Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
You are obviously unhappy with the prospect of Obama selecting judges who would defer to my right to make decisions about my body. One of the reasons I decided to eventually come to accept Obama as a nominee was the fact that I knew McCain and Palin would move to alter the federal bench so much that my metaphorical great granddaughter's body would still be under federal jurisdiction. I think that Obama supporters have every right to be angry if he renegs on his promise to protect my right to choose.
Now, you made some sarcastic remarks about abortion and you went on an uninformed diatribe about my views on the budget. I want to merge these topics and ask you a question.
By the way, you seem to be very concerned with interfering with my body. While I would kick you in the face if I saw you between my legs during my visit to my OB/GYN or anyplace else, I am interested in your "pro-life" stance.
1. Are you in favor of the death penalty?
2. Do you defy the position of both medicine and the law and believe that there is no distinction between brain and cardiac death (meaning, are you opposed to taking someone off of life support)?
3. Do you believe in palliative care or do you think doctors should flog patients who have no hope of survival by forcing them to endure endless treatment?
4. Would you support the government fully financing the entire life of someone whose mother wanted to abort him/her, but was saddled with the child because you thought you knew better and took away her right to choose? Would you support the government paying for that person to have good housing, access to top notch health care, top notch schooling through graduate school should s/he want to go that far in education, absolving that person from all taxes, and paying for that person through out his/her whole life?
I ask these questions to determine whether you are merely pro-life or pro-birth. Life is a lot more than the one second that marks your debut on earth.
Please answer.
Hey, I'm with you! I'm trying to feel your pain, not criticize you.
I am referring to the news reports that Congress does not want to raise taxes any time soon, while as much as $500 billion could be tacked onto the deficit to pay for infrastructure stimulus. That kind of sounds like . . . some outgoing Republicans we know.
I am confident you will get lots of traction with at least the lower courts, but assuming all remain healthy on the Supreme Court, the real wild card is a Justice Kennedy retirement. Does he want to step down and be replaced by a pro-Roe person like himself (albeit one more liberal on most other issues), or would he prefer to be the man in the middle for the foreseeable future? If the latter, and again assuming no voluntary conservative step-downs, the court is not going to move to the left. My sixth sense tells me the court will be further left in four years than it is today, but again without predicting or wishing anyone harm in terms of their health, I really can't articulate why.
By the way, short footnote on the Lincoln team of rivals. My great/great-something grandfather fought with Grant at Fort Donelson and elsewhere, and named one of his sons Charles Sumner. You can learn a lot of things by studying Lincoln, but I have never been convinced that Cabinet appointments is one of them. Grant and Sherman were of course unflaggingly loyal to Lincoln (their only rivals were Confederates, not each other, or their boss), and as I said, they were his most important deputies.
The only appointment Hillary should accept, if offered, is a seat on the Supreme Court! I thought Obama winning the election would mollify these haters on the loony left. But nooo? What did she do? Hide their Viagra? These nuts will be as much a liability to the president-elect as the rabid right.
Kos, indeed! Ugh!!
Let's not forget that the leak about her appointment came from the Clinton camp. Obama's people didn't do the deed. The leak is fairly sophisticated: she has to be dealt with now, as does Bill. She probably has to be hired, or forever keep her counsel. Another post won't be enough now.
You really do not have a problem with the man who was behind the Mark Rich pardon? That pardon took away what little credibility the Clinton Administration had despite great success on the economy, crime, and education.
As for the Waco raid, I do not have a problem with it. The only thing that was wrong was that the Feds let the Branch Davidians keep that stand off so long. And, it is dumb that right wingers have been allowed to hang that incident over the head of the government whenever they need to raid compounds that are used to break the law (the FLDS raid comes to mind).
I do not know whether to laugh at the naivete of Obama supporters who actually thought that Obama would totally disavow the Clintons (when his surrogates basically said that if they did not campaign for him and he lost that the Clintons would be to blame) or feel bad for them. Two thirds of the Obama staff is made up of Clintonites. And, what are fervent Obama supporters to think of the fact that Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson (a former member of the Clinton cabinet), Lawrence Summers (Clinton's Sec. of Treas.), and Bill Clinton's general counsel are all up for cabinet positions?
As much disdain as I might have for Obama groupies, I regret that he is breaking promises to them. Obama is ignoring the fact that virulent hatred of the Clintons is one element of the fuel that powered Obama's campaign. Obama's supporters in the press hate the Clintons, the left blogosphere hate the Clintons, black people were tricked into thinking the Clintons were racist so they hate them, and all those except the Hillary voters who agreed to support Obama hate the Clintons. They must be appalled to see the people Obama once denounced and mocked as being old and out of date and unworthy of him and the governance of America, being brought in. I imagine they feel worse about that than I feel about this Lieberman.
I would like to toss this question to the Obama groupies: in light of Obama's votes to continue funding the illegal occupation of Iraq and vote for FISA, are you shocked by his staffing decisions or are you only somewhat surprised? And, what will be the final straw?
Frankly, I am done with the Democrats. I can only cross my fingers about court appointments. As for everything else, they cannot be trusted.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
