Sarah the Instant-Pundit Urges Obama to Boycott Copenhagen

I swear, Palin is posting under a nickname on the WEBlog.  If one reads her rants about the “Climate-gate Emails” – one can’t help but wonder if several conservative posters at the WEBlog are her ghost writers.

I know conservatives complain that global climate change folk are frightened “Henny Pennys”.  I think what is much more frightening is that Palin has been given a national stage to spew her stupidity.  Exhibit One:  This WashPo Editoral.

Just to clarify, I am not here to stifle the free speech rights of one Sarah Palin, rather I am here to encourage their expression.  Despite her best intentions, Palin has done more for the adoption of informed policies than any Republican in a long, long time.

iggydonnelly

180 Comments

Filed under Sarah Palin

180 responses to “Sarah the Instant-Pundit Urges Obama to Boycott Copenhagen

  1. I have to tell you how tickled I am that TWO of my friends — jammer and Mary — have been ‘defriended’ by Sarah on Facebook.

    I know all the best people!

    Sarah, sarah, sarah… She’s a beautiful woman, until she opens her mouth.

  2. From the thread header:

    “I know conservatives complain that…”

    This could easily be a fill in the blank kinda thing!

  3. PrairiePond

    I do find it ominous though, that polling in the last few days shows obama only leading sarah by one percentage point in a fictional presidential matchup between the two.

    I think that says waaaaaay more about obama than sarah.

    The democrats need to get their fingers out of their ears and their heads out of their asses. Stop singing “lalalalalal” and wake up and smell the coffee.

    Like THAT will ever happen….

    • lilacluvr

      I think Palin is popular with people but to actually send her to the White House might be two different things. I know several Republicans who say they like Palin but no way in hell is she going to get the nod from the party.

      After all, the good ole white boys of the GOP will stomp her before she even gets her foot out of the kitchen – if you doubt that, just look at what Glenn Beck said about Palin. Now that is the mindset of the Republican males.

      • PrairiePond

        That was pretty funny.

        “Why am I hearing your voice? I’m not in the kitchen.”

        Women who vote and are republicans must experience a special kind of self hatred that even I cant fathom.

        Ditto for gay republicans and gays who join the military. Or try to join the ministry.

        WTF?

      • No kidding on women who could support putting women back into the dark ages! Same goes for gays who could support moving backwards in their journey. The woman or the gay who could support Republicans positions is a very ‘special’ person. Special in a very negative way.

        I do think the Republicans could nominate Palin. My hope is they can’t elect any candidate who their base would nominate.

  4. If America has become a country that could elect Sarah Palin as president, is there anything left of this country to salvage?

    If we are a country of, by and for the people and the people elect a person such as this then I’m convinced the people of America won’t stop until the country has failed completely, and becomes the theocracy they think (?) they want.

    If they were capable of thinking we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

  5. lilacluvr

    I’m all for Sarah Palin talking as much as she wants. She trips herself up each and every time. But with Levi out there lurking to keep his name in the limelight (and the money), he will be more than happy to contradict what Ms Palin has to say.

  6. PrairiePond

    “If we are a country of, by and for the people and the people elect a person such as this then I’m convinced the people of America won’t stop until the country has failed completely, and becomes the theocracy they think (?) they want.”

    Ahem. We’re already there.

    It started with two terms for st. ronnie ray gun and… wtf kind of country would let shrub serve TWO terms and not put him on trial for his crimes?

    Electing lil’ sarah isnt much of a stretch considering the long arch of electing wingnut neocon theocrats that started in 1980, and reaches on past shrub. After he was selected and elected, no feat of stupidity surprises me.

    “If they were capable of thinking we wouldn’t be having this conversation.”

    All too true, Fnord. All too true.

    • It started with two terms for st. ronnie ray gun and… wtf kind of country would let shrub serve TWO terms and not put him on trial for his crimes?

      Hear, hear, Prairie Pond! Well said!!!

  7. PrairiePond

    Dammit.

    long arch should be long arc.

    more coffee…..

  8. lilacluvr

    I just don’t think the women of America really like Palin – do they? If they did, then we would be discussing Vice President Palin at this moment.

    I would love to have a woman be elected president but I don’t want a stupid woman. I think women are more selective than that. We know we have one good shot at the presidency and we don’t want to blow it on some Northern Lights Airhead.

    • PrairiePond

      “We know we have one good shot at the presidency and we don’t want to blow it”

      Who is “we” Kemosabi? You got a mouse in your pocket? 🙂

      I dont think ALL women love sarah. But I think repuke women do. And they are not small in numbers.

      And we know repuke men love her. She’s looking right at them through the tv, remember?

      Sane repuke men (contraction in terms?) may say they wont vote for her, but if they think she can win, they will. Party and victory uber alles, remember?

      • lilacluvr

        But some of those Republican women are so tired of hearing their male counterparts doing those wolf calls at the hot Ms Palin that perhaps these women will turn on the GOP and either not vote or go in and vote for the Democrat on the ticket or Mickey Mouse.

        Palin is an untold story but when push comes to shove – I think Palin will be shoved right off the stage (that is, AFTER she brings in the crowd). And, perhaps, that will be what really tears the GOP apart?

        And we have not talked about the Religious Righties and their crusade to rid the GOP of all those RINO’s.

  9. PrairiePond

    “Women who vote and are republicans must experience a special kind of self hatred that even I cant fathom.”

    Heheh. I’m laughing at myself.

    What could be more windmill tilting-ish than being a gay democrat liberal in western Kansas and actually believing you could effect meaningful change?

    Who is the patron st. of lost causes? I need their direct phone number….

    I think it’s St. Joseph!

  10. PrairiePond

    “tired of hearing their male counterparts doing those wolf calls at the hot Ms Palin that perhaps these women will turn on the GOP”

    from your lips to god’s ears

    But.. I think most of the GOP women want to BE her and the men want to BOINK her.

    Hehehe. Both fantasy of the highest order….

  11. itolduso

    “If they were capable of thinking we wouldn’t be having this conversation”

    Let me fix that for you

    “If we were capable of thinking we wouldn’t be having this conversation”

    There. That fixes it. Of course, you won’t approve it or allow it to be posted, but that is okay. Remarks like this one:

    “Women who vote and are republicans must experience a special kind of self hatred that even I cant fathom”

    shows your own bias, and your ignorance.

    • Hi itolduso.

      Keep your criticisms to public people, please. Everyone here is entitled to an opinion of public people and anonymous groups; no one here is permitted to criticize the opinion of another blogger. Disagree, yes, but not criticize.

      We understand that you think anyone who criticizes Palin is wrong, as many here think anyone who supports Palin is wrong.

      That’s why we each get one vote.

    • PrairiePond

      ROFLMAO!!!!!!

  12. G-stir

    I think Palin is much like the Shrub, i.e., they are their own joke, and of course, neither is sophisticated enought to be aware of it!

    Sort of an off shoot of the Emperior’s new clothes scenerio.

  13. itolduso

    Sorry, you once again prove your fallibility. I think Sarah Palin is a lightweight that should never have been nominated. She does not embody the best of women, of Republicans, or republican women.

    That being said, the statement

    ” Women who vote and are republicans must experience a special kind of self hatred that even I cant fathom”

    Insults a very large number of women, but I guess that is okay, isn’t it.

    Sorry to disturb your sleep, but thank you for posting my comment despite it being “against the rules”

    Have a nice day.

