deac29
Steve Lepore
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2011
- Messages
- 2,981
- Reaction score
- 415
Does RJ have a special word document saved on his computer with all his talking points and then copy and paste, or does he retype them every time?
Crooked hillary
- Thread starter marquee moon
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Does RJ have a special word document saved on his computer with all his talking points and then copy and paste, or does he retype them every time?
Junebug
Well-known member
It's (partly) because you post shit like this that nobody takes you seriously. Abortion clinics in Indiana were flushing aborted fetuses down the toilet. Indiana passed a law requiring the *clinics* to properly dispose of the remains, with the mother having the right to take the aborted fetus if she wanted to properly dispose of it herself. The law passed with bipartisan support.
Indiana does not, as you claim, "make the woman bury or order cremation of the fetus."
http://aleteia.org/2015/08/12/india...ng-clinics-to-offer-burial-of-aborted-babies/
Last edited:
Why should there be any stigma to the disposal of a random clump of tissue? How is that "evil"?
We have been repeatedly assured that clumps of tissue are devoid of life, rights and dignity. They are merely the chattel of the property owner; no more entitled to a second thought than household furnishings or eighteenth century black Americans. In the face of a half century's worth of assurances, I am confused by your newfound consternation.
Make up your mind, RJ.
Last edited:
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
you draw this conclusion from the linked article? Interesting.
WFFaithful
Well-known member
RJ throws out facts while sailor posts third-handed conclusions derived from opeds.
sailordeac
Well-known member
I didn't. Where did you draw your conclusion from?
ONW
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2011
- Messages
- 19,177
- Reaction score
- 658
The fact you referenced it and then immediately made that statement I'm guessing.
DeaconSig
Well-known member
sailordeac
Well-known member
seriously, don't you think the Republicans will immediately move to impeach when she takes the oath of office? I do
Junebug
Well-known member
Hillary and her many wheelbarrows
Jonah Goldberg
DO YOU KNOW the old wheelbarrow joke? It’s truly funny only to grandpas and the grandkids they tell it to, so I won’t bother with the elaborate setup. For years a factory worker pushes a wheelbarrow full of straw past a security guard on his way out. Suspicious that the guy is stealing something, the guard looks in the straw but can’t find anything. Finally, when the worker is retiring, the guard asks, “I know you’ve been stealing something — can you tell me what it is?
The guy smiles and says, “Wheelbarrows.”
That joke keeps popping into my head whenever I hear Hillary Clinton’s defenders say there’s no evidence of a quid pro quo in the fresh batch of emails released this week. According to many Republican critics, the trove provides fresh evidence that the Clinton Foundation was, in Donald Trump’s words, a “pay-to-play” scheme, selling access to and favors from the Secretary of State.
...
This whole argument misses the point. What we know from these emails, particularly thanks to an analysis by the Associated Press, is that Clinton or other State Department officials agreed to meet or talk on the phone with a large number of Clinton Foundation donors. Some of these meetings probably would have happened if the foundation never existed. But clearly some wouldn’t have.
Team Clinton wants to say that even though these meetings and conversations took place, there’s no evidence that anyone was granted a special favor.
Fine. Maybe. We’ll see. But even if that’s true, is there any evidence that the Clinton Foundation wasn’t eager to leave the impression that a donation couldn’t hurt your chances with the State Department?
This brings me back to the wheelbarrow joke. The meetings (and phone calls) are the wheelbarrows. It really doesn’t matter if there’s nothing “inside” the wheelbarrows; the meetings and conversations alone were valuable. -
http://www.unionleader.com/columns/...ny-wheelbarrows-08292016#sthash.9hrKSsHw.dpuf
Jonah Goldberg
DO YOU KNOW the old wheelbarrow joke? It’s truly funny only to grandpas and the grandkids they tell it to, so I won’t bother with the elaborate setup. For years a factory worker pushes a wheelbarrow full of straw past a security guard on his way out. Suspicious that the guy is stealing something, the guard looks in the straw but can’t find anything. Finally, when the worker is retiring, the guard asks, “I know you’ve been stealing something — can you tell me what it is?
The guy smiles and says, “Wheelbarrows.”
That joke keeps popping into my head whenever I hear Hillary Clinton’s defenders say there’s no evidence of a quid pro quo in the fresh batch of emails released this week. According to many Republican critics, the trove provides fresh evidence that the Clinton Foundation was, in Donald Trump’s words, a “pay-to-play” scheme, selling access to and favors from the Secretary of State.
...
This whole argument misses the point. What we know from these emails, particularly thanks to an analysis by the Associated Press, is that Clinton or other State Department officials agreed to meet or talk on the phone with a large number of Clinton Foundation donors. Some of these meetings probably would have happened if the foundation never existed. But clearly some wouldn’t have.
Team Clinton wants to say that even though these meetings and conversations took place, there’s no evidence that anyone was granted a special favor.
Fine. Maybe. We’ll see. But even if that’s true, is there any evidence that the Clinton Foundation wasn’t eager to leave the impression that a donation couldn’t hurt your chances with the State Department?
This brings me back to the wheelbarrow joke. The meetings (and phone calls) are the wheelbarrows. It really doesn’t matter if there’s nothing “inside” the wheelbarrows; the meetings and conversations alone were valuable. -
http://www.unionleader.com/columns/...ny-wheelbarrows-08292016#sthash.9hrKSsHw.dpuf
They just found dozens of bengazi email in the 55,000 "personal" email she tried to wipe from her server and didn't turn over. "Personal"?
At what point does your own credibility matter more than her candidacy? Try to answer without using the names Donald or Trump.
sailordeac
Well-known member
It would show they have no interest in America succeeding just like their actions against Bill and against Obama. House Republican make 2 yos who haven't been potty trained look mature.
WRONG!
http://www.motherjones.com/politics...passed-law-requiring-funerals-aborted-fetuses
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/14/12190380/mike-pence-trump-vice-president-abortion-funerals-fetuses
This is why no one takes Junebug's BS seriously.
PhDeac
PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 155,839
- Reaction score
- 22,804
That's a negative for some voters.
No it's not. Johnson has no chance and very little money. If they had Perot money, they would have been taken more seriously. At least they would have been able to have a presence. Johnson doesn't.
The reason third and fourth parties work in other countries and not the US is that in Germany and other places they win local elections, then parliamentary elections before thinking about going national. Here they basically start at the top.
Before someone freaks out and says, "well there are independents and maybe a Green Party local official or two", they aren't organized to win over and over locally and statewide.
Junebug
Well-known member
I know you aren't going to read the articles others post, but you really should read the ones that you yourself do.
From the first one you posted:
"And, as Mother Jones reported in March, the law also required that *health care facilities* inter or cremate the remains of an aborted fetus...."
Fucking moron.