Cosby's Legacy: Ashes
BILL COSBY
is a very funny fellow
WRONG!!!
is a very funny fellow
WRONG!!!
Here would be a possible assignment for an experienced investigative journalist:
`
`
It is not an unreasonable assumption to conclude that a drug-induced rape might turn fatal. It's happened before. When one introduces a foreign substance into the blood stream of an unwitting victim, that is always a remote possibility. When there has been a half-century pattern of such behavior, that "remote possibility" becomes a virtual inevitability. This is not irresponsible speculation on my part. In fact, it only stands to reason. Think about it.
This is something that has to be looked into. Did any aspiring model/actress in Bill Cosby's presence or proximity die suddenly of an unexplained overdose in the last fifty years? There might be a long-forgotten news report that, at the time, didn't sound any alarm bells. It would be worth knowing the answer to that question. I'm just putting it out there.
`
`
I might be accused of jumping on the bandwagon here. So be it. When these allegations were first made public in 2014, I didn't want to believe them - in fact I didn't believe them. But as the months transpired, and more and more women came forward with their stories, my doubts became as soft as, forgive the pun, jello. As they say, where there's smoke....
The final straw came when the transcripts of Cosby's own testimony during a civil lawsuit over a decade ago became part of the public record. When he admitted to acquiring Quaalude to give to one woman in particular for the purpose of sex, it was all over as far as I was concerned. He convicted himself.
`
`
Of all of the women whose statements I have read and interviews I have seen, only one of them could I dismiss outright. This involved an alleged victim who said that her encounter with Cosby took place in the year 1969. She said that during their brief relationship she would refer to him as "Mr. Jello". Bill Cosby would not become that product's spokesman for another five years. However, most of the rest of them are entirely credible. I cannot believe that there are this many human beings so evil that they would conspire to destroy the career and reputation of an innocent man. And there shouldn't be any doubt at all: the once-towering legacy of Bill Cosby has been reduced to smoldering ruins.
When his obituary is written in a time not terribly far off, he won't be remembered primarily as "America's favorite dad", or as "one of the great humorists of the twentieth century" (a title which I believe he deserved). There will be no two-hour documentaries on the life and groundbreaking career of Bill Cosby - as is the case with Chaplin, Keaton, Richard Pryor and Lenny Bruce. There will be no more lifetime achievement awards for Bill. Nothing.
Instead he will be remembered, in the words of one of his alleged victims, as "the twentieth century's most successful serial rapist". This is too sad to comprehend.
I'm wincing as I write these words. When I was a kid, Bill Cosby was my first comedic hero; and in a lifetime that has been devoted to following the careers of comedians, I have had more-than-a-few. Ask anyone who knew me in high school. While my record collection was filled to the rafters with obligatory rock'n' roll, I possessed a sizable comedy collection. Bill's early Warner Brothers recordings were always a prominent part of that collection. When I was ten years old, the subject of the first book I ever purchased (the first of a thousand-or-more I imagine) was Bill Cosby. It was a biography written for kids called, "Cool Cos". The only time in my life that I ever made the effort to see a comedian in concert was in 1983 when I took a date to see Bill at Radio City Music Hall. No celebrity scandal in my lifetime has broken my heart one/tenth as much as this one.
I loved Bill Cosby.
This is a nasty tasting pill indeed. That he could be so reckless, given all that he represented to so many people - forget about race - is beyond comprehension. I know that he did a lot of good in his time, and I think he was sincere in his desire to leave the world a better place than he found it. Maybe that's true. Just try convincing his victims. Good luck.
We believed in Bill Cosby and he played us for chumps for a half century. That's some legacy, huh?
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
On a happier note....
`
SUGGESTED READING:
Jennifer's Musing
http://www.jennifersmusing.com/
Jennifer Circosta is an artist with words. Her spiritual writings, poems and essays soothe and inspire and, at times, are perfectly capable of sending this insufferable curmudgeon into the clouds - not a terribly easy thing to do (I tend to be a tad cranky these days).
Please, have a look at Jennifer's site. Her pen astonishes. This is someone whose gentle musings should be read by all.
She's also a very nice woman.
Instead he will be remembered, in the words of one of his alleged victims, as "the twentieth century's most successful serial rapist". This is too sad to comprehend.
I'm wincing as I write these words. When I was a kid, Bill Cosby was my first comedic hero; and in a lifetime that has been devoted to following the careers of comedians, I have had more-than-a-few. Ask anyone who knew me in high school. While my record collection was filled to the rafters with obligatory rock'n' roll, I possessed a sizable comedy collection. Bill's early Warner Brothers recordings were always a prominent part of that collection. When I was ten years old, the subject of the first book I ever purchased (the first of a thousand-or-more I imagine) was Bill Cosby. It was a biography written for kids called, "Cool Cos". The only time in my life that I ever made the effort to see a comedian in concert was in 1983 when I took a date to see Bill at Radio City Music Hall. No celebrity scandal in my lifetime has broken my heart one/tenth as much as this one.I loved Bill Cosby.
This is a nasty tasting pill indeed. That he could be so reckless, given all that he represented to so many people - forget about race - is beyond comprehension. I know that he did a lot of good in his time, and I think he was sincere in his desire to leave the world a better place than he found it. Maybe that's true. Just try convincing his victims. Good luck.
We believed in Bill Cosby and he played us for chumps for a half century. That's some legacy, huh?
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
On a happier note....
`
 |
| Jennifer Circosta |
Jennifer's Musing
http://www.jennifersmusing.com/
Jennifer Circosta is an artist with words. Her spiritual writings, poems and essays soothe and inspire and, at times, are perfectly capable of sending this insufferable curmudgeon into the clouds - not a terribly easy thing to do (I tend to be a tad cranky these days).
Please, have a look at Jennifer's site. Her pen astonishes. This is someone whose gentle musings should be read by all.
She's also a very nice woman.
posted by Tom Degan @ 1:57 PM
85 comments
85 Comments:
I think a couple woman have legitimate gripes. Th rest are looking for a payday.
"That bastard promised to get me in the movies if I slept with him and he didn't, so NOW it's payback time"
WHY wait so long to come forward?
WHY wait until the last day before the statue of limitations runs out?
Not saying he's innocent, but thete ARE opportunists out there.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I did not make an accusation of murder. I said it needs to be investigated as a possibility. Read carefully.
It is very easy for someone to overdose on downers if they are not used to them, especially women who weigh very little. He took a real chance of killing one of those women and he tried it 50 or more times so maybe he is a murderer as well as a rapist.
A good point Tom, that has not been brought up in any of the articles that I read.
Tom,
I share your sadness as the crimes Mr Cosby is accused of became know. Like you I wish it wasn't happening, like you I am upset that he as a strong spokesman for blacks taking personal responsibility for their actions is now it would seem trying to dodge taking responsibility for his actions.
Sad indeed
Chuck
What ever happened to "innocent until PROVEN guilty"?
I can understand chuckie/boy troll automatically assuming a Black man is guilty of rape, but Tom, I'm surprised at you. Can the man have a trial first? If he IS guilty, no punishment could be too severe, but if he turns out NOT to be...
Isn't interesting how the claim that the Tea Party issued racial slurs at blacks with no proof other than a few people saying they did, that Senator Reid claimed that Romney had not paid income taxesd, again with out proof, was believed, yet now some would not believe when 40+ women claim Cosby had raped them.
Talk about a war on women!
The same people who defend Bill Clinton against the sexual assault charges against him were all in when a claim that a white lacrosse team had raped a black women. The same people believe that the riots in Ferguson where caused by cops beating to death a black youth, that the Occupy Wallstreet protest did not damage public property.
It is do sad Tom, that idealogs are so blind towards the possibility that they could be wrong, that they can not find the truth nor do they search for it.
I tip my conservative hat to you Tom for being brave enough to publish what you have.
Chuck
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Chuckie there was obvious proff of all the things you mentioned. Just because Fpx news and the feces throwers on AM radio don't sppon feed them to you does not mean they didn't happen.
