "conceived in liberty" and that idea of individual liberty ought to be the basis of every policy and every decision which Republicans make. There is very little question that abortion is a sin, but shouldn't that sin be a matter of personal responsibility, to be resolved between the individual and his or her soul and church and god? Once you get government involved, a change in policy or administration could as easily mean forced abortion and sterilization, as you have in China, as it could mean protecting unborn fetuses. Putting such personal decisions in the hands of government can only work out badly when there is the potential to go to either extreme.

This change in attitude in the GOP seems real and very significant. It has been building for years, starting with uneasiness with many Bush administration policies and perhaps culminating with the Tiller incident. That doesn't mean that I expect a wholesale casting out of the religious right, but it does seem that the more reasonable elements of the religious wing of the party are finally realizing that they have to distance themselves from the extremists, perhaps putting broader priorities first, if they want to continue to play a role in the party and if they want that party to be successful. Extremism has been an anchor dragging the GOP down; if the party cannot cast itself free of that extremism and chart a better course for itself, it will never be successful.

Fanaticism and extremism breed violence and terror and are the enemies of liberty. If we are determined to fight them in the War on Terror how can we be less vigilant in opposing them at home? If we are to have a Republican party which makes liberty its first priority, then it must reject extremism and intolerance in every form. We can still embrace conservative and moral values, but we must accept that these are personal values, and that only evil and oppression can come from giving government the power to dictate morality and institutionalize the prejudices of religious fanatics.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    Very good piece. I hope the answer to your question is yes.

  • Lumpy

    the real question is whether repiblicans who are desperate for votes will still care about the ugliness the tiller killing exposed.

    my belief is that for every vote they get from the religious right they lose one moderate and one libertarian.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Very good article, Dave…and I agree wholeheartedly that the Republican party’s hoped-for rejection of extremism and violent rhetoric is the only hope they have to avoid following the path of the Whigs. Remember, I’ve said before I do NOT want a one-party country, even if that party is the Democrats.

    But there is one important and unanswered question – are you going to be able to avoid being canned by Rush Limbaugh?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with it? He’s not one of the extremists. He’s an entertainer. He’ll go along with whatever the predominant message is.

    Dave

  • Glenn Contrarian

    If the political world operated the way it’s supposed to, you’d be right.

    But it doesn’t work that way – at least not for the time being in the Republican Party – because the Republican who holds sway over the opinions of the greatest number of other Republicans…is Rush.

    You can call him an entertainer all you want, but in the real world (at least for the time being) you know very well that he has a greater influence over the Republican party than any other single human being.

    And that’s pretty sad.

  • Jeannie Danna

    What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with it?
    He has everything to do with it…Whether you want to admit it or not that SOB has become the face of both the Republicans and the Conservatives. He is bringing out the lowest of the low, here and in the real world!

  • Arch Conservative

    Speaking as a former Republican who’d rejoin the part if they started exhibiting financial sanity and stopped taking people like John McCain seriously, I think it’s hard for most Repubs/conservatives to reconcile their very passionate feelings for what George Tiller did during his with his murder.

    I nor any other Repub/conservative I know do not personally approve of what happened to Tiller. None of us wish to live in a society where people routinely take the law into their own hands. It’s just that we viewed him as such an evil man that it’s hard to muster up enough real concern over his murder to condemn it.

    I really hate that Nalle is tiptoeing around the idea that so many diehard leftist moonbats like to throw out there. That being the ridiculous notion that the more radicalized Christians in this nation are somehow on par with regard to the threat they pose to the world, with Islamic terrorists the world over.

    I’m not saying there is no reason to be concerned about our own Jesus fundies but anyone who does even a cursory gathering of evidence will see what an absurd idea this is.

    As far as accepting my conservative values as just personal. That’s fine to a point. Sooner or later someone’s personal values eventually get extrapolated to societal values and ultimately law and I while I can certainly sympathize with the very traumatic decision some women make in choosing abortion, I do not wish to live in a society where abortion is used as birth control and viewed as cavalierly as getting the oil changed in one’s car.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “I nor any other Repub/conservative I know do not personally approve of what happened to Tiller.”

    It seems you’re changing your tune, Archie. Only two days ago you were overjoyed. Is it because you came awfully close to being ostracized? I’d rather see the old Archie, sticking to his guns like the good old H&C.
    Are you getting softer now in you old age?

  • Jeannie Danna

    #7(I nor any other Repub/conservative I know do not personally approve of what happened to Tiller. None of us wish to live in a society where people routinely take the law into their own hands. It’s just that we viewed him as such an evil man that it’s hard to muster up enough real concern over his murder to condemn it.) Why did you view Dr. Tiller as such an evil man and who has given you the authority to decide what a woman, man and Doctor decide to do is evil? Yes, #7 there are also men involved in the decisions to terminate pregnancy.

  • Jeannie Danna

    I have one question here for Dave or anyone that can answer it.
    Who sponsor’s this “little football” web page? Is it a college paper?
    When I first clicked on it I thought it was Ann Coulter’s blog.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Arch, I hate to keep bringing this up but I’d really like to know what your thoughts are.

    You blame Dr. Tiller and call him “evil.” But what of those who decide, in the first place with full legal support in the United States of America, to have an abortion? Why is your ire not directed at those who have chosen to “recruit” the services of Dr. Tiller? Dr. Tiller was, like soldiers in Iraq, following the orders of his occupation. He was a gynecologist. He was not a “baby killer,” he was a doctor. Abortion is one of the parts of his occupation, in this case “late-term abortion” was a key component, but he didn’t coerce women to use his “services.” They chose to do so on their own accord.

    Going by your logic, wouldn’t the woman who requested the abortion be the real murderer? Aren’t they to blame?

    You say yourself that the women are in a “traumatic position,” but you have no sympathy for Dr. Tiller or his staff or, judging by your cruel commentary over the past days, his family. Why are those who choose abortion in the first place exempt from your rage? Why are they making a “traumatic decision,” in your opinion, as opposed to being murderous hags?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I find it very odd indeed that it’s only men who are the most vocal opponents of abortion.

    Is it perchance that they still entertain the illusion they they can keep women barefoot and pregnant?

  • Jeannie Danna

    read what the post is saying about Rush Wishful thinking on their part…:)

  • Jordan Richardson

    I think you’re on to something there, Roger. I think aggressive male roles play into sexual/reproductive politics a whole lot, both with the abortion discussion and with homosexual marriage.

    It does tend to fall into stereotypical patterns, sadly, and there are many men who have no problem assuming those roles. Two women making out can be “hot,” but two guys getting married is an abomination. I find abortion interesting in that regard too and I think Arch is inadvertently (maybe) playing the same hand here. He’s attacking the male doctor performing the abortions but reserves rather soft rhetoric (“traumatic choices”) for the females. I think he finds it easier to criticize the Evil Male, which is why I keep pursuing the question. I think it comes from a desire to, as you say, maintain this illusion of female roles.

    On another level, I begin to notice males attacking powerful and prominent females with tremendous force. This isn’t confined to the Right Wing, of course, but if one looks at recent processes in political history, it’s very easy to find a lot of it going on.

    Hillary Clinton, for instance, was bashed and criticized with sexist rhetoric like “holding on to the apron strings” and the like. Judge Sotomayor (sp?) became “fat” (someone around here called her fat recently, but my memory escapes me as to who it was….) and “emotional.” And so forth.

    Sarah Palin, conversely, was attractive (at least according to Mitt) but never really viewed as more than some sort of “attack dog.” Woof.

    A lot of what happens in politics, especially in these sort of social debates, often winds up somewhere in the middle of gender politics.

  • Jeannie Danna

    The other day there was a nice thread going on between the women about inner beauty and one of these clowns actually went over to say they should all get boob jobs! That was the message wasn’t it?

  • Jeannie Danna

    I like your mind Jordan!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re perfectly right, Jordan, especially as regards vicious attacks on Hillary.

    Remember the comments about her wearing the pants and suit to cover her “chicken legs and ankles”?

    Tammy Wynette comes to mind, “Stand By Your Man.” She went against the grain, sort of, when she said she wasn’t going to stay home and bake cookies, and she braved the Clinton scandal rather well.

    Think of Barbara Bush, on the other hand. A perfect image for the average American male.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Jordan is first-class, Jeannie. Too bad not enough of them.

  • Jeannie Danna

    You know I have to make an observation here because, well, I wouldn’t be me if I kept my mouth shut.:)
    Why do most Conservative/Republican women seem to wear only dresses and skirts on TV? Is this a wish to please their men or is it a subtle code?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    To tell you the truth, I kind of liked Laura (Bush). I think she was a cut above.
    In fact, I even fantasized about her (in my first novel).

  • Jeannie Danna

    I think I have been attacked here because I also show a picture of myself. Shallow thinkers have a way of judging people based on their looks! I don’t care because Rick loves me and that’s all that really matters in my life…:)

  • Jeannie Danna

    Well Roger I have to take a break… It was nice talking with you and reading what Jordan wrote. Say hello to Cindy for me..:) and go read my article! “blatant self-promotion!”

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You look just fine, Jeannie. I’d love to meet you in person.

  • Clavos

    Why do most Conservative/Republican women seem to wear only dresses and skirts on TV?

    Umm. Maybe because dresses and skirts are “conservative” clothing?

    But maybe not. You hardly ever see a conservative male wearing a dress or skirt on TV.

  • Jordan Richardson

    I notice they try to “sex up” the appearance of a good portion of the women on FOX. Lots of heavily-make-up’d blondes, lots of short skirts with side shots, etc. It’s pretty hot stuff with the sound off, actually.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Are you going to be around for a while, Clav? I’m just about to send you my next article.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t know about you, Jordan, but I think that Ann Coulter’s looks is way overrated. Rush salivates over her, and so do the other talk-show hosts. She leaves me rather cold – a raving bitch to say the least (though a vampire would be a kinder word).

    I guess it’s all in the eye of the beholder.

