Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Cynthia Neely Republican-style Sharia law denies women basic rights

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Cynthia Neely

Posted: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 6:09 am, Tue Apr 24, 2012.

One of the ironies of Republican political ideology is the paradox that poses their ardent enthusiasm for smaller government and less governmental intrusion into our lives, against their unceasing desire to pass laws to control our personal lives, thereby actually increasing the size of government and initiating legislation that permits government to invade our bedrooms as well as our person.

During the 2010 election, one Republican nominee raised the specter of "Sharia law," alleging that this Islamic law was being practiced in the United States. That actuality was quickly exposed as untrue, but Sharia law did inspire some concern, even though it is not strictly understood.

According to some, Sharia is not actually "law," but is a collection of ancient religious moralistic and often harsh principles which regulate personal and moral conduct. Muslim countries do not enforce this code uniformly. In some countries there is unequal treatment of women in inheritance, dress and independence. In some remote tribal areas, cruel punishments such as amputations and stoning are still practiced.

A realistic concern is whether, in this country, we are seeing a renewal of unequal treatment of women that was rejected decades ago, or whether we are now seeing a new set of rules for women, that is, Sharia Law — Republican-style.

During our early history, many laws promoted unequal treatment of women. Laws prevented women from owning property, making contracts, or even bringing lawsuits. In 1848, New York passed a law giving property rights to women, although it took decades for other states to adopt a version of this law. In the 1870s, U.S. courts overruled the common-law principle that a husband had the right to "physically chastise an errant wife."

In the 1800s, laws in the U.S. prohibited birth control. In 1873, Congress passed a law outlawing the dissemination of birth control devices or information through the mail. In 1916, Margaret Sanger, a strong supporter of birth control, served a 30-day sentence in a workhouse for opening a birth control clinic.

By the 1950s and 1960s, many states had legalized birth control, and in 1965 the Supreme Court found that prohibiting birth control violated the right of privacy, because it allowed the police to search the bedroom of a married couple to look for evidence of birth control.

We recently had Republican presidential hopefuls seeming to want to go back to the "bad old days" where women were deprived of the availability of birth control, resulting in women having more children than they could care for or, in many cases, could afford. (In the 1800s, the average woman gave birth seven times.) Clearly this restriction caused an increase in the number of abortions, which Republicans say they want to prevent.

Birth control statistics reveal that 98 percent of Catholic women have used birth control, even though their religion forbids the use of contraceptives. One in five women have used the resources of Planned Parenthood for contraception advice.

In a hearing on birth control in the House of Representatives, only men were witnesses and one woman was prevented from appearing before the all-male panel by Republican Chair Issa.

Former presidential hopeful Rick Santorum says that birth control "is not okay."

Even though birth control advice and support is provided by Planned Parenthood, which actually prevents countless abortions, Presidential candidate Mitt Romney says of Planned Parenthood, "I will get rid of it." He, along with Speaker of the House John Boehner, support the Blunt Amendment, which would permit employers to deny health insurance coverage to employees on the basis of their (the employer's) moral objections.

Republican hot-air merchant Rush Limbaugh called the woman who was not permitted to testify in the birth control hearing a "slut" and a "prostitute." Incredibly, not one Republican presidential candidate condemned the attacks on the Georgetown law student who was so vilified by Limbaugh.

Then there are the states in which Republican legislators have introduced, and in some cases have passed, laws making decisions on women's health that should be left to women and their physicians.

The Texas legislature defunded Planned Parenthood, cutting off health care — including breast cancer screening to 60,000 women. In Arizona, health care plans can refuse reimbursement for birth control drugs unless a woman can prove that she is taking them for medical reasons (acne, etc.) and not for birth control. Coverage can also be denied if the employer does so on religious grounds.

Another issue affecting women is emergency contraception, which can prevent pregnancy when taken shortly after unprotected sex. Eight states restrict emergency contraception even in cases of rape or incest. Six allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives, and two allow pharmacies to refuse to do so.

In Kentucky, Virginia, Wisconsin and Texas, a woman is required to have a medically unnecessary ultrasound 24 hours before an abortion. In Virginia, the proposed law required doctors to perform this procedure before an abortion even in instances of rape or incest. When the law requires a doctor to violate a woman with a medical instrument, this gives an entirely new meaning to statutory rape.

Lost in all of this rhetoric concerning birth control is the fact that birth control is not an issue that only affects women. Family planning is an issue central to both men and women in their relationships.

During the passage of the Affordable Health Care Act, Republicans carped constantly that this law would be an infringement on the sacred doctor/patient relationship. In reality, however, they continue to place politicians squarely between a doctor and his or her patient.

Rick Santorum's billionaire backer Foster Friess tried to make light of the birth control issue by saying that women should just do what they used to, put an aspirin between their knees. However, women are not laughing. They are tired of politicians dictating how they should live their lives.

Unfortunately, it appears that Republicans believe that corporations are people, but women aren't. But they should recognize one major difference: women vote.

Cynthia Neely of Lodi is a retired city attorney.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don't pretend you're someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don't insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.

Welcome to the discussion.

185 comments:

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:06 pm on Fri, May 4, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    mrl: "As my old pappy used to say, if you want respect, give it. Well if that is the case mrl...you have very little respect on this site.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:04 pm on Fri, May 4, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Bob Chapman: mrl thinks "meds" is LSD, crcak, crank, pot, cocaine and speed bllas. Never had the need for "meds" myself...how about you?

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:45 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Chapman stated...Future replies or posts from you to or about me will be totally ignored

    Mr Chapman... good decision. I think it wise all to follow Robert's post.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 7:48 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Why would you think i would be frustrated? Tell if I am wrong on how this went down. I made an argument about Kenysian Economics. You then said this:

    Kenysian Economics works. But only for a very, very short time. Eventually, like a house of cards, it comes crashing down. No economy has ever thrived and prospered, for any length of time, depending on Kenysian theory of economics. The newspapers are full of countries that have tried and are failing. America sure doesn't need to be the next victim.
    MR. BAXTER, it is most likely in your best interest to simply ignore Mr. Lucas, as others have. He obviously has "issues" and should probably attend an anger management program. Pathetic.
    MR. BAUMBACH, you mean if I say "it is so, it isn't". That's not how Mr. Lucas sees it.

    I posted a counter argument to the above at 10:49 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.
    In that argument their were no personal insults in spite of your dig above.

    After that you and your fellow second rater and coward Mr Baxter have done nothing but engage in one personal attack after another, If you notice I did not respond in kind until after the second personal attack. That is my policy. This is such typical right wing behavior that it is has become accepted. Someone argues with you without personal attack. You, as we see here, respond with a personal attack. You are confronted with a reasoned argument without personal attack again. You are unable to come up with a reasonable argument so you go personal again. That person FINALLY unloads on you and you whine and cry how the other person is so mean. This is not an opinion. The proof is on this very page. This is how it went down.

    I will repeat what I said before

    If you want an open and honest debate I am more than happy to oblige. If you want to engage in personal attacks and hyperbole I can do that also. If you choose not to respond I will understand why.

    I finally figured out why the first one neither one of you will choose. Neither one of you second rate cowards are capable of having an open and honest debate

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 6:58 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Ahh, Mr. Lucas, It must be a great frustration knowing only you have all the answers to the problems facing America and the world but nobody will let you be in charge. Your intellect is obviously far superior to anyone that could possibly post on this site. You just like to argue just for the sake of argument and can not carry on a logical and insightful debate because when someone disgrees with you they are "idiots", "off their meds", "stupid' or any other insulting barb you can conjur up. I have seen phony intellectual idiots like you come and go many, many times. Future replies or posts from you to or about me will be totally ignored.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 6:06 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Pat, I am thinking a wood post would be best but then who am I to decide? I am trying to spend ALL of my money as quickly as I can (helping the economy, ya know). I have two fears, running out of money before I croak or dying with a bunch of unspent cash (although my son wouldn't mind). I am trying to work it out so I write a bad check on my last day on earth. Harder than it sounds. But in the meantime, I am thoroughly enjoying my travels around America. Be home in Clements next month for a couple of weeks then off again, north to Alaska. Kind of makes me wonder why I keep the ranch, I am seldom there but have to have a "home base".

     
  • John Lucas posted at 5:54 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Mr Baxter posted:

    Posted by Mr. Lucas,
    "I know if I ever acted in the manner you are acting now the shame of it would make me go and get a gun and blow my brains out. There is such a thing as honorable behavior."
    Honerable behavior? Are you kidding me? I have read your previous posts on LNS. You are rude, crude and insulting to anyone that disagrees with you. As my old pappy used to say, if you want respect, give it. Evidently something your critical thinking class didn't cover.
    P.S. go outside first, don't mess up your house.

    Go and look at the totality of my posts. You will see very many that are reasoned responses with no personal attacks or hyperbole. It is only when second raters like you go into your personal attack mode that I respond in kind. When second rate intellects like you Mr Baxter or Mr Chapman cannot come up with any reasonable answer you immediately dive into personal attacks and other logical fallacies. Your response to one was this:

    Sorry to disappoint you Mr. Lucas, YOU are the only one arguing here. You throw out BS statements and tell me it is "proof" when in fact is is only YOUR opinion. Then you get all bent out of shape when someone questions you and ask for FACTS. Instead of countering with facts, you merely re-hash your unsubstantiated OPINIONS. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to offer. Til then, SEE YA.

    Do you notice that you do not say which facts were only opinions or reference anything I said? You did not answer one of the arguments I put forward. You just did not like what I said and signed off the same way your fellow second rate intellect Mr Chapman did. With a personal attack. There is a reason you and your fellow second rater Mr Chapman respond with personal attacks and nothing else. Neither one of you is smart enough to do anything else. More than that you are afraid of losing the argument in other peoples eyes.
    In an open and honest debate I will always beat you two second raters. I believe that God is love and God is truth. I am smart enough to realize that the only time I win an argument is when I lose it for then I am closer to truth and thus closer to God. When I lose an argument my world changes for I am closer to reality. When I win an argument I really gain nothing. The only thing you two second raters are interested is being right and you are shaking in fear that someone might see that you are wrong about something. Cowards

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 4:47 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1797

    Posted by Mr. Lucas,
    "I know if I ever acted in the manner you are acting now the shame of it would make me go and get a gun and blow my brains out. There is such a thing as honorable behavior."
    Honerable behavior? Are you kidding me? I have read your previous posts on LNS. You are rude, crude and insulting to anyone that disagrees with you. As my old pappy used to say, if you want respect, give it. Evidently something your critical thinking class didn't cover.
    P.S. go outside first, don't mess up your house.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:08 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Bob: Should I use a steel post or wood...wood is kind of dull, but sometimes steel has a ringing quality I can't stand. In any case the barbwire sings too much when I get loud or excited. Any suggestions?

    Pete: Does msn think these are the GOOD OL DAYS??? Good post!


    Bob: Can I borrow some money? Just kiddin!

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:02 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    mrl: The sincerity of your apology is overwpowered by the swift kick in the nads.

    Never said trickle-down economics is an answer. However, in my company as in most companies (look at Marriot Corp), when left alone by the govt it does work. Leaders of business are not stupid, fair compensation is tantamount, as is working conditions and benefits. Some can afford to supply them others can not, some employees take the benefits, others take the money. The GDR , Russia, Spain, Greece, Italy, South Africa and many others failed to make everyone equal...which is what BO (even though he has exempted himself and congress from it) has tried to do with Obamacare...and of course LIKE in the GDR many companies and groups were "exempted". It is not good enough for the elites. Would Keynes agree?

    Keynesian economics will NEVER work for one simple fact: The rules never apply to those at the top and in general too many are satisfied with 99 weeks of unemployment and government checks (of course many are working "under the table" or "on the side"). Now, who are the cheats?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 3:01 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726


    At it again, I see
    I find people like you interesting if repugnant. You make an argument saying Kenysian economics never works. I take the time and effort to make counter arguments. At that point you four choices of how to respond.

    1. You could have said I was right. That will never happen on this blog. Since I have been here I am the only person here who I seen that has admitted when I was wrong or admitted when I have gone over the top in something I said.
    2. You could have looked at what I said and made a counter argument and the battle would have continued
    3. You could have stopped for whatever reason and the argument would have ceased
    4. You chose the forth option. Like a deer caught in the headlights you ran as fast as you could to making personal attacks and telling the world how rich you are and what a fine education you have to avoid answering my arguments. George Bush also had a good eduction and is very rich and like George Bush got out of facing Vietnam by using political pull you used personal attacks and telling us how great a person you are instead of facing the trial of rebutting the arguments of some random truck driver. Like George Bush you have a second rate intellect and are a coward to boot. You and your fellow Conservative Republican friends may be fooling yourselves but deep down you know I am telling the truth and you can believe you are fooling no one else. I know if I ever acted in the manner you are acting now the shame of it would make me go and get a gun and blow my brains out. There is such a thing as honorable behavior.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 1:40 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Mr. Maple, go outside, find a fence post, any post. Then read what you wrote to the fence post. Trust me, the post will understand more than a Radical Liberal "Critical Thinker".
    I have an MSc and I can't figure out what kind of mumbo jumbo that this Radical Liberal "Critical Thinking" genius is espousing. I guess I should have taken a course in Critical Thinking. Wonder if they offer that online?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 1:11 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    In the first sentence I meant to say:

    Pat, some of what you say may be true

    sorry

     
  • John Lucas posted at 12:44 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Pat, what you say may be true. It still does not alter the fact that it has nothing to do with Kenysian economics which is a management system for a free market based capitalistic economy. Conservative Republicans also have their management system which has been called Voodoo, trickle down or supply side economics. The argument that is going on is about which management system works best. You bringing up a communist system in the argument is commonly called the Strawman argument. it is not germane to the argument at hand.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:53 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Darrell said:

    Ask me questions whenever you have the urge. Im always happy to help you along...