  14. No poster has ever not been approved at Prairie P&Ps.

    I think any woman who could support Palin as president of the United States of America wouldn’t recognize an insult, she would be brain dead. Same would go for men, although they would more likely be ‘thinking’ with their small head. I’m glad to know that wouldn’t include you.

    Furthermore, the Republican platforms drag women’s rights back to the dark ages. I see no reason to support going backward in a hard fight that isn’t yet complete.

  15. Monkeyhawk

    I think St. Jude is the patron saint of lost causes.

    St. Joseph helps you find a parking place near the store.

    St. Louis is, I think, the patron saint of thin crust pizza.

    San Antonio is the patron saint of nachos.

    • LMAO, Monkeyhawk!!
      If you ever get a chance, can you please make a longer list for me to post at my blog? It would be an honor.

    • Monkeyhawk

      San Juan Capistrano is the patron saint of bird shit.

      Sault Ste. Marie is the patron saint of poutine.

      St. Regis is the patron saint of chocolates on your pillow after the maid turns down your bed.

      San Francisco is the patron saint of “FAB-ulous!”

      I’ve dated a lot of Catholic girls, so I’m an expert. Trust me.

      • Check this out:

        http://www.catholic.org/saints/stindex.php

        I grew up Catholic and memorized the Baltimore Chatechim at a very young age. I HAD NO IDEA there were so many saints!!

        My favorite (though I am just getting started)–Saint Isidore of Seville; the proposed patron saint of internet users. Because we all need someone watching over us when we are on the internet. Saint Isidore, pray for us.

  16. itolduso

    “Furthermore, the Republican platforms drag women’s rights back to the dark ages”

    I disagree, even though I am perhaps not a ‘true” Republican. Please tell me how. Which planks of the Republican platfrom drags women’s right back to the dark ages. I’m all ears. Or so said my Mom.

  17. No one has the right to tell me, a woman, how anything about my reproductive health should be handled! Me, only me, should have the right to makes those decisions.

    I will not get into a discussion with any person who thinks abortion should be illegal. So, don’t go there. If you can’t honor this request you will be banned from this blog! This blog isn’t the place to rehash that disagreement! No minds will be changed. It makes no difference what any one of us thinks about the subject — we have all thought this through on our own and made our decisions. We don’t need to have anyone try to change the decision we’ve come to on our own after careful consideration.

  18. PrairiePond

    HA! Monkeyhawk. Yer right. It is St. Jude.

    And you are making me homesick for San Antonio.

    Rosario’s. Best mexican food in the world!

  19. Further to the Republican platforms that set us back to the dark ages:

    Every member of the GLBT community is a person and should have equal rights under our laws!

    Our laws and religion should be separate.

  20. PrairiePond

    “I am perhaps not a ‘true” Republican.”

    No true Scotsman.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

    Seems to be a lot of that going around lately.

  21. PrairiePond

    Perhaps our new poster would be more comfortable here?

    http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/

    You’ll find many of your own kind there.

    • That’s good, PrairiePond! Thanks for the laugh.

      It’s no wonder we hear, “I am perhaps not a ‘true” Republican,” more often nowadays. Isn’t the RNC having a bit of problems deciding exactly what that would be?

  22. itolduso

    So, after reading thru your hostility, I take it is the single issue “abortion” that is your litmus test? I wouldn’t dream of trying to change your mind on the issue. I don’t argue abortion, there is no point to it. So, is that it with the Republican party platform? This single issue that would make you think that any women who voted Republican was filled with sel-hate?

    • I won’t try to speak for fnord. I agree with her premise that, in order for a woman to support the republican platform, she must hate herself, so I will give you my own reasoning. Perhaps that will help you understand.
      The current GOP:
      Against gay marriage;
      Against a woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions;
      Against all taxes;
      Supports “free market” economic policies that have destroyed our economy and created a permanent underclass;
      Against the environment.
      Why are these women’s causes specifically? Women support marriage, while most heterosexual males would rather just have indiscrimate sexual relations with anything that looks good. The institution of marriage is in more danger of being destroyed by the poor behavior of married males (Tiger Woods, Gov. Mark Sanford, Sen. John Ensign, Sen. Larry Craig, former Congressman Mark Foley, former Mayor Rudy Guiliani, Sen. David Vitter, shall I go on?) than it is from gay couples who wish to enjoy the same rights under the law as anyone else.
      Women who would prefer that the government make their healthcare decisions for them or have no problem with the government taking certain decisions away from them, are self-loathing. They either believe that they don’t have enough sense themselves to make a good decision or they believe they have a right to judge others. Either way, they prove themselves insecure and weak.
      Women understand that things aren’t free. In today’s world, if anyone understands that everything comes at a cost, it is women. Any woman who believes that the government can be run without taxation to fund it is not dealing with a full deck.
      Women suffer more than men do in a failing economy because we don’t make as much money as men and we have twice the responsibilities that men do. When the going gets tough, often times men can walk away and women cannot (0r will not). It is proven by statistics that women are more likely to live below the poverty level than men. Any woman who supports the failed economic policies of the republican party is either in denial, waiting for a prince to save her or just plain ignorant.
      Any woman that supports the current gop platform on environmental issues clearly doesn’t give a crap what kind of life her children and grandchildren will have. Anyone with any power to reason for themselves can look around and see that the earth is struggling to support the numbers of people and their lifestyles that currently inhabit the earth. Overfishing, water pollution, air pollution, greenhouse gasses, endangered species, dwindling resources, anddeclining ecosystems among other things are real problems, not fairytales as the republicans would have us all believe. A lack of potable water is already threatening some populations of the world. There are real environmental problems, but the republican party would have us believe that it is all nonsense. While they bury their heads in the sands, when there is still a chance to affect real change, who do you think will suffer most from these problems? Women and children will, as they always do, more than any other groups.
      I am sure you will not agree with any of my points, but they are stated clearly and without name-calling. I would expect the same in return.

    • Paula,

      You spoke for me in your post even tho you said you wouldn’t. You laid out clearly and better than I could exactly why I know any woman who votes Republican votes against her own best interests.

      Thank you.

      Perhaps Republican women and/or men have no idea what a woman’s potential is. After all, the men keep the women down and the women allow it (or at minimum ‘go along’).

      • I’m afraid that Republican men are keenly aware of the potential of women. “Behind every man is a good woman” is not a new phrase.

        I can understand why the old white men in charge want to keep us down, I just don’t have any idea why any woman would find second-class citizen a desirable title or circumstance.

        But we all know those women who are just exhausted at the idea of being independent and yearn for a man to take care of them. They usually get what they want, and then find it isn’t as advertised. My argument with them is that they don’t stand up at that point, but continue to pretend that all is well.

      • My husband is a great man. No one else needs share that opinion because I feel it deeply and that’s what is important to me and our relationship. He respects women. One of the highest compliments he ever paid me came early in our courtship. He said he looked around that crowded room and saw a woman who showed in her every movement, in each word, that she didn’t need anyone to be complete, she didn’t need a man.

        That’s why I wanted that man!

        He married me and four children almost thirty years ago. He still thinks he got a bargain! I know we did!

  23. itolduso

    Hey, I have no problem with Gays and lesbians. They wanna get married, I could care less. What else you got?

    • Do you have any opinions to express or do you just plan to ask questions?

      I don’t like the game of twenty questions and blogging is either fun or informative or not worth doing. Got anything fun or informative?

  24. PrairiePond

    “This single issue that would make you think that any women who voted Republican was filled with sel-hate?”

    Well, there is always their resistance to children’s health care, like the bill bush vetoed and the repukes upheld.