  • Jordan Richardson

    I try not to look directly at Ann Coulter, much like Indiana Jones and Marion Ravenwood didn’t look straight at the Ark.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    If that ain’t a definition of a monster, than I don’t know what is.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    14

    I think Jordan makes some good points. Also though, I can think of possible alternatives.

    One might be empathetic toward the woman with for her position of being vulnerable. Especially if one speaks of the woman as having to make a “traumatic choice”. The doctor is not making a traumatic choice. The doctor has chosen action while not in a vulnerable state.

    (Caveat: I’m not defending/criticizing any position here.)

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    28
    LOL

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    First let me say I’m not in any way condoning the actions of his murderer.

    I’ve been reading these comments and it seems that a few of you want to defend the actions of this doctor by saying he was basically, only following the orders of his professions.

    My question to those of you who are defending him is, if these are the orders of his profession why are there only about three doctors in the country that will perform these late term abortions? Are they refusing to “follow orders” or are they living by the tenant of their profession that says, “first, do no harm”?

    I have no say in whether a woman terminates her pregnancy, unless I was involved in creating the situation in the first place.

    I could care less how many unwanted babies are terminated on this planet. Hell, I’ve met a lot of people that make me wish their parents believed in abortion!

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    16

    I like Jordan’s mind too! I was going to offer him a penny for his thoughts…or .38 cents for his entire brain. :-)

  • Clavos

    Rog,

    I’m around most of the day; either here or at the hospital (which has wi-fi).

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    30

    I garbled it, but hopefully still readable.

  • Jordan Richardson

    One might be empathetic toward the woman with for her position of being vulnerable. Especially if one speaks of the woman as having to make a “traumatic choice”.

    One might be, sure. But given the context of Arch’s inferences I’m not sure I’d buy that he would be empathetic. Abortion is, in his mind, murder. How would the person making the choice of/for abortion be let off the hook with such ease?

    The doctor is not making a traumatic choice.

    Not sure I agree with this.

    if these are the orders of his profession why are there only about three doctors in the country that will perform these late term abortions?

    Because it’s a fucking awful job and nobody really wants to do it. Most people refuse to perform the procedure because it’s horrific and disturbing.

    Are they refusing to “follow orders” or are they living by the tenant of their profession that says, “first, do no harm”?

    Do no harm to whom…?

    Dr. Tiller was “following orders” in that late-term abortions are a perfectly legal part of his job. Some call him brave for choosing to offer the legal procedure while other doctors choose not to.

  • Arch Conservative

    Jeannie, I gave myself the authority to formulate my own opinion that what Tiller did was evil just like you gave yourself the authority to judge me and suggest that I have no right to my opinion of Tiller.

    Jordan…I do not fault the women who choose ot have abortions because I know that for most of them it is a traumatic experience and they often fell guilty afterward. They don’t do it for the money and are often lied to by those who offer the service.

    PLanned Parenthoodon the other hand doesn’t give a dman. They mak emillions off of killing babies every year.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Arch,

    Please, really. How would that last remark sound if you’d said, ‘The Red Cross on the other hand doesn’t give a damn. They make millions off of human suffering every year’?

  • Jordan Richardson

    I do not fault the women who choose ot have abortions because I know that for most of them it is a traumatic experience and they often fell guilty afterward. They don’t do it for the money and are often lied to by those who offer the service.

    But they’ve chosen to, in your terms, murder their children, Arch. How do you simply let them off the hook for murder because it was a “hard choice” or a traumatic experience?

    Do you think abortion doctors provide the procedure for the money? How much money does Planned Parenthood make from “killing babies?” Why are the women seeking abortions not culpable for lining the pockets of these “killers?”

    I’m sorry, but given your very own premise I’m finding it very hard to wrap my head around your logic.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Thanks, Clav. It’s on the way.

  • zingzing

    archie: “My question to those of you who are defending him is, if these are the orders of his profession why are there only about three doctors in the country that will perform these late term abortions?”

    um, because doing so can get you killed?

  • Clavos

    um, because doing so can get you killed?

    That may be the motivation for some few of them.

    The majority probably don’t perform late-term abortions because they became doctors to save lives, not end them.

  • zingzing

    of course, clavos. if i were a doctor, i certainly wouldn’t want to be an abortionist. (although, as i understand it, being a doctor isn’t always a prerequisite for that sort of thing.) of course, your last statement also neglects to mention the women that (some, maybe some few,) abortions save.

  • Doug Hunter

    “Most people refuse to perform the procedure because it’s horrific and disturbing.”

    That’s true and makes me wonder why it’s legal. (with the exception of directly saving the life of the mother) There is plenty of time for a woman to choose prior to the point where a partial birth is necessary.

    Zing,

    Do you agree with delivering a viable fetus/baby most of the way out then brutally sucking it’s brain out as it squirms away and grasps at the doctors hand? That’s sick and is understandable why reasonable people wouldn’t perform it (or support it for that matter)

  • zingzing

    “Do you agree with delivering a viable fetus/baby most of the way out then brutally sucking it’s brain out as it squirms away and grasps at the doctors hand?”

    yes, yes i do. i think it’s awesome. i’m so glad that such things exist…

    of course not, doug. that’s like asking if someone really likes slitting dogs’ throats and wallowing about in the blood and eating their own poop at the same time. come on.

    that said, you do have a vivid imagination.

  • Doug Hunter

    The AMA says it is never medically necessary. Virtually everyone, when faced with the reality of what is done, is disturbed by it. The majority of doctors can’t even bring themselves to do this.

    If you don’t support it and I don’t support it and the AMA doesn’t support it and no one supports it why in the hell do democrats keep fighting to keep this procedure, which is used electively the vast majority of the time, legal? Why can’t it be gotten rid of?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Doug:

    Do you agree with delivering a viable fetus/baby most of the way out then brutally sucking it’s brain out as it squirms away and grasps at the doctors hand?

    OK, a little less emotional language would be good here, I think.

    One nurse who had attended at three such abortions testified that she had seen one of the fetuses – which had been diagnosed with Down syndrome – kick its legs and clutch with its fingers. Usually the fetus is euthanized or anesthetized before being delivered. A Salon journalist who sat in on some of these procedures reported seeing no sign of reaction from any of the fetuses as they were extracted.

    The AMA says it is never medically necessary.

    Appeal to authority, and I’m not sure it’s even an accurate one. AFAIK, the ones who stated that it was never medically necessary were the writers and sponsors of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Do you have a citation, Doug?

    BTW, the term ‘partial birth abortion’ is not a medically recognized one and is not used anywhere except in the US. The reason it’s used here is pretty obvious.

    If you don’t support it and I don’t support it and the AMA doesn’t support it and no one supports it why in the hell do democrats keep fighting to keep this procedure, which is used electively the vast majority of the time, legal? Why can’t it be gotten rid of?

    Because the alternative procedure at that stage is to dismember the fetus inside the uterus, which is even more horrific, not to mention more dangerous, painful and invasive for the woman. At least this way the parents, if they so wish, have something recognizably human to mourn.

  • Clavos

    Because the alternative procedure at that stage is to dismember the fetus inside the uterus, which is even more horrific, not to mention more dangerous, painful and invasive for the woman.

    I think what Doug meant is, Why perform any abortion at all at that stage?

    And it’s not an unreasonable question. One reason which justifies it is, of course, if the mother’s health is endangered, but there is widespread disagreement regarding how many abortions are performed for that reason.

    Just the sheer number of annual abortions seems to speak to the contention that the vast majority of them are for birth control; it’s highly unlikely that tens of thousands of pregnancies annually jeopardize the mother’s health. Also, far fewer abortions are performed on women of education and/or means compared to those sought by poor and/or poorly educated women.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I think what Doug meant is, Why perform any abortion at all at that stage?

    And it’s not an unreasonable question.

    No, it’s not, but I don’t think either you, I or Doug are really equipped to answer it. We’re none of us ever going to be in that situation.

  • Doug Hunter

    “Usually the fetus is euthanized or anesthetized before being delivered.”

    What is the purpose of this in the context that abortion is not considered killing or murder? Do they anesthetize the gallbladder before removing it?

    In your gut you know this procedure is wrong and so do most people associated with it. Yes, others approve and accept it but so did the Germans in regards to concentration camps. In fact, the Nazis would certainly approve of the use of late term abortions to eliminate fetuses with genetic issues. They believed in the same thing only doing it just after birth rather than prior to. Of course, when they conceived it, it was ‘evil’. How times have changed.

    The point is, by the time you need to anesthetize the fetus or worry about it grasping at surgical instruments you shouldn’t be doing abortions. I’m not religious and don’t empathize with a blastocyst or a little alien petri dish thing, but by the time it is a developed, viable fetus it’s to late to choose death IMO.

  • Clavos

    I’m probably never going to be a suicide bomber, either, but that doesn’t mean I can’t discuss suicide bombing and bombers.

    All of society (yes, including men) has a stake in the abortion debate. The argument that men are “not equipped” is specious, IMO. Men certainly shouldn’t have the right to dictate abortion policy without input from women, but we do have a stake and should have a voice.

    I noticed a while back on another thread that any number of women participated enthusiastically in a discussion of the pros and cons of circumcision, and nobody (including me) objected. And why should anyone have objected? Women have a stake in the issue, both as mothers, as wives and as citizens.

  • Clavos

    Sorry. In #51 “wives” should have been “sexual partners.”

  • Cannonshop

    To our Religiously Right posters: regardless of what you think of Tiller, Abortion, or the specific procedure, the fact is, he was Murdered in a Church. If you’re religious, it’s really, really clear:

    “Thou shalt not Murder” Doesn’t leave any room. None.

    If you Aren’t religious, then the Tiller murder’s still wrong. We are not a nation governed solely by the passions of men (in spite of what the Left has been pushing) Most states have mechanisms for changing laws, and Kansas is no different. At no point, either in Law, or Religion, is there a hunting license that makes the Tiller kill “Okay”.

    Mind you now, in Kansas what Tiller was doing, so long as it WAS driven solely by the health of the mother, is legal. (Disgusting and alarming, and morally repugnant, but legal.)

