User Name: Password:
New User Registration
Moderator: Vikings 
 Politics

Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.


All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..

As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.

Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!


*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."


Messages per page:
List of discussion boards
You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Pawn.
Mode: Everyone can post
Search in posts:  

<< <   76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85   > >>
4. February 2009, 02:36:56
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Czuch:  Obama needs to realize (and likely he does) that the stimulus package will, at least in part, define the early days of his presidency.  He needs to get this one right.

I don't know why he doesn't just look at the proposed package, and then start naming names of all those in congress that piled on the pork.  Expose them and make it clear that they are using the stimulus package as an excuse for pork.  But he won't cuz he ain't got the backbone to do that sort of thing.  But wouldn't it be great if the sitting democratic president took on the fat cats and let them have it publically? 

3. February 2009, 20:46:15
Papa Zoom 

Who Needs the Stimulus?


Gallup poll shows majority of Americans have severe doubts about economic stimulus plan's current format


and the doubts are growing.  


Why is it that congress drafted an economic recovery plan and then packed it with such pork?  The democrats want to pass it and the republicans want to change it.  Seems that the majority of Americans agree with the republicans on this one.


3. February 2009, 07:16:30
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:  Nuff of this chatter.  The mod may get upset and tell us we're off topic.    He can kiss my butt.  oppps, I'd better go to bed before I get into trouble. 

3. February 2009, 07:14:59
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:I want to go waltzing with matilda and find a billy bong or whatever it's called. 

3. February 2009, 07:11:28
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:That'd be so much fun.  ;)  My wife just said she'd love to visit there too.  Winter here is best to visit there.  I'd love to go on a walkabout in the outback.  :)  Do you know where crocodile dundee lives?  ;)  nite...

3. February 2009, 07:05:51
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:Ok, I'll do that.  I don't know enough about Australia.  I would so love to visit.  ;)

3. February 2009, 07:00:21
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Foxy Lady:  yeah, she snuck back on me.  ;)  Good thing I'm off to bed very soon. 

And now back to our regularly scheduled argument. 

3. February 2009, 06:57:55
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:  You snuck back  :)

3. February 2009, 06:57:33
Papa Zoom 

3. February 2009, 06:53:58
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Foxy Lady:See, now she left so I can be naughty again. 

3. February 2009, 06:39:30
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Foxy Lady:  See why we need Bernice around here?  She keeps Czuch and I in line.  lol.  Bernice isn't afraid to disagree with me.  Or slap me upside my head. 

3. February 2009, 06:37:38
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Just as a point of interest
I never knew there were so many different groups out there opposed to abortion.  Sure the religious right is once such group, but I was surprised to find the following:

Atheists http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html

Feminists  http://www.feministsforlife.org/

Democrats  http://www.democratsforlife.org/ 

Libertarians  http://www.l4l.org/

Others:  http://mommylife.net/archives/2008/07/prolife_feminis.html

It's worth the time to consider their arguments on such an important issue.




3. February 2009, 06:28:16
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:he'll be back  lol

3. February 2009, 06:27:44
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice: Even some of my "fellow Christians" have beat up on me for not belonging to their affiliation.  (not on BK but other forums, of which I no longer participate). 

3. February 2009, 06:22:13
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:I agree.  The issue itself is a political football.

3. February 2009, 06:18:26
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:Doesn't it seem odd to you that the pro-choice advocates don't want others to impose their views on abortion on other people, and yet they want to pass laws that will require all tax payers to help fund abortions (through taxes).  I don't know what the issue is like where you are but here in the States it's a divisive issue.   

3. February 2009, 06:13:09
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Foxy Lady:  I don't blame ya  ;)  That and religion are probably the two hottest topic buttons one can push.

3. February 2009, 05:37:51
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:  another thing that bothers me.  Doctors that preform abortions make tons of money.  Abortion makes the millionaires.  It seems to me that anyone that stands to make so much money preforming an abortion shouldn't be in on the decision of the woman.   I realize that most often the decision is likely between the woman and her private physician and that she would be referred to the specialist, but it strikes me as odd that so much money could be made by such a practice.

3. February 2009, 05:34:44
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:  I wonder if people (in the church) were just trying to do the right thing but were so seriously misguided that they made such poor judgments?  I don't know.   I'm sure there was plenty of religious arrogance that played a part in such decisions as well.

3. February 2009, 05:27:42
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Bernice:  I would always opt to save the life of the mother in those cases.  Without exception.  That is the predominate view of most protestant churches. 

