When McCain picked "you know who" to be his running mate, he knew then what we all know now and that is that he really never had a chance against Obama. Only a "trick play" could make any sense under these dire circumstances so McCain reached down into their minor leagues (rookie league) and produced "you know who". At this point in the campaign, McCain is trying to be a good sport about it and Sarah Palin is right now working for primarily...Sarah Palin. I sincerely hope she does not assume she is the "front-runner" for 2012.

McCain lost the professional wing of the Republican Party with the selection of Palin. To those people, McCain did not really think this thru to its logical conclusion, namely, that there was perhaps a 5-10% chance that Sarah Palin could become POTUS in the next 4 years. Those odds scared people who believed correctly that although she seemed interesting and intriguing at a "People magazine" level, she is totally unqualified to be POTUS. And who knows this better than Colin Powell.

because he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. There are a lot of folks who now believe that the Palin "trick play" is an embarrasment to the GOP and a lot of swing voters and independents are seeing it for what it is, and nothing more. Dan Quayle is a freakin' genius compared to SP with his 12 years in the Senate.

The other thing that rocks the feministas' boat is the parading around of baby Trig at political rallies. This rubs many women the wrong way because what's a 44 year old woman doing having a Downs baby anyways. SP likes to "stick it in your eye" by saying here's real proof why I am morally superior to you liberal sluts who get abortions because it is convenient.

I give you credit for putting up the minority opinion on abortion rights and watching the mob attack you. I agree that 99% of abortions are morally indefensible and that only a particularly hardended and self-absorbed person would seriously contemplate having one. Only the human specie is capable of such narcissism that would allow the deliberate termination of another life. Particularly, a totally defenseless human being, at that. Very simply, abortion is perfectly legal and it is perfectly evil.

BTW, an unfertilized human egg is not life because it has only 23 chromosomes. We need 46 to do cell division. Where do you think the other 23 comes from?

So, does evil make you laugh?

How many cloned people have you met? Does the exception make the rule?

Your carefully worded argument is an example of the seeing only the trees and not the forest. You can argue the science all day long and you accomplish nothing other than talk science. It may seem redundant, but a fertilized embryo is a human being in every material respect because it has all the genetic information it will ever need to become like you and me. All that is missing is time and the presumption is that the mother, in particular, and society in general will provide that needed time to develop fully.

I don't understand why this has become such a profound statement for so many otherwise intelligent people to accept at face value. It has been parsed down to nothingness by a wide slice of society mostly to justify in their own minds abortion rights and let the dogs out.

You are lost in your own facts and cicumstances such that you cannot see the broader picture. One can parse the facts down to nil until the cows come home, but certain issues remain unresolved such as (i) has a discrete human life been destroyed as the result of a voluntary decision to abort and (ii) is society better off or worse off with that human being never having a chance to mature past a few cells?

Your argument is what I would call "form over substance" whereas I would argue "substance over form". You are desperately seeking empirical evidence to support your position whereas I am content in matters of such grave importance to rely upon the premise that life begins at conception because I have no better perspective (24 weeks seems so arbitrary...why not 20 weeks, etc.).

Less than 100 years ago, Italian immigrants were not considered "white" enough and were called "guineas" which means a black man or a slave from Guinea in West Africa. You still hear the slur today but not often. Even eastern Europeans like the Polish and the Hungarians were not considered "white" by the ruling classes in America, who traced their roots to strict Northern European countries. In the British West Indies, non-whites were allowed social privileges based on a scale of 1 to 16 that measured how much non-white blood you carried around. This allowed the ruling classes to mix breed as they wished and still keep their offspring in the house.

Are we any better off today than 100 years ago? I would think so.

The Catholic woman's comment about Obama removing the "conscience clause" on state laws that allows a doctor the right to not perform abortions if the doctor believes it is wrong is correct.

Under Obama, if the doctor disagrees he can lose his license.

Under Obama's universal healthcare, we need all the doctors we can get willing to work for minimum wage.

Not everybody in central PA is an idiot after all.