    Nowhere is going down and shooting a man in front of, behind, inside, or next to a church because you don’t like his LEGAL business compliant with the Word of God, or the Word of the Law.

    And there’s also the “Stupid” factor here-by creating a martyr, you set back the fight to end the sucking of baby-brains or dismemberment of babies in the womb and marginalize opposition to the practice not only among your opponents, but among those that might otherwise be persuaded to be your allies as well.

    Blowing shit up and shooting people makes heroes for the Left-look at Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, but it doesn’t make heroes for the Right-because we don’t roll that way.

  • Clavos

    Good comment, Cannon.

    Second.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    36 – Jordan,

    The doctor is not making a traumatic choice. (my example)

    Not sure I agree with this. (you)

    I’m sure I don’t agree with it myself. Agreement is outside my point.

    What does accurately assessing or understanding someone’s perspective have to do with agreeing with it?

  • Jeannie Danna

    ???(Planned Parenthood on the other hand doesn’t give a damn.)
    #37 This is the most uninformed comment I have ever read and I corrected the spelling.
    both sides
    Just click over to the right “watch the full program online”.

  • zingzing

    “Blowing shit up and shooting people makes heroes for the Left-look at Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, but it doesn’t make heroes for the Right-because we don’t roll that way.”

    hrm. there’s some truth to this, when it’s individuals doing so inside the country. however… you guys like blow shit up and shoot people outside of the country, in mass quantity–that’s how you role.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    OK City was inside the country and it didn’t make Timmy a hero! So that blows that bullshit theory out of the water…try again zing.

    Janet Reno helped burn down a church full of people and you lefties still love her!

  • zingzing

    andy, that’s not at all what i was saying.

    i was saying that blowing shit up and shooting people OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTRY–i.e. in war–makes for right wing heroes.

    pay attention and wipe that drool off your face.

  • zingzing

    hrm, let me say “in war, or “military actions,” or “spreading democracy” instead.

  • zingzing

    “a church full of people”

    yeah… that’s what it was alright. (and i don’t really care for reno that much, but i was a little young at the time to understand what was going on there.)

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Clav,

    I was attempting to answer the question of why an abortion would be necessary at that stage, not arguing that you’re not entitled to an opinion.

    From where you and I are standing, it may be hard to fathom why a woman – or a couple – would wait that long. We could never really appreciate it until we’re in that position. The best analogy I can come up with – and I’m aware that it isn’t that good – is the person who waits until the last minute to decide who to vote for at a presidential election (admittedly a situation where the stakes aren’t as high (or perhaps they’re higher (who knows))). And say, on the morning of the election, the person decides they’re not going to vote at all. You and I, who’ve already made up our minds months ago, may regard this indecisive person with disbelief. That doesn’t mean we’re entitled to shove them into the polling station and stand behind them while they push the button.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    47

    Dr.D,

    I read the stuff about both the nurse and about the journalist the other night when I was researching the fetal pain issue. The accounts conflict, wouldn’t you say?

    There is a debate about the point at which the fetus feels pain. In my mind it is unresolved, from what I have read so far. The problem is some doctors feel that anesthetizing/euthanizing the fetus is a greater risk factor for the patient. In light of their belief that the fetus cannot feel pain, they choose not to anesthetize. The arguments went before Congress. There was objection because then Congress would be determining what it is felt only a doctor, with medical knowledge, should determine based on the facts of the particular circumstance.

    The fact that doctors have done and continue to minimize or rationalize pain felt by even neonates as either non-existent or as not really being pain but reflex, does not inspire my faith in their ability to appropriately judge whether or not the fetus should be anesthetized even during a surgical procedure, let alone whether a fetus should always or mostly be euthanized before an abortion.

    All this makes me skeptical regarding this statement:

    Usually the fetus is euthanized or anesthetized before being delivered.

    Any reference to confirm this or is it just an assertion?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    What is the purpose of this in the context that abortion is not considered killing or murder?

    It wasn’t in that context, it was in the context of the emotional images of wriggling fetuses you were conjuring up.

    Agreed, abortion is a horrible, horrible thing, but then so was dumping a bombload of angry plutonium on Nagasaki. I don’t agree with it myself and wouldn’t want it if it were my child. That doesn’t mean I claim a right to ban it. I’m pragmatic enough to understand that it might sometimes be the only option, and not just for medical reasons.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Cindy,

    The argument as to whether the fetus should be anesthetized is moot. The doctor will most certainly anesthetize the mother: therefore the fetus will be anesthetized also, as the drug passes from the mother’s bloodstream into the placenta.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    65

    Dr.D,

    It’s not a moot point.

    I understand that the anesthesia crosses the placenta. However, there may not be enough anesthesia to accommodate the fetal pain.

    Testimony of Jean Wright MD MBA

    “It is my opinion that the human fetus clearly possesses the ability to experience pain from 20 weeks of gestation, and aspects of pain perception are present from as early as 6 – 7 weeks
    gestation and continue to mature and organize until the 20th week. In addition, the pain perceived by a fetus is probably more intense than that perceived by term newborns or older children. Anesthetic agents that are routinely administered to the mother during any procedure would be insufficient to ensure that the fetus does not feel pain, and higher doses of anesthetic drugs, (enough to produce fetal anesthesia), would seriously compromise the health of the mother. Thus, it is my opinion that the fetus would be subjected to intense pain, occurring prior to fetal demise or during the surgical procedure, from many if not all in utero (abortion and other surgical) procedures.”

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Also, Dr.D, the mother is not always anesthetized. Sometimes nothing more than extra strength Tylenol or the equivalent is administered or even available. Where abortions have been performed at a facility (up until a certain gestational age) that don’t meet requirements for the administration of anesthesia, then it is not even available.

    Mistakes have also been made in gestational age.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    54

    Blowing shit up and shooting people makes heroes for the Left-look at Bill Ayers and the Weathermen, but it doesn’t make heroes for the Right-because we don’t roll that way.

    Then what is the US doing in Iraq blowing people up, shooting people and creating ‘heroes’?

    In fact, I hardly know people who say they are on the right (many on the left also) who don’t automatically confer ‘hero’ status or respect to soldiers merely because the engaged in a war. Some even claim that engaging in any war one’s government starts is noble.

    I think the taking of a good argument back to a battle of left vs right is getting boring. Not a good selling point, imo, that because you are on the right or the left you are therefore more noble. It’s not useful and it convinces no one.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Re my #68,

    I could have just said see zing at 57, 59, 60

    Except I’d say, those on the left also participate and justify and take part in war. But, I see the point.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    While I’m all for abortion in general, I see zero reason why near-term abortions couldn’t just as easily be replaced with mandatory adoption. Deliver the baby, whisk it away, have the mother sign away ALL rights forever, and let the adoption agency pay for the whole procedure. Legally mandate that in all cases where the fetus/baby is near term. The result for the mother is functionally the same and it’s better for the baby and the adoption agency and parents looking for a baby to adopt.

    But when the baby is NOT viable without artificial support out of the womb, abortion should be perfectly acceptable.

    Dave

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    51

    Clav’s analogy with circumcision: I think this is a false analogy. The analogy equates denying men a say on abortion with denying women a say on circumcision. This is a matter of adults and children, in my view–not male and female. Pick male circumcision at age 40 then I’ll agree with the analogy. :-)

    When speaking about abortion, this is something that happens to an adult and takes place in her body, something certainly no male has a right to decide about (but also no other female, in my view). If men would like a choice on the issue, I submit that they have one–refrain from impregnating women, by whatever means necessary; that is your choice. On the other hand, opinion is not a dictate, I can appreciate having male perspectives and opinions. I reject, though, the part where any man determines or dictates what I or any other woman does with our bodies.

    The relevant part applies to Dave’s #70 also.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Cindy,

    Points taken.

    Fernando,

    Isnt it time for left wing bloggers, such as this poster, to stop with the Democratic talking points ie “Rush is the leader of the republicans”

    But Rush Limbaugh is the de facto leader of the Republicans. There’s precious little direction coming from anywhere else in the party at the moment.

    “All prolife people support murdering abortion doctors”

    Would you care to show us anywhere on this site, or indeed in the known universe, where anyone has said this?

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Rereading Dave’s post I think his point is moot. Abortions, even late term ones, aren’t performed after the baby is typically viable without artificial support.

    To find out whether or not a 24 week old fetus could survive, one would have to deliver it and see if it lived without intervening support. Now, this would be a problem of a whole ‘nother realm, as it is now a separate entity and would be subject to receiving medical intervention.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    76

    Fernando,

    I agree, those are Dave’s words.

    ???

    (lol)

  • Clavos

    Clav’s analogy with circumcision: I think this is a false analogy.

    Only in degree. The infant boy doesn’t die, but has no more say in whether or not the procedure is carried out than the fetus does.

    If men would like a choice on the issue, I submit that they have one–refrain from impregnating women, by whatever means necessary; that is your choice.

    Since what’s at issue is a woman’s body, I see it as more incumbent upon the woman, if she doesn’t want a child, to refrain from getting impregnated, “by whatever means necessary; that is [her] choice.”

    I reject, though, the part where any man determines or dictates what I or any other woman does with our bodies.

    Agreed. I wasn’t arguing for ‘dictating.”

  • Clavos

    But Rush Limbaugh is the de facto leader of the Republicans

    That opinion is held by non-Republicans, not Republicans themselves.

  • Fawnstock

    Great article, hopefully ‘yes’. Even if the radicals comprise some non-negligible percentage of the party, the percentage to be gained with them no longer around is much much greater.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “Janet Reno helped burn down a church full of people and you lefties still love her!”

    Talk about bullshit theories. But if you want to support a man who had sex with children, Andy, have at it.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Clav,

    The infant boy is not inside another human being. That makes it non-analogous.

    It is only analogous if you remove from the equation the body of said woman.

    Since what’s at issue is a woman’s body, I see it as…

    Agreed. I wasn’t arguing for ‘dictating.’

    Great, then I think we agree. I support your right to have your own view–any view–as long as you cannot make law (dictates) about my body.