    Thanks Darrell I appreciate that. The only question I have after reading every one of your posts is: Are you off your meds?

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:49 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    mrl: The East German economy was based on theory, economic and social manipulation by the govt, lies, cheating and oppression. Everyone was being treated equally (supposedly) and everyone was fully employed (supposedly). Yet, many were treated as "upper class" (athletes, doctors, political and military leaders) and were given greater priviledges, more food, freedom and exposure to the outside world.

    "The German Democratic Republic had a centrally planned economy similar to the one in the former Soviet Union, in contrast to the market economies or mixed economies of capitalist states. The state established production targets and prices, and allocated resources, codifying these decisions in a comprehensive plan or a set thereof. The means of production were almost entirely state-owned."(Like GM?)

    "The private sector of the economy was small but not entirely insignificant. In 1985 about 2.8 percent of the net national product came from private enterprises. The private sector included private farmers and gardeners; independent craftsmen, wholesalers, and retailers; and individuals employed in so-called free-lance activities (artist, writers, and others). Although self-employed, such individuals were strictly regulated."(Like small businesses today?) Yes mrl...govt knows best... Exactly what Keynesians purport...GDR style.

    Darrell: mrl is entitled to his opine...I just enjoy making him look silly.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:57 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Mr Chapman replied to my comment below at 8:55 with following:

    YAWN, ZZZZzzzzz.

    What can one say when presented with such a piercing piece of thought provoking dialog. I salute you sir. :)

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 8:55 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    YAWN, ZZZZzzzzz.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:23 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated... I know I am breaking my vow not to comment on your posts

    Its OK Mr Lucas, As I stated just a couple of days ago, the content and accuracy of my statements is overwhelming for you and inspires you to respond.

    You admitting you are a radical liberal though is your first step to reality instead of your world according to Lucas.. Im sure with a little work and study you will become aware of the fallacies of your arguments and positions.

    Ask me questions whenever you have the urge. Im always happy to help you along...

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:11 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Bellville stated...Why are we focused on women anyway?

    My contention is that the woman vote is essential to President Obama. He has lost a significant percentage of independent woman who voted for him in 2008. Ms Neely wants her candidate, president Obama, to win in 2012. She is attempting to do her part by creating anger and emotion in woman to increase the vote for Obama... its that simple.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:04 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...how do you spell DEE Loo Sion... The obvious answer is "Darrell Baumbach"

    Thank you much for demonstrating my point... you always come through.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:56 pm on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Mr. Chapman I congratulate on your financial success in your life. You might have taken a critical thinking class for like Pat Maple you seem to think that success gives you license to spout Conservative Republican talking points, not even try to stay on point in any argument and engage in the art of personal insult. I also engage in the art of personal insult but the difference between you and I is that you initiate it and think it is a reasonable argument device while I use it when my opponent has shown he does not want to engage in an open and honest debate. As to feeling shame and inferior that would require an ability for you to take an honest look at yourself which you are obviously incapable of doing.

    It is interesting that your last post you stated:

    Kenysian Economics works. But only for a very, very short time. Eventually, like a house of cards, it comes crashing down. No economy has ever thrived and prospered, for any length of time, depending on Kenysian theory of economics.

    I then wrote a lengthy post responding to your argument. I did not engage in hyperbole or personal insult, I tried to present a logical and well reasoned argument. This was your response.

    Mr. Baumback, shame on you for disrespecting someone who took a critical thinking class. His liberal instructor gave him an "A". With credentials like that, who are we to think we have the intellect to compete with him? By the time I was 45, the company I founded had over 600 employees with annual revenues exceeding $80 million But then I never took a critical thinking class, I feel SOooo ashamed and inferior.

    You threw out an argument. I responded to it. I guess because of your financial success you thought that this is an appropriate response. Words one writes are the window to ones soul. There is your soul and character on display. You are a moral coward. Someone replies to your argument in a respectful way and this what you think a educated man with honor and dignity would reply. You may be rich but there is one thing there is in the world that no amount of money will buy. Character

     
  • Peter Bellville posted at 6:04 pm on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    gopher Posts: 26

    Ms. Neely wants to vilify all members of the Rebublican party by rehearsing history and legal differences among states. Rush Limbaugh does not represent the Republican Party. Rick Santorum is a devout Catholic who doesn't agree with birth control. That opinion seems natural for him, but it may not reflect how he would handle the issue if he were president. To me, Ms. Neely's position seems paradoxical. On the on hand she seems to approve the services provided by Planned Parenthood and government funding for it, on the other hand she says "women's health that should be left to women and their physicians." But government funding means government involvement which means women are not going to be left to their own health decisions. Why are we focused on women anyway? Planned Parenthood also provides services for men.Their opinion also matters. Both men and women vote. As she says, "Family planning is an issue central to both men and women..." Ms. Neely also says, "We recently had Republican presidential hopefuls seeming to want to go back to the "bad old days" where women were deprived of the availability of birth control." No one is trying to deprive anyone of the availability of birth control. If the federal government stopped funding Planned Parenthood people would still be able to get birth control, it would just be without any bureaucracy involved: no forms, no government agents, no interviews, no qualifications or limitations. Besides, where in the constitution is there a provision for the federal government to provide birth control to its citizens? Doesn't that seem silly? Planned Parenthood is controversial. Let each individual state wrestle with this on their own and leave the federal government out of it.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 5:25 pm on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Darrell, sorry, MR. BAUMBACH for misspelling your name.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 5:23 pm on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Mr. Baumback, shame on you for disrespecting someone who took a critical thinking class. His liberal instructor gave him an "A". With credentials like that, who are we to think we have the intellect to compete with him? By the time I was 45, the company I founded had over 600 employees with annual revenues exceeding $80 million But then I never took a critical thinking class, I feel SOooo ashamed and inferior.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 5:12 pm on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    I know I am breaking my vow not to comment on your posts but this one is too much fun because you raise a question that I would like to answer. You asked:

    how do you spell DEE Loo Sion...

    The obvious answer is "Darrell Baumbach"

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:30 pm on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Pat... Imagine, Mr Lucas thinks your post is amazingly stupid...

    Shocking.... but then again, everyone who disagrees with Mr Lucas is amazingly stupid.

    What is comical is how immature and childish he appears while he sees himself as knowledgeable and thoughtful... how do you spell DEE Loo Sion...

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:21 am on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Pat, you have outdone yourself this time. Your comment is so amazingly stupid on so many levels there is really no need to answer it but I will give the major one.

    Keynesian economics like the voodoo economics of Reagan is a management system for market capitalistic economies. East germany was a communist economy. One has completely nothing to with the other. I know as a Conservative Republican you probably do not know the difference but I am confidant that if you had tried real hard you could have made the distinction.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:03 am on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    My answer to all those who think Keynesian economics works...East Germany.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:11 am on Tue, May 1, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Chapman stated...MR. BAUMBACH, you mean if I say "it is so, it isn't". That's not how Mr. Lucas sees it

    I am saying Mr Lucas has a preconceived idea and no matter what you say... it fits his reality or it does not. He does not learn or consider variables that might change what he already thinks. Unfortnately what he thinks is insane.

    My concern was Ms Neely and this letter. This distraction Mr Lucas has gone on takes the focus off where it should be... Obama and the election in November which is what Ms Neely's article was all about.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:49 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    You are partially right in what you are saying if you mean stimulus spending instead of Kenysian Economics. We are in big financial trouble now because of wasteful stimulus spending. From Carter to the end of the Bush years we put 10 trillion dollars on the credit card. 78% of that stimulus spending came under Republican presidents. Of course this won the approval of all Conservative Republicans for as Dick Cheney said.”Deficits don’t matter”. It does not matter to Conservative Republicans because most of that money went into the hands of the top 1/10 of the top one percent of the income bracket while they gleefully watched our infrastructure deteriorate. Conservative Republicans only have one simple economic policy when it comes to taxes. If the economy is doing well and federal receipts are up we should cut taxes. If the economy is going down we should cut taxes. Like most things this simple it is also simple minded.

    Kenysian Economics worked very well from the 1930’s until Ronald Reagan reintroduced Voodoo economics to the American people. Voodoo economics are thousands of years old. It says if most of the money goes to the top some of it will trickle down to us peons. It has never worked and no middle class has been built upon its principles and no middle class will survive it in the long term. From 1870 to 1929 Voodoo economics produced a financial meltdown just about every 10 years. That is its history.

    Both Voodoo economics and Kenysian Economics are management systems for market based capitalistic systems. While Voodoo economics only has one idea which is cut taxes Kenysian Economics recognize that the economic engine like a car engine needs different approaches to its handling when meeting different environments. You use less gas going down hill, you apply brakes when the speed gets too high etc. The basic idea is to keep it on an even keel. It understands the business cycle. What goes up must come down. It is understood that a massive federal debt load cannot be tolerated for any lengthy period of time. That is why when the economy is going gangbusters it is necessary to pay down the national debt (Which Clinton did) instead of funneling money to the top in the form of tax cuts (Which Bush did). In bad times Kenysians use stimulus spending to soften the landing of the downturn. That stimulus spending is used to finance projects that the private sector cannot due such as the Interstate Highway System, electrifying the south with TVA etc. The fight is really about the level of taxation needed to cover both cycles of the economy. There was a time when the Conservatives and the Liberal fought over this issue and the issue of how big the government should be etc. Those Conservatives like Eisenhower and Nixon believed in Kenysian Economics. Nixon famously said, ”We are all Kenysians now”. They were rational human beings and Eisenhower in my opinion was the most underrated President in history. Todays Conservative Republicans have lost all sense of reality and if they went any farther to the right they would fall off a cliff.

    When you said

    No economy has ever thrived and prospered, for any length of time, depending on Kenysian theory of economics

    You are wrong. The period from the 1930’s to 1980 is the longest sustained period of prosperity in the history of the world and its management system was Kenysian Economics. It built such a strong and sound economy that it has taken 30 years of the Voodoo economic management system to come to the near crash of 2008 and if it was not for 8 years of Bill Clinton we would be in the middle of the second Great Depression.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:57 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    You finally said something that is true. I am the only arguing here. What you are doing is engaging in personal attacks. You are like Pat ,Brian, Darrel, Jerome and Gary. I take what each of you say and when I answer back with a logical argument all you know how to do is run and hide behind blatant personal attacks. You made the statement:

    There is absolutely no theoretical or empirical evidence that Kenysian Economics is viable.

    I provided evidence to the contrary which you could refute very easily if you could provide an answer to the following question:

    Name a country that has a substantial middle class that did not employ the four policies I laid out including Kenysian economics

    Like Pat, Brian, Darrel, Jerome and Gary,you intellectually incapable of coming up with a coherent counter argument. You froze like a deer in the headlights and ran for the hills behind personal attacks and straw man arguments. You and your Republican Friends are despicable cowards intellectually incapable of carrying on an open and honest debate. When I was 45 I got a good driving job that allowed me to go back to college. I had a 3.8 GPA. I took a course in critical thinking that was given by the head of the English Department who was a mean s-b. 3 of us out of 32 made an A in that class. You and your friends Pat, Brian, Darrel, Jerome, and Gary would have washed out the first week. You mindless inability to carry on an open and honest debate would not have been tolerated. He simply did not put up with stupid on steroids.

    I know that is pointless to hammer you idiots in this way in spite of the fact that it is so obviously true. I just get tired of cowards.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 6:22 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Kenysian Economics works. But only for a very, very short time. Eventually, like a house of cards, it comes crashing down. No economy has ever thrived and prospered, for any length of time, depending on Kenysian theory of economics. The newspapers are full of countries that have tried and are failing. America sure doesn't need to be the next victim.
    MR. BAXTER, it is most likely in your best interest to simply ignore Mr. Lucas, as others have. He obviously has "issues" and should probably attend an anger management program. Pathetic.
    MR. BAUMBACH, you mean if I say "it is so, it isn't". That's not how Mr. Lucas sees it.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 5:31 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1797

    Sorry to disappoint you Mr. Lucas, YOU are the only one arguing here. You throw out BS statements and tell me it is "proof" when in fact is is only YOUR opinion. Then you get all bent out of shape when someone questions you and ask for FACTS. Instead of countering with facts, you merely re-hash your unsubstantiated OPINIONS. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to offer. Til then, SEE YA.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:31 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    I cannot believe Mr Lucas is a truck driver. Most people I know in this occupation have better thinking skills. Maybe he is the driver's assistant...that would explain things.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:27 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...In response I said laid out some arguments that ended up with a question and a statement concerning the implementation of the four policies I laid out

    Yes... since your assumptions in your four policies are wrong, anything that follows is a waste of time... consistent with Mr Lucas... a waste of time...

    Focus on current events and maybe you would have merit with the intent of this thread guided by Ms Neely.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 5:08 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Mr. Baxter, I cannot tell you how much I enjoy your intelligent replies to the argument we are having. Your counter arguments are so cogent and to the point and this poor truck driver is so awestruck by your innate brilliance that it is hard to concentrate in the presence of such a first-rate, superior, dazzling intellect. This poor truck driver will just have to do the best that I can.

    Lets go over where we are. You stated the following:

    There is absolutely no theoretical or empirical evidence that Kenysian Economics is viable.

    In response I said laid out some arguments that ended up with a question and a statement concerning the implementation of the four policies I laid out

    Name a country that did not use the four policies and has a substantial middle class.

    All countries that have substantial middle classes use these policies. Us, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan etc.