There is no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of the Clinton's concerning Whitewater,(As Per Special prosecutor Ken Starr) yet you believe there is
There is no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of the Sec Clinton or the Obama administratin (as per NINE GOP led "investigations") yet you and other teabagger continue to use is as a weapon against Mrs. Clinton
There os no evidence that Obama is Muslim, or was NOT born in Hawaii in 1961, yet you teabagggers still claim otherwise.
I could go on for 50 pages, but you get the idea. Actually, you don't, but you should.
Keep making an ass of yourself. It's entertaining. Oh and get used to THIS phrase. PRESIDENT HILLARY CLINTON, or maybe "PRESIDENT BERNIE SANDERS"
Either way unless some major CHEAST happens (see Bush) you won't be seeing a Republican in the White house for a very long time.
He admitted in a sworn deposition giving drugs to a woman for the purpose of sex. He convicted himself as far as I'm concerned.
Tom,
This may ruin your standing with your peers, but I agree and support the position you have arrived at using logic and facts.
Chuck
Mozart
I'll type this slow so you can comprehend it.
None of the items you just posted have a damned thing to do with our prior conversations.
Simply stated you have become the Man of LaMancha, tilting after windmills.
I find debating with you a totally discusting exercise in futility.
Why?
1. For someone who wants to be taken serious you rarely post without mispellings
2. You swear at me, showing a complete lack of ability to communicate as an adult.
3. You continue to attribute what I say to 3rd party's while using the same phrases that others have used here, not seeing the irony.
4. When confronted with facts you cannot overcome you resort to ad hominem.
5. When I wish you a merry Christmas or a Happy New Year, you reply with the hate that is consuming you.
No longer will I respond to your posts, which I'm sure will cause you to demand I do so.
Tough shit Mozart, you're a looser, and not the sharpest pencil in the box. You are a complete waste of time.
You sure are a good bullshit artist Chuck. You have been bringing up the pencil thing, a small spate between me and Mozart that should of been forgotten about a long time ago, incessantly.
Your Christmas greetings were insincere and sarcastic because you brought up the pencil insult repeatably at the same time.
You are the reason that Mozart is the last person here that is still posting regularly to you. Every body else is sick of your bullshit. If Mozart stops you will be left all alone and you will deserve it.
By the way, what the hell is a "looser"?
By the way, what the hell is a "looser"?
I believe that's a reference to his bowels.
Mr Hansen
I hope you realize that nothing that nothing in your most latest post changes a thing of what I said about Mozart.
Further, I don't post here looking for a response because frankly if there is one it is either a personal ad hominem or a grade school play ground conversation that goes like this: "oh yeah, my father can whip yours", or " so what, you also did something wrong". Yours is a classic example .
I post here to use as Tom has allowed all of us to, I.E. Express my opinion. I don't need a response from anyone.
Cheers!
Mozart, let us see if he does not need a response, give him the cold shoulder and see how he squirms.
Mr. Hansen
There really is much more to say
You, Tom and I agree on the topic of Bill Cosby
The person who doesn't and seems to want to make it an issue of race is Mozart
He is wrong and in the minority on this issue
He admitted in a sworn deposition giving drugs to a woman for the purpose of sex.
That kinda seals it for me too.
Those who defend Cosby after this testimony may be under a similar form of psychological denial as those who defend the greater, and far deadlier, sociopath GW Bush.
Their fans and supporters don't want to see their hero/star is a liar, un-convicted rapist, or war criminal.
All too often we don't want to learn what we don't want to know.
This is why the radical Right wants to believe liberals are destroying the country, Obama is a tyrant coming to disarm them, tax cuts for the rich "trickle down" benefits to all, or there is an international conspiracy of evil climate scientists.
This is also why too many liberals want to believe Hillary is one of them, or that the Democratic Party is primarily about serving the public good.
The power of belief is strong, even when provably wrong, or at the least counter to the preponderance of evidence.
Faith has a place, but it should not be in support of celebrities or politicians. They will make fools of the believers.
Dave,
Except for one detail, I agree with everything you posted!
Cheers.
Chuck
Good post Tom. I loved Bill Cosby as a kid growing up. His self-induced demise greatly saddens me too. I hope justice is done in the end for all concerned.
"He admitted in a sworn deposition giving drugs to a woman for the purpose of sex."
Well, that's pretty much that isn't it?
Chuckie
" For someone who wants to be taken "SERIOUS" you rarely post without mispellings"
"Third party's"
"Looser"
Oh...the irony.
The rest of your post read like it was written by Sarah Palin.
Can you stop responding to EVERYONE'S posts? If so, to IQ of this forum will increase by a factor of 10.
As for Cosby, when did I mention race? I said something about women looking for a payday, and innocent until proven guilty. I'f he's confessed, well... case closed.
Now we can go back to your support of insurrectioin and domestic terrorism. But you won't respond to that will you? Nahh...
Mozart, admit that you would be lost without Chuck. You seem to enjoy the fight way too much, sir.
T. Paine,
Don't you love how Mozart is so full of hate and empty of ideas that he continues to put words in my mouth in an attempt to get response from me.
It's becoming laughable.
Hey, how's that cold front effecting you in the mountains?
Chuck
"automatically assuming a Black man is guilty of rape"
"As for Cosby, when did I mention race?"
Mozart
Fair enough, but it was a valid point.
And here I thought Chuckie promised not to respond to me.
I guess that didn't mean he'd stop talking ABOUT me like the coward he is.
And T. Paine, when I want your opinion, I'll give it to you, since you never seem to have any original ons of your own.
I noticed you guys refuce to talk about the Traitors up in Oregon. I guess "illegal" is OK when you are an armed WHITE guy.
I'm glad Armond Bundy is taking a stand in America against the Fascist government slowly treading on our freedom!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-Nnj1__o3U
I think Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton are kindred spirits.
Too bad Bill Cosby did not have a pit bull for a wife who would harass and discredit women with allegations.
I can't wait to see the movie Benghazi to learn the truth of what happened that night. Who do you trust with the 3AM distress call?
Mozart, I appreciate your offer to "give me my opinion" but I don't march in lockstep with any one party identity. I evaluate each position on its own merits and the evidence presented and then decide. I don't simply spew the Democrat or Republican party line for ALL positions. That said, I do have some counter-intuitive or what you would call "original" opinions of my own accordingly.
At the risk of getting down into the muck with you, you seem to be willing to support even a criminal like Hillary for president if it would keep the Democrats in office, sir. So who is it among the two of us who cannot think for himself and wishes to put party ahead of country?
As for the fools in Oregon, while I am sympathetic to some of their grievances, I strongly condemn them for how they are going about "solving" them by comandeering a federal wild-life reserve. Does that qualify for not sticking with the far right agenda enough for you, Mozart?
Do you suppose we can discuss and debate civilly, or do you wish to start calling me names and "giving me my opinion" too, sir?
Mr. Paine,
You cannot have a civil debate with Mozart. His brain is wired to ignore and deflect facts that will upset his leaning forward progressive world view.
As an example someone posted a wikipedia article that Paula Jones was paid $850,000 in hush money to shut her mouth. The Hildebeast tried her best to shut Paula Jones up who claimed Slick Willie dropped his pants in front of her. When the irrefutable fact came out, just like Monica's blue stained dress, that Paula Jones could identify distinguishing features of Bill's private parts, the Clintons crapped their pants and knew a large amount of money was needed to make Paula Jones go away.
I must admit having the President of the United States go to court and have to drop his pants to determine the truth would be the lowest point in the history of the United States. But all of this would not have happened if he was not a sexual predator who abused his power.
Mozart's response to the wikipedia post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones was that the payoff did not happen and anyone could post on wikipedia.
