(04-03-2016, 08:36 AM)FAHQTOO Wrote:

(04-03-2016, 05:19 AM)Duchess Wrote:

(04-02-2016, 09:24 PM)Cutz Wrote: Geez. First you're annoyed when he insults women, now you're annoyed when he downplays the criminality of their crimes. He just can't win with you. It's like first he said your ass didn't look fat in those jeans, then he said it did, and you're mad at him both times.

He annoys the fuck outta me. No matter what he does, I am going to be annoyed with him.

I saw him trying to be presidential. It was so fuckin' annoying.

Simply thinking about that annoying fuck makes me feel vulgar.

Now you know how some of us have felt for the last 7 years. Every last word.

The difference is, the last seven years we actually were led by a president whose accomplishments will eventually outshine the race-inspired smear campaign that was conducted against him. He was every bigot's worst fear: an intelligent, reasoned black man with actual power. And whattaya know, he got us through the mess Bush left. Think how much he could have done with actual help from congress.

With a free pass from congress the next Prez could have had the first name "Ayatollah" then we could have a group hug, but no women no,no.

fahqtoo made the news last night and didn't tell us.

Woooo. SNL went there...the Donald & his daughter. Holy shit!

They need the ratings, talent is scarce for them lately.

I haven't fact checked this and I don't feel inclined to do so - I just read that Donald took 5 different positions on abortion in a matter of a couple days. Hahaha. Sounds about right.

Maybe he was thinking of conception.

He looked downright foolish last week. I was involved in something over the weekend so I don't know if he has been able to dig himself out of that hole or not. Obama seems to think the American public are smart enough not to vote into office someone of Trump's caliber. I don't have that kind of faith in the average American.

Well, Hillary Clinton found herself in hot water with her pro-choice colleagues and pro-life advocates whilst trying to capitalize on Trump's abortion statements.

Not for reversing any positions of her abortion stance, but instead for how she worded her positions and sticking to her openness to late-term abortion restrictions.


Snip:
Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton ran afoul of both the pro-life and pro-choice sides of the abortion debate Sunday when she said constitutional rights do not apply to an “unborn person” or “child.”

“The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Mrs. Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Now that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support.”

Mrs. Clinton also said “there is room for reasonable kinds of restrictions” on abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy.

Diana Arellano, manager of community engagement for Planned Parenthood Illinois Action, said Sunday that Mrs. Clinton’s comments undermined the cause for abortion rights.

The comment “further stigmatizes #abortion,” Ms. Arellano said in a tweet. “She calls a fetus an ‘unborn child’ & calls for later term restrictions.”

Describing the fetus as a “person” or “child” has long been anathema to the pro-choice movement, which argues the terms misleadingly imply a sense of humanity.

In addition, the specific term “person” is a legal concept that includes rights and statuses that the law protects, including protection of a person’s life under the laws against homicide. Pro-choice intellectuals have long said that even if an unborn child is a “life,” it is not yet a “person.”

Guidelines issued by the International Planned Parenthood Federation discourage pro-choice advocates from using terms such as “abort a child,” instead recommending “more accurate/appropriate” alternatives such as “end a pregnancy” or “have an abortion.”

“‘Abort a child’ is medically inaccurate, as the fetus is not yet a child,” the guide reads. “‘Terminate’ a pregnancy is commonly used, however some people prefer to avoid this as terminate may have negative connotations (e.g., ‘terminator or assassinate’) for some people.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016...titutiona/

If a pregnant woman gets in an accident and the baby dies the person at fault for the accident is charged with murder. How can it be both ways?

I think that law is up to the states to decide. It's complicated. It's a slippery slope! Ha! There is some debate that it's a step towards granting "personhood" to a fetus and a lot of blah blah blah legal mumbo jumbo.

Donald says if he's President, this is how he intends to pay for the wall on the border. Is this even feasible?

^ On the surface, Trump's "Mexico border wall funding plan" doesn't seem realistic to me. And, I question if it would be effective or compelling to the Mexican government.

I especially don't like the idea of using the Patriot Act as justification to pass executive orders requiring all "aliens" from all countries (legal or not, Mexico or anywhere else -- the way the memo reads) to prove legal residency status before they can wire money to other countries. Nobody asks people for I.D. and proof before they buy goods and pay sales tax to help fund state works.

Sending money out of the country does not constitute terrorism or a threat to national security. I don't know if Trump's proposal would be legally ruled to be covered by the Patriot Act, but it would be interesting to hear objective legal experts weigh in.