3. February 2009, 05:22:21
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Granted, this is from the National Right to Life group but
it illustrates well the range of reasons a person may have when it comes to having an abortion.  When it comes to the "health" of the mother, I want to know what is meant by that.  What exactly is the acceptable range of health concerns?   Why is that such a troubling question to answer?

Social Reasons (given as primary reason)     
       - Feels unready for child/responsibility     25%
       - Feels she can't afford baby     23%
       - Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities     19%
       - Relationship problem/Single motherhood     8%
       - Feels she isn't mature enough     7%
       - Interference with education/career plans     4%
       - Parents/Partner wants abortion     <1%
       - Other reasons     <6.5%
     TOTAL:     93%
(Approx.)

3. February 2009, 05:19:26
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:  Gee, and I thought I was asking a fair question too. 

3. February 2009, 05:08:03
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
anastasia:  I'm unclear as to what extent the law would go with regard to the health of the mother.  What exactly does that mean?  I think some clarification would be nice. 

3. February 2009, 05:02:03
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Czuch:  Yeah, it's hard to find an unbiased source of info on this anywhere.

3. February 2009, 05:01:18
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)
Modified by Papa Zoom (3. February 2009, 05:02:23)
coan.net:  The problem with the law (as in so many of these kinds of laws) is that there are ambiguous phrases.  Here's how the law reads.

"A government may not (1) deny or interfere with a woman's right to
choose - (A) to bear a child; (B) to terminate a pregnancy prior to
viability; or (C) to terminate a pregnancy after viability where
termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or
(2) discriminate against the exercise of the rights set forth in
paragraph (1) in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities,
services, or information.

In item C, what does it mean exactly the "life" or "health" of a mother.  Protect in what way?  From death?  Or from other things (like being fat is unhealthy and I don't wanna be fat and unhealthy so I want an abortion).  I'm not clear on this and neither are many others. 

"[The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)] would sweep away hundreds of anti-abortion laws, policies" - National Organization of Women web site.See Here

This can't be a good thing. 

" Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, joined
pro-choice members of Congress and activists at a Capitol Hill press
conference to introduce legislation that would codify
Roe v. Wade into law and guarantee a woman's right to choose in all 50 states. " - NARAL

It seems that this law would remove states rights.  I thought the US was in favor of States Rights???

If FOCA is passed, it would automatically overturn
  • State abortion reporting requirements in all 50 states
  • Forty-four states' laws concerning parental involvement
  • Forty states' laws on restricting later-term abortions
  • Forty-six states' conscience protection laws for individual health care providers
  • Twenty-seven states' conscience protection laws for institutions
  • Thirty-eight states' bans on partial-birth abortion
  • Thirty-three states' laws on requiring counseling before an abortion
  • Twenty-eight states' laws requiring a waiting period before an abortion, and
  • Sixteen states' laws concerning ultrasounds before an abortion
see here

I think there's a lot more to this law than people think.  It will be a sad day for the pro life movement and unborn children (and parental rights) if this becomes the law of the land.  There will be a huge fight over this one and if Obama succeeds, the next Republican president will overturn it.


2. February 2009, 20:43:45
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: where do we(our government) get off saying that people who oppose this should be forced to contribute money towards it????
Czuch:   Exactly right.  And partial birth abortion is nothing short of genocide on babies.   He needs to rethink that position.  I certainly don't want my tax money funding such things.

2. February 2009, 07:46:45
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Foxy Lady:  ratts, I gotta go to bed.  Just when it was getting fun.  :)  

2. February 2009, 07:40:37
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Foxy Lady:  Gotta keep you guys up on the latest stuff  

2. February 2009, 07:40:00
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:  Laughter is good medicine.  I can't believe how funny politicans can be.  Al Gore actually appeared before congress and ask for some money from the <span>economic stimulus package to assist with global warming research.  global warming and economic stimulus?  Oh yeah, I see the connection.  

aL gORE  ----->

2. February 2009, 07:36:49
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Foxy Lady:  I subscribe to lots of blogs.  lol

2. February 2009, 07:15:14
Papa Zoom 
Modified by Papa Zoom (2. February 2009, 07:17:56)
Guess what Brazil did that the US has been refusing to do?  Look for oil!  And they found a ton of it.  Well, a lot more than a ton.  Meanwhile, the US is looking for solar powered vehicles (these will be sold in Alaska) and battery powered vehicles too (long extension chords are in massive production as we speak)  



2. February 2009, 07:03:27
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:  Just a little  ;)

2. February 2009, 07:03:10
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:Obama has a long hard road ahead of him.
Foxy Lady:  all of it uphill    I'd rather work with little kids.  