Poor Mozart is delusional. Even though all the following liberal papers (probably 4 of the 6 he reads every day) say the Clintons paid Paula Jones $850,000 to shut her mouth, Mozart will say it was a fabricated story. There really is no cure for someone like Mozart. Arguing with him is futile Mr. Paine.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/jones111498.htm
President Clinton reached an out-of-court settlement with Paula Jones yesterday, agreeing to pay her $850,000 to drop the sexual harassment lawsuit that led to the worst political crisis of his career and only the third presidential impeachment inquiry in American history.
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/nov/14/news/mn-42627
WASHINGTON — President Clinton agreed Friday to pay $850,000 to Paula Corbin Jones to end her sexual harassment lawsuit, finally settling a case that began as an embarrassing nuisance for the former Arkansas governor but later sparked a criminal investigation that threatened to topple him from office.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/13/clinton.usa1
WASHINGTON (AP) - Paula Jones is awaiting the arrival of an $850,000 cheque from President Clinton, bringing an official end to the four-year saga spurred by her allegations of sexual harassment.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/01/13/us/clinton-settles-jones-lawsuit-with-a-check-for-850000.html
WASHINGTON, Jan. 12— Just as the Senate is about to begin President Clinton's impeachment trial in earnest, Mr. Clinton sent $850,000 to Paula Corbin Jones today to settle the sexual misconduct lawsuit that started it all.
T.Paine, When you come up with one crime H. Clinton has committed, do let us know.
And if you support the domestic terrorists in Oregon AT ALL you need to give up your US citizenship.
As for you having any opinions of your own all evidence to the contrary. Your posts read like the outtakes from a Glenn Beck book.
Clinton = "the lowest point in the history of the United States"
Well, whadayaknow?
Something that isn't Obama's fault!
...Besides the Bush Financial collapse, Great Recession, and ISIS from a war based on lies for crony profit.
How low can you go, huh?
T. Paine and Harry,
I agree with both of your statements about Mozart.
Chuck
Chuck, you agree with Harry? You should tell him the next time you see him at the USO. During one of his six-hour shifts.
He'd be glad to hear it!
Chuckie agrees with himself. Go figure.
But all that is moot now. Tragedy has struck.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/david-bowie-dies-at-age-69-after-battling-cancer/ar-CCniBe?li=BBnb7Kz
R.I.P Major Tom.
Hey Harry, do you have anything relevent to contribute? Did you REALLY go back 30 years to find a "scandal" (It wasn't a scandal then either) to deflect from the way your GOP heroes are stealing from the American people, allowing the KKK to run our law enforcement, and attempting to take healthcare away from 20 million people?
Maybe you'd like to discuss Watergate instead?
Just a subtle hint there Rip Van Winkle...it's 2016. And an 'out of court settlement" that was supposed to be confidential is not proof of guilt, anymore than a Wikipedia article MUST be accurate (but only when a conservative uses it as a reference) Wikipedia is generally ridiculed as a source, but you know that already.
Mozart, you really do only see what you want to see, don't you sir?
There were also links to such "conservative" sources as the LA Times, New York Times, and Washington Post that Harry included to substantiate that fact that Paul Jones did receive $850K from Bill Clinton for his actions.
Let's not forget the fact that other credible Democrat women who worked in support of Clinton were also propositioned, fondled, and even a credible allegation of rape against Bill. Bill and Hillary both denied any involvement of Bill's with Gennifer Flowers, until that lie couldn't be held any more. Same with Kathleen Willey and then Juanita Broderick's claim that she was raped by Clinton. Clinton has denied every claim against him, including Monica Lewinsky's, even to the point of perjury and suborning perjury which caused a sitting president to be disbarred accordingly.
Now Hillary is not automatically responsible for Bill's conduct, but when she does everything she can to discredit, smear and destroy these victims of Bill's as just one more "bimbo eruption" then she has become part of the problem.
As recently as last November, Hillary tweeted, "Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported." I guess she doesn't include those attacked by her faithless predatory husband.
When you add into it the fact that Senator Hillary paid her female staff less than her male staff, it sure does take away a lot of the "war on women" crap she can spew at the GOP, doesn't it?
All of that said, Hillary is directly responsible for transmitting classified information on her own server/email account. The Clinton foundation has received millions of dollars from businesses and foreign nationals that had business in front of the State Department, and consequently received favorable decisions on their behalf. And then there are the lies and cover up Hillary has been involved with regarding Benghazi, including lying to the families of the deceased about it being caused by some internet video that hardly anyone had seen. I guess the 600 denied requests for extra security before the attack are ultimately not her fault, right?
If a Republican had done even one of these things, let alone all of them and more, you would rightfully be calling for his impeachment and imprisonment. In the words of our friend Dave Dubya, I guess IOKIYAAD.
If Hillary is the Democrat nominee, then the Democrat Party is thoroughly corrupt and no longer cares about our nation. They care only about concentrating and keeping power. In that case, Hillary is indeed the very personification of the modern day Democrat.
T Paine,
DUDE, wake up man, it's like 2016 already!
LOL
Well said and presented. Too bad it's wasted on Mozart.
Chuck
This comment has been removed by the author.
Since my name was dragged into this I will submit this response. And Let’s be clear. I’m not defending Hillary, just the truth.
So Mr. Paine considers Hillary some evil She-Devil for supporting her husband against women looking to cash in on their affairs? Were any hospitalized? So which of these “victims” were “destroyed” anyway? Evidence or documented facts please. (I know this is a futile request)
We know any allegation of anything is seen as guilt by Republicans and their propaganda targets. Sorry, he said/she said is the only evidence and that is not evidence.
Only in the propaganda and hate of the far Right is Benghazi tantamount to 9-11 when 3,000 Americans were killed. The more they squeal about Benghazi, the more they ignore Bush’s dereliction of duty after being warned about bin-Laden attacking the US. They more they howl “Benghazi” the more they ignore the lies that lead to a war for crony profit, civil war in Iraq, and ISIS. Add another 5 thousand or so dead Americans to Bush’s list.
But Benghazi!!! That’s the real crime of negligence. Yes, IOKIYAR. How about we investigate Bush and Cheney HALF as much as Hillary? Make the cowards testify on the record, because they refused to do so in the whitewash hearings.
Damn right IOKIYAR. They even blame Obama the “Marxist Kenyan” for the Bush financial collapse and great recession. They must believe, for they are true believers of party propaganda and dogma. It is exactly like a cult.
is directly responsible for transmitting classified information on her own server/email account.
Again, Evidence or documented facts please. (I know this is a futile request)
So far TP is exemplifying my statement. Any allegation of anything is seen as guilt by Republicans and their propaganda targets.
Bush’s lies about Saddam being in cahoots with al-Qaeda and “nukular” aluminum tubes are proven and well documented lies. No need for congressional committees on that, amirite? IOKIYAR.
Factcheck.org:
the Clinton campaign provided FactCheck.org a list of the names, titles and annual salaries of every full-time person employed in Clinton’s Senate office between 2002 and 2008. Those data show the median salary for men and women to be the same at $40,000. The data also show Clinton hired roughly twice as many women as men.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/gender-pay-gap-in-clintons-senate-office/
Politifact:
If you isolate the data from year to year, the median earnings between men and women were not so even. In 2002, female Senate staffers (excluding Clinton) earned a median of $33,000, while men earned $42,500. The median pay gap closed in 2005 to $41,000 for women and $43,000 for men, and then women exceeded the men’s pay in 2006 and 2007.
For what it’s worth, there were more women working for Clinton overall than men in every year.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/may/21/sean-hannity/sean-hannity-senator-hillary-clinton-paid-female-s/
I humbly repeat:
Any allegation of anything is seen as guilt by Republicans and their propaganda targets.
If a Republican had done even one of these things,
Yeah, as Dick and the Shrub enjoy their retirements and profits from war and torture and lies.
But, IOKIYAR
Chuck, as you already know quite well, I am sure, sometimes we have to put out the facts not necessarily for the closed-minded individual who refuses to acknowledge the truth, but rather those on the side-lines that are quietly watching the debate and are still open-minded enough to consider what the "other side" says and research on their own to find out that there is indeed truth behind it.