    It was here that the depth of your intellect and luminous quality of your remarkably impressive use of the English language came shining through. What was most impressive is how you stayed so on point, destroying my arguments with counter arguments so remarkable that one is simply brought to ones knees with their clarity of thought and the superb use of your obviously first rate critical thinking skills.

    Lets repeat some of these glitteringly magnificent arguments that are amazingly on point and directly used counter argument to destroy my rather obviously weak attempts at logical thinking.

    Tell me Mr. Lucas, how did you come up with the solutions to all the problems facing America while driving a truck down the road? Methinks the diesel fumes permeated your gray matter. How long did it take you to look up the definition of empirical?

    How can anyone counter such Brilliance? Your argument is so crisp and cogent in its construction. What makes it so compelling is how it directly answers the arguments I raised. I am going to send this to a University so students can have something to shoot for when making clear insightful arguments. I am sure it will be included in all critical thinking textbooks in the future.
    I leave the field a broken man knowing that I cannot compete with the dazzling intellect of the man who wrote those words. If you were alive during the founding of our country there is no doubt you would have listed as one of the founding fathers

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:16 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    I'm sorry Mr Baxter... reality is not allowed in the world according to Lucas...

    I'm afraid your positions differ from his which automatically mean you are wrong.. evidenced by his long rant repeating word for word what he had already articulated. Nothing new; no objective compromise in thought... just I'm 100% right, you are 100% wrong... Lucas world in motion.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:09 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Yawn... Mr Lucas insists on using his inaccurate rant repeatedly. His "we" in who did what is so badly distorted that every word following "we" is meaningless...

    100 % of the legislators were not and are not liberals. Liberals and conservatives normally compromise to produce any legislation, except of course if you are Obama with a super majority in both houses.... To think that no conservative ideas and policies are built into liberal led legislation is inexplicable.

    Mr Lucas unfortunately cannot comprehend anything that is outside his preconceived conclusions... comedy in motion Mr Lucas, especially when you take yourself seriously.

    Again, the topic Ms Neely presented was current events and why Democrats shouldbe elected next November ( in her mind). Mr Lucas is stuck on history and attempting to prove a point that is not in reality.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 2:42 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1797

    Judging from your post it seems you like to get into shouting matches and are into personal attacks. Are you kidding me? It appears YOU are the king of shouting and personal attacks
    Just how did I "shout" at you and please remind me of my "personal attack" on you. I have news for you, just because people don't agree with you they aren't shouting and attacking you personally.If I hurt your little feelings, that is your problem, not mine. If you are that thin skinned, perhaps this forum isn't the place for you.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 2:19 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1797

    Shouting matches? Personal attacks? Only when someone else starts with the BS. I am not shy about giving it back.
    According to your posts, everyone that doesn't swallow your BS doctrine is stupid and uninformed. Tell me Mr. Lucas, how did you come up with the solutions to all the problems facing America while driving a truck down the road? Methinks the diesel fumes permeated your gray matter. How long did it take you to look up the definition of empirical?

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 1:26 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1797

    Evidence? Not one iota of "evidence" that Keynesian Economics works. Same bunch of hogwash you have spewed over and over again.
    Keynes, in his "General Theory" (1936), was not so good at explaining why his "economics" worked, and subsequent generations of Keynesian economists have not been successful either.
    There are two ways to view Keynesian stimulus through transfer programs. It's either a divine miracle—where one gets back more than one puts in—or else it's the macroeconomic equivalent of bloodletting.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:26 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Pat Maple asked a simple question: ".Are you trying to say that the US is not the most successful country in the world that used the principles of conservatism?" Thus the veteran comment. WE are veterans of this COUNTRY...sworn to PROTECT it... not trash it. Maybe you should book a world apology tour with your bud BO...I plan to vote him out of office.

    mrl: "Those countries that did not (use liberal policies) are financial disasters for vast majority of their citizens"

    Liberal policies used by: Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain...they are ALL doing so well for their "middle class"? Can you spell Bankruptcy.

    Yes Joe, we will destroy the future...we will retire...and the grasshoppers will take over.

    mrl continues to mix apples and oranges...that doesn't work either. There is no country in the world that used strictly Keynesian ideals to form a government...or for that matter an econlmy. They all have apples, oranges, pears, walnuts and just plain nuts.

    What FDR offered and gave people was a JOB...not a welfare check (Keyensian principle). A JOB is today considered a conservative solution...not an idea.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:16 am on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Mr Baxter said:

    There is absolutely no theoretical or empirical evidence that Kenysian Economics is viable.

    Really? I will repeat my argument

    In the 1930's the four things policies were implemented that created the greatest middle class in the history of mankind and those countries that followed our example did the same.
    
1.We instituted a highly progressive tax system.

2. We regulated the financial industry

3. We instituted labor laws trying to level the playing field between labor and management
    
4. We instituted Keynesian Economics 
 
Name a country that has a substantial middle class that has followed exclusively Conservative economic principles. There are none. It has never existed in the history of humanity.

    Name a country that did not use the for policies above and has a substantial middle class. Again there are none. 0, zip, nada

    All countries that have substantial middle classes use these policies. Us, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan etc.

    Europe elected Conservative politicians in the recent past and those countries that did are now sliding into recession. The polls show these politicians will soon be out of a job.

    Here in America we had a modest stimulus program and we are experiencing modest growth and the private sector has been adding jobs for 23 straight months. This after the biggest financial disaster since the Great depression which was caused by 8 years of a Conservative Republican administration. After being left with an economy that was paying off the national debt, in 8 short years Republican Conservatives doubled the debt to 10 trillion dollars, left an economy in tatters, losing over 700,00 jobs a month, 3 1/5 million jobs lost in a single year, an auto industry on the brink of collapse, a credit crunch and the threat of the complete meltdown of the financial system.

    The Great Depression started after 8 years of Conservative Republican rule. Unfortunately they had three years to go. In those three years the Republican Conservatives managed to get the unemployment rate up to over 25% using the policies recommended by Conservative Republicans today. This would have happened here if we had followed the same economic policies they did and which Republican Conservatives want us to follow now.

    I will however tell you why Liberal policies work and conservative polices will always fail. Conservative polices are based on selfishness and greed. There was this Jewish guy who had some very interesting thing to say about that. He had some interesting things to say in the Gospels. Do you think that what he was talking about did not apply to economics also?

    There is a pattern that is in my argument.

    All countries that have substantial middle classes have made use of the four Liberal policies I listed.

    You will not be able to show a country that has substantial middle class that has not used the four policies because that country does not exist.

    Is that enough empirical evidence for you?

    Judging from your post it seems you like to get into shouting matches and are into personal attacks. I have just took the time to present what I think is a well reasoned response to your argument. If you want an open and honest debate I am more than happy to oblige. If you want to engage in personal attacks and hyperbole I can do that also. If you choose not to respond I will understand why.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 9:38 am on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1797

    WHAT???? "It is amazing that the middle class people here champion the very policies that will destroy the economic future of their children."
    Don't worry about the Conservatives destroying the economic future of your children, Obama has taken care of that very well. Children, grandchildren and greatgrandchildren.
    Yeah, lets champion "Robin Hood Economics", better known as Kenysian Economics. Rob from the rich, give to the poor/deadbeats. There is absolutely no theoretical or empirical evidence that Kenysian Economics is viable. The only ones that are on board with this theory are the ones that want big government to take care of them from cradle to grave. No, thanks, I worked hard for my money and I have absolutely no intention of giving it up so deadbeats can be "middle class". However, I have no problem if others want to write big personal checks to elevate a slacker to "middle class" status.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 7:14 am on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    well said. They do however care about the top 1/10 of one percent of the wealthy in this country it is just the middle class and the poor their policies are bent on destroying. It is amazing that the middle class people here champion the very policies that will destroy the economic future of their children. You are correct , it is very sad and so pointless.

     
  • Jerry Bransom posted at 6:52 am on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Jerry Bransom Posts: 363


    How can you argue with the FACTS Ms. Neely? Look at all the knuckleheads on this blog who fail to get anything you said. Clearly, the Repubican leadership is only about winning because winning is power. They have no concern for the rights and welfare of Americans. And look at all the people here who agree. Sad.. very sad!

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:05 am on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Ego stated...I will now put you back on ignore where you most certainly belong...

    Thank you!

    You have promised to ignore me 2 times before. Hopefully, this time you will have the determination to follow through with your promise. I doubt it as you cannot control your emotions.
    It is obvious that your inability to comprehend the most simply of concepts is a real problem for you in keeping up with most people on this thread including me. Hopefully, you will mature and develop a grasp of reality. Good Luck !

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:59 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    9 straight posts and no one reading them much less commenting on them. You truly are pathetic. I will now put you back on ignore where you most certainly belong. Take care Darrell

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:35 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    You see Mr Lucas... I have prvided you some current events that relates to the concerns people have. Im sure you disagree with most everything posted, but that is the mind of an extreme liberal.

    Stay of topic and focus Mr Lucas... your one sided view of history is meaningless.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:32 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Are Obama’s job policies hurting women?

    By Glenn Kessler
    April 10, 2012

    “For far too long women have been left behind in Obama’s job market. Of the 740,000 jobs lost since Obama took office, 683,000 of them were held by women. That is truly unsustainable.” — Statement by Sharon Day, co-chair of the Republican National Committee, April 6, 2012


    As Bill Clinton so successfully utilized in his presidential campaign, "its the economy stupid"

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:31 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Alert. Darrell is off his meds again

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:24 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Obama’s 2nd-term agenda? House Dems propose raising taxes by 40%, including on middle class...

    The “Budget for All” contains just about every sort of tax increase imaginable. It would, of course, allow the top-end Bush tax cuts to expire, as well as create five new tax brackets — 45%, 46%, 47%, 48%, and 49% — for “millionaires and billionaires.” In addition, House liberals would break new ground by slapping a European-style wealth tax of 0.5% on fortunes of $10 million or more. The plan also contains a bank tax and a financial transaction tax.

    Regardless of whether Obama could implement such a plan in a second term, this agenda gives Americans a pretty clear vision of where liberals want to take them over the long term.


    http://blog.american.com/2012/03/obamas-2nd-term-agenda-house-dems-propose-raising-taxes-by-40-including-on-middle-class/

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:18 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    02/12/2012

    A new Gallup poll shows that ongoing concerns with the economy, complicated by uncertainty with government regulation and the anticipated cost of Obamacare, has dampened hiring by small businesses.

    "(Forty-eight) percent of those not hiring said it was due to concerns about possible rising health care costs, while 46 percent said they were worried about new government regulations," according to a report by Politico.

    This is especially concerning for Montana where small businesses employ such a high proportion of our workforce. We're in this race to ease regulatory uncertainty at the state level to create a stronger economic environment in Montana. But that's only half the battle. We also need a governor who will stand up to the federal government and fight back against regulations that we know will hurt our economy.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:14 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    http://www.usnews.com

    According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Obamacare will reduce the labor force by 800,000 over the next decade and estimates that the cost to American businesses due to inability or failure to comply will be $52 billion. The last thing our economy needs is even more hurdles to job creation, yet that is precisely what the healthcare law represents.

    For a small-to-medium sized business, the prospect of having to comb through the 2,700 pages of Obamacare to figure out which of the $525 billion in taxes, or $26 billion in penalties, or hundreds of new regulations and mandates apply to them is daunting, to say the least. Is it any surprise that healthcare costs have risen already? Fifty-seven percent of employers nationwide say that healthcare costs have risen due to Obamacare, and in my home state of North Carolina, premium costs are projected to increase by 5.2 percent over last year's costs.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:09 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Another online comment that says it all...

    Barack Obama is a community organizer. He knows how to grow division and class warfare. He knows nothing of growing economies. Left alone in control, democrats created policies that were not only not helpful to the economy and the middle class, they are harmful. The so-called “obstruction” by the GOP may be the only thing saving the middle class from Obama and the democrats.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:05 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    The Post-ABC poll found that the number of liberal Democrats who strongly support Obama’s record on jobs plunged 22 points from 53 percent last year to 31 percent. The number of African Americans who believe the president’s actions have helped the economy has dropped from 77 percent in October to just over half of those surveyed.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:03 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    More than a third of Americans now believe that President Obama’s policies are hurting the economy, and confidence in his ability to create jobs is sharply eroding among his base, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:56 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...Put it where the sun does not shine, Pat

    Yet another impressive intellectual post from Mr Lucas... Please Mr Lucas, try using you brain instead of childish verbal rubbish. Personally, I do not think you have the capacity to address people in an appropriate manner. Maybe Pat had it right...some veteran... Most veterans I engage with are much more refined and respectful to people they agree and “disagree” with.

    But again, off topic.. current liberal policies and legislation signed by president Obama that have been implemented and damaging our economy is the focus and related to the topic of this letter. Mr Lucas and his rather galactic ego should be on the back burner.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:43 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Yawn... more unrelated posts from Mr Lucas... who cares?

    Mr Obama and his liberal policies is the concern. Nov 2012 is coming soon and thought, energy and clear thinking about current events is in order and also related to this thread.

    Finding solutions to the oppressive and damaging liberal policies Obama has implemented should be the focus... Lucas theories and irrational fantasies are a distraction and should ignored until there is nothing better to do that play intellectual meaningless games that has “NO” basis in reality...

     
  • John Lucas posted at 4:26 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    The question revolved around 4 Liberal polices that are always present with countries that have a substantial middle class. It is a pattern that is always present with countries that have a substantial middle class. They are:

    1. A highly progressive tax system.

    2. A highly regulated financial industry
    
3. Having labor laws trying to level the playing field between labor and management
    t4. Keynesian Economics

    Conservative Republicans actively rail against and fight these policies. I am saying you cannot name a country that has a substantial middle class that did not use these policies. By definition if these policies are not present then it can be said that those countries are just using Conservative Republican policies. They are always economic disasters with a few rich people, a tiny middle class with the rest living in abject poverty. Mexico would be a good example. If we keep voting Republican we shall soon join them. That the history of economic policy around the world.