Secondly, I don't know if Trump is right about the bulk of money being sent to family members in Mexico being sent by illegal aliens vs. legal Mexican immigrants and how much his estimated $24 billion halt to individual Mexican families would motivate the Mexican government to change its firm stance. I'd like to hear what Mexico's leaders have to say about it.

Also, I don't like the idea of small businesses who handle money orders and such being burdened with a kind of immigration enforcement.

I think Trump is going back to "The Wall" because his rhetoric about it garnered him a lot of early support and he's looking to regenerate the base after a difficult week for his campaign.

Wisconsin -- Cruz and Sanders Win

Man, I find Ted Cruz to be one fake-ass annoying mofo. But, he and his campaign are doing a good job of gaining extra votes and delegates by painting Ted as the "anti-Trump conservative choice."

Cruz kicked Trump rump in Wisconsin tonight; early results show Cruz beating Trump by about 20%. A few weeks back, Trump was polling ahead of Cruz there.

My Republican guy Kasich got around 15%, not too impressive. But, Kasich's helping to make it extremely difficult for Trump to earn 1,237 delegates and thus forcing the Republican nominee to be decided at an open convention. Kasich thinks his delegates can convince other Republican delegates to move to his side at an open convention because he's the only of the three remaining Republican candidates who consistently beats Clinton in general election polls.

On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton by about 10% in Wisconsin tonight. He's now won 7 out of the last 8 contests. But, he's still far behind in earned delegates because Hillary has won big-delegate states by high percentages and has thus won way more delegates per victory.

Still, I think it's impressive that Bernie's been able to win so many states and raise so much money from individual donors. Bernie has the money to stay in the race for a long time, much to the Clinton campaign's annoyance. Even if he can't catch up to Clinton soon, his campaign apparently hopes/thinks he can keep gaining on her and then possibly win big in California in June, overtake her in earned delegates in the end, and then gain her super delegates at the Democratic convention.

Not happy fuckface got 35%, I wanted it to be under 30.

I read a couple articles saying Donald brought Melania in to help him with the women voters. Bitch, please.

Donald Fuckface has been fact checked and this is just a tiny portion of his lies. Lying liar.

I could probably do the same in regards to the Clintons but I'm not going to, I like them.

Trump boasted that he “predicted Osama bin Laden.” Nope. The book Trump published in 2000 mentioned bin Laden once, and predicted nothing about bin Laden’s future plans.

Trump “heard” that Obama is “thinking about signing an executive order where he wants to take your guns away.” If so, he misheard. What Obama reportedly considered was requiring large-volume private gun dealers to conduct background checks, not confiscating firearms from those who own them.

Trump said he “heard” the Obama administration plans to accept 200,000 Syrian refugees — even upping that wildly inaccurate number to 250,000 in another speech. Nope and nope. The number is about 10,000.

Trump said he got to know Putin “very well” while the two were on CBS’ “60 Minutes.” Nope. The two men were interviewed separately, in different countries thousands of miles apart.

Trump claimed his campaign is “100 percent” self-funded. Nope. At the time, more than 50 percent of his campaign’s funds had come from outside contributors.

Trump said his tax plan is revenue neutral. Nope. The pro-business Tax Foundation estimated the Trump plan would reduce revenues to the Treasury by more than $10 trillion over 10 years, even assuming his plan would create economic growth.

Trump told the story of a 2-year old who got autism a week after the child got a vaccine. But there’s no evidence of such a link. The study that claimed to have found a link between vaccines and autism has been exposed as an “elaborate fraud.” It was retracted five years ago by the journal that published it, and the author was stripped of his license to practice medicine in Britain.

Trump said Mexico doesn’t have a birthright citizenship policy. It does.

Trump claimed credit for getting Ford Motor Co. to move a plant from Mexico to Ohio. Ford says that’s baloney; it made the decision years before Trump even announced his run for president.

Trump denied that he ever called female adversaries some of these things: “fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals.” He used all of those terms.

Trump said in June “there are no jobs” to be had, when official statistics were showing 5.4 million job openings — the most in 15 years.

Trump claimed economic growth in the U.S. has “never” been below zero — until the third quarter of 2015. “Who ever heard of this?” he asked. Except it’s not unheard of. Economic growth has been below zero 42 times since 1946.

He is such a jackass!

