Well, Brushfires family, I have been derelict in my duties, once again. But, I have the semblance of a reason: I am so fucking angry with the GOP, the media and the Dems right now, I'm not sure I can finish this post without it deteriorating into an incoherent mess. (I know, how would that be any different...)
How many times do we have to witness the Repugs use the old 'bait and switch' play before we get wise to it? "What did Nancy Pelosi know, and when did she know it?" I call BULLSHIT!!! Anything Speaker Pelosi knew was AFTER John Yoo and Keith Bybee wrote legal briefs justifying torture, AFTER Dick Cheney told the CIA to take over the 'interrogations', AFTER men and women who are sworn to defend, protect, and uphold the Constitution tortured!!! That is the issue - people gave orders, others followed them. (Oh, and by the way, they briefed a few members of the House and Senate about what they may/might/possibly do/be doing to prisoners.)
Come on, folks! Please, please, please tell me we're not going to fall for this again. This is mis-direction and deflection of the highest caliber, but we've all seen it before, we know it's happening...will we allow the GOP to turn this into a referendum on Speaker Pelosi - and thereby an instrument to blunt the effectiveness of PrezBO - or are we going to keep the discussion where it belongs: Who ordered it, who did it - and what are WE going to do about it?
(Not too bad, a minimum of swearing...at least compared to what I wanted to type.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
206 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 206 of 206Invoking Godwin's Law can itself become an abuse, dsg. Besides, I went past the comparison and on to the physical evidence. Have you taken a peek at how you define yourself in the eyes of man?
Gina, xoot was absolutely right, your arguments make the case for choice being in the hands of the woman in question. It is still a matter of conscience to me, and the law has no business intruding on a woman's exercise of her conscience. What your argument boils down to is that you want to impose your personal experience and feelings on every other woman through the law. Even if it's not religious, it's still not a good enough reason.
I haven't based my argument on personal experience at all. I'm offering it as proof and as four examples that there is no defining moment when a new life growing inside of a person feels like it becomes a "person". Which gives my argument more credibility than yours or any other man or woman who has not had that experience. I'm refuting assertion that you can define, or any man or woman that has not not carried a new life inside them can establish when that happens.
Did you look at the evidence of manslaughter yet, Gutless Wonder?
Those pictures would hold up in court, you know. But you would already know that considering how much time you devote to trials and the courts, wouldn't you?
Sorry, Gina, what you are suggesting is that only women who can bear children can make policy about abortion. That's not how this country works.
wv: enablu
'Sorry, Gina, what you are suggesting is that only women who can bear children can make policy about abortion. That's not how this country works.'
Which is why I think the abortion laws are all about money and the power of the men who choose to profit from the lives of others. They know how easily manipulated women are when emotions are involved--especially when they're pregnant. Abortion goes against the female instinct to protect and nurture. Rather clever of the beasts to make a 'civil rights' issue. They sure counted on women being fooled easily....and it worked.
Speak for yourself.
Post a Comment