    Welfare is not mentioned in any of these policies.You are right FDR offered people a job by using stimulus spending which is part of Keynesian Economics.

    you said:

    Are you trying to say that the US is not the most successful country in the world that used the principles of conservatism?

    I am not sure what that means. I know for a fact that those policies were used in creating the greatest middle class in the world and those countries followed our example did the same. Those countries that did not are financial disasters for vast majority of their citizens

    As for this:

    Some Veteran

    Conservative Republicans like to attack a veterans service to their country when they do not like his or her politics. I am not John Kerry who took it in silence. Put it where the sun does not shine, Pat

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 3:20 pm on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    mrl: per your request: Name a country that has a substantial middle class that has followed Conservative economic principles. There are none. It has never existed in the history of humanity.All countries that have substantial middle classes use these policies. Us, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan etc.

    Are you trying to say that the US is not the most successful country in the world that used the principles of conservatism? We as a country and people spend Billions every year protecting people who are not ours, feeding people who are not ours, healing people who are not ours and in general helping people who are not ours. Every six seconds someone dies from starvation...who else is helping to keep this from being 1O people per second? Not many.

    Some veteran.

    mrac: What FDR offered and gave people was a JOB...not a welfare check. A JOB is today considered a conservative solution...not an idea.

    Quit watching BOs lips and start watching his feet.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 2:19 am on Sun, Apr 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Darrell said:

    Your middle class question is so far off base it is interesting that you are not aware of it.

    Then why do you not answer or use logical argument to refute it? You cannot because there is a pattern there that cannot be refuted. It is the same as saying you have to have water for grass to grow. What you said above is just a cop- out which is one thing you are good at. Do you notice that not one of your right wing nut job freinds have given a direct answer or come up with any counter arguments? It is because your trash can full of talking points do not cover the question. To answer that question or come up with rational counter arguments requires intellectual honesty and intelligence. Your comments about the question I ask are just meanderings of a coward afraid to engage in open honest debate.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:34 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Lastly Mr Lucas... please consider the “here and now” in your reality. Focus on current events. Ms Neely is wise enough to do so. She articulates her position so to make clear why she perceives liberals and democrats should be elected
    "THIS YEAR"... Unfortunately for her, the inflammatory nature and inaccuracy of her appeal is inappropriate... It seems that you and the author have this trait in common... no wonder you loved her letter.

    One might think that out of respect for Ms Neely, you would make posts that are in relationship to her letter.

    She wants president Obama elected again as well as a bigger supporting cast to have a super majority again.... Your middle class question is so far off base it is interesting that you are not aware of it. Or, was that your intent; to distract from Obama's record that so badly hurt our economy? I think so.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:15 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...Two you are not smart enough to defend your position.

    There he goes again. So insecure and uncertain of his reality that he must denigrate the intelligence of others to elevate his own stature in his mind. I think you are an intelligent man who simply has little awareness and grasp of reality.

    When you state... “Is there a country that you can name that has a substantial middle class that did not use the four Liberal policies I outlined many times on this site. You cannot for there is none.”... it tells a story about you. It says you are narrow minded and unable to grasp simple variables that effect the outcome. What you outlined is thinking a high school drop out would pose. When you educate yourself to a point that you can outline a question that has merit, I will answer your question.

    What ever question you pose though, better have a constructive tone where you acknowledge liberal and conservative policies that have benefited society. Until then, my time would be better spent watching grass grow.

    You state there are no possibilities other than what you know to be true.. Its comical that you do not know what you don't know. Again...you are intelligent obviously... but wise?... not in a million years.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:45 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    You are changing the tack. I asked a very simple question which you cannot answer. Is there a country that you can name that has a substantial middle class that did not use the four Liberal policies I outlined many times on this site. You cannot for there is none. If you had any honor you might say it is true(for it is definitely true) yes but there were other factors involved and listed those factors and the argument could have continued. You did not for two reasons.One you are an intellectual coward. Two you are not smart enough to defend your position.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:43 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Lets stay on task Mr Lucas... its 2012. There is an important election this year. Ms Neely was attempting to win votes for her candidate, Barack H Obama. Please stop distracting and distorting and focus on the event this article is really about.

    Mr Lucas never gets cornered by a question... he frames the argument in such a narrow focused way with most the pertinent facts missing, and expects a response as if it would have merit.

    If you call him on his false premise he simply ignores it and states... I'm right...you are wrong. For example... he states all our economic problems are caused by conservatives... not 70%...not 95%... no he believes 100%... and that only liberal ideas and policies are responsible for 100% of whatever success we have had...

    So if any conservative points out any factor that conservatives have contributed to success... his response is basically... you are stupid.

    My thought is that any individual as one sided as Mr Lucas is simply an ideologue whose opinion is meaningless to an objective person. Mr Lucas...there is no possible reason to run and hide from someone as shallow as yourself. I do encourage you to continue your colorful speech and ideas as it so clearly demonstrates the folly subjective liberal people like yourself.

    If you call him on his false primise he simply ignores it and states... Im right...you are wrong. For example

     
  • John Lucas posted at 4:26 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian does not engage in argument. If he get cornered by a question he has no answer he runs for the hills or changes the subject. Darrell is much the same. They are very much like George Bush when confronted with the possibility of going to Vietnam. They run and hide

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:02 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    How humorous it can be reading Mr Crowder's posts. Brian talks generally about liberalism and conservatism and he responds with one isolated specific program to refute Brian's contention.

    Obviously, Mr Crowder is simply agitating and distracting. John Kennedy, a democrat was not considered conservative in his time. Yet, he embraced many principles that today's conservatives do...like reducing taxes. If John Kennedy made a speech in today's society, many liberal democrats would be shocked. But enough about irrelevant topics as it relates to this letter...

    The topic really is Obama,, the 2012 election and his liberal policies that have damaged our economy. Why all these distractions Mr Crowder, please be more relevant.

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 3:42 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    Brian, are you suggesting that FDR's New Deal in the 1930's was a conservative strategy? If not, exactly which policies or programs in the 30's do you feel were examples of effective conservatism?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:15 am on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    interesting, how about giving a specific example.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 6:35 am on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr. Lucas,

    You're not understanding my point. Liberalism and Conservatism have switched roles. What was Liberalism in the 30's is now considered Conservatism, and visa versa.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:36 am on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...You might say you are self made stupid...and then he said... I could not understand why your reasoning was so outright stupid...

    Thank you for the humor Mr Lucas. As is your custom, you misunderstand and misinterpret as well as attempt to elevate your stature by ridiculing others... yes...you are a liberal for certain.

    I am in complete agreement with you that it would be absurd to ignore history and not learn from it. You have a great point there. When I stated I thought it was absurd to talk about 50 years ago, it was in relationship to this letter. Ms Neely was addressing current affairs and I was discussing her intent in doing so.

    There is a presidential election this year Mr Lucas. Stay focused and on topic as Ms Neely is. I will not play your silly liberal game of distraction talking about an off topic irrelevant subject... especially with a person who does not have the ability to draw appropriate conclusions from the history he does read.

    The topic is, Obama and his liberal policies that is dramatically hurting our economy...that is the topic Ms Neely and yourself do not want to focus on at all costs.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 1:19 am on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Darrell said:

    Talking about what happened 50 years ago is so absurd.

    I could not understand why your reasoning was so outright stupid. That comment explains it all. There are people in this world who are born mentally challenged. They are not to blame for that. You on the other hand think that looking at the past is absurd. The most important way we learn is from our experience. Looking at history is vital. You admit that you do not do that. Unlike the person who is born mentally challenged you deliberately refuse to learn from the past. You might say you are self made stupid. It really explains a lot about your comments. Thanks

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:44 am on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...From 1920 to 1932 this country was run on Conservative policies that led to the greatest financial disaster this country ever had. Darrell that is the history and it cannot be denied

    If I were to ignore 90 % of history as you do, I might come to the same conclusion. If I ignored 90 % of the variables that contributed to the decades of economic evolution like you have, I also might agree with your conclusions.

    Fortunately for me, I decide not ignore everything that you do and as a result, have a different conclusion and reality than you.

    Also, fortunately for me, I recognise the that this tread is a distraction to take attention off Obama. Of course Obama's liberal policies have been destructive and harmful to our economy. Talking about what happened 50 years ago is so absurd, it is a wonder why anyone would care what you have been posting.

    Hope and change? ... not if Obama has any control. Hold your nose and vote Romney.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:57 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    From 1920 to 1932 this country was run on Conservative policies that led to the greatest financial disaster this country ever had. Darrell that is the history and it cannot be denied. In 1932 the four policies I outlined ware put into action. This led to the creation of the greatest middle class ever seen upon the face of the earth. Darrell that is the history and it cannot be denied. In 1980 conservatism made a comeback and culminated with Conservatives being in charge from 2000 to 2008. They were left with a government that was living within its means and was paying down the national debt and 4% unemployment in 2000 after Clinton cleaned up the mess left by the first Bush. In 8 short years they managed to double the national debt from 5 trillion to 10 trillion, were shedding close to 800,000 jobs a month, the financial system was on the brink of collapse and credit was frozen. This was the greatest financial disaster since the Great Depression. That is the history and cannot be denied. Now their are only two answers to the question why? One is that the Republicans are the unluckiest party the world has ever seen or their policies are insane and their leadership is incompetent. Either way a prudent country would never let them be in charge anymore. By the way the United States only had a substantial middle class after the four Liberal policies were instituted.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:35 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Many of these countries did elect conservatives such as England and France. The instituted conservative policies and their economies are sliding back into recession. These conservatives (none nearly as conservative as you by the way) are going to be losing their jobs in the near future if the polls taken there are correct.
    You can jump up and down and chuckle al you want but history is clear that the Liberal policies I described result in substantial middle classes and Conservative policies always end up in disaster. You have presented no evidence to the contrary and still cannot name a country that has a substantial middle class that did not use the four Liberal policies I named and you cannot name a country that has a substantial middle class that was built on conservative policies. YOU ARE STILL DODGING THE QUESTIONS. Man up and admit that my hypothesis is correct or tell me of a country that does not follow the pattern I laid out.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:09 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...Name a country that has a substantial middle class that has followed Conservative economic principles. There are none. It has never existed in the history of humanity.

    Obviously, the United States is a prime answer as well as any country that has conservatives.
    Mr Lucas unfortunately sets up a false premise in describing what leads to better paying jobs. He lists variables that are so limited that a thinking person would simply have to ignore Mr Lucas until he educates himself as to what actually leads more people to have better paying jobs.

    Liberals contend that unions had something to do with it while I content unions cause good hard working people to earn less than they would have otherwise. They also cause employers to hire less employees which results in a less profitable company.

    Mr Lucas should accept the reality that it is liberal policies that have shackled and fettered the private sector from achieving the greatness that could have been. Mr Lucas should be thankful and appreciative that conservative ideas have rescued the liberals from financial disasters . Hopefully, President Obama will lose this election so that conservatives can demonstrate once again how to save the liberals from themselves.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:07 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Baloney.You are dodging the questions again. You are a Conservative Republican. These are the very specific policies I am talking about. You are against them all

    You are against a high progressive income tax
    You were for the Bush tax cuts and all tax cuts on the wealthy
    You are against a highly regulated financial industry
    You were for the repeal of Glasss-Steageal and all forms of regulation on wall street.
    You are against labor laws that level the playing field between employees ad employers
    You are for gutting labor laws
    You are against Keynesian Economics
    You are against stimulus spending

    These are very specific policies and none of them are "Conservative"

    You cannot name a country that has a substantial middle glass that did not use these Liberal policies
    You also cannot name a country with a substantial middle class that used Conservative economic policies.
    If you had the least bit of honor you would concede these two points. I will not hold my breath. I will however tell you why Liberal policies work and conservative polices will always fail. Conservative polices are based on selfishness and greed. There was this Jewish guy who had some very interesting thing to say about that. You might try reading what he said in the Gospels. Are you so silly to think that what he was talking about did not apply to politics also?

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 9:46 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr Lucas wrote:


    Why do all countries that have substantial middle classes use these policies.? Us, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan etc.

    -Chuckle:

    Why are so many of these countries going back to more conservative policies? Because they've figured out you can have only so many liberal government sponsored entitlement programs designed to prop up the economy because these programs lead to stagnation and a nanny state.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 9:39 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr Lucas,

    Regarding your post at 2:05PM.

    What they considered liberal policies back in the 30's are considered Conservative polices now I doubt you know of this. Also, you have left out so many reasons for the the 2006 financial disaster that can be attributed to liberal policies as well. Barney Frank ring a bell? Fannie Mae, Freddy Mack?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 5:54 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    I see you are dodging my questions also. If as you say:

    anyone who thinks we would have no middle class without liberal ideas is so far out of reality that any comments to him are a waste of time.

    Why don't you answer my the following Questions directly?

    Name a country that has a substantial middle class that has followed Conservative economic principles. There are none. It has never existed in the history of humanity.

    Name a country that did not use the for policies above and has a middle class. Again there are none. 0, zip, nada

    Why do all countries that have substantial middle classes use these policies.? Us, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan etc.

    You do not because the answers do not fit into your ideology. The answers show without question what ideas work to build a substantial middle class. Liberal ideas lead to a substantial middle class and Conservative ideas lead to financial disasters such as 1929 and 2008. The proof is in the pudding and you and Brians ducking the question in no way invalidates the lessons of the answers to those questions.

