Politics....

Jill:

I read your article and have to laugh....as our Lord does in Psalm 2......verse 12 is exceptionally poignant.

Psalm 2
1 Why do the nations conspire
and the peoples plot in vain?

2 The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the LORD
and against his Anointed One.

3 "Let us break their chains," they say,
"and throw off their fetters."

4 The One enthroned in heaven laughs;
the Lord scoffs at them.

5 Then he rebukes them in his anger
and terrifies them in his wrath, saying,

6 "I have installed my King
on Zion, my holy hill."

7 I will proclaim the decree of the LORD :
He said to me, "You are my Son ;
today I have become your Father.

8 Ask of me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession.

9 You will rule them with an iron scepter ;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery."

10 Therefore, you kings, be wise;
be warned, you rulers of the earth.

11 Serve the LORD with fear
and rejoice with trembling.

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry
and you be destroyed in your way,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Love the disney dollars!

I really doubt PP and their pro-abort ilk would "donate" that kind of money....their coffers are being drained paying for the defense of their abortionists and paying off corrupt politicians aside from paying their so-called volunteers a premium to work for them and man their abortuaries.

I wonder how much a good night's sleep is worth to these people?

I keep seeing Trombley with dark circles around his eyes...

and Jill may I remind you that the wacko in the IL race self-destructed so thoroughly that it was not necessary to spend funds to defeat him.

It may be another matter with Palin, who is the most extreme religious right-wing candidate who has ever been on a major party ticket, yet is in "stealth" mode to hide her extremist views.

I expect the organizations will spend $10 million, $30 million or whatever it takes to expose Palin as the ultimate extremist, no abortion, no exceptions for rape and incest, a position which failed in South Dakota, and will alienate 90+% of the voters nationwide.

Let's remember there is a tremendous payback for getting a Dem elected. PP stands to retain/increase its already lofty sum of $300 million a year in taxpayer funding. It certainly would be a good investment for them to expend $10 million and get $1.2 billion in return (4 x 300 mil).

By the way, where DOES that $10 million come from and isn't PP a non-profit? If the non-profit Catholic Charities were to spend $10 million to support a Republican candidate the excrement would certainly hit the fan.

LTL, if the most popular position in this country is to ban abortion except in cases of rape, incest, etc. (which it is according to plenty of polls), meaning to ban 95% of abortions, and one candidate wishes to ban 100% of them, and the other wishes to ban 0% of them, then it's evident to me that the latter candidate is the one more "out of touch."

LTL, what makes Sarah Palin "extremist"?
That she supports the 2nd amendment to our constitution? That she decided to carry her disabled son to term instead of aborting? What, exactly?

By the way, I'm wondering why you never answered Oliver's question here at 11:56. Did you perhaps miss it, or are you avoiding answering for some reason?

Yes Bethany, anyone who doesn't drink Jill's kool aid is a SPY, A SPY PAID BY THE OBAMA CAMP!

That's it, that's the ticket!!!!

Bethany @ 5:30,

LTL, what makes Sarah Palin "extremist"?
That she supports the 2nd amendment to our constitution? That she decided to carry her disabled son to term instead of aborting? What, exactly?

These days you're an "extremist" if you're NICE.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Planned Parenthood spends so much money on their abortion business. Don't they care about women and children? Think how that money could be spent providing diapers and cribs and food to women with children.

If McCain is elected will he go after Emily's List demanding to see their donor list and check out their books??

One of the biggest mistakes that Jill Long-Thompson made when running against Chris Chocola for congress a few years back was her accepting funding from Emily's List.

When people in Indiana heard in the radio and TV ads that she was with Emily's List - which only backs women running that support abortion through 9 months - that sank her. She lost by 10 points if I remember right.

Now she is running for governor in Indiana. Gonna check now to see if she is taking money from Emily's List this time around. If she is then she will lose.

Sorry, but what's the significance of the Disney dollars again? =P

"These days you're an "extremist" if you're NICE."
--------------------------------

The way I see it, you're an extremist if you follow the Teachings of Christ...

Wasn't Christ considered extreme for the Roman gov't and was nailed to the Cross for it?

I guess history is now repeating itself...

The word "extremist" is a useless expression. It only means that you take an "extreme" position, that is a position on one end of a subject or the other, which could be either right or wrong. It is an innocuous word which just sounds awful but isn't. Most right positions are "extreme". If something violates human rights, you must oppose it under ALL circumstances (an "extreme" but also "right" position); if it doesn't violate human rights, you should support it under ALL circumstances (another "extreme" position). Don't call somebody an "extremist"; if you think they are wrong just say so.