Indeed that is what I try to do too. It is why I don't agree in lockstep with all of the GOP positions.
For instance, I think Citizens United was a poor decision. Corporations are not people and should not be treated as such when it comes to voting. Of course, neither should special interest groups and unions.
I also part ways with many Republicans when it comes to the stewardship of our natural resources and the environment. That said, I have not been convinced that global warming or climate change or whatever they are marketing it as this week is anything other than a leftist hoax that is hiding an underlying political agenda.
I disagree with many conservatives regarding the death penalty too. I try to be consistent with my pro-life stance. That said, I think murderers should NEVER be paroled and I would make prison conditions for the most violent and worst offenders to be far more spartan than what they currently are.
I wonder if some of our progressive friends can also look at the merits of individual issues and decide for themselves what is best. Sadly, like most Republicans, they simply follow the party line without giving these issues much more than passing thought.
I had to laugh earlier when our friend Mr. Mozart accused me of not having an original thought, when I absolutely don't follow the GOP mold, whereas I have not seen him swerve from progressive orthodoxy in any of his statements thus far. He accuses me of parroting Glen Beck. Ironically, that is indeed a compliment, because Mr. Beck is willing to look at an issue and render criticism of the left AND the right when warranted.
Sadly, our friend Mozart often sounds like he is parroting the shrill talking points from Debbie Wasserman-Shultz.
====
One more detail:
it sure does take away a lot of the "war on women" crap she can spew at the GOP, doesn't it?
Republican accusations do nothing of the sort.
Here’s your Republican war on women:
How pro-life is it to force a woman to bear the offspring of her rapist? Does her life count when a shattered emotional state and the pain of a forced birth are imposed upon her to remind her of the trauma of rape? What hope would a developed child have to be normal, knowing he is the unwanted, government-mandated product of violent rape of his mother?
Should a woman be forced to bear to term, and give birth to a fetus that has no brain, or other severe deformity that would make life a terrible choice for both the fetus and mother?
Are you aware of the arrest, humiliation and imprisonment of women who suffer a miscarriage in El Salvador where the same policy that Republicans Rubio and Cruz embrace is in place?
They are being charged with murder. Is this what you mean by "truly pro-life"? It is in fact anti-choice, anti-freedom and anti-equality.
Be thankful you will never suffer such inequality of rights as the loss of control of who you are, and who you choose to be.
Some things are best left between a woman, a doctor, and her God. You and I, and the Republican Party and the government are not, and should not be, in this relationship.
And you whine about the government coming between you and your doctor? Please.
How much of that hated government control over your life is anything near being forced by the government to bear the child of your rapist?
Be honest.
When anti-choicers whine about being "oppressed" by Obamacare, or "Socialism" or anything else, they are hypocrites wishing to impose their beliefs and choices unto others.
That last question will never be answered honestly, for they have no honest answer.
Dave, don't you love it when Chuckie agrees with himself?
And T. Paine (Chuckie/sore loser) is hilarious.
He quotes the Glann Beck playbook and claims he has "original thoughts".
No conservative has original thoughts, they all talk in bumper stickers.
"Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported." ~ Hillary Clinton 11/2015
Again, she forgot the caveat that these women should not be believed or supported if the “alleged” abuser was her husband.
And Mr. Dubya, I don’t fault Hillary for “standing by her man” necessarily. What I do fault her with is the ruthless torched earth tactics that she employed to try to discredit Bill’s accusers. It sure doesn’t seem like she is being “supportive” of these Democrat women that were unfortunate enough to be victims of her slimy husband. Use Alinksy tactics to demean, ridicule, and marginalize the enemy. Send James Carville out there to say stupid crap like, “Drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.” As if all of these women, some of them fairly wealthy, were simply trying to blackmail poor little Bill.
“Were any hospitalized? So which of these ‘victims’ were ‘destroyed’ anyway?”
Really? Oh my God, Dave! Kathleen Willey had just lost her husband and was distraught when Clinton groped her in the White House. Juanita Broaddrick has a credible allegation of rape against Clinton when he was Arkansas attorney general. Lewinsky was foolish, but had her reputation completely destroyed in the media. Same with the reputations of Gracen and Flowers. I guess if there is no hospital record though, it is okay? What the hell?!?!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/broaddrick022599.htm
Every survivor of sexual assault (except Paul Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Elizabeth Gracen, Sally Perdue, and Gennifer Flowers) deserves to be heard, believed, and supported. ~ Hillary Clinton (and maybe Dave Dubya?)
As for Benghazi, there were over 600 requests for additional security for this area. All were denied. Hillary lied to the families of those killed that it was a video, when she knew it was a planned terrorist attack. Operators were told to stand down in rendering assistance to those under attack. Nobody is claiming responsibility for any of this. Hell, it isn’t a matter of the buck stops here. With Obama and Hillary, the buck never got to them. Freaking cowards!
As for Bush, I am not going to delve into that again. I already addressed all of your arguments regarding that on my own blog: http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2015/08/re-fighting-iraq-war.html
As for the creation of ISIS, yes I will assign blame to Bush for part of that; however, the lion’s share comes from Obama’s disastrous decisions regarding Iraq. He should have renegotiated a status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government so that a vacuum of power would not have been created for ISIS to fill with our rapid and publically announced draw down of troops there.
Regardless, even if every last damn allegation you made against Bush/Cheney were true, does that mean that since they did wrong we should excuse the new Democrat running for president out of a sense of “fairness” for her wrong-doing? Does that make any damned sense at all? I guess two wrongs makes for a Democrat nominee in progressive circles.
I know that there is probably nothing that you or Mozart would consider as hard evidence here, but the fact that the FBI has over 100 agents now working on this classified information and private server case and there is a HUGE semblance of wrong-doing and violations should be unnerving to you all. Indeed you have convicted Bush and Cheney with less evidence than this. Hillary continues to do FOIA dumps of her emails like she did this last Friday at 2:00 AM so that the media is less likely to broadcast it. She is in trouble, and our country would be well-served if she were indicted and Sanders went on to be the Democrat nominee. Further, it would go along way to restoring public trust in government, on both sides of the political spectrum.
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/11/fbi-expands-hillary-e-mail-probe-to-investigate-corruption/
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/11/hillary-by-ordering-identifying-heading-i-meant-dont-transmit-classified-info-or-something/
Mozart, you truly are the very charicature of a progressive, sir.
You are right Dave, it is far more “civilized” to KILL the child of a woman that was raped. That makes everything so much better. Then, not only will the woman be a rape victim, but she will also have had her unborn INNOCENT child killed. That should help her heal wonderfully, right?
I have met several incredible people that were the products of rape. Their mothers chose life and took a horrible and evil thing and allowed good to come from it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3000499/Woman-discovers-conceived-RAPE-nearly-aborted-tracking-birth-mother-gave-adoption-40-years-ago.html
And I certainly do not support arrest and imprisonment of women who suffer miscarriages through no fault of their own. And I don’t buy for a second the asinine assertion that Rubio or Cruz would support that either. Please provide your evidence of this nonsense.
I know you think it would be easier to abort the child of a rapist, or simply if the mother didn’t want the child. Sadly there are millions of people that agree with you. I personally don’t see how killing an innocent child helps make a woman… a mother… whole again.
As for our damnable government, it does indeed over-reach and overstep its constitutional boundaries all of the time every single day. But, as is stated in our very founding document as a nation, it is not the government but our Creator that has endowed us all with the natural rights of LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is our government’s first and primary duty to protect those Americans’ lives. Even those that are inconvenient or unwanted by their parents.
And I will answer your question. Nothing of the government’s current egregious intrusions and violations of the Constitution in my life would be anything near to having to bear and have the child of a rapist. I honestly cannot not even comprehend that sort of pain. That said, it is still the right thing to do.
Doing what is right is sometimes exceedingly difficult. It is a concept that is unfathomable to many looking for the easy way through life, especially in politics. We will reap what we sow accordingly, Dave.