    Then there is their resistance to anything that would allow women to be treated equally in the workplace. You know, the bill the democrats passed as soon as obama took office.

    Then there is the resistance to paying for birthcontrol while rushing (no pun intended) to pay for viagra.

    Then there are the repuke senators who voted in favor of rape by voting against Frankin’s bill to bring defense contractors to heel.

    And did I mention their undying resistance to the ERA?

    I could go on. But I have a feeling it’s futile.

    Women who support the repuke party are like black folks who support the KKK.

    insane

  25. itolduso

    So, is there anything else about me that you would like to assume?

    I

    • I don’t want to assume anything about anyone. If you want to tell us all about yourself, have at it. Or, voice your opinions, if you choose.

  26. PrairiePond

    “What else you got?”

    Why do I think this is going to be an unending diversion? Much like a two year old asking “why?” after every answer.

    Why SHOULD women support the repuke party?

    What else do YOU got?

    Besides bad grammar.

  27. itolduso

    “Women who support the repuke party are like black folks who support the KKK.

    insane”

    Okay, I was told this was a blog that was full of love and tolerance. I guess only if you follow the same light.

    So sorry to have had the wrong idea. You are right, I don’t belong here. See ya

  28. PrairiePond

    Heh lilac.

    The repukes running AWAY from shrub often resort to the “no true scotsman” fallacy.

    ‘Cause ya know, he’s not a TRUE conservative. Or republican. Or xian. Or whatever….

    They can run but they cant hide. The stink of bushco gives them away.

  29. PrairiePond

    “Okay, I was told this was a blog that was full of love and tolerance.”

    Who told you that?

    Or did you read it at TBTSNBN?

    Too easy.

  30. Nothing to support anything. Just questions — the baited kind — and then goodbye. Kewl.

  31. PrairiePond

    And I see this disrupter never DID offer any info. Just whining about us.

    Disrupter, not a poster.

    Buh-bye.

    PS–Go tell your pals at the TBTSNBN that we were mean to you. It drives up our hits.

    Which results in more revenue… HAHAHAHAH!

  32. GMC70

    itolduso:

    Don’t bother.

    This blog isn’t about thinking, or challenging any thinking. Challenging opinions, you see, just isn’t tolerated (all in the name of “tolerance,” of course). Doing so just interrupts the mutual admiration society.

    Sorry folks, just had to see what was happening over here, just for laughs. I see nothing’s changed.

  33. PrairiePond

    Hee hee heeeeeee Lilac!

    I especially liked this at the end of the “no true scotsman” link.

    “See also

    * Cognitive dissonance”

  34. PrairiePond

    ROFLMAO!!!!!!

    hehehehehehehehheheehehheehheeheheheh!

    I’m thinking we know the identity of ityso.

  35. GMC70,

    The poster you choose to support didn’t offer any challenging opinions, or any opinions at all. Any opinions that are offered in a civil way are welcome, any statement of disagreement may be voiced. The poster was tolerated. Even you are tolerated.

    Do you believe that someone / anyone stating a differing opinion should automatically change an opinion I hold?

    • Many of the posters at WEBlog do not understand how to state an opinion, they only know how to attack. Those that do understand the term “debate” would probably not come here spoiling for a fight.

  36. Probably have a new record day here at PPPs.

    Sheesh.

    It must be terribly boring at the place they think so highly of.

    Everyone is welcome here, whether they stay or not will be determined by their behavior. 🙂

  37. lilacluvr

    What just happened – I leave for a few minutes and all this breaks loose?

    I suspect the bullies in the other play yard are bored playing with themselves and wandered over here to try to stir up some trouble?

  38. Seems someone came here to tell us we were wrong, another person (or the same one?) came to say that telling us we were wrong was defined as a challenging opinion (although none was ever stated).

    (shrugs shoulders)

    No wonder one of our two major political parties is considered relevant by some people even tho they have no ideas, no solutions and no alternatives.

  39. Oh, and I’m sure that our right to define the proper conduct, along with topics allowed, is not very tolerant, but it is certainly the way blogging here will be conducted. 🙂

    WordPress allows anyone to pay for their own blog and do the same.

    • lilacluvr

      Wasn’t it Ronald Reagan that proudly boasted that he paid for the microphone and will say what he wants?

      It is okay for St. Ronald but no one else?

      If it’s good enough for Ronnie – then it’s good enough for us!

    • All of us have made up our minds about some issues, and each person came to their conclusion after careful thought. That includes everyone and every opinion.

      Remember that visual of the gay marriage issue we had as a thread header over the weekend? It listed all the points of both sides. That is one of the issues we all know inside out and needs no rehashing. Abortion is another.

      Solutions are what we need to find.

      • lilacluvr

        Agreed…..I don’t like the fact we have so many abortions performed in this country but rather than just making it illegal, let’s try to figure out why there are so many and then do something about changing that fact.

        But that would require actual working on a solution and then those millions of fundraising dollars won’t be coming into the those anti-abortion coffers – huh?

  40. lilacluvr

    Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t the only litmus test the current one the RNC is using to rid the Grand Old Party of those dreaded RINO’s?

    One who is so worried about litmus tests should really pay attention to their own backyard.

    As for the illegal abortion issue – that didn’t work before Roe v Wade and it won’t work if put into place now.

    Government can never legislate social behavior – much like we can’t seem to get Republican elected officials to stop indulging in adultery….

  41. I can’t keep up with their ‘litmus’ tests. Some of the people accused of not being conservative enough baffle me. Think about the people Jesus “palled around” with.

    Conservative has so many different meanings. The ones that have to do with fiscal responsibility are easily understandable, all those that have to do with legislating morality I don’t understand.

  42. PrairiePond

    Party Purity. It’s not just for breakfast anymore.

    We dont mind differing opinions. But it wasnt too hard to figure out that itys was just here to disrupt. So.. he/she created a self fulfilling prophesy.

    Circular logic at its finest!

  43. Oh well, moving on happily.

    Have they decided what their pure party will allow? Hasn’t everyone acknowledged neither of the two major parties can elect to the national level without Independents? Will the pure candidate have appeal outside the purity they decide on?

  44. lilacluvr

    I believe in fiscal responsibility but obviously not the kind the Republicans say they believe in because I have yet to see any Republican president actually BE fiscally responsible.

    Cheney boasted that Reagan proved deficits don’t matter and we all know what GWB did to us – blew up the government by all his war on terror crap and the only we got from all those billions was some strip searches of little old grandmas in airports.

    Of course, Halliburton and other private contractors in the Iraq War have been paid – and continue to be paid – quite handsomely and without any investigations into their personnel matters. Why, even the Republicans support gang rape not being reported if it happens in one of their golden-boy contractor companies.

    And then these GOPPERS wonder why they are being scrutinized?

    • There is a very interesting theory that the economic crash that we experienced at the end of the Bush regime was just cover for the last bit of redistribution of wealth to put the nail in the coffin of the middle class once and for all.

      Watching what happened at the time and what has and has not happened since has made me consider this theory more plausable.

      http://endofamericamovie.com/

  45. PrairiePond

    “Hasn’t everyone acknowledged neither of the two major parties can elect to the national level without Independents?”

    That’s what concerns me about the obama/palin polls. She drew more independents.

    • lilacluvr

      Maybe she is just the ‘flavor of the month’?

      Those independents will be more impressed with whoever or what party actually helps turn this economy around.

      That is where the real battle for the votes will be – who is actually accomplishing something or who is simply sellling a book?