    Men should never be in a position to decide what women should do with their bodies.

    Consider this: Say we develop a culture with a balance of pro-life men. (which we had at one time) Women are now once more under male domination. Men could, by law, force women to bear children. It’s not acceptable.

    That is one thing that makes it different from your circumcision analogy.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    I’ll leave it up to the ladies to decide since I am in the insane, irrational camp with Dave.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Fernando and Clavos –

    “Isn’t it time…to stop with the Democratic talking points ie “Rush is the leader of the republicans””

    I’ll stop saying that when either of you can show me that someone other than Rush has more influence, has more pull, more power over the Republican electorate.

    If you can’t show me someone more influential (in the REAL world, not the ‘way-it-oughta-be world), then the Democratic talking point stands.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    That opinion is held by non-Republicans, not Republicans themselves.

    Yes, that’s right.

  • Doug Hunter

    Cindy, re #73

    Your advice towards men is pretty much the same rigid counsel pro-lifers would give women… don’t get pregnant in the first place. Your version of it is just as uncaring. Your view on abortion is also like theirs in that it completely sidesteps the core of the issue, the rights of the developing human versus the rights of the mother.

    I think it is proper to compromise. By the time the fetus is squirming, grasping, and flailing in it’s fear/pain response as it is being killed it is time to recognize it’s not simply an extension of the mother’s body.

    I am a bit interested why you were researching the pain response of late term fetuses as it doesn’t seem to be in line with your beliefs.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Doug, #86:

    “The core of the issue, the rights of the developing human versus the rights of the mother.

    . . . By the time the fetus is squirming, grasping, and flailing in it’s fear/pain response as it is being killed it is time to recognize it’s not simply an extension of the mother’s body.”

    Very good points, Doug. It is the core issue, but there’s still a question mark as to when exactly the fetus is a developing human and has rights.”

    So you do subscribe to a certain non-relativistic view of morality, after all.

    Good for you!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dave,

    Excellent, well reasoned article. Without hesitation, I’d say by far the best I’ve heard from you yet.

    You realize, of course, that you’re open now to attacks from ultra-conservative Right – even among many BC commenters. And those attacks can be quite vicious, as you can readily see. (So perhaps you’re getting a foretaste of what some of us, from the left, experience day in and day out.)

    Congratulations again.

    Roger

  • Maurice

    Yes Dave, politics and religion should be separated. Unfortunately all laws are moral or if you don’t like the religious word moral they are ethical. It is unethical to deprive someone of their life so we have laws against murder. It is unethical to steal so we have laws against theft. It is ethical that we all share in common burdens so we have a tax code.

    I think it would be great if everyone was an atheist like me but unfortunately we are surrounded by god fearing people. 80% of the population go to church every week. It is inevitable that politicians will be influenced by these soul suckers just like they are influenced by union (brotherhood similar to religion!) lobbyists.

    The republicans might want to distance themselves from religion but religion will always be trying to assert themselves politically.

  • Doug Hunter

    “So you do subscribe to a certain non-relativistic view of morality, after all.”

    Not so much. I certainly have my own set but I’m not foolish enough to believe they’re more enlightened than the next guy (or gal). Perhaps that is why I am willing to compromise rather than take an extreme either way.

    I grapple occasionally with the very basics of morality… why exactly is murder a crime for instance? Is it the expectation of great pain, or the creation of loss for remaining humans? Is it the fear of the unknown or loss of control or the taking away of one’s future?

    There’s conflicting data and actions out there. We somehow seem to attribute more value to the killing of children as if taking away of a future is key or perhaps it is the sense of grief for the parents. Killing yourself has been anything from celebrated to a crime to reason for confinement in a mental institution. Myself, I’m afraid of pain or illness that will preceed the event, not death itself (although I hate to imagine the suffering of my family). We seem to factor in contribution to society as it’s always been easier to allow killing of the disabled, or terminally ill, or criminals who actively undermine society. Something as simple, black and white to most, as murder leaves me scratching my head a bit.

    Once I get that nailed down then maybe I can apply it to abortion. Until then, it seems reasonable to allow the 97+% of abortions that don’t involve wriggling fetuses, dismemberment, or the need to euthanize or anesthitize (hint: if you need to do this you already realize you’re dealing with another person, you don’t anesthitize a gallbladder) and to not allow the killing of a viable fetus for elective reasons. The woman should not be required to care for the baby or have anything to do with it, she simply should not be able to have it killed at that point. By then, it is necessary to dialate anyway to get the dead baby out, the only difference is dialating a couple extra centimeters and taking the thing out live. That’s a small price to pay to eliminate a barbaric procedure.

  • Doug Hunter

    That should be dilate, not dialate.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    90 – Doug,

    There may be a few problems with those solutions. First, it’s not known exactly when the fetus begins feeling pain. (See the quote “Testimony of Jean Wright MD MBA” in my post #66.) A fetus under 22 weeks has about zero survival rate. 28 wks= approx.10-20% survival, 32 wks=approx. 50% survival. When the word viable is used, it doesn’t actually mean the situation is adequate for life. Even preemies are at high risk for all kinds of breathing problems and blindness, for example. Therefore planned delivery of fetuses any less than attempted full-term is not likely to be an option.

    I am a bit interested why you were researching the pain response of late term fetuses as it doesn’t seem to be in line with your beliefs.

    The most interesting thing about this question, to me, is its expectation/implication about what people might generally do or not do in regard to their beliefs. I had, in the past, understood that it was impossible for the fetus to feel pain until a very late gestational age. Then Irene mentioned the experience of the nurse. It left me with unsettled questions.

    I would hope understanding the issue might lead to education, disclosure to pregnant women, and options for fetal anesthesia. I think women should have all available information to make their decision.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    86 – Doug,

    There are certain ideas we are all rigid about. I’m opposed to anyone imposing their will on anyone else. There is the added problem here of the imbalance of power of one sex over the other that would result. One sex’s ability to force birth on the other was a key issue in that sex’s domination of the other.

    That said, generally speaking, I would likely argue on behalf of the male’s involvement in the decision and for his right to have his opinions heard. I personally, would never exclude an interested partner (even a casual one) from such a decision. I’d want to reach a consensus with a partner.

    So, perhaps I gave the wrong impression in my adamant proclamation. But, back to barefoot and pregnant is not where I want to see women headed.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle


    You realize, of course, that you’re open now to attacks from ultra-conservative Right – even among many BC commenters. And those attacks can be quite vicious, as you can readily see. (So perhaps you’re getting a foretaste of what some of us, from the left, experience day in and day out.)

    Roger, I’m used to it and generally not terribly sensitive to it. The more outraged they get and the more they rant and rail, the less seriously I take them. Pretty much the same way I feel about the equally irrational fanatics of the left.

    Maurice. Please note that I did not advocating purging religion or those of faith from the GOP, just the extremists who advocate, practice or condone violence. That’s a tiny fraction. Most of those who are deeply religious and politically active are perfectly reasonable people.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    “extreme right in the wake of the assassination of abortion”

    This is a classic left wing smear. Lump conservatives with deranged muderers and insinuate that they are one and the same.

    Just for the record, Fernando, I’m generally not considered “left wing” — far from it. Ask anyone here. But I’m a rational conservative and I can see that extremism and murderous craziness is not good for the Republican party.

    Isnt it time for left wing bloggers, such as this poster, to stop with the Democratic talking points ie “Rush is the leader of the republicans” “All prolife people support murdering abortion doctors”

    Where did I say anything like either of those things anywhere in this article. Did you read the article?

    “While I’m all for abortion in general” There is something sick in America when a person thinks this type of comment is sane and rational.

    Why? Abortion has been the standard for birth control for thousands of years. The ancient greeks allowed children to be born and then exposed them to be eaten by wild animals. We’ve become too sensitive to the supposed value of life. The truth is that all life is not inherently equal. Sorry, just an unpleasant fact.

    Even if the radicals comprise some non-negligible percentage of the party, the percentage to be gained with them no longer around is much much greater.

    Dead on, Fawn. Someone earlier pointed this out as well. Catering to extremists gains a few votes, but loses the GOP far more independents and moderates and ‘reagan democrats’ and even libertarians who are what the party really needs to win.

    Rereading Dave’s post I think his point is moot. Abortions, even late term ones, aren’t performed after the baby is typically viable without artificial support.

    Actually, Cindy, Dr. Tiller performed late-term abortions where in some cases the fetuses could survive without artificial life support. That’s what made him particularly controversial.

    Dave

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    To comment 88 – Do you really think you need to warn Dave about what may be coming his way? You obviously haven’t been here that long if you think he doesn’t know what it feels like to get crucified at BC! Pretty much anyone that’s written anything here knows what it feels like!

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    And to comment 81 – Did Koresh get his day in court? Or are you just going by what you heard on NBC…or was it MSNBC?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #90,

    It wasn’t a warning. And the communication was person-to-person. But go ahead and jump in – the more the merrier. I suppose next time I’ll just email him to express my approval.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Directed at #96.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Actually, Fernando, you hit the nail on the head with your acute observation in #97.

    Dave is a shill.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    Well excuse the hell out of me Roger! I didn’t realize we were having one on one conversations in the comment threads! I’ll try to make it a point to ignore your comments from now on…my most insincere apologies!

    I’d usually say no more coffee for you…but since it’s early, maybe you actually need a little caffeine!

    WTF happened to this place anyway…at least back in the day, with the exception of MD, the liberals around here were a little more friendly.

    You’re all turning into a bunch of miserable mother fuckers! It’s the reason I stayed away so long. Yeah yeah, I know, some of you wish I’d stayed away longer!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Andy,

    Don’t take it that way, Andy. I agree I was rubbing it in somewhat, but my remark to Dave was congratulatory in nature. I have been here for almost six months now and haven’t seen Dave being attacked so from the Right simply because he’s being his most reasonable self. So perhaps I overreacted with my comment to you in that you chose what it surely looked like “putting me in my place” rather than focus on what I believe was the positive intent of my message.