TP,
First thing. You once again fail to offer any facts or evidence supporting your statements. All you did was cite your blog and the opinion of the far Right Hot Air. They all support my point that accusations, without proof or judgment by law, are regarded as guilt, but only for Democrats.
You have no proof Hillary denied requests for more security, do you? No. You do not. I don’t think you even know why requests were denied. Republicans voted to cut funding for that very purpose. Obviously bad decisions and poor judgment contributed to the Benghazi incident. Staff who were most immediately accountable resigned.
Who resigned after 9-11? Nobody. IOKIYAR. Hey, “things happen”, amirite?
You prove again my point that any allegation of anything is seen as guilt by Republicans and their propaganda targets. Judgmental a bit?
How would you react if I cited MY blog as evidence? Would that be OK, or is it just OKIYAR or IOKIYATP? You may deny being one, but you are parroting the Republican Party’s words and propaganda here.
When asked for documented evidence you cite only far Right blogs. I mean, are you TRYING to insult me? Rather than take offense I’ll just state this. Your claims are empty, and are purely partisan claptrap. You either can’t or won’t see this of course.
If Hillary is found guilty of crimes, I support punishment for them. Hillary is at this point is only guilty by decree by you and Republicans. This is politics, not justice. The Right doesn’t seem to understand the difference. Like a cult.
Nothing of the government’s current egregious intrusions and violations of the Constitution in my life would be anything near to having to bear and have the child of a rapist
Thank you. You have the courage to admit some truth, yet it shows you hold double standards, or at the least the notion that the “oppression” you claim to suffer is negligible at best by comparison. This egregious intrusion is fine with you, only because your opinion says it’s the right thing to do.
Every tyrant knows the “right thing to do”… for others, and only conservative men know what’s best, and will dictate accordingly for women in circumstances they don’t even care to know.
Funny how that works.
The woman with a rapist’s embryo, or a fetus with no brain, has no right to decide for herself what to do about it. This is what it boils down to.
You want to force your opinion onto her right to reproductive choices. YOU want that right taken away from her, and by your admission must suffer the consequences of being a second class citizen with less rights than an embryo, as well as less rights than yourself.
It’s pretty easy to dictate “what’s right” when you would never be forced to undergo the same trauma.
How generous. THAT is the GOP war on women. The rights of a zygote literally supersedes that of a woman. That’s some “freedom” you support. And it ain’t in the Constitution.
Would you share the wording of the Declaration or Constitution or under the Bill of Rights that declares a zygote a person with superior rights to the woman, please?
As you’d say to those who believe limiting the number of semi-automatic weapons in society is the right thing to do, “You’re free to not buy a gun”, then they may just as fairly say to you, “You’re free to not have an abortion”.
A zygote (from Greek ζυγωτός zygōtos "joined" or "yoked", from ζυγοῦν zygoun "to join" or "to yoke"), is a eukaryotic cell formed by a fertilization event between two gametes. The zygote's genome is a combination of the DNA in each gamete, and contains all of the genetic information necessary to form a new individual.
If the DNA is from humans, then a zygote is a human, a new indiviual.
Sigh. Thanks Chuck, but as we already knew, it is hopeless.
I referenced my blog on your endless rant on Bush and the Iraq War because in it I referenced, with links, my supporting data. I wasn't going to reinvent the wheel to argue it all again. All of it you have dismissed in favor of your own narrative anyway. Such is your right. Again, I suppose I could ignore facts and agree with you, but then we would both be wrong, my friend.
As for Hillary's abuses as Secretary of State, the FBI keeps expanding its investigation. This is not a special prosecutor looking for partisan red meat. This is the top law enforcement agency of a friendly administration that is doing this, because evidently there is TONS of smoke that sure seems to indicate a raging fire underneath. All of Clinton's obfuscation, delaying, and ignoring sure seem to indicate that she has much to hide.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0UP1XC20160111
Hillary has said "there has been no evidence that she broke the law." She sounds a lot like you and every other progressive partisan. She doesn't unequivocally say that she did NOT break the law, but rather says that there isn't any evidence. I think there is, and if you read those other articles from my previous comment, they stated that they have successfully prosecuted others on less evidence. This includes General Petraeus.
If a truly objective investigation of Hillary is conducted, the smart money would be that Hillary is guilty of multiple charges. If you would put your partisanship aside, if you must admit that she is not trustworthy. I'd like to believe that you, Mozart, and other leftists would indeed support punishment for her, if/when convicted. I suspect there will be far more scapegoating and claims of political witch hunts though instead. Again I state that there is far more evidence already of her wrong-doing then there ever was for your allegations against Bush regarding Iraq.
As for an unborn child, you do realize that such is a separate human life from that of the mother, right? Yes, it is dependent upon the mother for life, but the same argument can be made for a newborn, and we don't wantonly kill those children in our society... yet.
And it is not just my opinion that even the unborn are human life and deserving of protection that makes it imperative that we as a supposedly civilized society must do all we can to protect them and all human life. This is the opinion of untold millions of other people and that of God and His natural law. I know... I know... other faiths have evolved in their beliefs and think that God is okay with killing the innocent now. That flies in the face of millenia of orthodoxy in Judeo-Christian values until the 20th century came around.
And yes, I absolutely do want to force my opinion on women that would abort their children, just as I want to do so with people that would murder others for whatever reason. But the fact is, I don't want to do this simply because it is what I believe. It is a matter of logic, common sense, and objective truth. The Democrats have turned it into a plank in their vile and evil platform. What does one expect of a group who booed having God even mentioned at their convention last time.
"Don't like abortion? Then don't have one." THAT is a sophomoric retort. It is akin to saying, "Don't believe in murder? Then don't kill people."
I suppose we have beaten this Democrat donkey to death already now.
Chuckie and TP insist a zygote is a super human, a new individual...a eukaryotic cell with rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman.
Let's look at this fact of their belief again.
A eukaryotic cell has rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman.
Combine this extreme view of a "person hood" with their party's corporate super person; buying politicians and literally taking the law into their own hands by forcing their "trade agreements" that overrule our courts and national laws.
The radical Right now represent fascism's new century of super humans. Their beloved corporate persons and eukaryotic cell persons will have more rights, and power, than those uppity women, minorities, unions and commie liberals!
Just like their masters intended.
This fascistic force against equality is winning too. Freedoms are eroding. Numerous voting and registration restrictions are imposed by authority of one party.
The fascistic anti-union, anti-middle class, anti-minimum wage, anti voter, anti-government of, by, and for the people, anti-reproductive choice, anti-public education, anti-public health, and anti-democracy party.
Vote Republican, and make America great again!
Just like their neo-feudal lords and masters intended.
I state that there is far more evidence already of her wrong-doing then there ever was for your allegations against Bush regarding Iraq.
You state this totally without evidence, based solely on your far Right propaganda sources... that you refuse to share here! What's the big secret? It's hardly re-inventing the wheel.
This makes it difficult to take your efforts for fair discourse seriously.
As the song goes "Gimme some truth!"
"A eukaryotic cell has rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman."
This is NOT "a matter of logic, common sense, and objective truth" no matter HOW much you stomp and scream it.
Sorry.
And telling us a that eukaryotic cell has rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman is the "opinion of God" is sheer lunacy, and fuel for theocratic tyranny at worst.
You are shoving your religion down the founders' throats. No religious test, remember? No person claiming that his is the opinion of God should dictate any law of the land, or any superior rights to a eukaryotic cell.
You are free to have your opinion, but not your own facts. Your case founders when evidence is requested.
Now you want us to believe you and your fellow believers' idea of God's opinion allows you to dictate a law that grants an eukaryotic cell rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman.
No wonder most Americans reject your view. That must certainly madden you! If this enrages you as much as the evil monster Hillary and Marxist Obama, then you bring a lot of anger into your heart.
Anger clouds thinking, and leads to many, many negative actions and outcomes.
American white men are angrier than ever. Neo-feudal fascism feeds on, and grows from, that anger.