    Do not worry for you are in good company for I have never had a Conservative yet with the honor and courage to answer these very simple questions

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:43 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Brian... Mr Lucas is not open to a discussion. He is right...you are wrong. He has no time to listen to or consider any information that is contrary to his own.Of course some liberal ideas have contributed positive things to the middle class, however, anyone who thinks we would have no middle class without liberal ideas is so far out of reality that any comments to him are a waste of time. I suggest this tread dies as Mr Lucas has has made it absurd at best.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 2:05 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian without Liberal thinking there would not be a middle class. I will repeat my argument that I have been making for years that no Conservative has had the courage to answer my questions at the end. LETS SEE IF YOU DODGE IT ALSO.
    In the 1930's the four things policies were implemented that created the greatest middle class in the history of mankind and those countries that followed our example did the same and most of those are doing better than we are for they did not embrace this conservative nonsense
    1.We instituted a highly progressive tax system.

    2. We regulated the financial industry
    
3. We instituted labor laws trying to level the playing field between labor and management
    t4. We instituted Keynesian Economics
     
    Name a country that has a substantial middle class that has followed Conservative economic principles. There are none. It has never existed in the history of humanity.

    Name a country that did not use the for policies above and has a middle class. Again there are none. 0, zip, nada

    All countries that have substantial middle classes use these policies. Us, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan etc.

    These policies are at the core of what separates the economic idealogical differences between Liberals and Conservatives. We are for them and you are against them. What does our experience tell us which works? What does History tell us? The answer is clear to anyone who is open to logic and not so tied into their ideology that they have lost touch with reality..

     
  • John Lucas posted at 1:36 pm on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    You had Republican majorities in both houses of congress from 2000 till 2006 and laid the groundwork for the greatest financial disaster since the Great Depression. You took an economy that was living within its means and paying off the national debt to an economy that was losing close to 800,000 jobs a month, doubled the national debt from 5 trillion to over 10 trillion and a credit system that was frozen. Good job. Just stabilizing the gigantic disaster caused by Republican policies is a miracle but Obama did it. He saved the auto industry(and killed Osama, I love that) and has us on a path that real recovery in spite of the Republicans trying everything in their power to stop it. The Republicans have a track record even though they will not own up to it but that is normal for them. The fact that Republicans are good at funneling money to the top 1/10 of one percent of the income bracket, starting wars that are both unnecessary and cost trillions of dollars, driving up the national debt, shrinking the middle class and bringing the economies to their knees is proven by its history. Voting for Republicans will give credence to that old cliche. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. The Republican record speaks for itself.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:56 am on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr. Lucas,

    I think I'd faint if you were to acknowledge Democrats have signed laws into effect that purposely oppress the Middle Class all the while giiving Illegals carte blanc.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:51 am on Fri, Apr 27, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr. Lucas

    I think you are doing exactly what the Democrats want you to do. If they cannot get you on their team they want you to be cynical and think it does not matter what you do it is all fixed. They win either way. They only way we are going to get this country back on track is have major Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House with a Republican President. Right now the Corporations have the power to get what they want or stop any progress from being made. We are on a path to the destruction of the middle class directly caused by Democrat ideas. Doing nothing by being cynical is not going to stop that destruction.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:42 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    absolutely, you are doing great

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 11:24 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    Lodi 1970 Posts: 85

    You have given me some food for thought, John, thank you. Perhaps I am a bit too cynical. But, I do plan to vote, so at least I'm doing something, right?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:02 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Gee Jerome we agree again. I agree it would take a person with a half a brain to believe that this has nothing to with forcing anyone's religion upon others. Calling you a member of the American Taliban is not juvenile name calling. It is just an accurate description of how your politics is so similar to those of the real Taliban. You and your fellow Conservative Republicans have earned it by the policies you advocate.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:51 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    I stand corrected on Wisconsin but in Kentucky the Democrats could not have stopped it. The one thing you can be assured of though is that if the Democrats were in the majority it would have never came up for a vote.
    I think you are doing exactly what the Republicans want you to do. If they cannot get you on their team they want you to be cynical and think it does not matter what you do it is all fixed. They win either way. They only way we are going to get this country back on track is have major Democratic majorities in both the Senate and the House with a Democratic President. Right now the Corporations have the power to get what they want or stop any progress from being made. We are on a path to the destruction of the middle class directly caused by Republican ideas. Doing nothing by being cynical is not going to stop that destruction.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 9:22 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2255

    This has nothing to do with forcing anyone's religion upon others. Anyone with half a brain actually knows that. But in a political year, virtually everything is going to be used as fodder.

    In addition, you can continue to waste keystrokes (or copy and paste) on juvenile name-calling. That might work on elementary school kids on the playground; but for those of us who would like to begin discussing these matters reasonably, we'll just take our conversations elsewhere. It's just not worth much more than this comment to bid you adieu. So – Adieu!

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 9:19 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    Lodi 1970 Posts: 85

    Hi John,
    While I do agree that these kind of laws are made primarily in Republican held legislatures, I still contend that Democrats have played a role in some cases. In Kentucky, SB103 passed the state senate by a vote of 32-4, and there are only 22 Republicans--clearly some Democrats had to vote for it. In Wisconsin, SB 306 passed 17-15, with only 16 Republicans in the chamber. This is probably because of the whole "I'll scratch your back if you scratch my back" politicking that is so commonplace in government, and that is the point I'm trying to make. When it comes down to it, most politicians (from both parties) simply want to get reelected and that is the main focus of everything they do.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 7:58 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    If you ever say something remotely cogent you can be assured that I will reply to it.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 7:23 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Rich Hanner: I would think that Ms Neely or anyone for that matter who works or worked in the legal field as a lawyer would have at some time been called much worse names than a idiot . I further believe that anyone who would posit such misinformation (like they did in the Zimmerman case) should be chastised and taken off the site as well. You need to follow your own rules especially #4. That is what I do.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 7:19 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Mr Lucas: Since you made no comments or presented any counter evidence of proof, you must be in agreement with the proof and evidence I presented...case closed.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 5:24 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    They find out how many catholic women use Contraceptives by surveying them. If it showed the result you wanted you would naturally jump on it as proof of your position. You might ask yourself why the birth rate among Catholic women is the same as non Catholic women.
    The issue Sandra Fluke brings up is whether those who offer health insurance should have to follow the public law and include birth control medication for women. It is no accident that the Catholic Church and the American Taliban(Republican Conservatives such as yourself) have banded together to shove your religious edicts you get from your Mullahs, whoops again I mean Priest and Preachers, down women's throats. It is a drummed up issue for you but it is not to millions of women and those of us who do not want the American Taliban to have more power in our personal lives in other areas. It is a front line political battle which Ms Neely clearly and precisely laid out.
    I do think you came up with a good word for your comment. Balderdash.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 2:56 am on Thu, Apr 26, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2255

    Ms. Neely expects us to believe that "[b]irth control statistics reveal that 98 percent of Catholic women have used birth control, even though their religion forbids the use of contraceptives."

    How would anyone know this to be true? I don't buy it for a second. But assuming that she's either correct or nearly so, wouldn't this be an issue to be handled between these women and their priests? After all, don't liberals/progressives preach about keeping things in the family so to speak?

    But more to the point of contraceptives and this whole silly argument, it has nothing to do with religion or even the use of contraceptive devices or even abortion for that matter. No, this has only to do with who should be expected to pay for these contraceptives for folks like Sandra Fluke. Considering that Ms. Neely and Ms. Fluke have quite a bit in common as one is a retired attorney and the latter wants desperately to become one, I can see how this has morphed well beyond the actual issue at hand – especially in an election year where Democrats and especially President Barack Hussein Obama will do practically anything to be elected or re-elected.

    Regardless, after submitting a post or two earlier in response to Ms. Neely's most recent journalistic effort, I've tried to come up with the best way to describe it (her writing; not Ms. Neely) in a nutshell. And the only word that keeps popping into my head is balderdash.

    NOTE: Please be advised that my comments above were not posted as commentary about Cynthia Neely on a personal level. I’ve never met the woman and know very little about her except what she writes for this newspaper. In support of my stated intentions, please note that suitable synonyms for “balderdash” include (but are not limited to) the following: nonsense; twaddle, rubbish; drivel; claptrap; baloney and tripe. Hopefully this will be enough to satisfy even the liberalist of liberals that I mean no disrespect for the person of Cynthia Neely, only what is contained within the 991 words above.

    Thank you.

     
  • Charles Nelson posted at 8:35 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 257

    John, have you ever considered the possibility that the reason 85% of doctors aren't members of the AMA is that they disagree with their medical opinions?

     
  • Charles Nelson posted at 8:24 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 257

    My point was that the AMA is more politically oriented than medical. Besides, are you aware of how a woman gets pregnant in the first place?

     
  • Ryan Jameson posted at 12:54 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    Where is something fantastically witty yet inappropriately sarcastic from Steve Schmidt when you need it?

    You are wasting your breath Patrick. The likes of John Lucas and the Neely's do not care what you have to say. They have nothing to contribute other than draconian metaphors and calling names.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:42 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Rich: I am not sure why you pulled my one post. I did not call ms neely any names or make any other comments other than her idiotic post made me sick. I do not see a difference between ms neely's assertions about Republicans as a whole and mine about her column. If you wish you can review and edit out what you find offensive and re-post my comments.

    Posted above are my responses to her post that I find incorrect, derogaroty, false and just downright lame. Thanks.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:32 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Ms Neely: "In my opinion, these are the private issues and decisions of the men and women involved and there is no room for the government." I agree, let the men and women pay for it not the taxpayer...I paid for my children and as a taxpayer have paid for thousands of others...it is time for people to take responsibility for their own actions. Child support should not only be paid by the parents, so should an abortion if one is needed. In the case of other pregnancies...such as by rape...these should be treated as crimes...the victim should be taken care of by us...and the costs charged back to the perpetrator as restitution...along with jail time.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 12:26 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Hi Christina,
    I agree with much of what you say except for saying that Democrats are part of these laws. Name one state that Democrats were the deciding vote in any of these laws. It just does not happen. These law are only made in Republican held legislatures. To say that Democrat have a part in this is disingenuous and is simply not true. It goes against everything the Democratic party stands for.
    As to the other I completely agree. We rate 93rd in the world in women representing us in government.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:22 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Point #10. msn stated: "Republican-style Sharia law denies women basic rights"

    To this assinine statement as well as you challenge mrl I say:

    msn, msl, mskl, mrt or any other person who wishes to make statements on this site should be willing to step up to the plate with evidence of some sort that supports their statements and be willing to be challenged on those statements. This IS and opinion page but if you want any credibility in your stances...try doing more than being a cry-baby...try to come up with some solutions to our problems... As myself and many here have.

    msn's proof does not support her contention...not guilty,

     
  • John Lucas posted at 12:19 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    I agree that statistics are not the point here. The point is why don't you American Taliban types quit trying to legislate your religious ideas on women? Why cannot those decisions be left to her? It cannot be because you American Taliban types do not think these poor little darlin's cannot be trusted to follow your Mullahs, whoops I meant preacher or priest, religious edicts.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:17 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Point #6. msn stated: Romney "will get rid of it" (Planned parenthood) : A statement made in the context of budgetary cuts. Romney campaign strategist Eric Fehrnstrom downplayed the comments on CNN , saying the former Massachusetts governor was talking about "cutting federal funding only". "It would not be getting rid of the organization," Fehrnstrom said. "We're going to have to make some tough decisions about spending. The test that Mitt Romney will apply is, is this program so worthwhile and valuable that we'll borrow money from China to [fund] it?"

    Seniors should be happy...maybe they will get a pay raise. Which I personally think they deserve.

    Point #8. msn stated: Republican hot-air merchant Rush Limbaugh called the woman who was not permitted to testify in the birth control hearing a "sult" and a "prsotitute." Actions speak louder than words.
    Foster Friess tried to make light of the birth control issue by saying that women should just do what they used to, put an aspirin between their knees. A dumb comment...that comes with as many rights for speech as what msn just posted.

    Point #9. msn stated: Unfortunately, it appears that Republicans believe that corporations are people, but women aren't.
    Sorry msn: women own corporations and run MANY corporations, MANY are large and MANY are Republicans: The numbers below do not include those women who RUN corporations both large and small.

    Women Entrepreneurs
    Women own 10.6 million businesses in the United States.
    They employ 19.1 million workers--that's one in every seven employees.
    Their businesses account for $2.5 trillion in sales

    Ms neely was a business owner…or was she?

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:03 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Point #5. msn stated: "Birth control statistics reveal that 98 percent of Catholic women HAVE USED birth control (this is an incorrect statement... seemingly (there’s that word again) on purpose). Why is this limited to just Catholic women? Is it because their religion forbids the use of contraceptives? WHY? Answer: because the Democratic party is currently demonizing the Catholic Church.

    The Catholic Church is opposed to artificial contraception and orsmagic acts outside of the context of marital interourcse. …Equally to be condemned as the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. Lost in all of this rhetoric concerning birth control is the fact that birth control is not an issue that only affects women. Family planning is an issue central to both men and women in their relationships. Vasectomies can be reversed.

    Studies have found 98% of Catholics women in the United States (NOT WORLD WIDE as is implied) use contraceptive methods other than those officially sanctioned by the church.[10] msn’s statement is factually incorrect…period.

    Only 2% of Catholic women rely on natural family
    planning; even among Catholic women who attend
    church once a month or more. Sixty-eight percent of Catholic
    women use highly effective methods: sterilization
    (32%, including 24% using female sterilization,) the
    pill or another hormonal method (31%) and the IUD
    (5%).