    So let’s forget it, if you can, and start any, OK? Are you willing to accept my apologies? I certainly wouldn’t want to count among the reasons if you decide not to participate. Fair enough?

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    Roger that Roger!

    My SINCERE apologies this time!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    No need, Andy. We all get overheated at times in midst of the battle. Many a times I’ve said thing on the spur of a moment only to regret having said them.

    And you’re right, BTW. The site has become much more hostile-prone than it used to. I just ran into one of the articles by Marlowe from a year ago, and everyone, whatever their persuasion, was much more civil in content and tone. But that was a year ago, and perhaps things have kind of come to a peak since, or the people are simply year older and therefore more intolerant and impatient. Sign of the times.

    And I definitely don’t wish you’d go away.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    I’ll take that last line as a compliment!

    I think maybe it ebbs and flows, so to speak. There have been times that it’s been civil here and then, WHAM, it gets real ugly, then it turns back to a nice place.

    Kinda like this country we live in!

    And since I haven’t been around for a while I guess maybe I should warn some of you newer folks….I’m a smart ass…always have been. Honestly, I like being one!

    And for those wondering where I have been, I guess I can tell you now. I was so deeply hurt, yeah right, by a couple of BCer’s who said the only reason I did 20 in the navy was because I couldn’t hack it on the outside that I started my own business. Actually, after being laid off for the fourth time in a little over 12 years I decided it was time to get away from govt contracting.

    What kind of business you ask? I am now the proud owner of “i AM Promotions”, a promotional products and advertizing specialties company. “Your image or idea on just about anything!”

    My target clientele are smaller businesses that want to look like the big guys. I have access to small quantities at prices as if you were buying the larger quantities.

    So, if you’re looking to put your name out there for the world to see on some very cool items (I have access to over 900,000 different ones) then drop me a line. Check out the new website, i AM Promotions

    I know this ain’t the place, but I didn’t think Dave would mind a little capitalism in action!

  • Jordan Richardson

    Good stuff, Andy, although I have to tell you that the woman that pops up on the bottom right of the screen at your website scared the living shit out of me!

    Seriously, well done. It’s nice to see that you’re doing well.

  • Jeannie Danna

    (You realize, of course, that you’re open now to attacks from ultra-conservative Right – even among many BC commenters. And those attacks can be quite vicious, as you can readily see. (So perhaps you’re getting a foretaste of what some of us, from the left, experience day in and day out.))
    I for one am getting very tired of worrying about what I write when I constantly read the acid that covers these Political comment threads. Just who do people think you are? The Left and the Liberal and the Independent and the Democrat have just as much right to EXPOUND here as you! I would like to know which Editor actually possesses an open mind so that I can submit my Political opinions to them for editing.
    A post note here. I also comment on the Washington Post and have yet to see any of these big names there.

  • M a rk

    Jeannie, while I do enjoy reading your sentimentalist liberal pap (wink), I do wish that you’d see fit to stop the incessant whining about the brutal comments board. Ass kissing comity is not everyone’s highest goal.

  • http://blogcritics.org Lisa McKay

    Jeannie, as the exec editor here, I absolutely must respond to comment #108.

    While it’s true that our Politics editors have their own personal biases, which they are free to express in the comments threads, those biases in no way affect the way in which they perform their editorial duties. Dave and Clavos have never allowed their personal views to get in the way of their editorial work here — they are both fine writers and editors, and anyone looking to improve their own writing would benefit from working with either of them.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    What Lisa said!

  • http://blogcritics.org Lisa McKay

    Hey Andy, that’s probably the first time you and I agreed on anything 😉

    Nice to see you back in BC-town.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    You may be right Lisa! I’ll try not to make a habit of it!

    But you knew that already!

    hehe

  • Jeannie Danna

    Lisa with all due respect I would like for you to read what was barked at Roger and Me last night on Jordan’s thread. I want this crap out in the open so it will be dealt with. I couldn’t help but notice how nice Maurice was treated one second later when he had a “like mind” to communicate with!”
    #23 and #28

  • http://blogcritics.org Lisa McKay

    Jeannie, I saw those comments. They took place in the comments space, where I believe Clavos was taking Roger to task for attempting to squelch discussion. They are part of the rough-and-tumble of online discourse and have nothing to do with the way in which editorial matters are handled here.

    Please do recognize that there’s a huge difference between the behind-the-scenes editorial process and the conversations that take place in public.

  • Jeannie Danna

    M a rk I don’t want your ass kissing I would like your respect. Calling me a whining liberal with sentimental pap is neither…:)

  • m a rk

    Leannie, you have my respect re your articles…you will need to toughen up a bit to get it here in the nether world.

  • m a rk

    ‘Jeannie’…the ‘L’ must have bean some kind of a psychological twitch.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    You are completely right in that you are a rational conservative. I don’t recall seeing you post anything truly extremist.

    But the really sad thing is that so many on the far right (as on the far left) do not realize that their views are extremist and their words inflammatory.

    Problem is, the biggest names in radio continue to feed their extremism every day.

  • Jeannie Danna

    Lisa, Where are the more “liberal” articles? I find it hard to believe with all the writers listed here that there are not more? It’s my perception.
    I was very pleased after Dave edited my article. I wrote that in the thread and also e-mailed him to personally thank him.

  • http://blogcritics.org Lisa McKay

    Jeannie, if writers like you give up because they can’t take the heat, there go our liberal articles!

    As you know, we don’t assign topics. We can only publish what gets submitted. The site itself is politically neutral — our politics editors could just as easily lean leftward, it’s all the same to us as long as the editing is done impartially — but for now, it is what it is. If you’d like to see more liberal writing, then write stuff!

  • Jeannie Danna

    Oh, I’m tough enough for this “nether world” Don’t let my…:) fool ya M a rK
    The problem is I like all of you!
    I said once that I should call my next article “I’m an ass and so are you” I’ll start writing it right now…wink

  • Jeannie Danna

    Lisa you read my mind! How did you do that?

  • ma rk

    Well, I’m certain that I’m an ass.

  • Jeannie Danna

    Ha HA HA. Ma rK will be featured in my article if I can figure out how to spell that name! and sorry folks especially Clavos…:(

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Hiya Jeannie,

    There are other liberal participants who aren’t around. The liberals take a vacation in the summer. They’ll be back in the fall. :-) (If not sooner…or later.)

    But for some reason mostly they don’t write.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    I keep hearing and reading how what happened to this doctor is the fault of primarily two people, the talking head Bill O’Reilly and the mouth Rush Limbaugh.

    Here’s my question to those that would blame these guys. What would you have them do when they come across something that they honestly believe is morally wrong? Should they keep quiet about it as if it’s not happeneing? Or is it, as they seem to believe, their moral duty to bring these things out into the open?

    I never heard O’reilly call for this doctors execution. I don’t watch him much and I’ve never heard his radio show. I never heard Rush, at all, I don’t listen to him, ever, except when the idiots on MSNBC are repeating him while he bounces in the background…what the hell is that anyway?

    These guys let their listeners and watchers know, most of whom are like minded, what they find abhorent in the world! It’s what they get paid to do and quite nicely I would imagine.

    Let’s be real here, when a pedophile gets his ass kicked because neighbors found out he was there from a website, do we blame the website? Personally, I don’t. I know that to a lot of you that’s a bad comparison, because the doctor wasn’t a criminal…at least not to you.

    Most of the comments I’ve read from both sides speak of what a horrible thing this near term abortion thing is, how you have to basically knock the baby out before you kill it and yet, somehow, it’s not a crime to perform this “operation”.

    Maybe it’s not murder, but if it’s not, it surely must be torture and the same folks that are so up in arms over the torture of 3 jihadists are also the ones that are so for abortion on demand.

    But really, I don’t think this is a conservative issue. I don’t think it’s a conservative issue because it’s not conservatives that are killing off the next generation of their voting block! I would be willing to place a pretty high wager on which way most folks that participate in abortion from either side, receiving or performing, vote.

    I know, that’s so crass, making stereotypes like that…there’s a reason that stereotypes become stereotypes you know!

  • Jeannie Danna

    Andy,
    I want people to spend this much of their energy to figure out how to help the baby after it is born into this world! You know “the Human race?” but oh no, that’s welfare or some sort of socialist conspiracy to take all of the money away from the free capitalists! I know that this sounds inflammatory and maybe it is?

    thoughts from me…:)

  • Jeannie Danna

    Well I really am going now to write something! I don’t have a clue what it is yet…but I hope someone edits it with a really open mind and heart…:)

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    How about this Jeannie. If you can’t afford to have a kid then don’t! And if you get pregnant and decide you don’t want the kid then don’t wait until it’s to fucking late and you have to go to someone like Dr. Tiller!

    It doesn’t take a village to raise a child, it takes a pair of fucking adults!

    Welfare sucks, it is socialist.

    The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” -Thomas Jefferson

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    Hi Andy,

    In another part of my life I am doing a lot of online marketing for SMEs and, having popped over to your site, I had three brief suggestions; 1. Autoplay video like you have in the bottom corner is a pain in the bum potentially annoying thing to customers who might well already be listening to other audio/visual stuff. 2. Paragraphs would improve legibility of your front page and 3. your SEO could be tweaked a fair bit too.

    Apart from that, well done and good luck to you!

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    Thanks CR! I was wondering a bit about the spokes model. I go in through an admin portal so I don’t have to listen to her. I would imagine she could get a bit annoying after a while.

    Paragraphs…like I got time for paragraphs! I’ll work onthat too!

    And forgive my ignorance…yeah yeah, you’ve been doing so for years now, but anyway, what’s SEO?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Lisa, #115,

    I’m sorry but that’s entirely incorrect. If you read the subject remark “about the incorrigables” in context, you should readily see that I was responding, somewhat ironically, to Jeannie’s earlier comment. There was no thought in my mind, none whatever, about trying to squelch the discussion. And as you can readily surmise from judging the great bulk of my comments on BC, that’s rarely if ever my intent. As a matter of fact, I happen to believe that I often go to extraordinary lengths to try to reach a common ground – and that’s not only with the Right but also the Left; far greater lengths, I’d say than most. And I’m certain that Clavos is also aware of the fact. But if he chose to interpret my remark so, so be it. Any careful reading of what preceded it would definitely argue against that interpretation.