Dave, I can only assume I hit a nerve somewhere. If that human zygote was found on Pluto, scientists would rightly declare that we discovered life on that planet. Of course if it were scientists like Peter Singer or any other hyper-progressive, that life would be just as disposable on that planet as it is on ours.
The woman should have the right to kill her unborn child if it is going to be inconvenient or a nuisance or just too expensive to care for, right? After all that extra money needs to be used on getting the latest iPhone 6s.
As for corporate person-hood, don't even use that argument with me. It doesn't fly because I don't believe in it either and you know that.
Nice to play the identity politics card too. Race, gender, etc... I can always tell when I have won an argument when my opponent resorts to name-calling like some people are prone to do or they play the race or fascist card.
Yep, the Republicans truly are a frightening mess. I do absolutely agree with that. But the Democrats, who would nominate Hillary, are even more frightening. They renege on holding any moral high ground whatsoever if they do nominate her.
As for my take on government, I want the federal government to do ONLY those things they are specifically authorized in the Constitution to do. I don't want an expansive interpretation of the general welfare clause to turn it into the good and plenty clause, while academic leftists conduct social engineering of our laws through the courts because they cannot get their legislation passed by congress.
In other words, I want the federal government to pretty much leave me in peace. The left wants them to solve all of their problems and provide for all of their needs and wants. Guess what? We cannot afford it and with a $19 trillion debt, it is soon coming to a disastrous end. Of course that will be blamed all on Bush too. (and indeed he is partly responsible.)
When the nation does collapse because of progressive foolishness from both parties, we may well indeed start again as serfs and peasants living under Lord Soros and such. What a wonderful world it will be! Guess I better go buy some more food for storage and ammunition to keep the looters at bay.
TP,
"Progressive foolishness" is to blame? You mean labor rights, voting rights, public safety nets, public health care, public education, environmental protection, and all that evil?
And to be clear, the Right's unprovoked ISIS-creating war of aggression, futile and failed blood sucking "war on terror", a futile and failed war on drugs, the repeated futile folly of de-regulating Wall street with its financial collapse and great recession, corporate coup by trade agreement, the securiy/surveillance state... I could go on...these bear no cost or negative consequences for our prosperity and way of life?
Just blame "progressives". Yup.
And never, ever, blame the economic elites who have all the power and "free speech" that we the people are denied. They call the shots yet are entirely blameless, for the rich are infallible and wise. Whatever they want is what's best for all of us.
Uh, huh. Got it.
I'm truly sorry you are so angry and fearful, as you buy food for storage and ammunition to keep the looters at bay.
I understand the world is unpredictable, confusing and changing. Any thoughtful and caring person can feel uneasy imagining what lies in the future. But if we as a people let fear and anger and confusion dictate our actions, we will precipitate the disasters we want to avoid.
Look at Dave putting words into others mouths AGAIN to suit his views.
IE "insist a zygote is a super human, a new individual"
Re read my post T. Paine and you will NOT see the term "super human"
And the term he objects to " new individual" came from the dictionary, it was not my making but a quote of the correct definition of the word he used, zygote.
Typical, can't win the argument so change the meanings of the terms HE used in the first place.
And oh looky he has called us "fascistic", that usually means you hit a nerve, keep it up.
Like fish in a barrel.
Chuckie and TP believe a eukaryotic cell has rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman. "Super human" is my clarifying term for their entities with superior rights to others.
I invite TP and Chuckie to correct the term with whatever they think more accurately describes a cell structure, or corporate entity, with superior rights to human beings.
Superior rights over other humans is what fascism is all about.
This is Chuckie's chance to straighten us out on this concept.
Davy (since you can't seem to call me by my name, I'll revert to calling you Davy),
I dont have to straighten you out on a thing.
Why?
Experience has taught me that doing so will not change one wit your position IE that the death of the unborn is acceptable. That you can't see that you agree with me that a zygote is a human is an example of how the culture of death that those who are pro choice belong to, has blinded them to what an abortion does. It murders a defenseless, guiltless human.
And then there is that charming tactic of your of putting your words into others mouths and then demanding they explain that which they did not say.
I find, "Superior rights over other humans is what fascism is all about" is an interesting comment for those who support affirmative action and the rights of those illegally in the USA. Intellectually challenging to say the least. Almost as much so as Chris Matthews asking MS. Clinton what is the difference between the DNC and socialism? A challenge for Hillary based on her answer.
Let the name calling and ad hominems begin.
The fact remains. Most Americans disagree that a eukaryotic cell (A human zygote, not yet a person) should have rights that supersede the rights of a mature human woman
If something were to happen to an undeveloped cell structure, a nameless, gender-less, brainless cell structure arbitrarily called a "person" by the radical religious fringe, the woman would be investigated for manslaughter, or even charged with murder.
Are you aware of the arrest, humiliation and imprisonment of women who suffer a miscarriage in El Salvador where the same fringe policy that Chuck, TP, Cruz and Rubio embrace is in place?
This is "freedom"?
Minorities and illegal immigrants certainly are not granted rights over women and other Americans. I have never advocated such. This is another false accusation and distraction from a person who cannot participate in rational discourse.
What a foolish accusation.
But, that's our Chuckie... I mean "Chuck Morre", not to be confused with the real Chuck Moore who was driven away by "Chuckie" after having his name mangled and taken.
"Chuckie" is my designation to distinguish the impostor from the real Chuck Moore.
What kind of idiot thinks Wall Street supports a DNC "socialist", by the way?
Rhetorical, of course. We know exactly what kind of idiot will make this stupid case.
If this applies, then it's not ad hominum. It is fact.
I don’t advocate for an unborn child having more rights than the mother. I advocate for that human life to have the SAME rights as the mother: the inalienable rights to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You can change the terms to "super-human zygote", or what-have-you in order to create a talisman to protect your soul by using some euphemism, but the fact remains that an unborn child is indeed a human life. That is absolutely and unequivocally scientifically inarguable.
The only way I would advocate for the tragic ending of its life would be if the life of the mother was in jeopardy. And even then, my aim would be to save the mother and not kill the unborn child.
Chuck is right. The left has totally embraced this dark and pernicious culture of death.
And again, I call Bravo Sierra on your asinine claim that Cruz and Rubio, let alone Chuck and I, support imprisoning a woman who had a miscarriage through no fault of her own. Once again, please cite your source for this outrageous claim.
Further, even in my own “conservative” state of Utah, we do have minorities and illegal immigrants granted rights above those of ordinary citizens. We have in-state tuition rates to the University of Utah and other state colleges to illegal immigrants, but if my child lives in Idaho, he or she doesn’t get that same right. Minorities are given extra weighting in their admission screening based on the color of their skin pigment rather than their academic qualifications. Tell me those are not extraordinary rights that the average American doesn’t have.
Good Lord. You cry fascism while advocating for differences. You want to turn America into Animal Farm. We are all equal, but some of us are more equal than others, right Dave?
Let’s imprison all of the evil wealthy people, or better yet… we can kill them! After all, we know that they only got wealthy by stealing from the poor. Let’s destroy these evil corporations too. We don’t need their jobs or products. We have the government to take care of us. Let’s boost up and increase the size of our enlightened and benevolent government to provide for all of us (that are worthy of being provided for.)
If that is the world you wish to live in, please consider a move to Europe. I have nowhere else to move to if I want to live in a liberty-based free-market society besides what is left of the United States of America. You have hundreds of choices to find a socialist utopia bordering on fascism. I wish you well. I truly do.
My dear TP,
How can I put this politely? You're losing it.
Chuck is right.
Oh, oh. “Off the deep end” alert!
The left has totally embraced this dark and pernicious culture of death.
And now we have the inevitable plunge into demonization and hate. This is what always happens when you agree with Chuck.
Unprovoked war for crony profit and political gain is the real culture of death. Sorry, the clumsy assassination attempt on Bush Sr. was simple retaliation for Bush first targeting Saddam. IOKIYAR? It does not justify wholesale slaughter of innocents.