    Only 3% of married Catholic women who do not
    want to become pregnant rely on natural family
    planning; 72% use highly effective methods, including
    40% who rely on sterilization.
    ■ Reliance on highly effective methods is also common
    among Mainline Protestant (76%) and Evangelical
    (78%) married women.
    ■ At any given point in time, 14% of married women
    are pregnant, postpartum or trying to get pregnant,
    and there are no variations by religious affiliation.

    Protestant movements such as Focus on the Family view contraception use outside of marriage as encouragement to promiscuity.

    The Jewish view on birth control currently varies between the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform branches of Judaism. Orthodox Judaism, use of birth control has been considered only acceptable for use in certain circumstances, for example, when the couple already has two children.

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 12:02 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Lodi 1970 Posts: 85

    In my opinion, if there is a "war on women" it is being waged by both political parties. The states mentioned in the column--Kentucky, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Texas--have a good number of Democrats in their legislatures, so it's not like the Republicans did this alone. Several of the states even have an equal number of state senators from both parties. To say the laws passed are a product of the Republicans alone is disingenuous.

    Instead of debating which political party treats women better, or respects women more, why not collectively try to find answers to questions like: why, out of 535 members of Congress, are only 90 women? Why, in statewide office, do women only make up about 23% of those seats? Why are there only 12 female CEOs out of all the Fortune 500 companies? Yet, women make up nearly 51% of the American population. As a woman, this is what I'd like to see discussed, not some feigned "war" to try and get my vote.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:00 pm on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Point #3. msn stated: "We recently had Republican presidential hopefuls seeming to want to go back to the "bad old days". As though the Dems will just have to sit back and watch it be done...kind of like the Reps have had to do for the past three and a half years with regards to many OTHER issues.

    ??Seeming??? msn??? Seeming?? That is just a belief backed by zero evidence or proof. “bad old days”?? When people took responsibility for their actions (both men and women). Nothing more than an opinion.

    Point #4. msn stated: "where women were deprived of the availability of birth control, resulting in women having more children than they could care for or, in many cases, could afford. (In the 1800s, the average woman gave birth seven times.) Clearly this restriction caused an increase in the number of abortions, which Republicans say they want to prevent". This is a convoluted statemen...what happened in the 1800s is what Reps want to prevent today? The women of the 1800s were deprived of birth control? MAYBE just MAYBE msn...the abortion increase is due to the current sexual moires and attitudes are a bit out there?

    My grandmother had thirteen and wanted more. Many women believed in the right to have the children they desired and for the gov not to pay for them. They had some pride. msn, MAYBE just MAYBE we don't want to pay for those moires.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:54 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    These laws you American Taliban types are passing are the substantiation and proof of the accusation.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 11:51 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    If you do not like being called an part of the American Taliban I would suggest not supporting laws the are abridging the rights of women and are Taliban like in nature. As to wearing that uniform when you took that oath is was to the Constitution of the United States of America which includes the Bill of Rights. It gives you no immunity from criticism upon completion of service. You, like millions of us before you, were protecting our right to speak freely. So you will excuse me if I do not shut my mouth. That privilege was bought and paid for by those who served and it applies to all Americans not just those who did serve.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:24 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Point #1: msn stated: “During the 2010 election, one Republican nominee raised the specter of "Sharia law," alleging that this Islamic law was being practiced in the United States”. So....
    An American liberal judge in Pennsylvania, Judge Mark Martin, ruled on the case and sided with the Muslim, and said that the victim would have been put to death in Muslim societies for his "crime."
    Martin told Perce: "Having had the benefit of having spent over two and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/exclusive_interview_infidel_victim_of_pennsylvania_sharia_judge_reveals_inside_details_of_case.html#ixzz1t0liAITI

    Point #2 msn stated: A realistic concern is whether, in this country, we are seeing a renewal of unequal treatment of women that was rejected decades ago, or whether we are now seeing a new set of rules for women, that is, Sharia Law — Republican-style. She even questions her own statement calling it a “realistic concern”…that is nothing more than a thought. No substantiation just accusation.

     
  • Ryan Jameson posted at 10:51 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    John Lucas, unless you fought against the Taliban and truly understand who and what they are please shut your mouth and respect those who have. You didn't like being called a baby killer because of what happened in Vietnam? I don't like being called an American Taliban because of my political beliefs. I am an American plain and simple, you disagree with me that's fine, but how about you stand up like a man rather than using grade school insults to get your point across.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:11 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Her title is completely accurate. The American Taliban want to use the force of law to roll back the right long held by women concerning abortion and birth control. They have put into law the rape of women by transvaginal probe in order to shame them. They have put up personhood amendments that would in effect ban most forms of birth control. They have fought to have birth control medication not being part of any public health plan if the employer does not like it. These are not figment of ones imagination but real life threats to rights of women. The only difference between the American Taliban(Conservative Republicans) and the Taliban is one of degree.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:01 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Sorry you cannot have both ways. It is impossible. Freedom of religion is only possible in a secular society. This allow freedom of conscious to reach for a higher power in ones own way. it is the ultimate freedom. You American Taliban types want to take away that freedom just as your spiritual brothers in Iran do.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:50 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    You may be laughing but women are not and they vote. I understand the anti-choice position but the law is that it is up to the woman and her doctor. These laws you American Taliban types that call for use of rape to shame women are grotesque in nature and if you do not stand up against it it says volumes on your true feelings about the rights of women.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:45 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    well said

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:41 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    How am I supposed to respond to this "logic and fact based" comment. You are in Darrell territory now. If you do not think something is honest how about being more specific about which idea you are talking about? What you just did was give an opinion without pointing out specific ideas you think are" emotionally-driven intellectual dishonesties". What you are really saying is that you have no counter argument. Who is being intellectually dishonest here? If you cannot stand the heat I do not blame you for going to the showers.

     
  • Nancy Neely posted at 9:39 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Nancy Neely Posts: 2

    Cynthia is spot on! When I read that the initial bill in Virginia required a transvaginal ultrasound, and that there was no exception for rape or incest, I was horrified. We can’t ignore it, or pretend it never happened, because it did. The proposed law was a blatant attack on women, and whether born of ignorance, dominance or ideology, the result is the same. This, and the various other attempts to require medically unnecessary ultrasounds, or to require proof that contraception is being used for purposes other than birth control, or to defund planned parenthood are part of widespread effort to force women to conform to certain conduct by imposing laws and creating hurdles to help keep them in check. This is the kind of big government that I live without, particularly when people like Rush Limbaugh display their ignorance about birth control through widely disseminated hate-filled rants directed at women, and many of those in power, or who want to be in power, stand by in silence. In my opinion, these are the private issues and decisions of the men and women involved and there is no room for the government.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 9:34 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Republicans implementing sharia law? Thanks for the laugh. This from the looney left that get up in arms when O and his puppets are agenda is compared to Hitleresque strategies. You can always tell when liberals are out of valid points, they attack over non-issues trying to turn them into something they are not. I guess womens "basic rights" include murdering unborn children. Except for instances of rape or when carrying to term endangers the mother's life, abortion is inexcusable. Unfortunately some women use it as a convenience and a sick form of birth control.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:29 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Secularism is not a religious belief. Religious belief is a personal matter. The first amendment protects our right to freedom of religious thought on an individual basis. It also protects us from you American Taliban types who want to shove your religious values down our throats. One of the main reasons that this country has such a high number of Religious people is that one is free by individual conscious to believe any religion we like or believe in nothing. It is in secular government that religion flourishes. Organized state religion has been nothing but a stain on the humanity of our species. On an individual basis it can be a blessing beyond measure. If people followed what Jesus said and not what the preachers and priest say this world would be a paradise. Doing what Jesus said in one's life can change your whole world but organized religion is just a mob out to force people to believe what they as a group believe. If you read history you know this has led to millions of people being killed, tortured and whole civilizations being destroyed. Organized religion when involved in politics has be malignant cancer.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:09 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    To the contrary. You and the Taliban are religious freaks who want to force their beliefs on everyone else. The fact is your treatment of women is just a matter of degree. Like you American Taliban types the Taliban want to use the law to control women and limit their rights as human beings. If you do not want to be know as the American Taliban quit acting in the same manner.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 9:03 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    John,
    regarding your 8:46 post.

    As long as you continue to perpetuate emotionally-driven intelectual dishonesties like this I find it very difficult to have a logic and fact-based discussion with you.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:02 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Again with the apple and oranges nonsense. You American Taliban types put laws on the books to subject women to a transvaginal probe in order to shame them. If a man did this to a woman he would be sentenced to a long jail sentence. That is because it is rape in a real sense. Understand this. You American Taliban type are lawfully doing to women what would be a long jail sentence for anyone ease doing the same thing. Do you get the same thrill the rapist gets? Do you enjoy the power you have over women? Abortion is legal. I understand the anti-choice arguments but if you want to change the law do it without raping and shaming women.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:55 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2692

    Mr. Lucas,
    When the state insists that one’s religious beliefs be supplanted by another’s, in this case by secularism, then might one argue that the state is establishing a religion in contravention of the Constitution’s intent?

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:49 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr. Lucas,

    To use the term American Taliban Types as loosely as you do only reveals your complete ignorance of what the Taliban is.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 8:46 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian again with the straw man arguments. The issue is whether women have a right to make their own decisions when it comes to their own bodies. The American Taliban wish to use the law to force women to abide by their religious beliefs may be good for Iran but this is America. Just because you American Taliban types would like us to live in a theocracy like Iran we have along history of rejecting rule by Mullah. Just because you think a good majority of abortions are unnecessary does not mean you the right to make that kind of personal decision for anyone else just because your Mullah, whoops I mean preacher or priest, convinces you otherwise. Next time you are pregnant you can make make that personal decision. I am reminded of that comment a woman said,"If men could become pregnant abortion would be a sacrament." You of the anti- choice crowd should keep your nose out of others personal matters and mind your own business.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:46 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr. Lucas,

    And it would be a bigger problem if people like you had it their way and transformed this country into a COMPLETE secular society. No matter how much you dispise it, people in general feel more comfortable knowing there is a higher power over us. Even in a COMPLETE secular society there is a higher power, that being the central government that is Godless. To each his own. I choose God as my higher power, not a Hitler-like government empty of God.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 8:33 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    This would not be a problem at all if you American Taliban types would not be trying to use the law to enforce your religious ideas on everyone else especially women.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:33 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Democrats and Republicans all have their crosses to bare. In all fairness to the Republic of the USA Ms. Neely would have been a bit more accurate to title her column
    " The Republic of the USA- style Sharia Law Denies Women Basic Rights". Of course this title is even more ridiculous. But the point is, there is no correlation with Sharia Law and our current Republic no matter how much Mr Lucas and Ms. Neely portray it.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:18 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Ms. Neely wrote:


    Rick Santorum's billionaire backer Foster Friess tried to make light of the birth control issue by saying that women should just do what they used to, put an aspirin between their knees. However, women are not laughing. They are tired of politicians dictating how they should live their lives.

    -Of course this is totally out of context with what Mr. Friess was trying to say. Surely even Ms. Neely caught the sarcasm. But she chose to disparage his remarks anyway.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:11 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    I tend to take the position a good majority of abortions are unnecessary. This may not sit well with Obama since he has made it clear (see my post at 8;04PM) Pepsi's use of flavor enhancement from aborted fetuses is not a significant concern.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:01 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Since Mr. Lucas agrees with Ms. Neely this tranvaginal probe is akin to statuatory rape, let's take it a step farther. Let's take it a step farther and discuss the procedure it takes to perform an abortion. Not only does it violate a woman akin to statuatory rape, it also is akin to murder from Mr. Lucas's perspective. Now, there is an ongoing debate whether the unborn fetus has a soul yet. Many people who are advocates of abortion take the position the unborn fetus does not have a soul yet. The fact is, no one really knows. I really don't think it is the intent of the doctor to committ murder or statuatory rape. But, if we were to follow the logic of Mr. Lucas then it is to the contrary.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:35 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...All this hot air does not alter the fact you and your American Taliban compatriots ...

    I can see you and Ms Neely are in intellectually, ethically and politically in in the exact same boat. You on the other hand a more emotional than she. You were correct about Ms Neely's writing abilities. I think they are excellent. I happen to not appreciate her inflammatory remarks and statements that have no bearing to reality.

    For this, we get called dim witted and American Taliban. Maybe you should team up with Ms Neely and write the next letter together where to articulate just why people like us are American Taliban to go along with the Republican Sharia Law.


     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:55 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    All this hot air does not alter the fact you and your American Taliban compatriots response to Ms Neely's letter was despicable and an insult to any conscious being. Your whining because someone gives it back to you was my objective. Frankly you do not know when you have been had and probably not smart enough to figure it out.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:41 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...You and your fellow clowns behavior today in regards to Ms Neely’s letter was an insult to thinking people everywhere and frankly you pi--ed me off.

    Really? This post very much surprised me Mr Lucas. I sincerely did not notice a difference in temperament and style of putting down people's intelligence . I thought this was your normal demeanor and that you were just being what us knuckle dragger's have become accused to... Mr Lucas tirades.