  • http://blogcritics.org Lisa McKay

    I apologize for misreading your remark, Roger. And my intention was certainly not to interpret Clavos’ reading of your comment, so I’ll not respond to that.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Thanks, Lisa. Understand I wasn’t criticizing you. Just wanted to set it straight.

  • Clavos

    If you read the subject remark “about the incorrigables” in context, you should readily see that I was responding, somewhat ironically, to Jeannie’s earlier comment.

    Ironic or not, Roger, the remark followed a pattern you’ve established some time ago, of attempting to function as Moderator of the Comment threads; a function which belongs only to Chris and Doc, and which, even for them, is limited in its scope.

    It’s an irritant, and that was the straw that broke this camel’s back.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, that’s your impression, Clavos, and you’re entitled to one. The remark was addressed directly to Jeannie – and it was on the same wavelength as hers – and yes, it was facetious. If you want to see it as my desire to moderate anything, fine.
    No grudge on my part.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    Andy, SEO, or Search Engine Optimization to give its full title, at the most basic level simply means making sure your site structure, meta data and content is presented in the right way so as to make you appear higher in the Search Engine Results Pages (SERPs).

    There is a whole lot more to it of course so, if you want to know more (no obligation!), email me direct rather than clogging up this comments stream.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Cindy:

    …But for some reason mostly they don’t write.

    Actually, I think that if you took away Dave, who is by far the most prolific writer in the Politics section, the balance of left- and right-leaning articles would be fairly even.

    The reason I, personally, don’t write more is that it usually takes a particularly interesting and/or off-the-wall topic to motivate me enough to write non-fiction. I also have an annoying habit of seeing both sides of an argument, which doesn’t manifest as much when I comment but tends to take over when I author and am actually thinking closely about every word.

    I may try writing something about the UK political situation this weekend but will probably get bored and give up halfway through.

  • Maurice

    Dave #94 – Agreed.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    It doesn’t take a village to raise a child, it takes a pair of fucking adults!

    The structure of most societies through history – with the exception of our modern, nuclear family-based one – proves you wrong.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Yes, I’d say there is a great burden nowadays on the two parents – provided there are two – to raise a child, especially if making a living is the first priority So much that the young ones absorb is not from home but their peers, the media, influences at school, etc.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    I may try writing something about the UK political situation this weekend but will probably get bored and give up halfway through.

    Ah, boredom is my arch enemy too. My biggest problem with writing is thinking in a rush of ideas that all seem important and by the time I put one down I’ve lost the others…or they all just disappear when I touch a keyboard or pen. Or, did you ever think without words, then have trouble actually putting words to the idea which is in some other form?…brain language or something they call it.

    Anyway, I never looked at the balance of left or right., that’s actually interesting and unexpected that it’s even except for Dave skewing the bell curve. I was just thinking of the list of non-rightists who are also non-writers.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    comment 141 – Doc, that was then, this is now!

    And no matter, the point was and still is that most of the time it’s kids having kids, or kids having abortions. Adults, for the most part, tend to be just a little more responsible. Not a lot, just a little more. So, continue as you like to do and take lines from comments out of context…I’m cool with it as long as you are and apparently you are…

  • zingzing

    97 – Fernando Escobar: “You continue your backhanded attack on Republicans by connecting them to kooks and murderers”

    they are valid connections, fernando. if that is your real name…

    “One would think you are really a liberal blogger pretenting to be a conservative to make Republicans look bad!”

    if one wants to start thinking that way, i’d bet you are a liberal posing as a conservative, trying to make republicans look bad.

    i do hope you stick around, because you seem to be really good at what you do.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Out of context?

    I was taking issue with your response to Jeannie’s comment about welfare, is all.

    For goodness’ sake, Andy, people have been helping raise their brother’s/daughter’s/cousin’s/neighbor’s kids for as long as the human race has existed.

    Sometimes I get the impression that if you haven’t got where you are absolutely and exclusively through your own efforts, without any help from anybody ever, then in the eyes of conservatives you’re worthless.

    You’re letting ideology get in the way. There’s nothing inherently bad about welfare just because it’s provided by the government.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    Doc – there’s nothing wrong with a helping hand now and then, but we have people that have lived their entire lives on welfare and that’s just wrong. And the line that you picked out came right after, if you can’t afford to have kids then don’t. I guess I should’ve added, my village doesn’t want to raise your idiot! Does that help?

    We have women in this country that do nothing but have kids just so the welfare check will get bigger.

    You know, my mother and father help my brother raise his boys. I see nothing wrong with that. I on the other hand was never close enough to family while my kids were growing up, so I raised my daughters with my wife and we did it without anyones help. My kids aren’t too awful fucked up! Hehe, they’re actually very lovely young ladies, thank you very much!

    But my brother has an excuse. He’s a widower.

    And maybe I am letting ideology get in the way, whatever that means, but I see nothing inherently good about welfare either… especially because it’s provided by the govt.

    You see, you still see me as a conservative and I tell you I’m not. I don’t care if gays want to marry, I don’t care if every liberal on the planet aborts every fetus that ever comes their way. The thing that bothers me is when the govt decides it’s gonna provide everything for everyone and they decide to do it by picking my pocket.

    You wanna pick my pocket, legalize pot, I’ll pay the tax!

  • Doug Hunter

    “There’s nothing inherently bad about welfare just because it’s provided by the government.”

    The problem with government welfare is it’s impersonal an unwieldy. For example, a person working manual labor framing houses at slightly above poverty level wage with spouse and child may be an extremely productive member of society, struggle mightily, and gets nothing from the government. On the other hand a drug addict who pops out a kid and who refuses to marry her boyfriend so she doesn’t lose alimony can claim to be ‘bipolar’ collect an assortment of benefits and live on the government’s dime while contributing absolutely nothing to society.

    I believe our society has advanced enough that we can provide everyone the basic necessities (including healthcare) in life, we just need to be sure we do this in a way that doesn’t encourage negative behavior. We should ensure that welfare programs always phase out very gradually and never punish people for attempts to improve their situation.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    there’s nothing wrong with a helping hand now and then, but we have people that have lived their entire lives on welfare and that’s just wrong.

    So what’s the problem? The welfare system, or those people?

    We have women in this country that do nothing but have kids just so the welfare check will get bigger.

    Some might try. But if you have another child after being on welfare for more than 10 months, you ain’t gonna get another penny from the government.

    You wanna pick my pocket, legalize pot, I’ll pay the tax!

    So taxes are OK only if you personally are going to derive a direct benefit?

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Re 97

    I think this is a hoot. Dave is getting labeled a leftist and a secret liberal. His positions are being distorted out of all proportion and standard ‘liberal’ fare is inserted even when it isn’t there.

    This speaks volumes about what people often do. Fernando seems like a caricature of that.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “Did Koresh get his day in court?”

    Nope, he refused it, a not uncommon position for child molestors. He even made requests on what it would take for him to surrender and he reneged a few times.

    I am going in part by testimony of a number of former BD members, including Kiri Jewell, and unless you can find some ulterior motive for her to state she was molested, I’ll take her word over some crackpot who thought he was God, according to his own letters.

    I have read a number of reports on the matter. Are you just going by what you heard on right wing radio, who hated anything that could be traced back to Clinton?

    btw, MSNBC didn’t go on the air until three years after this incident, so you shouldn’t jump at the first cliche that comes to mind.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    If you don’t want to be called a whining liberal, stopping the whining would be a great place to start.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    I guess I’d have to say that the folks that suck the teat dry would be the problem, not the teat itself…kinda fond of them anyway…the teats I mean!!!

    I’m not a big fan of taxes either, but I pay them. The example I was trying to make is that there is a monstrous caash crop out there, a lot of it grown in your state, you are still in northern CA aren’t you, that’s illegal for no good reason. I don’t know the amount of revenue collected on alcohol, I’m sure someone around here could come up with a number, but could you imagine, if CA can generate 20million in tax dollars from something that’s illegal under federal law, how much money could the govt make if they legalized it and taxed it?

    And just trust me when I tell you that I don’t need it to be legal and taxed to benefit from it right F’ING now! But it sure would be more convenient if I could go to the ABC store and buy it like I can a bottle of Jack!

    But you live in the Sacramento area, so you can already go to the local dispensary and buy it if you want to…can’t you?

    I live in the south and these backwards MFers don’t do shit until the northern aggressors make ’em do it! So it won’t be legal here until some old tobacco farmer/congressman realizes that there’s a lot of money to be made in hemp!

    Taxes are never okay, they are however a necessary evil of a civilized society.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    We have women in this country that do nothing but have kids just so the welfare check will get bigger. (Andy)

    Some might try. But if you have another child after being on welfare for more than 10 months, you ain’t gonna get another penny from the government. (Dr.D)

    Andy, you may wish to pay attention to what Dr.D says right there. Your ideology is skewing reality for you. That argument (it’s validity aside) should have died when welfare was ‘reformed’. It’s based on a historical circumstance that is no longer even applicable.

    And maybe I am letting ideology get in the way, whatever that means… (Andy)

    It’s a sort of important thing to know. It’s hard to be credible by saying, “Yeah, I know I am imagining things based on my preconceptions about how things are, but…”

    Here is an true story:

    In the 60s a male and female were conversing with an older man at newspaper’s offices when they got into a disagreement. As the young man and woman left, the older man shouted insults at them. He said to the young man, “your hair is too long” and to the young woman, “and your skirt is too short”.

    The young woman was wearing pants.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    I bet the pants actually bothered him more!

    You know, I don’t know where these people that are living off the govt are getting their money, but they’re getting it and both of you, Doc and Cindy, know they’re getting it. I don’t give a damn what you call it, they’re getting it. They were getting it before and they’re not on the streets now and nothing else has changed, so they’re still getting it from somewhere!

    Call it whatever, it’s taking from those who have by force and giving it to those, who in a lot of cases, are to fucking lazy to go get it themselves!