This is the same Bush who urged Iraqi Shiites to rise up against Saddam, only to let them be slaughtered.
Corporate denial of healthcare is also part of the real culture of death. Since when has the far Right respected the life of fully developed humans, especially the poor and minorities?
No answer expected.
Is Bush a murderer, or “pro-life”, if his bombs killed a fetus? No answer? Then it’s IOKIYAR after all. The fact hundreds of thousands of Iraqis needed to die by decree of the “Decider” means those lives were less equal. Dance around this fact all you want. It is fact.
Once again, please cite your source
Why? You never honor my request. IOKIYATP?
“The mothers being criminalised in El Salvador”
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-32480443
I’m pleased you think education should be a right for all. I agree. No preferences. Everyone. How’s that?
We are all equal, but some of us are more equal than others, right Dave?
Says the one who wants a eukaryotic cell having a “right to life” that supersede the reproductive rights of a mature human woman, by force of government monitoring of every uterus.
A mother forced by BIG government (how bigger can it get than that?) to bear the child of her rapist DOES NOT have the same rights as the zygote. Not even close. Only one is an actual living, breathing person. Just the wrong sex, so sorry, less rights for you.
Fanatics wouldn’t know equal rights if they were hit on the head with the Bill of Rights. Again, show us the rights of zygotes in there. Did the founders state zygotes had more rights than slaves, or just women? We need your constitutional expertise here. This is your chance to step up and impress us.
Let’s imprison all of the evil wealthy people, or better yet… we can kill them! After all, we know that they only got wealthy by stealing from the poor. Let’s destroy these evil corporations too. We don’t need their jobs or products. We have the government to take care of us. Let’s boost up and increase the size of our enlightened and benevolent government to provide for all of us (that are worthy of being provided for.)
Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. You have proven my point that you hold the powerful rich and corporations blameless and even benevolent. They are like gods to you. You even accept their PR over scientific consensus. You have lost the argument here.
Your anger, and belief that you know God’s opinion, is clouding your reason. You’re one step removed from declaring, “Masturbation is murder”. After all, those are living human cells, are they not?
Whether conforming to your beliefs or not, there is a reasonable position stating a zygote is not a living breathing person, and this eukaryotic cell should not have a “right to life” that supersedes the reproductive rights of a mature human woman.
All that you have in opposition is your grandiose “belief” that God shares your opinion, that a cell cluster is a person, rather than a potential person that cannot function or even breathe as an individual.
Only one of these is fact. The other is belief. Denial of reproductive rights, and compelling a woman to bear a rapist’s offspring is a form of tyranny.
I’m not trying to change your beliefs. You are entitled to them. But let’s be clear, you are a man seeking to impose your religious beliefs on rape victims.
And that is the bottom line.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I'd like to add, regarding this question. Since when has the far Right respected the life of fully developed humans, especially the poor and minorities?
How about the "compassionate" Republican regime of Rick the Prick Snyder in Michigan, forcing the city of Flint to drink lead from contaminated river water? What if this causes some miscarriages, abortion by lead poisoning?
IOKIYAR? Absolutely.
There’s your “liberty-based free-market society” applied to a non-Republican population.
Dave, I know it may appear to you that I am “losing it”. When the entire progressive world has gone completely mad, then the rational conservative looks like he is “losing it” by comparison. It makes sense how you could misunderstand this though, my friend.
“And now we have the inevitable plunge into demonization and hate.”
Why? Because I make a valid observation about our increasingly leftist society? You are the one advocating for aborting humans, sir. It is the left that has unwavering support for birth control, sterilizations, and abortifacients, as was unconstitutionally foisted on us through Obamacare’s HHS mandate. It is the left that fights for euphemistically termed “death with dignity” laws so that we can eliminate those that are terminal or in chronic pain. One wonders how long that will take before it moves from the terminally ill to those that are just inconvenient or a financial drain on medical or personal resources? It is all for the common good though, right? And then we have the front-running Democrat Hillary who advocates making abortion on demand free to all Medicaid recipients. What a progressive culture of death gal she is!
Of course if a Republican had suggested such a thing, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would be hitting the airwaves crying RACISM because they all know that it is people of color that are the most poor and most likely to be on Medicaid and therefore aborting their children, according to them. Margaret Sanger’s eugenics dream via Planned Parenthood is alive and well! So again, while this is indeed ghoulish, and perhaps even demonic, I wouldn’t use the word “demonization” when I accurately observe and characterize what the left is doing in their support of this death culture.
And then we AGAIN resort to “Bush killed thousands of innocent Iraqis for oil and crony profit.”
I will say that I absolutely agree with you about the horrendously cowardly act of George H.W. Bush urging the Iraqi Shiites to rise up against Saddam and then not providing any support so that they were slaughtered. You are absolutely correct in this matter, Dave. (Gee, I wonder if a leftist will ever agree with me on any subject… EVER?)
As for the El Salvadoran mothers being prosecuted, it sounds like they have an abominable third world justice system in need of reform. Go figure. I don’t see how you make the leap from this article to making the foolish claim that Rubio and Cruz (let alone myself) support prosecuting women who have had spontaneous miscarriages. (And you say I demonize!)
“Says the one who wants a eukaryotic cell having a ‘right to life’ that supersede the reproductive rights of a mature human woman…”
Yes, Dave, I do want LIFE to supersede the “reproductive rights” of other people. “Reproductive rights” is simply a pro-abortion euphemism for the practice, by the way. Life should be a greater right than the right to abortion.
Next, I do not “worship” the rich or corporations. Some are good and some are bad. My support is given accordingly to them when they are good. As for my so-called “reduction ad absurdum” fallacy, I simply wanted to point out your absurdity by taking it to the logical end point.
My “knowing God’s opinion” is simple orthodox Judeo-Christian philosophy. Murdering the unborn has always been against His moral law for THOUSANDS of years. It wasn’t until the last hundred years or so that the progressive “enlightenment” has shown us that killing our unborn is not a grave and mortal sin.
While you may not recognize a fetus as an unborn infant, the fact remains that if left to take nature’s course unmolested, it will become that living, breathing, thinking human that you so value theoretically. Destroying that life for the convenience or “reproductive rights” of the mother doesn’t seem to be a very moral trade-off based on western civilization’s standards over many millennia until now.
So tell me, were we wrong for those many thousands of years to morally and religiously support protecting life… even that of our unborn? Or are we wrong now in this last century when we find that life is disposable based on the wishes of the mother or both parents?
Finally, as a conservative member of what you would classify as the “Far Right”, I have dedicated hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars over the years to support those in need and less fortunate than what God has blessed me with. Do I wish all conservatives would act accordingly? You bet. Are some greedy and uncaring of others? Certainly. And I support the full prosecution and incarceration of those people that knowingly harm others in their quest for money or power, especially politicians. That said, anecdotally I have seen far more conservatives actually work towards helping the poor than I have from my progressive friends who simply have good intentions. It kind of goes to that whole “faith without works is dead” thing.
TP,
what a bag of wind Davy has become.
sigh.
:)
TP,
(Gee, I wonder if a leftist will ever agree with me on any subject… EVER?)
We’ve found some common ground here and there as I recall.
You have presented your case. I credit you for doing so with minimum hostility and I credit you for being a good man with good intentions. I understand your reasons, even though they are based on religious belief. I even sympathize with your beliefs, in that I wish there was never a need or desire for abortion. Abortion is horrible. I do not condemn your motives at all.
I do however condemn your misunderstanding and misrepresenting.
making the foolish claim that Rubio and Cruz (let alone myself) support prosecuting women who have had spontaneous miscarriages
If you are as rational as you claim, you would understand I never made that claim. Get a grip old buddy. Perhaps your defensiveness is causing you to slip loose here.