    Have you ever considered that your perspective is so biased that you find yourself in complete agreement with what Ms Neely ( who many think her extreme and inaccurate ) considers facts. Imagine, you accusing 40% of American men as thinking women are not people... amazing that you perceive your perspective is reasonable. I think my wife is a person. I think your wife is a person. Yet you accuse me as being a knuckle dragger who is dim witted. You accuse all people who believe life of a unborn child is just as important than the life of you , me or anyone else is somehow against women. We disagree Mr Lucas and so do millions of American women.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 1:13 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    I read Ms Neely’s column and came away, not just because I agree with her, how well written it was. You may not agree with what she said but any person of intelligence could see that she made her point well and backed them up with facts. Then I read what you, Pat , Brian and others wrote. You did not argue her points but set out attacking her personally (calling her an idiot) and more than one of you called on the editor saying this was not up to LSN standards. Why? It was because you do not agree with her. Did you argue her facts or come up with a counter argument? No because you are not smart enough to do so.
    I have watched you clowns in action for a while now. You are not interested in a honest open debate. All of you come from the Sean Hannity school of argument. Attack personally and make up stuff. You are the product of the conservative media especially Fox News. The two studies done about Fox News viewers are very fascinating. I was not shocked when it was found that Fox News viewers were less informed that those who chose other news outlets. The one that surprised me was the one that found that Foxx News viewers were less informed than those who listened to no news at all. You, Pat, Brian and a few others are part of that demographic. The part you really have down is the bullying. When someone stands up to you and calls you on your nonsense all you can do is whine like any typical bully. As to calling you guys stupid I admit is a personal failing. I do not suffer fools gladly. Instead of whining and crying you might try a different track. You know like say something intelligent once in a while. On the respect thing I also have an answer for you. If you want to treated with respect, show respect to others. You and your fellow clowns behavior today in regards to Ms Neely’s letter was an insult to thinking people everywhere and frankly you pi--ed me off.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 1:08 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2255

    Thank you for your civil reply.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 1:06 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2255

    So much for a civil response as requested. The buffoonery exhibited by the usual cast of suspects on this forum is getting just a tad old. It's not even worth the entertainment value that it once held prior to us having to use our actual names. Oh well.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 12:33 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    I love this logic. 85%of MD's in the US are not members of the AMA. I guess that settles it. All women should get a transvaginal ultrasound, a medically unnecessary procedure which requires women be internally probed with an instrument roughly shaped like a phallus when getting an abortion. Glad we cleared that up. You American Taliban types kill me with your thinking processes and the depth of your empathy for women. Maybe we should bring back the dunking pool or maybe even stoning.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 12:21 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    It would be bad if Ms Neely's so-called insulting, derogatory and inappropriately provocative were not true but they are true. You may be fooling yourself but you are not fooling women or any male who, unlike you, lives on this planet. These laws that the American Taliban (Conservative Republicans like you) are way out of mainstream thinking here in the US. I wish you idiots would just get out of peoples bedrooms and stop making laws that try to force women to do what you and your Mullahs, whoops I mean preachers, think is right.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:16 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    CONTINUED...


    Respectful questions for Mr Hanner.

    You state you require a particular discourse when it comes to guest columnists and expect an appropriate decorum. I appreciate the thought. However, Mr Lucas consistently posts items like I outlined below. Just what is your expectation? How does one listen to the inappropriate dialogue this man posts and not respond in kind. I am doing my best to control what I say, but I completely understand Pat Maples frustration and anger which predictably resulted as a consequence of Ms Neely's aggressive inflammatory letter as well as the demeaning language and intent of Mr Lucas. This leads me to believe you are encouraging and fostering behavior that you say you do not want.

    To say the least, I am confused and bewildered by the apparent inconsistencies. I had many posts removed from the Mike Kelly threads which to me were much cleaner than what I see here. It is becoming difficult to participate and understand what is and is not acceptable.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:12 am on Wed, Apr 25, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...

    1. Just what planet do you live on? I cannot believe you are this stupid. ( To Brian)
    2. Are we like the idiots at Fox News? Are we like you, Pat, Darrell and the other knuckle draggers here?
    3. Darrell,I know you are not the brightest bulb on the planet but it is not Ms Neely who requires a woman who was raped to be violated with a medical instrument if she opts for an abortion
    4. then you are even dumber than I thought you were and that is saying something ( to Darrell)
    5. You may have many here of knuckle dragging, fox watching community who thinks the nonsense you spout on these pages passes for thinking ( insulting Brian's intelligence)
    6. Brian you are really a piece of work. If you had any intellectual capacity for thought you are certainly not showing here. Just because you do not agree with someone does not mean it is not a valid viewpoint. ( insulting Brian's intelligence and behaving like a bully )

     
  • Charles Nelson posted at 11:41 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 257

    Over 85% of MD's in the US are NOT members of the AMA.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:35 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Hanner stated...The majority of posts here stick with the issues and facts, and that's appreciated. Derogatory comments about local columnists, however, are not..

    I am actually appreciative of Mr Hanner's position to set appropriate standards of discourse. However, I am very surprised that he would allow such inflammatory rhetoric from a guest columnist then expect appropriate calm measured comments from the reader.

    Ms Neely stated several things to me that are “intended” to be insulting, derogatory and inappropriately provocative in my opinion. Let me list the statements.

    1. we are seeing a renewal of unequal treatment of women that was rejected decades ago, or whether we are now seeing a new set of rules for women, that is, Sharia Law — Republican-style.
    2. We recently had Republican presidential hopefuls seeming to want to go back to the "bad old days" where women were deprived of the availability of birth control, resulting in women having more children than they could care for or, in many cases, could afford
    3. Unfortunately, it appears that Republicans believe that corporations are people, but women aren't
    4. When the law requires a doctor to violate a woman with a medical instrument, this gives an entirely new meaning to statutory rape.
    5. Rick Santorum's billionaire backer Foster Friess tried to make light of the birth control issue by saying that women should just do what they used to, put an aspirin between their knees
    If one is in Rome and decides to throw fresh red meat ( with Cat Nip) to the lions ( which is the norm for Ms Neely), is it reasonable to expect the lions to politely mind their manner's and a have a gentle demeanor? The standards should apply both ways.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:33 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2692

    Glad to see you are visiting naturalnews.com...

    When did you take the red pill?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:39 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Jerome, Statutory Rape is the perfect metaphor for what a woman has to go through in order to get an abortion. It gets American Taliban people such as yourself a thrill when you can shame a women in this way. The American Taliban Governor of Pennsylvania said that women should just shut their eyes when being shamed in this way. There is no medical need for this procedure. Some states are making the woman pay for this completely unnecessary procedure. I think you American Taliban would call this a "mandate". To paraphrase DarrellIt it is obvious how that American Taliban in general, respect, cherish and value woman.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:24 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Jerome see the web address in earlier comment. There are several sates that require a ttransvaginal probe if it is very early in the pregnancy. Look up transvaginal probe on google

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 10:20 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    Kinderman, the bills in question require the usage of transvaginal ultrasound, a medically unnecessary procedure which requires women be internally probed with an instrument roughly shaped like a phallus. The AMA considers this unnecessary and invasive.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:07 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2255

    NOTE: As I was about to post my thoughts below, I noted that Mr. Dockter had already addressed some of the same points that I had written. Rather than let all that work and good fodder go to waste, I provide it to augment what he had already brought to our attention.

    Ms. Neely wrote, “In Kentucky, Virginia, Wisconsin and Texas, a woman is required to have a medically unnecessary ultrasound 24 hours before an abortion. In Virginia, the proposed law required doctors to perform this procedure before an abortion even in instances of rape or incest. When the law requires a doctor to violate a woman with a medical instrument, this gives an entirely new meaning to statutory rape.”

    Okay, I’m hoping that someone here will civilly help me out with this notion. Isn’t an ultrasound performed with a device that rests upon the outside skin of the patient? Without attempting to debate the reason(s) for these tests before and/or after abortions are performed, how could Ms. Neely straight-faced imply that these women were somehow raped? Her use of the words “medical instrument” would give the untrained mind the picture of some invasive steel tool inserted into the women which could very well be considered unnecessary or maybe even cruel especially regarding cases of rape or incest. Perhaps rather than “statutory rape,” an apt replacement could have been “virtual rape?”

    Isn’t this just another attempt to make one thing appear to be something else only to mislead the issue or to at the very least inflame? I find such tactics to be very disingenuous at best; but this is what I’ve come to expect from Cynthia Neely. And here she’s amassed nearly 1,000 words to ply her divisive and clearly deceptive journalistic trade.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 10:04 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian said:
    -Chuckle,
    If you think she can validate her viewpoint that somehow what Republicans want is akin to Sharia Law you're stupider than I thought you were.

    The parallels between the American Taliban (Conservative Republicans) want as laws and Sharia Law are chilling and intuitively obvious to the most causal observer. They both want to control the reproductive rights of women. By the 1970’s we had thought we had won that battle. The battle being that a women's reproductive decisions were between her and her doctor. The American Taliban (you and your Conservative Republican brothers) are trying to turn back the clock. There are many other areas you are trying to force your religious ideas down everyone else's throats. Women's rights and gay right are just the front lines in this battle. The truth is that the Pat Robertsons and the extremist Mullahs are pretty much on the same page
    `

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:03 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Lucas stated...Darrell,I know you are not the brightest bulb on the planet …

    Thank you Mr Lucas. I know when someone is insecure and lacks of confidence in their own position, it is common to attempt to elevate their status by putting down his perceived opponent who actually is in a stronger position. Unfortunately for Mr Lucas, it diminishes and devalues what ever follows his unwise putdown. After one reads his thoughts, only pity comes to mind for such unfounded animosity and bitterness in his heart.

    It is obvious that Republicans in general, respect, cherish and value woman. There is a good reason a record 140 Republican women filed to run for the US House and Senate in 2010. One of the reasons is the confidence, respect and admiration so many republican men have for these lady's.

    In addition, If you look at the loving relationships of the two Bush presidents and Reagan's and compare it to the anything but loving activities that took place in the relationships of the Clinton's and the Kennedy's, it speaks highly or the Republicans admiration and devotion woman deserve.

    How unfortunate that Mr Lucas and several others posters decided to add fuel to the fire and attempt to divide and antagonize the relationship between the sexes for political gain. In my view, a very selfish act.
    I think it time for these gentleman and Ms Neely to stop all this self-serving verbal behavior and join republicans who put woman on pedestals and encourage them to be as successful as they can be. Just think if we had more woman like Condi Rice and Palin. The world would be a better place.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:29 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian said:
    -Chuckle,
    And we barely heard a peep from the Democrats when it came to the surface this Georgetown student was an advoacate of taxpayer funded transgender operations.

    Just what planet do you live on? I cannot believe you are this stupid. Ms Neely was talking about the ugly things said by Rushbo in attacking Ms Fluke. Are you saying that Democrats should have called Ms Fluke a sl-t and prostitute, should have told her she should put sex videos online because they might disagree with her on the sex change nonsense that is not even part of the debate? I do not think they should be covered. Are you saying I should start calling her names and spend three days assassinating her character just because i disagree with her on a policy question? What do you think we are Conservative Republicans? Are we like the idiots at Fox News? Are we like you, Pat, Darrell and the other knuckle draggers here? You really should apologize for saying that Democrats could act in this manner. I know you cannot possibly understand it but there is such a thing as standards.

     
  • Charles Nelson posted at 9:20 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 257

    Andy, the issue isn't whether insurance should pay for birth control, it's whether the Church should be denied its fist amendment rights to opt out of paying for it when it contradicts their beliefs. According to our Constitution, congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of their religion. Polling numbers of anyone are irrelevant. It's the decision of the Church.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:11 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian said:
    -Last I checked, an ultrasound is a procedure with a device going over the surface of the area where the baby is. Evidently Rich Hanner thought her definition of an ultrasound wasn't cause to edit it out.


    Check again
    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/17/i-had-a-transvaginal-ultrasound-my-perspective-on-the-mandate-that-touched-off-2012s-war-on-women/

    Virginia almost passed it but the protest stopped it. These laws are insane. Why do freedom loving Conservatives love to come between a women and her doctor?

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:12 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    A few months later, Pepsi' shareholders filed a resolution petitioning the company to "adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements." But the Obama Administration shut down this 36-page proposal, deciding instead that Pepsi's used of aborted babies to flavor its beverage products is just business as usual, and not a significant concern.


    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035276_Pepsi_fetal_cells_business_operations.html#ixzz1t19Gbx3l

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:04 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Obama agency rules Pepsi's use of aborted fetal cells in soft drinks constitutes 'ordinary business operations'

    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035276_Pepsi_fetal_cells_business_operations.html#ixzz1t192tlyM

    But then Pepsi went on to:

    A few months later, Pepsi' shareholders filed a resolution petitioning the company to "adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements." But the Obama Administration shut down this 36-page proposal, deciding instead that Pepsi's used of aborted babies to flavor its beverage products is just business as usual, and not a significant concern.


     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:57 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Ms. Neely wrote:


    In Kentucky, Virginia, Wisconsin and Texas, a woman is required to have a medically unnecessary ultrasound 24 hours before an abortion. In Virginia, the proposed law required doctors to perform this procedure before an abortion even in instances of rape or incest. When the law requires a doctor to violate a woman with a medical instrument, this gives an entirely new meaning to statutory rape.

    -Last I checked, an ultrasound is a procedure with a device going over the surface of the area where the baby is. Evidently Rich Hanner thought her definition of an ultrasound wasn't cause to edit it out.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:50 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Ms. Neely wrote:

    Republican hot-air merchant Rush Limbaugh called the woman who was not permitted to testify in the birth control hearing a "sl*t" and a "prostitute." Incredibly, not one Republican presidential candidate condemned the attacks on the Georgetown law student who was so vilified by Limbaugh.

    -Chuckle,

    And we barely heard a peep from the Democrats when it came to the surface this Georgetown student was an advoacate of taxpayer funded transgender operations.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:44 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Anyone who thinks the Republican establishment is conspiring to enact Sharia Law here needs to get their head examined.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:41 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Mr. Lucas wrote:

    Just because you do not agree with someone does not mean it is not a valid viewpoint.