Sarah Palin's position in favor of protecting human beings from abortion violence under ALL circumstances is the only morally right position, just as protecting human beings from murder violence or rape violence under ALL circumstances is the only morally right position.

It is a tragic reality that abortion crime is a politically popular crime because of the moral and spiritual weaknesses of human nature, but that does not absolve us of the responsibility of doing all that we can to try to stop this evil.

LTL, (lots to learn)

So you have had a few days to thing about it.

What species of embryo/fetus was in your mother's uterus when she was pregnant with you?

affectionately
your knuckle dragging neanderthal, not bitter, but still clinging to Jesus and my guns

I wonder if they will be sponsoring seminars by ACORN (Obama's former "community organizing" employer and repeat voter registration faud and polling offender).

Employing more university students to cast repetitive votes and round up street people?

Implementing nursing home personnel to case votes for those who can't vote for themselves?

I wonder if they will be sponsoring seminars by ACORN (Obama's former "community organizing" employer and repeat voter registration/polling faud offender).

Employing more university students to cast repetitive votes and round up street people?

Implementing nursing home personnel to case votes for those who can't vote for themselves?

Intellectual Inconsistency

I was once charged with trespass for refusing to move from the doorway of a building where pre-natal humans were being killed. In the subsequent trial I was interviewing perspective jurors. They all answered questions under oath, understanding that lying would be perjury, a crime. I read the part of the 14th amenndment to the U.S. Constitution which states: 'nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

I asked each perspective juror which of these three rights was pre-eminent, life, liberty, or property. Each one of them said liberty was the most important. I then asked them how you could possibly enjoy liberty if you had been denied life. They all said you could not. I then said, 'If that is true, then you would have to say the right to life trumps all others, would you not?' Each one of them, in turn, agreed. Life is numero uno/number one.

Now here is the interesting part. I could only interview one juror at a time. The remainder of the jury pool was present and heard me ask all the previous persons the same questions. But when it came their turn, each one of them answered the same way. Initially, liberty was the most important right, but when asked how you could enjoy liberty without life, logic dictated that the right to life is our most valuable right.

All the perspective jurors answered the questions honestly. But initially they were all honestly wrong. When required to exercise logic they had to acknowledge the truth: Without life every other right is meaningless.

What kind of embryo/fetus was in your mother's uterus when she was pregnant with you?

Here are some clues: not bovine, not feline, not canine.

I know this is really difficult for some of you. You do not want jeopardize your bliss by giving up on your willful ignorance.

Are you smarter than a fifth grader?

And all the fifth graders said, "Human!"

What do you say?

ps:They convicted me of criminal trespass. I believe they would have voted to execute me if the penalty had been available. I know some of you would have.

kbhvac, yes you wingnuts always do well in court.

kbhvac, thank you for sharing your experience. Did you act as your own legal counsel? That's pretty cool if you did, especially since it was a jury trial rather than a court trial. Do you know why your jurisdiction doesn't allow group methods, ie show of hands, for conducting a voir dire, in addition to individual q&a format? It's okay if you don't; I'm just curious.

Sometimes I think that the US goes overboard in jury selection. Death-qualification, especially, creeps me out, although I understand the logic behind it. But that's not related to anything, really. I just find the jury selection process -- and how much influence a legal system allows the prosecution and defense -- to be really interesting.

Anyway, I hope you don't actually believe that anyone here -- or elsewhere -- would execute you for trespassing.

I wonder if they will be sponsoring seminars by ACORN (Obama's former "community organizing" employer and repeat voter registration faud and polling offender).

Employing more university students to cast repetitive votes and round up street people?

Implementing nursing home personnel to case votes for those who can't vote for themselves?

Posted by: Arlen Williams at September 5, 2008 8:46 PM

Hey Arlen,
Patricia offered to come Chicago and play dead so she could vote in the US election. Sweeeeeet.

Seems silly to justify using his choice of running mate when there are so many other good reasons.

I asked each perspective juror which of these three rights was pre-eminent, life, liberty, or property. Each one of them said liberty was the most important. I then asked them how you could possibly enjoy liberty if you had been denied life. They all said you could not. I then said, 'If that is true, then you would have to say the right to life trumps all others, would you not?' Each one of them, in turn, agreed. Life is numero uno/number one.

The jurors already were alive, thus they looked at liberty. Many people would not want to live, had they no liberty. In practice I wonder if any of us would want to live without any liberty.

Without an individual being alive, no other rights are to be considered, heck - nothing is to be considered. It's not that life, per se, is the most important right, it's only that "somebody" has to be there in the first place to have any conception about this stuff.

DeeL: Patricia offered to come Chicago and play dead so she could vote in the US election. Sweeeeeet.

Well, if she'll vote for Obama I'll throw in a nice shroud.