    I’m not imagining it, as much as you’d like me to believe I am. Either they’re (the govt) doing something, like paying child support until they can find or find out who daddy is, or whatever, the govt is still footing the bill and if the govt is doing it, then that means I’m doing it and I don’t like it!

    My kids aren’t ready to have kids so guess what? They don’t have kids! Wow, that takes rocket science to figure out!

    And you dress IS too short! And so’s your hair Doc! That’s right, too short!

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    95 – Dave,

    “Rereading Dave’s post I think his point is moot. Abortions, even late term ones, aren’t performed after the baby is typically viable without artificial support.” (me)

    Actually, Cindy, Dr. Tiller performed late-term abortions where in some cases the fetuses could survive without artificial life support. That’s what made him particularly controversial. (you)

    I’ll repost the rest of the argument I made to Doug in 92, so you don’t have to page back.

    “A fetus under 22 weeks has about zero survival rate. 28 wks=approx.10-20% survival, 32 wks=approx. 50% survival. When the word viable is used, it doesn’t actually mean the situation is adequate for life. Even preemies are at high risk for all kinds of breathing problems and blindness, for example. Therefore planned delivery of fetuses any less than attempted full-term is not likely to be an option.”

    So yes, at 27-28 weeks, all normal pregnancies, as opposed to most, result in a ‘viable’ fetus, potentially able to survive with or without support. Therefore, some fetuses might survive without support (and depending on the particular pregnancy, this could be true down to 22-23 weeks).

    Considering the information above, I will be surprised, though, if you find your strategy ‘viable’.

  • Doug Hunter

    “I don’t know where these people that are living off the govt are getting their money”

    In my experience it’s usually a combination of programs that need to be combined in order to eek out an existance. Usually there is a base individual getting a check from either Social Security or disability, an anchor if you will. Then you add in their children, or friends, or partners, some food stamps, alimony, child support, CHIP’s, WIC, Section 8, government housing, medicare, medicaid, Food pantries, private charities, and yes even the occasional temprorary job or actual welfare payment or unemployment check or workers comp or cash from work under the table. It helps if they can somehow get ahold of a trailer or house that is paid free and clear or qualify for government housing or they will be moving quite frenquently. That is the situation of the chronic poor I’m familiar with.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    95

    We’ve become too sensitive to the supposed value of life. –Dave Nalle

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Doug has it about right. You have to be a bit creative about income when you’re dirt poor, that’s for sure. I’ve got a few clients that have been telling us they have no income for years. They’re not living on fresh air, that’s for sure. The thing with people like that is that whatever the various sources of income are that they do have, no single one of them lasts and so we can’t really account for it.

    And Andy,

    I’m about three hours from Sacramento in a rural, conservative-leaning part of California. No marijuana dispensaries here, at least not legal ones. Every so often there’ll be some story trumpeted on the local news about the sheriff’s department finding and burning a crop, and I’ll think to myself, ‘Gee, I feel safer already’.

    And not to worry, my hair gets longer every day. But I suppose I probably shouldn’t tell you I’m getting it cut next week. Whoops.

  • zingzing

    cindy: “I think this is a hoot. Dave is getting labeled a leftist and a secret liberal. His positions are being distorted out of all proportion and standard ‘liberal’ fare is inserted even when it isn’t there.”

    ahh, the irony. hope dave sees it.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    I think I need to go out and have a martini after reading that comment. I’m speechless Dave.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Knowing Dave as we do, it’s highly amusing to watch Fernando’s obsessive pigeonholing.

    To folks like Fernando, you’re either a conservative, with the fixed raft of views that Fernando thinks go along with being a conservative, or you’re a liberal. No gray areas.

  • Doug Hunter

    “You have to be a bit creative about income when you’re dirt poor, that’s for sure.”

    Yes, you still need somebody with a steady check though or it is extremely unstable. I left one out, the tax code also refunds some people more than there entire tax liability if they have low income and a number of dependents. That extra few hundreds or thousand from the treasury probably helps out a bit.

    I’ve been interested for awhile in working up a table of income plus benefits (including all the ones I mentioned above)for different family arrangements. I know there are alot of large stretches where it actually hurts your finances to earn more or to attempt to change your living arrangements, etc. Our system should factor these things in and try it’s best to insure that effort and positive changes are always rewarded. If anyone knows if some analysis like this has already be done I’d be interested to see it.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Actually, I think that if you took away Dave, who is by far the most prolific writer in the Politics section, the balance of left- and right-leaning articles would be fairly even.

    And as demonstrated here, or at least in the mind of Fernando, I apparently skew the balance to the left. Err, right? Whatever.

    I may try writing something about the UK political situation this weekend but will probably get bored and give up halfway through.

    I believe that this attitude is what put the utterly worthelss Gordon Brown in office.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    #You are completely right in that you are a rational conservative. I don’t recall seeing you post anything truly extremist.

    You may have missed a couple. But when I’m extreme, it’s not in the way that most on the right are expected to be extreme.

    But the really sad thing is that so many on the far right (as on the far left) do not realize that their views are extremist and their words inflammatory.

    A fundamental truth, Glenn. If they realized they were nuts then they would be taking the first step on the road to sanity.

    Problem is, the biggest names in radio continue to feed their extremism every day.

    Everyone in the media just wants to reassure their audience to keep them listening or viewing. It’s just as true of the news networks as it is of talk radio. It’s all about giving the people what they want, so IMO the blame should go on the people, not the media shills.

    Lisa, Where are the more “liberal” articles? I find it hard to believe with all the writers listed here that there are not more? It’s my perception.

    Jeannie, don’t take this the wrong way, but more “liberal” writers seem to be hypersensitive to criticism than is the case with those on the right. The two groups seem to react to criticism very differently. Right wingers tend to ignore criticism and bull ahead. Left writers seem more invested in what they right and get offended when everyone doesn’t agree. As a result they don’t do well in an environment where there are open comments from different perspectives.

    I’ve observed that left-leaning blogs are more likely to have closed comments sections or to require registration and approval before commenting. They seem to favor the “echo chamber” mentality. Coming from that environment to this one can be hard on someone with a fragile ego. We’ve had some notable examples of left-leaning writers who have come to BC and then left in a huff because commenters questioned or disagreed with their articles.

    You may think we should be trying to coddle and cultivate these writers, but IMO you shouldn’t be writing in a public forum if you aren’t prepared to take some criticism and defend your ideas.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dave,

    “We’ve become too sensitive to the supposed value of life. The truth is that all life is not inherently equal.”

    I, too, have a problem with this. In what context are you saying such an atrocity. It’s totally unlike you.

    One could argue, in fact, that it is to our credit that valuing human life is more or less generally accepted nowadays and hopefully, more and more a part of mass consciousness.

    You don’t really want us to revisit our ancestors, the Romans, for example, who routinely killed their female offspring because it was a drain on the family resources.

    Just wonder.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Roger I put the comment number there for the context.

    (yeah right there on the shelf dear, yeah that shelf, you know right in front of you, you can’t miss it, it’s right in front of the oatmeal…what oatmeal?… okay, well, never mind then…wait a sec, I’ll be right there…)

  • Clavos

    (yeah right there on the shelf dear, yeah that shelf, you know right in front of you, you can’t miss it, it’s right in front of the oatmeal…what oatmeal?… okay, well, never mind then…wait a sec, I’ll be right there…)

    I’ve heard similar utterances around my house for years!!

    VERY funny, Cindy!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    yeah, I know, #95.
    And I did think you were communicating to your hubby but forgot he wasn’t online.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    And as demonstrated here, or at least in the mind of Fernando, I apparently skew the balance to the left. Err, right? Whatever.

    Now you know what a crisis of identity I feel when people think I’m Australian.

  • Bliffle

    IMO there are a lot of people who would like to belong to the republican party, but they are chased away by the crazies, who seem to have a “rule or ruin” attitude.

  • Clavos

    Now you know what a crisis of identity I feel when people think I’m Australian.

    Do all you Kiwis suffer from that?

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Clav,

    I love the puzzled look of disbelief part when we retrieve it matter-of-factly from right under your nose. (every………..single…………..time)

  • zingzing

    cindy, if you women would just fuckin’ get up and get the damn thing yourself, we wouldn’t have to go through this shit all the time. seriously, there’s only such female laziness we men can handle. ever get the idea that we’re just messing with your mind?

    lalala. do-do-do.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Roger,

    I would be unlikely to forget if my hubby ever got online.

    The noise the people who would have to be dragging him there would make and all the protests would give it away.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Just kidding, Cindy.

  • Clavos

    LOL, zing!

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I, too, have a problem with this. In what context are you saying such an atrocity. It’s totally unlike you.

    Talk about overreacting. Atrocity? Really? I didn’t suggest setting up deathcamps or anything like that.

    I just acknowledge the reality that some lives have a higher instrinsic value than others. When given the choice between saving the 90 year old lady and the 12 year old girl, which do you save?

    Governments and the free market also recognize this reality. Life is valued less highly in nations where healthcare is severely rationed, or where there is no healthcare at all, or where they choose to live in chaos and violence because of religion or greed or ideology. Just the way of the world.

    One could argue, in fact, that it is to our credit that valuing human life is more or less generally accepted nowadays and hopefully, more and more a part of mass consciousness.

    I didn’t say we don’t value human life, just that in practice we clearly we value it unequally. In the abstract we certainly try to do our best, but in reality we often accept pragmatism over idealism.

    You don’t really want us to revisit our ancestors, the Romans, for example, who routinely killed their female offspring because it was a drain on the family resources.

    Roger, the Chinese follow that same practice today. That lowers the overall value of Chinese life relative to other lives in the world.

    Not atrocious – just the way it is.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Cindy,

    You may be interested in this. I was visiting graveyards and just ran across on old prof of mine from University of Oregon. Just died (2009).

    First, a big write-up in the Wiki: Frank B. Ebersole.

    And then, there is a short, five page paper,
    What Killed Ordinary Language Philosophy?”.

