News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

GOP Primary Megathread!

Started by jimmy olsen, December 19, 2011, 07:06:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

garbon

Well Clinton getting caught in his extra-marital affairs and Bush with his inability to speak in English help set a new paradigm on how we should treat our presidents.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Fate

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 10, 2012, 05:09:01 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 10, 2012, 05:08:00 PM
What's wrong with Santorum's daughter?

Has a genetic disorder, Trisomy 18;  came down with a bout of pneumonia over the weekend apparently.

He didn't abort that shit? Jesus fucking christ. Mamma Palin keeping her Down's syndrome baby is one thing, but the average life span for a kid with Trisomy 18 is ~2 weeks.

Caliga

You're shocked that Santorum didn't go in for an abortion? :hmm:
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

Fate

Quote from: Caliga on April 10, 2012, 05:51:53 PM
You're shocked that Santorum didn't go in for an abortion? :hmm:
Yes, I'm shocked that someone could be so cruel to another human being, let alone their own daughter.

Caliga

But Jeebus doesn't like abortions. :(
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

Jacob

Speaking of the Republican war on women, I'd like American lawtalkers to tell me if there's anything to this:

Apparently Oklahoma is passing a fetus personhood bill today, similar to the one Missouri passed in 1986 but with one crucial difference. The Missouri bill had a bit about "subject to the Constitution of the United States, and decisional interpretations thereof by the United States Supreme Court," while the Oklahoma one does not.

This apparently leaves the Oklahoma bill open to lawsuits, the intention of which is to work its way up the chain and eventually put it before the Supreme Court, setting the stage for overturning Roe v Wade. Is that realistic? Likely? If so why or why not?

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/04/10/oklahoma-legislature-poised-to-pass-personhood-bill

DGuller

Aren't they jumping the gun?  Aren't they short of a vote, or do they know something about Kennedy others don't?

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Fate on April 10, 2012, 05:48:52 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 10, 2012, 05:09:01 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 10, 2012, 05:08:00 PM
What's wrong with Santorum's daughter?

Has a genetic disorder, Trisomy 18;  came down with a bout of pneumonia over the weekend apparently.

He didn't abort that shit? Jesus fucking christ. Mamma Palin keeping her Down's syndrome baby is one thing, but the average life span for a kid with Trisomy 18 is ~2 weeks.

It's Gawd's Will.

Hey, at least he's not going to have to carry an extra kid on his auto insurance.

Habbaku

I think Santorum should be forced to carry his campaign to term.
The medievals were only too right in taking nolo episcopari as the best reason a man could give to others for making him a bishop. Give me a king whose chief interest in life is stamps, railways, or race-horses; and who has the power to sack his Vizier (or whatever you care to call him) if he does not like the cut of his trousers.

Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people.

-J. R. R. Tolkien

DGuller

Quote from: Habbaku on April 10, 2012, 07:12:46 PM
I think Santorum should be forced to carry his campaign to term.
I guess you're not for abortions even in cases of mental defect?

MadImmortalMan

Quote from: Jacob on April 10, 2012, 06:07:29 PM
Speaking of the Republican war on women, I'd like American lawtalkers to tell me if there's anything to this:

Apparently Oklahoma is passing a fetus personhood bill today, similar to the one Missouri passed in 1986 but with one crucial difference. The Missouri bill had a bit about "subject to the Constitution of the United States, and decisional interpretations thereof by the United States Supreme Court," while the Oklahoma one does not.

This apparently leaves the Oklahoma bill open to lawsuits, the intention of which is to work its way up the chain and eventually put it before the Supreme Court, setting the stage for overturning Roe v Wade. Is that realistic? Likely? If so why or why not?

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/04/10/oklahoma-legislature-poised-to-pass-personhood-bill

Seems pretty short-sighted, as in bad strategy. I would not put money on the court overturning it with the current sitting members.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Viking

Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 10, 2012, 07:03:45 PM
It's Gawd's Will.

Hey, at least he's not going to have to carry an extra kid on his auto insurance.

Well, he is using he kid as a reason not to donate to charity.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

CountDeMoney

Quote from: DGuller on April 10, 2012, 07:15:36 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on April 10, 2012, 07:12:46 PM
I think Santorum should be forced to carry his campaign to term.
I guess you're not for abortions even in cases of mental defect?

lulz on both counts.

Eddie Teach

Quote from: garbon on April 10, 2012, 05:48:02 PM
Well Clinton getting caught in his extra-marital affairs and Bush with his inability to speak in English help set a new paradigm on how we should treat our presidents.

Not really their fault. Clinton had a much snoopier press and even special investigators whereas earlier Presidential philanderers just had to avoid PDAs. And Bush was mangling the English language long before he was elected, so voters knew what they were getting.
To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?

garbon

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 10, 2012, 08:03:53 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 10, 2012, 05:48:02 PM
Well Clinton getting caught in his extra-marital affairs and Bush with his inability to speak in English help set a new paradigm on how we should treat our presidents.

Not really their fault. Clinton had a much snoopier press and even special investigators whereas earlier Presidential philanderers just had to avoid PDAs. And Bush was mangling the English language long before he was elected, so voters knew what they were getting.

Clinton should have recognized that the times were different. Bush could have taken lessons a la King's Speech.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.