  46. Half the population is of below average intelligence.

  47. PrairiePond

    “Those independents will be more impressed with whoever or what party actually helps turn this economy around. ”

    True enough.

    However, given the number of corporatist, obstructionist democrats in congress, and the republicans just plain obstructing ANYTHING that has obama’s stamp on it, and obama’s own corporatist, DLC nature, I dont see him turning things around.

    Had he held out for a better stimulus package and then made regulatory reforms, he might have public sentiment on his side.

    But as it is, he’s made no one happy and everyone mad. Especially his own base. And that does not bode well for 2012. If his own base stays home, and knowing the other side wouldnt vote for him if their hair was on fire, I wonder who WILL vote for him.

    Independents? Looks like they will go the third party route or stay home.

    I look for low turnout and a close race in 2012. As someone said on another blog yesterday, tumbleweeds were blowing through the polls in Mass yesterday in the election to fill Senator Kennedy’s vacant seat.

    People are disgusted. They will either stay home, or vote for the opposition.

    Just my humble prediction.

    • lilacluvr

      I think people are disgusted and that disgust will only grow if the jobs losses continue to creep up into the upper middle class level of voters.

      No one seems to care much when job losses are in the lower end of minimum wage jobs but there is alot of anger when that job loss axe comes after their own neck!

      • PrairiePond

        Lilac, do you honestly think that he will be able to stem the job loss tide? Without changing course?

        Do you really think meaningful health care reform will be IMPLEMENTED before 2010 or 2012?

        Do you think DOMA will be repealed or DADT abolished before 2010 or 2012?

        Do you think Americans will see any improvement in their lives before the next elections?

        Really?

      • PrairiePond

        I know bushco phucked things up beyond all recovery and improvement will take time, but given our reality show sense of patience in this country, I’m thinking “this takes time” is true, but wont win obama or the democrats any votes.

        Especially at the snail’s pace obama is working on the important issues.

  48. PrairiePond

    “Half the population is of below average intelligence.”

    Hehehe. HAHAHAHHAHAHA!

    I think you are confusing average with median, but I could be wrong about that too. I got out of statistics by the skin of my teeth thirty years ago!

    Of course the question in regard to your statement is…which half?

    Hee hee hee!

  49. lilacluvr

    A third party idea sounds good but it is not very practical when trying to implement.

    I still think that if Ross Perot had not been such a screw up in his third party bid, our country would be in a better position than we are now.

    I’d like to see both parties get brought down a peg or two to see reality. But is that going to happen when the losing party (GOP currently) does nothing but obstruct rather than compromise?

    Politics has become too much of a stategy to get re-elected. GOPPERS know that if they compromised with Obama and Democrats and actually solved some of our problems, then the credit will be given to Obama and Democrats – and they cannot stand that thought.

    So they would rather see the country go through another 4 years of hell just so they can keep their seats of power? In a word – YES.

    Rather than a third party – let’s try term limits.

  50. What’s the percentage of our adult population who vote? Small if I remember correctly. And, some (how many?) of those vote without being informed or vote party…

    Until we actually kick the bums out, and hold them accountable what we’ve got is what we’ll get.

    We must accept this is our responsibility!

  51. Oh brother, is all I can say. And, back to work for me…

  52. itolduso

    Wow. Since pointing out that your histronics about women who vote Republican shows your own bias, and ignorance is not considered an opinion, and then you “people” pat yourselves on the back for being so right, I will point out the errors in your reasoning, at least to my own opinion. You have already put forth two false statements, or at least assumptions, but I will be glad to detail them in order

    “Women who vote and are republicans must experience a special kind of self hatred that even I cant fathom”

    I know plenty of women who votes Republican, and Democrat, neither seem to have a problem with self hatred. The women I hang with are all very self assured, and refuse to have others define their role in the Universe for them. That includes stay at home moms and corporate vice Presidents.

    “We understand that you think anyone who criticizes Palin is wrong”

    I think Sarah Palin is out of touch and anybody who chooses to criticize Palin has ample material to work with.

    “Furthermore, the Republican platforms drag women’s rights back to the dark ages”

    I disagree. I see nothing in the platform that does such a thing. Abortion apparently being the primary one from your focus. Okay. Again, I refuse to argue abortion, nobody cares what the other side has to say one way or the other.

    “Every member of the GLBT community is a person and should have equal rights under our laws!”

    I do not disagree. I don’t really care if gays/lesbians/black/brown/yellow want to get married, or not.

    “Well, there is always their resistance to children’s health care, like the bill bush vetoed and the repukes upheld.”

    I have not seen that in the platform, but I will give you my opinion. Fine, treat children on the public dime.. Up to a certain standard of income at least. they cannot help their parents condition. After a certain income, treat the kids, charge the parents with a bill that cannot be eliminated by bankruptcy.

    “Then there is their resistance to anything that would allow women to be treated equally in the workplace. You know, the bill the democrats passed as soon as obama took office.”

    Again, I don’t think that was in the Republican Party platform, but I think that women should indeed be treated equally in workplace. With equal qualifications required. and equal opportunity and pay if they are so qualified.

    “Then there is the resistance to paying for birthcontrol while rushing (no pun intended) to pay for viagra.”

    Where is that in the Republican party platform? I don’t personally know of any republicans who think Birthcontrol shouldn’t be paid for, or Viagra should be paid for. Perhaps my number of contacts are too limited.

    “Then there are the repuke senators who voted in favor of rape by voting against Frankin’s bill to bring defense contractors to heel.”

    Again, not in the party platform, and I disagreed with the senators that voted against Frankin’s Bill, even though I thought it was not well thought out, or carried out the intent.


    And did I mention their undying resistance to the ERA?”

    I am opposed to the ERA. I find it unnecessary.

    “Women who support the repuke party are like black folks who support the KKK.
    insane”

    I find women who support such logic and broad paint brush thinking are, in fact, insame. (intentional mispelling, so don’t get your panties in a wad

    “Why SHOULD women support the repuke party?”

    Because, while currently the Republicans are not much better, the Democrats are trying to spend us in the poor house. That is reason one.

    “PS–Go tell your pals at the TBTSNBN that we were mean to you. It drives up our hits.”

    I could care less about your “meanness” I’ve been called worse by better. Why should I tell anyone?

    “I suspect the bullies in the other play yard are bored playing with themselves and wandered over here to try to stir up some trouble”

    Whether you call me a bully or no, I was in fact bored with the other blog, seeing that there was no real discussion. And you don’t have to worry about me playing with myself, or being the only action. I could tell, but gentleman don’t. maybe the likes of you do, I couldn’t even care to guess.

    “Wasn’t it Ronald Reagan that proudly boasted that he paid for the microphone and will say what he wants?

    It is okay for St. Ronald but no one else?

    If it’s good enough for Ronnie – then it’s good enough for us”

    You are right, if it’s your blog, you can do what you want. I doubt that you “pay’ for it though, the xxx.wordpress.com indicates a free blog, but I could be wrong.

    “Solutions are what we need to find”

    I agree, and dismissing a large number of women as full of self hatred and insane doesn not help to find any solution or common ground.

    “Government can never legislate social behavior ”

    Crap, they do it all the time. Just depends on which side of the coin you are whether or not you agree.

    “Some of the people accused of not being conservative enough baffle me. ”

    Yeah, me too.

    We dont mind differing opinions. But it wasnt too hard to figure out that itys was just here to disrupt.”