    -Chuckle,

    If you think she can validate her viewpoint that somehow what Republicans want is akin to Sharia Law you're stupider than I thought you were.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:37 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Rich Hanner,

    The title of her column waas the entire preface of it. There is no correlation with what Republicans want and Sharia Law. Ms. Neely purposely titled her coulmn to see what kind of reaction whe would get. and then she goes on to try to explain away her limited knowledge of Sharia Law all the while she implies there's some correlation with what Republicans want and Sharia Law. I would speculate you have limited if no knowledge of Sharia Law for you to allow her column to be published.

     
  • Rich Hanner posted at 6:57 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Richard Hanner Posts: 10 Staff

    From Rich Hanner, editor: The majority of posts here stick with the issues and facts, and that's appreciated. Derogatory comments about local columnists, however, are not. We'll delete them or disallow posts altogether. Point of clarification: I review and edit the contributions of guest columnists, and I am thankful for their efforts. Challenging their views is absolutely fair and fine. Attacking them personally is not. Can we move on?

    Edited by staff.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:53 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian said:

    Shame on the LNS for allowing Ms. Neely to make such a spectacle of herself with THIS piece of work.

    Ah, the latest piece from the self-appointed mouthpiece for the liberal establishment should finally discredit her. Unfortunately it won't. As long as there are people who believe trash like this she will have followers.

    Brian you are really a piece of work. If you had any intellectual capacity for thought you are certainly not showing here. Just because you do not agree with someone does not mean it is not a valid viewpoint. You may have many here of knuckle dragging, fox watching community who thinks the nonsense you spout on these pages passes for thinking but they too have graduated from the Sean Hannity school of argument. Do not give examples of what you disagree with and make your arguments accordingly. That is using logic and your brain for thinking instead of the trashcan full of right wing talking points and making personal attacks. You may disagree with Ms Neely but the essay she wrote was well written, clear and to the point. In your dreams you could not write this well.
    By the way you may feel you are in the majority here in America. The fact is that most Americans think people with political views like yours are extremists. Of course in you view these people are not real Americans just because they disagree with you.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:48 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Brian said:

    Shame on the LNS for allowing Ms. Neely to make such a spectacle of herself with THIS piece of work.

    Ah, the latest piece from the self-appointed mouthpiece for the liberal establishment should finally discredit her. Unfortunately it won't. As long as there are people who believe trash like this she will have followers.

    Brian you are really a piece of work. If you had any intellectual capacity for thought you are certainly not showing it here. Just because you do not agree with someone does not mean it is not a valid viewpoint. You may have many here of knuckle dragging, fox watching community who thinks the nonsense you spout on these pages passes for thinking but they too have graduated from the Sean Hannity school of argument. Do not give examples of what you disagree with and make your arguments accordingly. That is using logic and your brain for thinking instead of the trashcan full of right wing talking points and making personal attacks. You may disagree with Ms Neely but the essay she wrote was well written, clear and to the point. In your dreams you could not write this well.
    By the way you may feel you are in the majority here in America. The fact is that most Americans think people with political views like yours are extremists. Of course in you view these people are not real Americans just because they are in the majority.

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 5:54 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    CBS/NYTimes poll from second week of Feb. 2012, 53% of GOP women support the requirement that private insurance plans cover full cost of contraception, 37% oppose. 71% of women independents and 85% of women democrats also support this. Other polls show similar results. So, it would appear that you are smearing the majority of Republican women as pigs as well.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 5:17 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Sorry DB: Yep was too harsh a word for the LNS. Let me rephrase: Yes

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 5:15 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Well, well, well...it has come to this...a woman who testifies that she needs enough contraception to have sex 3 to 4 times a day and wants the taxpayers to pay for it...can be called a sult but if I put her in the same category as what a man would be called for doing the same...my post is pulled. A pig is a pig no matter the gender Marty.

    YOU will continually post the pictures of murders, rapists, thieves and their ilk in the name of journalism and that is okay. I think it is sick. They were to be "locked up, put away and later terminated (that's a kinder word)"...yet the LNS continues to post their pictures...for what reason??

    mrluc: Make some sense will you.

    mrps: Use your real name.

    mrac: I agree with your last sentence. Put some data on this post for your assertion about Republican women.

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 4:58 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    Pat's last slobber was deleted by the LNS, but he couldn't have been more supportive of Cynthia Neely's point, labeling women who support birth control coverage in their healthcare as self important pigs who should pay for their own sexual appetites.

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 4:44 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    Polls show that the majority of Republican woman, including senators and congresswomen, agree with Cynthia Neely.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 4:39 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Pat said:
    Marty: WHY did you let this idiot back on the opinion page??? We may have a bunch of nuts on this site (including me sometimes) but at least we have some logic backing our thinking. I feel sick!

    I see you are up to your old name calling nonsense again. Your logic and thinking comment logic really killed me. When have you ever used logic or for that matter did any real thinking? This comment is so typical of your self righteous inanity. Did you site anything she said? Was their any analysis of her column? No you just did not like it. Poor baby, a female’s words hurt your poor tender feelings? I am sure there is some female in your life that you can cry on or you could try something new, like you know, man up. Take her on point by point using logic to back up your thinking. That will happen when pigs fly for that would take courage, honor coupled with logic. and I have come to know you. You cannot get blood out of a turnip.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 4:20 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2726

    Darrell said

    Ms Neely desires to divide and create animosity between the sexes when in reality, we need each other to make the world a better place.

    Darrell,I know you are not the brightest bulb on the planet but it is not Ms Neely who requires a woman who was raped to be violated with a medical instrument if she opts for an abortion, it was not her who voted for the Blount/Rubio amendment, it was not her that said like Santorum that birth control is not ok, it not her that put up these personhood amendments that i passed would not only ban abortion but most forms of birth control, it was not here who thinks viagra should be covered by health insurance but not birth control. Women are mad as h--l about this as well they should be. This bridging of the rights of women was brought by conservatives such as yourself. Seems you guys are really into freedom except when it ones to women and women know it. What really kills me is how you frame it. You are just trying to make these decisions for them because the sweet little darlings simply will not do as you idiots think they should do except by force of law.You want the freedom to tell a women what to do with her own body. Good luck with that for that train left the station long ago. If you think it is Ms Neely is the problem then you are even dumber than I thought you were and that is saying something .

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:28 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Pants Saggins posted at 2:57 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012...Straight up, LOL at all of you. You have all just gone down in character and intelligence a few points. All you have been discussing on this forum is the first four paragraphs of her column. How about switching the conversation to what her article is actually about. There are sixteen other paragraphs and all you have focused on is her "Sharia Law" comment...

    Thank you so much for your insight and understanding. With all the important specific points you articulated in reference to what everyone missed, it is obvious your intellect is far superior to anyone else on this thread... maybe you could post at least one point you find important so that we might understand your perspective.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:16 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1804

    Yep.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:31 pm on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Actually Pat, I appreciate that Marty selects Ms Neely to represent the people who perceive reality like they do. It providers readers education how someone can draw bizarre conclusions based on a reality perpetuated by progressives. Since there are many people who think of themselves like her, it is helpful to understand how they come to the conclusions they do.

    It could be that they really do not care if what they say is real or not. Maybe the left has determined Barack H Obama is in trouble with female voters. They say and do whatever it takes to divide and conquer. The ends justifies the means. If she is intelligent, but low on ethics as well as a progressive political agenda, I understand her strategy.

    My strategy as a counter, it to articulate truth, which is woman are important and admired by Republicans and her contention is divisive and hurts woman, not helps. It is nothing more than a destructive political game.

    In fact, if you look at Condi Rice and Sarah Palin, it is obvious that Republicans are more balanced and open to woman having power and positions in politics. In fact, Republicans respect woman who work in the home as well . Clearly the democrats think woman working in homes is unworthy as Hilary so clearly articulated during Bill's campaign. The left has Hilary Clinton, but of course her rise to power was because of her husband Bill.

    As far as this paper and truth, I am not sure truth is a priority as much as readership. As we saw in the Mike Kelly case and again in this article, getting more people to read is a primary goal.

     
  • Linda Poteet posted at 10:05 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    originalgripgirl Posts: 6

    The issue of contraception is about forcing people to pay for something they think is wrong. Not about keeping women from getting any. How would a population control enthusiast like to be forced to pay for Octo-mom's next IVF? Or an animal lover being forced to pay for killing off kitties at the pound? Its about religious liberty, which is guaranteed by the first amendment. The media and others want to make it about keeping women in the dark ages.

     
  • Ryan Jameson posted at 9:13 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    It is a little funny that Ms. Neely discredits her own point. She describes the Republicans as wanting to shrink government size and influence and then goes on to describe all the things Republicans want to get rid of that cost taxpayers money and increase the size of government. Using the left talking points this is seen as nothing more than an all out war on women. Nothing is further from the truth. This is a war on how taxpayer dollars are spent. Reducing it to a "war onb women" is a poor way to win an argument while millions and millions of dollars are spent funding birth control and abortions. Disagreeing with abortion is not tantamount to hating women as the liberals would have you believe. The larger argumet is here is just what exactly the government is spending our money on and whether or not we have a say in how our tax dollars are spent. For many Americans, paying for birth control for the likes of Sandra Fluke and government sponsored murder (sorry "abortion") is not ok. Just like it is not ok with many people on how money was spent on wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. Let the battles begin

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:47 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2692

    We were told that we had to invade Afghanistan because they were harboring "al-Qaeda" leaders. The American people were told that the system of government established by the Taliban in Afghanistan was so repressive that it needed to be overthrown, but now we are helping essentially the exact same system of government be set up in Libya?

    The leader of the Libyan rebels was very open about the fact that his "troops" included significant numbers of al-Qaeda fighters that were firing bullets at U.S. soldiers in Iraq. But now we have helped al-Qaeda take over Libya? It makes no sense whatsoever.

    Now that they have won the war, the "rebels" have announced that they will be imposing strict Sharia law all over Libya. The head of the National Transitional Council in Libya, Moustafa Abdeljalil, has already made this very clear. Just consider the following statement... "Sharia law is the source of all our laws."

    http://www.vice.com/read/al-qaeda-plants-its-flag-in-libya

    Meanwhile, the U.S. government has been spending billions of dollars to help al-Qaeda take power in Libya and is helping them enslave the entire Libyan population to a brutal form of Sharia law.

    Can anyone explain how this makes any sense at all?

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:17 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Darrell wrote:

    I think if Ms Neely actually understood what Sharia Law is, she would reconsider her entire letter.

    -Darrell,

    I believe she does understand what Sharia Law is. It is her intent to fool people into thinking the Republican establishment is somehow advocating Sharia law. If my theory is correct then the LNS should distance themselves from Ms. Neely because she's an agitator and an outright misinformant.

     
  • Charles Nelson posted at 8:04 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 257

    I found this piece hilarious. First, you have someone comparing Republicans to radical Muslims who abuse women. Secondly, you have someone playing fast and loose with the fact that she's advocating using the US Constitution for toilet paper. Too funny.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:58 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Shame on the LNS for allowing Ms. Neely to make such a spectacle of herself with THIS piece of work.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:55 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    At first I thought the title of Ms. Neely's column was tongue-in-cheek. But when I went on to read the column I was convinced she is actually serious. She has some explaining to do to those who understand Sharia Law and how it is enforced in Islamic culture. Since she does not believe Sharia Law is the the atithesis of Democracy she should just pack her bags for Iran or Syria. From her perspective it shouldn't be any different for her living over there.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:47 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2742

    Ah, the latest piece from the self-appointed mouthpiece for the liberal establishment
    should finally discredit her. Unfortunately it won't. As long as there are people who believe trash like this she will have followers.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:23 am on Tue, Apr 24, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Most Republicans I know think women are intelligent, deserve respect and admiration for all the value they bring to humanity. How unfortunate that Ms Neely desires to divide and create animosity between the sexes when in reality, we need each other to make the world a better place. I think having more women Senators and Congresswomen has helped our country. Sharia Law Republican style? Clever line but not reality. I think if Ms Neely actually understood what Sharia Law is, she would reconsider her entire letter.

     

Recent Comments

Posted 12 hours ago by Joe Baxter.

article: Letter: Pastor Frank Nolton forgets abo…

Fighting for "civil rights". Who defines civil rights? It is clear the LGBT isn't stopping at "civil rights", they are …

More...

Posted 14 hours ago by Brian Dockter.

article: Letter: Obamacare is not the program pr…

And of course it's not a matter of plagiarizing. It's what's plagiarized. Right, Ms. Bobbin?

More...

Posted 14 hours ago by Brian Dockter.

article: Letter: Obamacare is not the program pr…

Chuckle, Had the letter been plagiarism and thus citing the positive attributes of Obamacare, we wouldn't have heard a peep of criticism f…

More...

Posted 22 hours ago by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Pastor Frank Nolton forgets abo…

Well said, Mr Heuer. Your line about is it a woman or a man made me think of the song "Turn the Page." That'd be the perfect t…

More...

Posted 22 hours ago by Christina Welch.

article: San Joaquin County supervisors approve …

You are a good man, Walter.... Quack on, baby!! [beam]

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Should graduations return to the Grape Bowl?

Lodi Unified leaders are moving Lodi and Tokay high school graduations from the Grape Bowl to the Spanos Center at UOP in Stockton. They cite limited seating, costs and unpredictable weather at the Grape Bowl. But others say graduations at the Grape Bowl are an important Lodi tradition, and one reason many supported renovating the stadium. What do you think?

Total Votes: 99

Loading…

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists