Rinos broke their PLEDGE to
 

Rinos tonight broke our hearts and their PLEDGE to America.
Cant wait for next primary season to hire a new team.
JJ
A tea party supporter.

Business as usual!!!
 

What have they accomplished?
They are in a vehicle speeding toward a wall at supersonic speed and they feel good about reducing the speed a couple of miles per hour.
And now they are all puffed up cow towing the historic event they just defined.
They are shouting to we the people that ....THEY JUST DO NOT GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!

btk

Jim,

You have your viewpoints about the teaparty and you seem to fully support them. They are just too conservative for me in most of their beliefs.

I prefer some more liberal social policies but not on the radical end, by any means. If it cost a bit more in tax, we should be willing to pay.

The ultra-conservative idea of outlawing abortion is one that just irks me to no end. A lot of conservatives have said they may be against abortion personally, but it is still a personal choice for each woman herself. This should not be a political issue at all.

Too bad the baby doesn't have a choice before it's killed.

Interesting that we agree on..
 

Interesting that one thing we do agree on this:
If you want ANYTHING, you should be willing to raise taxes or reduce some other program to pay for it. This is exactly how we got into this program. Both parties over the years have just found it easier to borrow to pay for wars, and programs. I think we can agree that should be stopped, right?

I prefer to avoid social issues but here is my position and the position of most tea party people I think.
Social issues should not be decided by the Federal Government. The Constitution is specifically designed to leave those decisions to the States. That is where they belong. If that means abortion is legal in California, but not in Montana, that is democratic republic government.
JJ

Lassen,
It is not a baby until born or until able to sustain itself (breathing) outside the mother's body. Once again, it is the mother's choice.

:confused: Opinions differ widely on when a fetus becomes a baby. I disagree with your idea of when life begins. When a baby's heart starts to beat, is that not a life?

Barefoot -

No, it isn't. It is a baby when born or when it can sustain itself by breathing outside the mother's body. Once again, it is a choice to be made individually by each woman. This should not be a political issue but a personal choice to be made individually by each woman. No coersion should be made either way to influence the mother on her choice. This coersion includes the ridiculous Florida rule that says a mother must have an ultra-sound before an abortion and listen to the results.

Talk about extreme, brutal and cold.

Things We DO Agree On
 

While we may differ on the Right To Life/Women's Rights issue, I think one thing is for sure...we all should now realize that it makes little difference on which party is in the majority in the Congress. The people elected, even the new ones, are far more interested in their own re-election and satisfying the needs of those who finance them, than they are in responsibly governing this country.

Personally, I think there's a place for honest debate and legislation on Right To Life/Women's rights in either Washington or in the states. But I emphatically disagree that an argument over such an issue, justified because a miniscule amount of the federal budget is spent on it, should be used to hold up and confuse desperately needed discussion, debate and votes on the broken fiscal policies of the country.

It's like an argument over whether they're out of pretzels when the plane is spiraling out of control, headed for a crash.

I've often wondered; Why?, when we all have come to accept that life ends with the cessation of brainwave activity, that we don't all agree that life begins with the start of brainwave activity? By the way, that begins at about 40 days gestation, or about 6 weeks.

The "Great One", Mark Levin, discussing the deal Boehner made with Obama on the Mark Cavuto show, and calling it a "historic scam". Very Interesting.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffG-0IZF4bY&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

RINOS Broke their Pledge
 

Richielion, as I recollect, there was a female columnist some years back that made the very same argument you had with the brain wave analogy. It has validity. I am against abortion primarily because it deadens the heart making us less likely to protect life creating a short leap from its just a fetus to this old fool is using up to many resources. I am especially surprised concerning logic that states its a woman's perogative. Yes it is a woman's perogative to choose between getting pregnant or not getting pregnant but to suggest that a woman has a choice once pregnant well that's just plain selfish and irresponsible, especially with the number of terminations some repeatedly by the same woman. Worse yet the government has no idea how many of the clinics have been terminating viable fetuses

As to RINO's I wrote Bohner a week into his new job and explained that I could tell by his words and actions that RINOs did not understand the people's mandate. I wrote in another thread that both parties are and both incumbents and newbies are facing a "widow maker" created by each succeeeding administration since the 1970's. I also said I believe that the only wat out of this mess is to lose the labels Democrat Republican, etc because it is not a Democrat problen nor a Republican but America's problems and unless and until we can all get past that we will continue down the same dead end alley. I am not a tea party member but I am a tea party supported. As it stands now I will vote for many of the candidate backed by the tea party

Fetus brain waves
 

Richie,

I just had to look further and came up with a very interesting link you might like to read.

http://eileen.250x.com/Main/Einstein/Brain_Waves.htm

Take it for what you want. I am not putting it there to argue my point. I have already stated my viewpoint as to when I believe life begins. I also believe it is only up to the mother to decide if abortion is right or not for her. It is an individual choice each must make on their own without coersion from either side.

If you read Tbugs quote (above) on brain waves, you may be interested in reading further information about Margaret Sykes.

http://www.themediareport.com/specia...aret-sykes.htm

Sounds to me like they're jumping through hoops and stretching the standards of what are "brain waves" to give aid and comfort for those whose agenda is the propagation of abortion and need cover for the destruction of so much life. It seems pretty despicable to me, but then I have a weakness for those among us who can't protect themselves.

Thanks for posting. I got some confirmation on what I've suspected, and direction for further inquiries into this subject which has long interested me.

The article found in the Daily Sun Page A9 speaks to my last post. Citing Dr. Gosnell's Abortion clinic in Philadelphia outs the ugly truth regarding this industry. People can go on about the science but the truth is that the science won't be settled no matter what proofs are offered. This has always been for me a psycholgical issue both from the point of a woman and society.
I do not know how pro abortionists can look you straight in the face and claim it is a "right" Well with "rights" come "responsibility". To have a woman say "oops" and then terminate that Oops is .............you fill in the blank. To have a woman Oops more than once and terminate is criminal. A civilzed society has a natural inclination to protect the most vulnerable among us. Unless and until Roe v Wade is reversed we will continue down this immoral path. As you are aware even the plaintiff in this case admits she was wrong and suffered from her decision to abort.

I know this post on the seeming capitulation of the RINOS who still occupy the Republican leadership (not for long if they keep this up) in agreeing to a watered down deal with Obama & Co. has transformed into an abortion debate because of, what many people feel, is the immoral use of taxpayer's money to fund what they consider infanticide with the federal funding of Planned Parenthood.

I've just long thought it unreasonable and disingenuous for doctors to be so certain when life ends while being so uncertain when it begins.


Back to the thread at hand is the story that the National Debt has increased $54 Billion Dollars in the 8 DAYS preceding the adoption of $38.5 Billion in spending cuts. This is all just so much bulls**t.

It doesn't seem like we can ever get out of this mess that began with an overwhelmed G.W. Bush and then was doubled, and quadrupled down by Barack Obama.
Obama has put us on the precipice to national bankruptcy. Some learned people still think we can find a way to dig ourselves back out. I have no faith in that.

I'm linking the story by CNS News as they have a link to the government's own numbers to verify their assertions.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...days-preceding

I Hope We Can
 

Hopefully, we all can redirect our attention to by far the greatest threat to our American way of life. That threat isn't Right To Life, it's not terrorism, it's not nation building, it's not trying to democratize the rest of the world. (Good Lord, can we really call what we have right now in the U.S. a "democracy"? Where the representatives of the people act primarily to represent the special interests who pay them?)

No, the greatest threat to our way of life, to the importance of the U.S. among the world of nations, is our skyrocketing debt.

It's a pretty simple analysis if one simply takes a few minutes to do the arithmetic. Notwithstanding all the self-serving soundbites being made by our politicians (several from both sides on this morning's Sunday talk shows), the arithmetic shows clearly that the debt crisis can only be corrected with the enactment of life-changing "give ups" of programs and services currently funded by the government, by meaningful reductions in Social Security and Medicare, by a dramatic reduction in defense spending, and yes, an increase in income taxes will be necessary.

Do the arithmetic yourself and tell us all how it can be accomplished any other way. Our elected representatives know that, but they spend the majority of their time debating spending issues that are meaningless in the grand scheme of things (Planned Parenthood and Head Start as examples). They're more interested in appearing to appeal to voters than they are in getting to work to resolve the greatest threat to America in a century or more.

It cannot be accomplished any other way. Do the arithmetic yourself. If you can see another way, tell us all how our future budgets can be balanced with enough left over to begin to pay down the national debt.

Of course you are right, but how to do this with the self-serving people we've entrusted to accomplish this is the problem.

People want what you are preaching until it comes down to some government benefit being denied, or cut, that they receive.

Paul Ryan is the repub sweetheart on the budget. Just now on Face the Nation.. he praised the Friday budget deal indicating it is a good start. How disappointing.. He says his budget sets us on a path to pay off the debt... More BS.. his plan does not even balance the budget for at least 27 years.. and during that 27 years the DEBT increases dramatically beyond the current 14.3 trillion. Soon the dollar will no longer be the reserve currency for the world and that is the only thing that allows us to hid our crisis using all of this deficit spending and money printing. Countries that are not the international reserve currency and print trillions are called failed economies and banana republics. The only thing that dems and repubs have the courage to do is print money and paper over the problem for as long as they can get elected.

This Could Happen
 

If we don't stop the unsustainable and dramatic increase in our national borrowing from the rest of the world to finance our spending, that is a distinct possibility. If that were to happen, our budget and spending would have to be adjusted downward immediately. Without the ability to print money to pay for our governmental expenditures there would be only three alternatives--

• Continue to borrow money to finance spending (not likely, see what Greece and Ireland are experiencing now. Lenders might be willing to make loans to us in a new currency, but not dollars.)

• Dramatically decrease federal spending

• Or dramatically increase taxes
  

There are some experts who believe that the U.S. Dollar being replaced as the world's reserve currency is something that will happen in the forseeable future. Speaking only for myself, even with a career spent as a banker, I don't know how that happens. I doubt that it happens all at once, that there's a vote of all the creditor nations not to accept payment in U.S. dollars any more. My guess is that it would happen over a period of time.

As an example, what if Saudi Arabia began to say they'd prefer to be paid for their oil in Euros instead of dollars? Or what if the Chinese said they would only lend us (and require repayment in) Euros instead of dollars--we'd have to convert the Euros they lent us to dollars to spend here in the U.S. and then convert dollars back to Euros to repay them at the going exchange rate when our debt obligations mature. In that example we could print all the dollars we wanted to and their reduced value would be reflected in the Euro-Dollar exchange rate, less valuable dollars would buy less in Euros to pay off a debt denominated in Euros.

The reason that the dollar being replaced as the world reserve currency is possible, even probable, is that the rest of the world who lends us dollars by buying our Treasury bonds and notes are quickly tiring of lending us dollars with a given value, then being reapid when their loans mature with dollars worth substantially less (as our profligate spending, borrowing and money-printing continues to deflate the value of the dollar compared to other currencies).

I hope this isn't too complicated, but I believe this is a distinct possibility. It would become more possible if another currency or basket of currencies became an attractive and liquid alternative to the U.S. dollar as payment for trade.

Here's the test, when we take the White House and the Senate back in 2012 we'll see what they do then.

Then the libs will really start screaming about killing seniors and putting kids out on the street with no food.

Bottom line is the Democrats simply won't do with one penny less. The Republicans aren't much better but they are better.

It is already happening..
 

It is already happening:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/10/mark...llar/index.htm

Your new money will probably be called a SDR, a Juan, or a Euro.
Just google the subject. Other currencies already being used increasingly in foreign exchanges.
We have the international reserve currency ONLY because we had the strongest economy and the most stable money. That has ended.

It will not happen over night UNLESS after QE 2 ends and we cannot sell the bonds at an auction necessary to continue the spending or service the debt. I think that could happen shortly after the end of QE2 on July 1st. I think the FED then would rush to announce QE3 which would give us just a little more time during which the IMF would announce a new international currency, or China, oil countries, and Europe will announce all financial transactions in Juan or Euro payments.
JJ
did you see how low the dollar went on Friday?? about 75.
Devaluing the dollar to "create" more jobs was a smoke screen. We did it so We could use our visa to pay our :highfive:mastercard and spend more.

I respectfully disagree
 

Repubs are not better than Dems.
Dems lie and say there is no problem.
Repubs say there is a big problem and then lie when promise that they will actually do what is necessary to fix it.
Paul Ryan's Path to Prosperity is such as joke. 27 or more YEARS of deficits.. during that time our DEBT increases dramatically and he knows this gov could never stay on that path for 27 years. Any fix that takes longer than 5 years will never work.. During the next 5 years the DEBT will increase where it can never be paid, unfortunately where we probably already are.
Both want to get re elected and are afraid to say and do the right thing because they rightfully believe that NOW half the voters love the gov freebies, and do not want to give them up.
Any politician who says they can fix the debt without causing a recession is lying. We have not had a real recovery from a recession since 1971 because we have papered over all of them. A real recession recovery causes the value of everything to drop including lifestyles to where the real economy can sustain them.
JJ

Once again, I have to say that life does not begin until a baby is born or can sustain itself by breathing outside the mother's body.

One of you stated that this is just a slippery slope so government can get rid of old fools who take up too many resources. Not true at all.

How many of us have had relatives who signed a Do Not Resusitate order? Would you want your relative to linger for possibly years in a vegatative state breathing only with the assistance of a machine? I hope the answer is NO.

I had a friend whose mother suffered a massive stroke, was in a nursing facility for about 2 years, did not know who or where she was, was in constant agony,could not communicate and only screamed and cried and could only breathe with help of a machine. Her son wanted to turn off the breathing apparatus but his sister just refused saying a cure was always coming the next week. Fortunately, the mother passed on.

The choice of abortion is up to each mother individually. Take it another step. If it was your daughter telling you she was pregnant and was going to have an abortion for whatever reason - would you support her? Please do not say that she would never do that based on upbringing, etc. I just want to know if you as a parent would support your daughter in her decision?

Barefoot -
Thanks for posting that information about Margaret Sykes. It was interesting to read and to see how desparate that Pro-Life people are about misleading others. Your posting did a great service to the Pro-Choice side. Thanks.

Please consider
 

What is the definition of Death?
a : a permanent cessation of all vital functions : the end of life

If death is the end of life, the permanent cessation of all vital functions, then life is the presence of any vital function. That begins before 20 weeks. FAR sooner. Why not just check for heart beat or brain waves? If they are there you cannot abort except in self defense, simple as that.
JJ

100 years from now....no one will care!!!!:boom:

Then those on respirators are not human anymore. I guess keeping Chris Reeves alive for so long was a crime against nature, by your definition. It doesn't change things that he could think as you've discounted brain activity as life.

Richie,
You know very well I was speaking of a fetus. And I never mentioned "crime against nature." Christopher Reeve accomplished much during his time as a quadriplegic by bringing stem cell research to the attention of Americans. I really am somewhat surprised that a conservative would hold a person in esteem that championed stem cell research. Good for you.

I just using your arguments. What you call a fetus I call a human being. I'm just saying if breathing is life, as you say in your argument as to what constitutes a human being, than my analogy stands that any human being that cannot breathe is not a human being by your own words. I don't believe that, but that was your argument.

If a baby is born prematurely at 5 months and doctors work hard to help the baby survive, I'd imagine you'd be alright with that.

If a baby is 5 months in the womb (exactly the same baby) and is aborted, you call it a fetus, give your blessing to have that human life destroyed and sleep well at night. I'm sorry, but you'll never convince me that it's not infanticide.

A Failure to Recognize Competing Rights
 

The problem in the abortion debate is that there are two legitimate rights in conflict: (1) The right of the mother to control her own body, and (2) The right of the baby to live. Both these rights need to be recognized.

IMHO, the most straightforward way to do this is to allow the mother’s rights to be the first priority until the baby can survive outside the womb. This would correspond to the first two trimesters. During the third trimester, the baby’s right to live takes priority over the mother’s right to an abortion. The only exception to this would be when either carrying the baby to full term or having a C-section impairs the mother’s health. Neither rape nor incest compromises the baby’s right to life at this time. The mother had six months to make her determination.

Unlike many others, I believe that elective abortion should be paid for by all health insurance plans including Medicaid. The cycle of poverty and the increasing rate of single parenthood, brought about largely by the ‘Aid to Mothers With Dependent Children Act, must be stemmed by making safe and legal abortions available and affordable to women in the first two trimesters.

Richie,
You obviously have strong views on abortion that are completely different than mine. I am going to drop the topic.

I know, it's always the never ending argument because it never makes any kind of sense. Pro-abortionists always have to jump through hoops to justify their beliefs and no matter what life science you show them they stick to dogma like it was a religion. In many ways, it is.

Even BBQ's proposition for the rights to the procedure up to six months has the effect of killing a viable baby.

So, we drop the subject; but did you know Planned Parenthood performs an abortion every 95 seconds?

CNS New links Planned Parenthoods own fact sheet. Check for yourself.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...fe-american-ev

OK Rinos.. defend this: CBO says the budget deal actually only reduces spending by
$352 million; NOT BILLION.. that is less that 1% that is ONE PERCENT of the 38 billion they said the deal was worth and it is less than One third of ONE percent of what they promised.. What a great deal..
DUMP Boehner and anyone that votes for this SCAM
I told you they BROKE THEIR PLEDGE..and now they are trying to scam us.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/budge...llion-20110413

Take a good close look at the article. The CBO said it's $352M less than *2010* spending. It's $78B less than Obama's originally proposed 2011 budget bill and the $39B number comes from the 2011 spending plans which WERE higher than 2011.

Sorry but that makes no sense
 

Using your logic, if I am broke and am increasing the RATE of my spending EVERY YEAR,and I need to reduce my spending to avoid bankruptcy, to get a loan from my banker I just need to say that I will cut my spending from the 78 billion ADDITIONAL dollars my wife was going to spend this year or 39 billion ADDITIONAL spending I was going to spend, and I can call that a cut and therefore my banker should consider that a GOOD start on fixing my fiances and allow me to borrow another 700 BILLION to spend THIS YEAR!!! I am sorry but that makes no sense. My banker would drop kick me out of his building and that is what we need to do to Boehner, Obama, Reid, and all of the Repubs and dems who are pushing this scam.
JJ

and a new team in charge...
 

Jim,

Yes, we should put the new team of Sarah (I quit, I quit) Palin, Michelle (swine flu a Democrat invention), and Ron (chicken little was right) Paul in charge.

Hey, with that team in charge of America, we could just reach up and flush the whole country right down the toilet.