(04-03-2016, 09:07 AM)Donovan Wrote:

(04-03-2016, 08:36 AM)FAHQTOO Wrote:

(04-03-2016, 05:19 AM)Duchess Wrote:

(04-02-2016, 09:24 PM)Cutz Wrote: Geez. First you're annoyed when he insults women, now you're annoyed when he downplays the criminality of their crimes. He just can't win with you. It's like first he said your ass didn't look fat in those jeans, then he said it did, and you're mad at him both times.

He annoys the fuck outta me. No matter what he does, I am going to be annoyed with him.

I saw him trying to be presidential. It was so fuckin' annoying.

Simply thinking about that annoying fuck makes me feel vulgar.

Now you know how some of us have felt for the last 7 years. Every last word.

The difference is, the last seven years we actually were led by a president whose accomplishments will eventually outshine the race-inspired smear campaign that was conducted against him. He was every bigot's worst fear: an intelligent, reasoned black man with actual power. And whattaya know, he got us through the mess Bush left. Think how much he could have done with actual help from congress.

I'm so sick of hearing this bullshit line. Anytime someone doesn't agree with Obama's decisions they're racist. If they're vocal about it, it's a "race-inspired smear campaign." All throughout history there have been those who oppose the current commander in chief. Now that we've had a black president those who oppose are racists. Get over yourselves and realize that YOU are widening the gap between the races by even implying such an agenda. It's okay to oppose and those who oppose are not necessarily racists. FFS!

(04-04-2016, 12:27 PM)Maggot Wrote: If a pregnant woman gets in an accident and the baby dies the person at fault for the accident is charged with murder. How can it be both ways?

This is incorrect. A charge of murder would only apply if the "accident" were a premeditated attack of some sort. At best an attorney would be able to go for a manslaughter charge. Besides which, we all know that fair and unfair, right and wrong have little place in a legal court of law. It's all about what the DA thinks he or she can prove, what sort of representation the defendant can afford, and of course the possibility of an election year or political motivation for the prosecutors involved. It can not only be both ways, it can be a hundred other ways besides.

But that's not really the answer you wanted, is it. Did you want to keep discussing the millions of ways the American Justice sytem contradicts and confounds itself on a daily basis? Or did you want to move on to something more stable and solid and completely in agreement with itself on matters of right and wrong? Like the Bible for example. No contradiction there.

(04-06-2016, 11:08 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote:

(04-03-2016, 09:07 AM)Donovan Wrote:

(04-03-2016, 08:36 AM)FAHQTOO Wrote:

(04-03-2016, 05:19 AM)Duchess Wrote:

(04-02-2016, 09:24 PM)Cutz Wrote: Geez. First you're annoyed when he insults women, now you're annoyed when he downplays the criminality of their crimes. He just can't win with you. It's like first he said your ass didn't look fat in those jeans, then he said it did, and you're mad at him both times.

He annoys the fuck outta me. No matter what he does, I am going to be annoyed with him.

I saw him trying to be presidential. It was so fuckin' annoying.

Simply thinking about that annoying fuck makes me feel vulgar.

Now you know how some of us have felt for the last 7 years. Every last word.

The difference is, the last seven years we actually were led by a president whose accomplishments will eventually outshine the race-inspired smear campaign that was conducted against him. He was every bigot's worst fear: an intelligent, reasoned black man with actual power. And whattaya know, he got us through the mess Bush left. Think how much he could have done with actual help from congress.

I'm so sick of hearing this bullshit line. Anytime someone doesn't agree with Obama's decisions they're racist. If they're vocal about it, it's a "race-inspired smear campaign." All throughout history there have been those who oppose the current commander in chief. Now that we've had a black president those who oppose are racists. Get over yourselves and realize that YOU are widening the gap between the races by even implying such an agenda. It's okay to oppose and those who oppose are not necessarily racists. FFS!

I am not disagreeing that political opposition has occurred throughout our history, or that it hasn't been nasty like this before. I'm not even saying everyone who disagrees with Obama's policies is a racist. You said that. I said, and stand by the assertion, that Obama's record is nowhere near as awful as has been put forth by his opposition, and that he has been the target of a widespread, RACE_MOTIVATED, smear campaign. I could call up the hundreds of thousands of examples of monkey jokes, nigger jokes, ape jokes and other assorted memes to prove this point...but I'm pretty sure you've seen them. There is an agenda. Pretending it doesn't exist just because it's distasteful and embarrassing does no one any favors.

If that makes you angry and defensive, look inward for the reasons why. It isn't my problem you get touchy about being associated with a bunch of racists who happen to share your views. Perhaps you should pick better allies.