    Read it at will. It’ll give you some idea where I’m coming from.

    Roger

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    zing,

    lol, that’s good

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Roger,

    Interesting. I read about ordinary language philosophy a few months ago to see where you might be coming from. That sort of thing on the link doesn’t look like the same understanding I thought I had of what you did in your article.

    I’m trying to figure out why still, you seem to me to have clearly said something in your article and when I said it back to you in my words–you don’t really seem to recognize what I mean.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m going have to reread the thread then.

  • Zedd

    Roger,

    I know this comment does not fit this thread however I seem to remember an article that you wrote about language and its relevance, a while back. I found it interesting particularly when I read the passage in the Bible which says “in the beginning was the word”. You came to mind.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, check out my article in the Politics section, front page. It’s somewhat controversial as I’m testing the waters. The title, “Random Thoughts on Torture …”

  • Zedd

    Budding in….

    A few years back on BC there was a dialouge on Madeleine Albright’s looks. I was stunned.

    Side note: Considering that Washington DC certainly would not come to mind as the place to go to if I was in a race to check off as many hunk citings as possible. Not sure why Albrights looks needed to be discussed. I don’t know, Senior Citizen Civil Servants and sex appeal somehow don’t mix. Regardless of gender. Just a thought.

  • Zedd

    Dave,

    You look like a serial killer on the picture OR a nutty gun enthusiast/survivalist who lives on a ranch just outside of town who likes to shoot dogs for target practice…. Oh,oooops.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    Hey there Zedd :-)

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle


    You look like a serial killer on the picture OR a nutty gun enthusiast/survivalist who lives on a ranch just outside of town who likes to shoot dogs for target practice…. Oh,oooops.

    What’s really scary is that most other photos of me look far worse.

    Dave

  • Arch Conservative

    “The Left and the Liberal and the Independent and the Democrat have just as much right to EXPOUND here as you! ”

    That’s a laugh. It’s generally the left leaning posters on this site that piss and moan and try to get the editors to remove comments they don’t like, not those who lean to the right. In a sense BC is just a microcosm of society as large as we often see intolerant leftists attempting to silence those who do not share their opinions whether it be the fairness doctrine, a bunch of uppity college kids in some socialist shithead club behaving like screaming two year old during guest speak engagements our very on King Barry telling the American public that they’re “listening to the wrong talk shows and watching the wrong TV shows.”

    As for being an extremist. There is nothing I have said about Tiller that millions of other Americans do not also feel but just don’t vocalize. That being that they are not happy he was murdered, they are in fact happy about what his murder represents and that is that he will no longer be able to kill babies by the thousand.

    Any conscienable person that truly understands what partial birth abortion actually is and who also understands how very rare that it’s necessary to save the mom’s life and how this cannot be reconciled with the sheer number of PBAs that Tiller performed must necessarily be disturbed by his life’s work.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Arch, are partial birth abortions common?

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    PBA= IDX or D&X

    IDX, along with dilation and evacuation (D&E), early induction of labor, and rare procedures such as saline abortion, are only used in the late stages of pregnancy. Late-term abortions at 21 weeks or later account for 1.4% of all abortions in the USA.[10] Intact D&X procedures are used in approximately 15% of those late-term abortion cases. This is the equivalent of between 2,500 and 3,000 per year, using data from the Alan Guttmacher Institute for the year 2000. They are typically performed between the twentieth and twenty-fourth week of pregnancy.[11]”

    Reasons women gave for late-term abortions:

    71% Woman didn’t recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation

    48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion

    33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents

    24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion

    8% Woman waited for her relationship to change

    8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion

    6% Something changed after woman became pregnant

    6% Woman didn’t know timing is important

    5% Woman didn’t know she could get an abortion

    2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy

    11% Other

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    People who oppose this type of abortion might want to consider if not teaching teens about birth control, pregnancy, abortion is a great idea.

    I am wondering how many opponents of abortion are also opposed to education?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Keep ’em dumb, barefoot and pregnant is the general idea.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    185 – Zedd,

    I’m not sure what the point is ever in discussing people’s looks or for that matter people’s age in relation to their looks. Seems, minimally, shallow and absurd, often mean and always dimwitted.

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    I think the general idea is that sex is some sort of sin and therefore it’s not appropriate to educate teens about sex. I think it’s an abstinence mentality.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Or the vestige of the Victorian era. Some still live in the nineteenth century.

  • Arch Conservative

    People who oppose this type of abortion might want to consider if not teaching teens about birth control, pregnancy, abortion is a great idea.

    I agree with you wholeheartedly Cindy. It’s absurd to object to abortion and then in the same breath deny young people birth control. It is a natural healthyhuman desire and practice.

    However Planned Parenthood, like any good sales people are playing the numbers game. Under the guise of education they’re actually seeking to promote promiscuity among young people because that even if they hand out a million condoms it’s encouraging kids to have sex and some of those condoms won’t get used and some will fail relating in pregnancies of which some will be terminated which means more money for Planned Parenthood.

    Not only is Satan’s Little Helpers the biggest abortion provider in the nation but abortion is by far thier biggest source of revenue. So you can spin it any way you want it but the facts don’t lie….PP is in the abortion business first and formeost

  • http://twitter.com/tolstoyscat Cindy

    I don’t know much about planned parenthood Arch. I haven’t been there since I was a teen. When I did go, it was to get free gynecological services. Perhaps they offered these services like a premium, hoping that when they could get me pregnant, I’d give them my abortion business.

  • zingzing

    archie: “Under the guise of education they’re actually seeking to promote promiscuity among young people because that even if they hand out a million condoms it’s encouraging kids to have sex and some of those condoms won’t get used and some will fail relating in pregnancies of which some will be terminated which means more money for Planned Parenthood.”

    wow. that’s some theory. they hand out condoms… and educate men and women about the dangers of sex… so that people can have sex, but not get diseased or pregnant… hoping that they WILL get pregnant… and have abortions… thereby making money for pp…

    i mean, that does sound like a viable, if kind of stupid business model. don’t you think you’d be banking on some flimsy ground right there, and you’re kind of muddying your message with the whole education thing.

    i would think that it would be easier to tell kids not to have sex, that abstinence is the only way, then set up an organization like planned parenthood to provide abortions for the stupid teens acting like teens.

    …hmm…

    i think that planned parenthood has a silent partner in the catholic church, who planned the whole thing as a money-making venture. good job, catholic church!

    that’s my theory.

  • Arch Conservative

    “When I did go, it was to get free gynecological services.”

    How’d that work out for ya Cindy?

  • zingzing

    worked out better than when you went in there for gynecological services. oh, wait, you’ve never been to planned parenthood? so you don’t know what you’re talking about? i see. natch.

  • Irene Wagner

    If Planned Parenthood is being discussed here, someone ought to bring up Bernard Nathanson, co-founder of NARAL (National Association of Repeal of Abortion Laws.)

    He claims that in the early days of the pro-choice movement, false statistics were used to encourage a then-resistant population to accept legalized abortion.

    I’ve tried to find a “neutral” link for this, but they all seem to be associated with the anti-abortion sites. The pro-abortion sites don’t want to touch his story, except for an attempt to discredit the video “Silent Scream” which he produced. It claims to be a video of a fetus’ physical reaction to the abortion process. Bernard Nathanson, in return, claims that this video was vetted for authenticity by Ian McDonald, the doctor who pioneered use of the sonogram in medicine, including obstetrics.

    I think the testimony of former abortionist Beverly McMillan, M.D. is worth reading because she reminds people that some doctors really DO go into the practice to help women. It’s after they get there that they discover some of the shady practices.

    Kathy Sparks is another who stopped providing abortions, but anyone who really wants to hear about the things that go on in the industry needs to read the stories she has to tell about her witnessing of (and involvement in) in gross abuses of vulnerable women.

    I’d provide links, but again, its hard to find a site that would be to everyone’s liking. Y’all know how to google. And I’m out of here. It’s getting a little bit too personal.

  • Arch Conservatie

    So by your logic if someone’s never been to Iraq in the past 5 years they can’t be informed or have an opinion about what’s going there right Zing?

    Better let the editors know that no comments on the war will be accepted unless the poster can prove they’ve been to Iraq.

    Satan’s Little Helpers are the largest abortion providers in the nations. That’s a fact.

    They make millions in not just revenue but profit from abortion every year. Another fact.

    They have been caught on tape lieing about age/consent laws to people pretending to be underage girls seeking abortions. Another Fact

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Irene,

    I’d hope to keep the distinction between the concept and the practice as clear as possible.

  • Irene Wagner

    Roger Nowosielski:
    Because people are so enamored of the concept, people who practice awry are given a pass.

  • Irene Wagner

    I matched your pithiness, Roger Nowosielski, 16 words to 16 words, and with precious little time before church to react, too.
    I’m done.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Touche, Irene! But then again, I wouldn’t expect anything less from you.

    To be resumed.

  • Bliffle

    The article asks: “Have Republicans Finally Had Enough?” One assumes that the author means: “enough screwing around chasing the votes of nitwits by emphasizing unimportant but divisive issues”.

    For all the talk that one hears about republicans being anti-gay rights and anti-abortion there is precious little discussion of the basic principles of the republican party, little things like Fiscal responsibility, Freedom, Opportunity….

    I suppose it’s too late. They’ve forgotten.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dave,

    Reference – you long comment (numbers have been cancelled on a/c of Fernando).

    You’re referring to triage then (sort of playing God). I, Robot comes to mind.

    To follow this line of thinking, you should have no objections to assisted suicide.

    Am I wrong?

    Roger

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    To follow this line of thinking, you should have no objections to assisted suicide.

    Am I wrong?

    So long as consent is clearly given, no.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Gee, Dave.

    You had better switch the parties, then, because this is a “liberal” position. The other option left open to you – you have a great deal of party reforming to do (which you’ve been hinting at of late).

    Not unlike David Horowitz, I’d say, who is a through-and-through liberal except for his position on Israel. Yet, he can’t seem to leave because there’s nowhere for him to go.

    Roger