    Sorry, wrong again. But do go ahead and try and characterize or pigeon hole me and my intentions.

    Well, I guess that was a long post, but thought I would answer your questions, snarks, and rude comments all at once.

  53. Funny how that GMC needs to keep coming here and telling how intolerant we are and how superiour he is to the folks here. I think he has got some kind of problem with people spending their time the way they see fit.

    He’s jealous that people can talk to each other without insults. Go to your sewer, nobody here gives even the slightest damn on what you do with your time and that REALLY gets to you doesn’t it. Please extend to us the respect we extend to you on how you spend your time. We don’t need you here, you hypocrite. Go back to your blog, you surely are very proud of that cess pool.

    • itolduso

      Hope you aren’t speaking to me. I am not GMC. Nor does the rest of your remarks within that post fit. But do go on. Oh, I thought that criticism of bloggers wasn’t allowed? Yeah, speaking of Hypocrites.

      • If you aren’t GMC it should be clearly obvious no one was speaking to you, or even about you, don’t you think?

        I will make this perfectly clear one time only — Iggy pays for this microphone, and yes, there is a cost. He makes the rules, he enforces the rules, and that is his right.

        If you would like to blog here, you are welcome as long as you abide by his rules and understand it is his microphone, he will make the decisions.

        If you decide you don’t want to understand his rights, you will be banned.

  54. You are correct, I was not speaking to you. Take your straw men, and go play with them somewhere else.

  55. lilacluvr

    I just don’t get it.

    If one thinks they are so bored and think they are so superior that they come into a blog just to ask baited questions to stir up trouble and then they get told back, and somehow that is our problem???

    Must be nice to have absolutely nothing to do rather than to cause trouble just because you can.

    And that is being superior??? Somehow, I doubt that.

  56. It is boring to blog about bloggers. We all know that! So, did you read something you’d like to share? Do you have an idea or an opinion you’d like to share? Anything informative or fun you’ve run across and know someone else would like to hear about?

  57. itolduso

    “If you aren’t GMC it should be clearly obvious no one was speaking to you, or even about you, don’t you think”

    Since his post was directly after mine, no I don’t believe it was obvious.

    “Iggy pays for this microphone, and yes, there is a cost. He makes the rules, he enforces the rules, and that is his right. ”

    Already said the same. Please look within my 3:08 post.

    “If you would like to blog here, you are welcome as long as you abide by his rules and understand it is his microphone”

    Apparently not,

    “Take your straw men, and go play with them somewhere else.”

    I posted no straw men, In my 3:08 post I posted exactly what you requested. My opinons and my ideas.

    • Great! Keep that up and everyone is A-OK.

      Post away on those opinions and ideas, but DO NOT blog about other bloggers! This will be the very last time this is said.

  58. itolduso

    ” Do you have an idea or an opinion you’d like to share?”

    I did. My entire 3:08 post was about ideas and opinions. But, i will leave it at that, and be sure not to post anything that might rile the natives here. Your blog, your rules.

  59. At another place, at another time, I made the not-so-bold prediction that due to the condition of the nation, the economy, etc., regardless of who was elected in 2008 would be a one-term president. I continue to hold that opinion.

    As to 2010; the independents will be voting their pocketbooks/wallets, if they deign to vote. It may be that the economy is “recovering” by all formal measures, but that won’t mean anything to those who are unemployed (or underemployed) with bleak prospects for future employment. A change in their condition will be what they are looking for, and these folks may well take the position that voting for “the devil they don’t know” is preferable to voting for “the devil they know”.

    2012 will likely break along the same lines if, as I expect, things don’t materially improve. It’s still “… the economy, stupid”, as it has been for my lifetime.

    Repeal of DOMA will take action by the Congress. No, it isn’t going to happen any time soon, much to my regret. Reelection being paramount and all, Congresscritters in many states won’t be rushing to vote for a repeal. Unless DADT has been codified (my ignorance is showing), an Executive order would repeal it. A caveat, however; if it is done in this way, Congress may well have the votes to codify it, and to override a veto.

    I am not, nor have I historically been, a supporter of term limits for any elected official. I rather think that for the most part those who proclaim their support for the same are the ones whose oxen are being gored (or perceived as being gored) by those wielding power, especially if those in the other camp have been in a majority position for a substantial period. I am rethinking my position, as the “power of incumbency” grows exponentially over time (along with the financial resources that accompany being the incumbent, i.e., contributions to campaign funds).

    Sorry this is as lengthy as it is, but it is rather condensed as hard as that may be to believe. 🙂

  60. PrairiePond

    I say ignore. He/she will get bored and go away.

    But thanks for driving up the hits….

  61. I too see too many pitfalls in term limits. I do hope for the day ‘We The People’ all enact term limits they way it was intended — with our votes.

    • Short of all elections being “publicly financed” and those who might vote taking the time to really gather, digest and understand the issues and positions of the candidates, I don’t think that’s going to happen.

      Note: I recognize the Constitutional infirmities of having all elections “publicly financed” and in so doing proscribe contributions made by private parties. I also recognize the fact that the two chambers of the Legislative may write their own rules to ameliorate the perquisites of seniority.

    • I don’t see it happening either, 6176, but it’s still my hope. I don’t ever get everything I hope for!

  62. PrairiePond

    Oops, sorry 617 🙂 posts crossed.

    Of course I didnt mean ignore YOU!

  63. itolduso

    Unfortunately, I cannot support term limits. While I would like to, and I think in one sense it it necessary, I believe it would give the two major parties even further power. Something that I abhor even more.

  64. lilacluvr

    If term limits is not the answer, then how can we the people make the political parties toe the line?

    And I agree with itolduso – the two major parties do have too much power and we don’t need to give them more.

    I think the entire political structure is rotten to the core and it really does not matter much who is sits at the desk in office at the White House – at the end of the day – money talks and bullshit walks.

  65. Money. The root of all evil.

    And boy has a bunch of that money found its way into politics! Look at what it costs to field a candidacy! And look at the money that is spent (by lobbyists for one group) to buy the votes of those who manage to get elected. How do we get that money out?

  66. PrairiePond

    “Look at what it costs to field a candidacy!”

    That’s precisely what led the kansas democrats to endorse tom wiggins for governator.

    Sebelius sucked all the democratic money out of the state, and wiggins can fund his own vanity campaign.

    And brownback wins!

    All in a day’s work for the corporatists. And larry gates doesnt see any problem with it….

  67. itolduso

    Start at the local level. Elect delegates and local party reps that are first of all honest, then second that agree with you. If politicians make promises, and then as soon as they are elected do an about face, fire their butt in the next election. Regardless of their opponent’s political party. The link between your vote and any particular party needs to be broken. Support the candidate, not the party

    • It almost takes a Pollyanna attitude to imagine an honest person wanting to be involved in such an unsavory profession. I’ve been disappointed so often now I’m jaded. I don’t like that either!

      • itolduso

        I understand. But all it takes for evil to win,is for good people to do nothing. (not an exact quote, but you get the drift). You and I are not of the same ilk or politics. But the answer is the same. Honest politicians before “promising” politicians. Good for the country as a whole, and no single pass/fail agenda item. Telling the political parties to go f themselves, that we will not blindly follow any candidate just because he/she is of the “right” party.

  68. Can you even imagine how backwards Kansas can become when Brownback is governor?

    At least in the Moran / Tiahrt contest one of them is gone so there is that tiny positive.

    How many of our elected officials are we really happy with? And, I’m not limiting this to just the ones we get to vote for, but all those congresscritters. And yet, all across our nation we send them back…

  69. Another thing we inherited from the Brits, for the most part; political parties, which sprang up almost as soon as the Constitution was signed. No, G. Washington didn’t have a formal political affiliation, IIRC; but many of those first elected to Congress did.

    To make the political parties “toe the line”; hmm, I have a bit of trouble with that as well, especially where “the line” is one with which I disagree.

    I believe, in my heart of hearts, that campaigns should only be financed by those who may vote; natural persons of a determined age, etc. I also believe that the identities of those making any contribution to a political campaign must be disclosed within a set period, say an hour or so, publicly to a gateway to such information established by a governmental agency.

    I do not adhere to the legal position that a corporation, or other entity created solely by statute, is a “person” for purposes of Constitutional protections. Thus, my use of the term “natural person”, to distinguish us Homo sapiens from said entities.

    • itolduso

      I would go even further. I would be open to the idea that any person may give whatever amount he/she chooses, but it must be in a contest where they would derive direct representation, and their donation must be published for all to see.

      • I like your proposed modification to my thoughts, but the ‘derive direct representation’ part likely is violative of First Amendment protection of free speech, at least as said Amendment has been interpreted by SCOTUS.

      • lilacluvr

        I agree with that. I don’t care how much money someone gives to a candidate as long as it is made public.

        I remember when corporate PACS were a big push in the nursing home industry. It was all rage then – every corporation had their own PAC.

        And politicians love the PACS because it is alot more money at one time than waiting for individuals to donate.

      • itolduso

        Sorry, I can’t seem to reply in the way I want. I understand your comment 617, but I believe (not that it matters) that spending money is not free speech.

      • itolduso, I, too, do not believe spending money equates to free speech. Again, not that it matters, for in the area of ‘political speech’, the precedent appears clear.

    • I believe that there is such apparatus in place that all campaigns could be run for free.

      Give each candidate a small, but equal amount of air time on radio, television and newspaper ads; all must be given without charge by the media in question. They can afford it. Then each candidate can have their own webpage.

      Then the only other press they get is whether they do something that a news outlet or newspaper deems newsworthy. And I am not talking about just giving a speech.

      All of this can be codified at the local and national level. Current politicians just don’t want to do it. But the people can make them.

  70. lilacluvr

    We all need to support the candidate and not follow the party blindly but how will that take place when the GOP is wanting to have a purity test for all their candidates?

    Maybe the right candidate disagrees on one issue of that purity test – does that mean that person is no longer even eligible to run for any elected office?

    That is what is wrong with litmus tests – they dwindle down the potential candidates to the blind party loyalty candidates and that’s it.

    We might as well call the GOP candidates the Stepford Wives Candidates if that is all they are going to promote.

    • That’s what party primaries, etc., are for, although I’m sure that it is recognized that a candidate who ‘fails’ one issue of the test will be running against not only the other candidates but also the party hierarchy as well.

      • lilacluvr

        Therein lies the rub? Without the party hiearchy’s backing – there is no hope for someone who is not blindly following party lines?

    • itolduso

      Do you not think the Dems have an litmus test, whether it is in writing or not?

      • lilacluvr

        No, I do not think they have a litmus test. That is one reason why Democrats seem to be such a helter skelter type party – not one unified party lockstepping to the same platform like the GOP.

        If you’re referring to the abortion issue – being pro-choice does not automatically mean being pro-abortion. That is a mistake alot of Social Conservative Republicans make.

        I, for one, don’t like abortions and would never have one. But I do not believe the government has the right to tell women what to do with their own bodies and to make their personal decisions for them.

        And for all the hoopla the Republicans make over the government being too intrusive into our personal lives – I would think the Republicans would get on that bandwagon also.

        Just why do Republicans want the government telling women what to do with their own bodies and to make a personal decision for them?

      • Yes, I do think the Democrats have had litmus tests. I think this last election the litmus test was “don’t appear to be too liberal” whatever the hell that is supposed to mean now. Pelosi and Reid have bent over backwards since we helped the Dems reach majority in 2006 to make sure that the Democratic party can’t be labeled “liberal.” Has it helped them? Not one bit.

  71. Certainly a purity test is no worse than a person who sells their vote to the highest bidder.

    If we follow the issues, and expect the person we elect to also follow the issues instead of personal beliefs, we should get better than what we currently have.

    • Ah, the old conundrum; is the elected person required to vote as the folks who elected her/him decree, or for her/his personal beliefs as to what is best for the political division (city, county, etc.) as a whole.

      • itolduso

        And what would be your answer to that particular conundrum? And it is quite a conundrum. Personally, I guess my “vote” if you could call it that, would be to run exactly as the candidate actually is, and believes. No poll driven politics, no market surveys, etc. If the candidate is then elected, if there is a difference in what he/she sees as what is best for the political division, and what the people want, then it is his responsibility to educate the people as to why they are, in his opinion, wrong. If he cannot so educate them, and sway the majority of opinion to his side, and there is not already some controlling law (statutory or case), then he is obligated to vote the way the people he represents want him to. Not a great answer, but the best I can come up with

      • My answer, such as it is, is congruent with yours, admitting all the while that it isn’t satisfactory.

    • Yes, that is a conundrum. But if the facts (not made up s**t) was told to the voters, don’t you think they would want what is best for the city, county, etc. as a whole?

      I mean TRUTH, not what would line someone’s pockets, etc.

      • lilacluvr

        Sometimes, the perceived truth is what the person wants to hear.

        Just like Fox News supporters think that only their beloved Fox News anchors are telling the truth and the other media are just lying liberals.

      • You’re correct. Perception. Oh well, once again, no solutions! Let’s keep trying tho.

      • itolduso

        No, I do not . At least for a great many folks. They only see what they see is in their own best self interest, and thus, by their own logic, the best interests of everyone. Voting by only looking at one’s own best interest is strictly selfish. Voting against one’s own self interest, because of it being the right thing to do, is principle.

    • I have enough confidence in humanity to believe that at least a majority of people would want what was best for the common good most of the time.

  72. Take for example the promises made on all those emotional issues that get out the vote. We all know many who have run on the controversial issues, made voters think they were actually going to make changes, and in truth had no intention of doing so. In fact, if they did away with those issues they may not be able to get out that vote.

    Remember very recently when the Republican Party who say they are against abortion being legal were in the majority in both the Senate and House, with a Republican president and a majority on the SCOTUS? Yeah, nothing was done, and they never intended to change anything, they just needed something to motivate the voters.

    Every thinking adult knows making abortion illegal doesn’t stop them!

  73. lilacluvr

    I am a person who does not see the world as black and white. I also believe in compromising for the good of the entire country.

    But when we see one or both parties dig their heels in and refuse to even debate – why even have these politicians in Washington?

    Why not just save our money and send in our own votes on the major issues?

    Why not set up computer terminals in the courthouses and whenever a major issue comes up for voting – each registered voter gets to voice their opinion.

    I know that is probably tool futuristic to even think about – but the way we all blog, vote for American Idol winners, etc. – why couldn’t the voters’ opinions be heard through our modern technology?

  74. To the original comment I was here to memorialize before my ADD set in: let her have a platform. That’s how it should be. For me, freedom of speech doesn’t begin and end with the opinions, statements, writngs, etc., of those with whom I agree on the issues. Questioning my opinions, etc., in light of a well-presented opposing view serves to make them stronger, or illustrates a flaw in my thinking which causes me to revisit them. I leave it to others as to the efficacy of Gov. Palin’s op-ed on their position. It strengthened my position, and did not cause me to revisit it.

    • lilacluvr

      I agree 6176.

      Freedom of speech means we can say what we want and everyone else has the right to disagree with us.

      But just because the person disagrees with us, that does not make their freedom of speech any more important than mine.

      Freedom of speech is a Constitutional right for every American – even those who might be deemed ‘unAmerican’ by some people.

      • True, lilac; but it was WaPo who made the decision to provide the forum. It was under no legal obligation to so do, and she would have been without legal recourse if access would have been denied.

        The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech from governmental interference (with some restrictions, such as defamatory utterances, cannot shout fire in a crowded theater, etc.) and is one of the enumeration of rights specifically identified as being worthy of such protection, as opposed to general protection (see, e.g., Amendments Nine and Ten to the Constitution of the United States).

        While I use ‘freedom of speech’ in the colloquial sense most do in my prior post, such as a Constitutional right is protected against ‘state action’ only.

  75. lilacluvr

    itolduso – Just wanted to say welcome to the blog . It was a little rocky at first but this blog bunch are nice people and deserve to be treated with respect, as do you when expressing your opinions.

    I suspect you and I have more in common than we might be willing to admit. We only have differing views on how to get there.

    Gotta go….til next time.

    • I predict it will always be a “little rocky at first” when any blogger’s first post is less polite than a visitor to another person’s place should be. Who would barge into any place and expect to be welcomed? Social skills are needed in every first meeting.

  76. G-stir

    They continuing low and lower numbers of people actually voting is what is scary. It seems this is becoming ever more a country ruled by the minority that actually votes.

    • itolduso

      That is indeed a huge concern. It should be impressed upon everyone how important it is to vote. Regardless of whether or not the outcome was to their liking..

  77. itolduso

    “If you’re referring to the abortion issue – being pro-choice does not automatically mean being pro-abortion.”

    i understand that. I do think that for many, it is a litmus test that they must be “prochoice”

    “Just why do Republicans want the government telling women what to do with their own bodies and to make a personal decision for them?”

    Because they don’t see it as a simple matter of telling women what to do with their own bodies, they see it as telling women what to do with someone else’s body. In a nutshell.

    • lilacluvr

      If Republicans are really concerned about the baby’s life and welfare, then why are they not after the man that impregnated the woman?

      I never hear one word from anti-abortion supporters about that factor in this abortion debate.

      Just why is it the woman’s fault and not the man’s?

      And if anti-abortion supporters feel abortion is murder, then why not pass the law to charge the woman with murder? I don’t ever see that addressed either – but they certainly want to charge the doctor for doing it.

      If Republicans feel the government has the right to tell a pregnant woman what to do with her unborn baby – then that same government should be able to tell the man that helped to make that baby what to do also.

      Or is that not what Republicans want to do???

    • Who knows, who cares? They and no one has any right to tell any woman what to do with her reproductive organs. And every sperm doesn’t get to have a name.

      • lilacluvr

        I know, but I was trying to make a point about these anti-abortion supporters. I think it is all about keeping the power over women.

        When I see Republicans proposing to do something with these men that impregnate the women who are getting abortions, then I’ll believe they are really trying to stop abortions and not just running a power bulldozer over women – just because they can.

        For every abortion, there is a man that is half responsible.

      • Oh, I agree about the power over women completely! I’m just sick of them thinking they have power. They’ve abused women for too long a time, and if they had something growing inside them I’ll bet they would think it was their decision on whether to remove it or not.

        Potential life — a sperm by itself, an egg by itself, a blastocyst. None are life alone!

        I can change my face, donate a kidney, get implants, alter my entire appearance or have fat sucked out of me. I can even change my sexual orientation. I can have any objectionable object growing inside my body removed as long as it’s NOT in my uterus. Well, like it or not, it’s my body and I’ll make those decisions.

        The most ludicrous part of the whole discussion is that abortions don’t stop just because they are illegal. So why would any thinking person’s goal be to make them illegal? For me, that is the key to knowing the whole debate is about that power over women!

        Every sperm doesn’t deserve a name!

    • Our new dufus, may have summed it up here. There may be intelligent life amongst consertives – but, personally, I suspecting that is not true, actually…

      If we were to say that every life you (itolduso) were lucky enough to conceive should be born, regardless of your wishes, would you adopt that position, without reservation? I suspect not… Put up or shut up … You are really tiresome… And… yawn…

  78. David B

    “Elect delegates and local party reps that are first of all honest.”

    Do they come with “Honest” and “Dishonest” labeling?

    • itolduso

      I wish. But, as a last resort, we must use the old adage “fool me once, shame one you, fool me twice, shame on me.”

  79. David B

    Cabin fever sets in so early here in Kansas!

  80. itolduso

    The above is why I do not argue the abortion issue.
    None of you even know my position, and you want to argue about it. Fnord starts talking about giving sperm names, and blastocysts, and eggs, and whatever. Wow. I never said anything near that. I was asked a question about why Republican women were against abortions. I answered. I thought Lilacluvr brought up a very good point about holding the men responsible and not just focus on the women.
    As I said, I don’t argue the abortion issue. There is no point.

    And I thought posts about posters , and posts attacking posters, was out of bounds. Is that the rule or not? You tell me. Or is just do as I say, not as I do?

    • I want to make it very clear to you, itolduso, this blog doesn’t limit comments to you or responses to something you’ve posted. In fact, most of what you’ve posted is easily ignored by me. So let go of your egotistical, “Wow. I never said anything near that.” We’ve been talking here for almost nine full months without you and we each will continue to post our opinions!

    • From the RULES:

      I will delete comments that
      — are posted with the explicit or implicit ( we can tell when it is implicit, even if you can’t) intention of provoking other commenters or staff at Prairie Populists and Progressives.net

      You are welcome here under our rules and we’ll happily make them up as we go along if that’s necessary!

      You decide!

  81. itolduso

    “If we were to say that every life you (itolduso) were lucky enough to conceive should be born, regardless of your wishes, would you adopt that position,”

    Yes, I adopted that position at the age of 17. What’s your problem with it?

    ” without reservation”

    Of course not. Everything has exceptions.

    • I have seen babies born to addicts and doomed to a life of neglect, abuse and disfunction.
      I have seen babies born to ignorant parents and doomed to a life of ignorance, abuse, pain and hopelessness.
      I have seen children hungry for food, love, attention, knowledge and opportunity go without.

      Every life that is possibly conceived does not need to be born. If people who felt that strongly about forcing women to bring all pregnancies to term because it was life that they valued, they would be willing to lavish the people they are forcing into this world with love, care, food, shelter, knowledge, attention and opportunity; they would care about the quality of that life.

      But “pro-lifers” don’t worry about how they will suffer and sometimes die after they are born–being born is the only thing they are interested in. After that, it’s a pat on the head, well wishes and off to force the next pregnancy to term.

      There was once a woman in her thirties, a single mother of a pre-teen boy who experienced an unplanned pregnancy. She asked her friend for advice on what she should do because she really didn’t want to have an abortion and she really wanted to keep the baby. She wasn’t the best mother to the child she already had and she really couldn’t afford it financially. But her friend believed in her and encouraged her to keep the baby. She was already a single mother of one, after all. Surely she could manage another. That friend should have kept her opinions to herself. That baby didn’t live to his third birthday. And the friend never found out just how that baby died. And the older child was taken from the mother’s care under a cloud of suspicion and the mother had a breakdown. How many lives were destroyed or at the very least temporarily derailed?

      Every potential pregnancy is not necessarily a blessing. Women should be allowed to choose and they should not be shamed into choosing to bring life into the world by a society that will give them no help in providing a quality of life once it is here.

      • How many already born babies / children need homes, care, love?

        Remember that study of many years ago — the one everyone hates — that shows the relationship to the reduction in crime and adoption of Roe v Wade?

  82. Bad Biker

    Well, well, well………………………… I’m gone for a bit and look what happens.

    Just a few points…………………………

    Abortion is a simple issue, make/keep it safe, legal and rare. I am pro-choice, always have been and will be, but I am personally opposed to abortion. Simply put, it is not my business, it is a woman’s choice.

    All consenting adults should have the exact same rights. I am not gay, but support the civil rights of all gay and lesbian people that are currently denied equality.

    Taxes are now lower than they ever have been in the past one hundred years. How much lower do the tea baggers want them to go? There is a tipping point and we probably past it with the Bush tax cuts.

    End of sermon.

  83. itolduso

    “I will delete comments that
    – are posted with the explicit or implicit ( we can tell when it is implicit, even if you can’t) intention of provoking other commenters or staff at Prairie Populists and Progressives.net”

    So, does the statment

    “Our new dufus, may have summed it up here. There may be intelligent life amongst consertives – but, personally, I suspecting that is not true, ”

    qualify?

    Just to understand the rules, you understand.

    • What part of comments are not limited to responding to you or anything you’ve said are you not able to understand?

      This blog isn’t limited to you or what you say!

      Defensive?

  84. itolduso

    Not a bit defensive. You gave me the riot act yesterday about posting about posters. Fine. I modified my postings. I expect the same from the other posters here. What part of that is hard to understand?

    • I think itolduso is trying. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt, itus.

      Despite what you may have heard, everyone here does not agree on all the issues. But, my experience here is that when I have politely disagreed, I have encountered polite debate in return.

      I think perhaps you may have started with the wrong foot. I only say that because my own foot can frequently be found in my own mouth.

      Some here have experienced verbal assaults and baseless attacks at other blogs and came here for polite conversation. Maybe they have some PTSD issues or maybe the niceties of civilized society have not extended themselves to the internets.

      Maybe we should just all give each other the benefit of the doubt. Attack the issue or argument, not the one that presents it and I think you will be very welcome here.

      Maybe tread lightly at first, since we seem to have started off on the wrong foot?

      • itolduso

        I have no intention of ‘attacking” anyone. Or even an issue. Except for one…yesterday I was reamed for posting an opinion about a post. I suppose, as a corrollary, it could be said I dissed the poster. Fine, the rules of the blog and all. Got it. Not a problem. So then I come in and find the “our newest Dufus” comment. Among others. I object. Either the rules are, or the rules aren’t. Then the commentary goes in the line of “he who has the gold makes the rules” So, for all your comments, what am I to believe? That rules apply? or not?

        I understand many things. I understand that many came here to escape the personal attacks and animosity from the other place. I understand that I am pretty much outside the political leanings of the majority of the posters here. I understand that without frank talk with people who disagree with your own opinion, nothing will get accomplished and we will continue to slide as a country into the sewer. I understand that I will not compromise what I have to say, for any tyrant, be he a supposed conservative, or a supposed progressive. I also understand that I actually prefer to have someone disagree with me without throwing rocks at me, and am more than happy to listen, when they put the rocks down. That is why I am here.
        Anyway, thanks for the benefit of the doubt. I enjoy speaking to issues. Perhaps, or perhaps not, that will be acceptable.

  85. Bad Biker

    “What part of that is hard to understand?”

    I hate to be the one to state the obvious, but this is Iggy’s blog – he can post anything he likes – that’s the deal.

    Easy.

  86. That’s true, Biker. We are all his guests.

  87. I think it’s always easier to identify poor behavior in others than in ourselves. It’s easier to say that was snark and acceptable in someone we know and trust than in a stranger who isn’t a friend and may never be one.

    We’re all human. We all mistakes. Me more than most! I’m trying. Sometimes too trying.

    I too will give that benefit of a doubt. I can control what I do, what I say, what I post. I didn’t post a single thing that was to our newest blogger or in response to our newest bloggers posts. S/he jumped to that conclusion and I straightened that point out. Yesterday, the newest blogger said I jumped to conclusions and straightened me out! Should be OK for both of us to expect the other not to assume things!

    Iggy has given me the right to help him in the administration of his blog so I can control more than just me. But I don’t want to! I want everyone to control themselves.

    The truth will always include that Iggy paid for the microphone and makes the final decisions. I don’t have the right or any permission to control the owner of the blog!

    • Bad Biker

      I have heard that Iggy is extremely hard to control, to the point of being incorrigible.

      But, that’s just what I heard.

      Regardless, I’ll always be better looking than him.

      sarcasm/

  88. I apologize, I shouldn’t have called him a “dufus” – more accurately, I should have said he is a “delicate flower whose feelings are easily hurt.” I stand corrected.

  89. PrairiePond

    “I understand that without frank talk with people who disagree with your own opinion, nothing will get accomplished ”

    What, in the wide, wide world of sports, do you think you are going to “accomplish” on a blog?

    We all read. We all hear viewpoints that differ from our own. You say you will not compromise what you have to say? Fine. But why do you want to say it to us? Here? Perhaps you would be more comfortable saying whatever it is you have to say on a different blog. It’s pretty clear you are from the “other place” as you said.

    Why do you follow us here?

    What the hell would “accomplish” something on a blog look like?

  90. PrairiePond

    Perhaps instead of whining about the rules here and how they are enforced, or not, you should go somewhere that you like the rules and the enforcers?

    We all know we are far from perfect. We dont need you to point that out.

    Sanctimonious much?

  91. Thank you, PrairiePond!

    I tried to find the words to say what you easily said.

    It is absolutely true! We are all (and that covers every person of every opinion) well read and we came by our opinions after careful thought. It isn’t us (those who are interested in what’s going on) who are ill informed. We aren’t perfect and we are interested in other opinions to test ours, to cause us to reflect on where we are or cause us to look at that issue again to evaluate if we are still satisfied in our due diligence.

    But we don’t need to have anyone be wrong in order for us to be right! There truly can be several ways of looking at each issue and none need be right or wrong for everyone.

    We don’t need comparisons. We don’t expect that because we think one way everyone should or will agree.

    So post away on information, opinions, ideas, and if anyone has a question they’ll ask it, or if they have a comment they’ll make it. Don’t imagine that each post is a comment to any individual or a response to a post you made, maybe it’s no more than words that poster wanted to share.

  92. PrairiePond

    Hee hee heeeeee Fnord!

    I have great fun imagining you as THE ENFORCER!

    HA!

    You and Iggy and everyone else who works so hard on this blog do a great job. I appreciate it.

    • I can’t remember ever having my kids fooled either.

      Problem is, I’m just erratic enough that you never know for sure… I can go off on emotional tantrums! Hey, when you’re as emotional as I am, you’ve gotta have a release valve!

  93. Blogging gives each of us a greater opportunity to find those bits of info we missed — everyone spreads out on these ‘internets’ and brings back things they think might be interesting.

    Blogging makes friends (and I guess can make enemies too).

    Blogging can be fun.

    Blogging is a place where the words we want to say can be said.

    Blogging probably is never going to solve a single world problem. Although there can be strength in numbers. I wouldn’t have the slightest idea of how to direct any strength we might create! 🙂