2. February 2009, 06:50:57
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Foxy Lady:  Yeah cept if you told me to jump, I'd probably ask how high.    Did you know that Obama is against unreasonable gun control?  He's being accused of being a "centrist."  That's a good thing for those of us on the right.  Pelosi wants him to move left but she really wants him to do her bidding.  Obama won't do that.  He's a smart politican in many ways.  I hope he works with the republicans on this "stimulus" / pork spending package.

2. February 2009, 06:44:52
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Foxy Lady:  Yeah, he can take it too.  She's our number one blog subscriber.  Wanna join the AD/Czuch fan club here?  All ya gotta do is listen to us ramble, and then disagree with us, and then sit back and watch us dismantle your arguments point by point.  Then Bernice comes on and puts us in our place and we start all over again.   It's great fun!  

2. February 2009, 06:38:13
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Foxy Lady:  You got it right.  ;)  Yeah politics can be light fun as well as tense.  I like it both ways. ;)

2. February 2009, 04:42:14
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:we are not broke even close to that bad, IMO!
Bernice:  I knew what he meant. 

2. February 2009, 02:05:55
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice:Are you sure it's not me you're talking about? 

2. February 2009, 01:59:44
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Bernice: You tell him girl.  He won't listen to me. 

2. February 2009, 01:23:05
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Czuch:No I'm not a progressive.  ;)  But when it comes to music, there are certain musical tastes I have that allow for individual expression.  Usually I'm a traditionalist when it comes to most things.  Music is no exception.  But thee is a lot to be said for interpretation and putting emotion into a song.  I'd say that when you sing together, you sing it the traditional way.  When a solo, you sing it your way (ala Frank Sanatra) 

2. February 2009, 01:17:27
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Czuch:No but I am a musician and so I probably see it through my musical training more than through my political lens. ;)

2. February 2009, 01:03:47
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Vikings: I see.  Well I think for some that's true.  Sandy Patty certainly could hold the notes.  I've never thought of it as I can't sing either way.  I sound like Paul Stooky. 

2. February 2009, 01:02:16
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Czuch: I think it's just a style of singing.  Listen to the American Idol contestants that make it.  they all do that.

2. February 2009, 00:56:24
Papa Zoom 
And jennifer houston rocked the house.  

2. February 2009, 00:46:28
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Czuch:Not really.  I like they way they sang. 

2. February 2009, 00:38:30
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Vikings:  Faith Hill can hold a note for a long time.  Have you heard her songs? 

2. February 2009, 00:30:57
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Change the subject..
Czuch:I think you're over reacting.  A bit.  ;)  Patriotism is from the heart and singing and interpretation go hand in hand. 

2. February 2009, 00:06:21
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re: Gitmo
Jim Dandy:
  He could hold peace conferences with Israel and Hamas "Sham Wow" style. 

1. February 2009, 23:55:43
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Gitmo
Gitmo will close.  But only because Obama wants to improve our image with the world.  But, what will they do with all those captured terrorists?

They will simply lock them up somewhere else.

They won't be tried in a civil court because the rules of law in civil court has greater requirements on rules of evidence etc.  And let's be realistic, they weren't captured by CSI Miami.  They were captured on the battle field.  Soldiers don't have time to take pictures, collect bullets, interview "witnesses" or any of those other required evidence components that would be required in a civil court. 

The terrorists aren't with a government per se.  They don't wear uniforms.  Some argue that since they operate outside the rules of the Geneva convention and are not therefore entitled to Geneva convention agreements on treatment.

Likely the US will find a "new home" for the detainees and then try them by military tribunal.  It won't be a complicated procedure.  The fact that the detainee will have been captured on the battle field or is a known terrorist (where evidence does exist to support the claim) will likely be enough to detain some indefinately.

If Obama lets some go and they turn around and attack America or her interests, Obama won't survive the political fallout. 

1. February 2009, 23:45:39
Papa Zoom 
Subject: Re:
Czuch:  Besides that, Al Gore's science flies in the face of real science anyway.  He just ignores all the evidence to the contrary and forges ahead.  Well, at least he has a platform now (global warming is more about Al Gore than it is about facts - and now he has to save his face after an award from Hollow Wood and a Notsonoble Peace Booby-Prize.

<< <   76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85   > >>
Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved.
Back to the top