And be clear on this. I am not “pro abortion”. That is inaccurate and it would never be my choice, were it mine to make. I am pro-choice. Reproductive choice means just that . The choice to bear or not to bear children. But just as I would never choose it for a loved one, I would never choose to force my will or beliefs on anyone, especially if it deprives women the freedom to own their body. It makes her a slave to others’, (mostly conservative men) beliefs.
Abortion is legal, therefore it is not murder. Saying it is murder is the beginning of falsehood in your position. You may say “I believe it is murder” as much as you want. But fact is fact. A zygote is not a sentient being and it is part of, and within, a woman’s body. You may call this cell formation a person, but it is not a legal citizen with a right to be carried against the will or better health of the woman.
This most personal physical condition of a woman’s body is between herself and her doctor and her God.
You and I, the Republican Party, and the government do not belong in this relationship. And sorry, but not even your personal religious beliefs belong in that relationship. How about letting go of your need to dictate someone else’s rights and leave that one to God?
Don’t you believe God could let that soul move on, (if a soul is in a brainless cell structure in the first place) to a more welcoming mother with better life circumstances? Maybe HE knows something you don’t? Just a thought.
Abortion is a right that the majority of Americans support. You want to deny the freedom to exercise that right.
But your beliefs are not the law. Your personal definitions do not supersede accepted definitions. It is not your right to dictate that a woman must bear the child of a rapist.
I tried to show you what that destruction of rights leads to in another country with the same kind of law you want. The American justice system has been corrupted enough with harsh and medieval punishments. It does not need more theocracy, nor more laws that apply only to women, nor more forced inequality.
On this we must agree to disagree.
Dave, that was really eloquent and the best post I have read on such a thorny subject. For a bag of wind you are doing pretty good. James
Paine: (Gee, I wonder if a leftist will ever agree with me on any subject… EVER?)
Dubya: “We’ve found some common ground here and there as I recall.”
Yes sir, we have. And unless I am mistaken, that common ground was always because I was not following some traditional GOP positions. I may be wrong, but I cannot think of a time when you have crossed the aisle and departed from a leftist position to find common cause with me, my friend. If I am wrong, please correct me.
Paine: “…making the foolish claim that Rubio and Cruz (let alone myself) support prosecuting women who have had spontaneous miscarriages”
Dubya: “If you are as rational as you claim, you would understand I never made that claim. Get a grip old buddy. Perhaps your defensiveness is causing you to slip loose here.”
Really? Let me remind you of your previous comment in this thread, sir: “Are you aware of the arrest, humiliation and imprisonment of women who suffer a miscarriage in El Salvador where the same fringe policy that Chuck, TP, Cruz and Rubio embrace is in place?”
I think any reasonable reading of that last comment of yours suggests that Cruz, Rubio, Chuck and myself support a policy that arrests, humiliates, and imprisons women who suffer a miscarriage. It seems rather straight forward language to me. Perhaps you didn’t really mean this or something got lost from your thoughts to how it got translated into written words. Indeed this happens to me too on occasion.
Next, you and I will sadly continue to disagree regarding abortion. I understand your arguments and from a purely secular and selfish perspective, I understand the logic behind your arguments. I simply think that how a nation acts in regards to protecting the lives of ALL of its citizens is a defining mark of its national character. When we cheapen life and make it expendable or can mitigate the need to protect it in all forms, I think this does indeed create a dangerously slippery slope towards ever greater unforeseen abuses.
And with all due respect, the argument that abortion is legal and therefore not murder is an exceptionally poor defense of the practice. There have been horrible human rights abuses and murders under regimes from Soviet Russia to Hitler’s Germany that were “legal” by force of law but certainly no civilized human would claim that they were morally and by natural law not considered murderous. The veneer of a corrupt or evil government’s stamp of “legality” does not erase the immorality of murder, my friend.
“A zygote is not a sentient being and it is part of, and within, a woman’s body.”
No, a zygote is not a sentient being, and indeed it is within a woman’s body; however, it is NOT a part of a woman’s body. That zygote contains its very own unique DNA that it received from each of its parents. It is a totally separate life. Yes, it is dependent upon the mother for growth and life, and I do agree that a woman’s life should not be jeopardized by the growth of that unborn life, but neither should that unborn life be eliminated because of any number of reasons the mother might have for doing so. Again, you and I are simply just going to have to realize that we are not ever going to change the minds of each other. That said, I will advocate and do everything I legally can to undo the horrible constitutional law of Roe v. Wade so that it is overturned and we no longer will have to add to the 50 million unborn that we have killed since its passage. I am sure you and other like-minded individuals will advocate for the opposite. Such is your right. I wish the right to life of the unborn was as forcefully advocated by all people.
I realize too that my opinions, plain-English and scientific definitions, millennia of natural law, and common sense will not change this “right” to kill our unborn children. This is a “right” that no civilized nation should ever be allowed to have, any more than euthanizing the inconvenient elderly should ever be a “right”. Changing the terms from “pro-abortion” to “pro-choice” does not lessen our culpability either. It is not a “choice”. It is a unique human life. Hiding behind gentler language so as to hide the horrors of what we are actually advocating as a “right” does not lessen our responsibility for our actions.
I find it sadly amusing how so many on the left want the government to be involved in nearly every facet of their lives, but use government intrusion as an argument when it comes to their desire to abort a growing life within a mother. I think that is the very definition of irony, sir.
I hate to say it but you put up extremely powerful argument T. Paine. Your logic, passion and intelligence are clearly on display.
Well done Mr Paine, well done.
I am amused that Mr. Hansen hates to admit you have put a good strong argument, but I'm glad he admitted so.
TP,
OK. Let me clarify.
“Are you aware of the arrest, humiliation and imprisonment of women who suffer a miscarriage in El Salvador, where the same fringe policy of zygote personhood that Chuck, TP, Cruz and Rubio embrace is in place?”
I meant the policy of zygote personhood, not the fanatic religious zeal and intolerance of their enforcement of that fringe policy. No matter if it’s here or there, women who both carry and miscarry would be under unique government observation and intrusion. This conservative ideology is not “freedom”. It is not your beloved constitutional liberty anymore. It is by all definitions inequality and stripping of rights.
Like in El-Salvador, the “death of an embryo” must be treated like the death of a person under this type of intrusive law, right? Public medical examiners, investigations, etc, would be involved like that of any death of an actual formerly breathing, eating, drinking, thinking person. Yes, I just defined a person. Deal with it. A zygote is a simple cell structure. All cells have DNA. Cells and cell clusters are not persons. They do not have the characteristics or qualities of a person.
If you want to dance around the definition of murder, Bush’s starting an unprovoked war was murder in the greatest sense of human folly and evil He unleashed unspeakable violence and murder. His orders were to kill/murder, but fascistic ideologues cannot grasp this. He even lied to have his way. This is what fascism looks like. You radically equate terminating a zygote with the wanton and malicious destruction of living, breathing, loving, humans. You seem to believe abortion is worse than war. That kind of thinking is what truly dooms the human race to endless war and madness, not abortion, not birth control, not even socialism.
War is murder on both an industrial and personal scale. Ask a combat veteran.
A woman’s shared blood. Nutrients and oxygen, attached and within a body, very much constitute part of a woman’s body. A zygote is of, by, and from the woman. Not you, Not the government. Not even itself.
You also blithely ignore the certain and countless deaths, of both woman and fetus, with back alley abortions. You oppose the freedom and safe healthcare that most Americans want.
So you think liberals LIKE Government intrusion, like warrantless mass surveillance, into their lives? Hell no. You really show another of your deep misunderstandings here.
We want government to protect our rights, not violate them, or remove them, or make them more restrictive like voter suppression laws. You and the far Right Republican Party are the ones advocating removing and suppressing rights. Clear?
Don’t try to doublethink your way out of that fact. God knows I’m telling the truth.
You want less abortion? Then stop opposing access to birth control. Stop voting for politicians who work for corporations that offshore jobs and inflict economic hardship onto Americans, so they can afford to raise children.
Abortion goes down when the people see prosperity. But that ain’t gonna “trickle down” with your “benevolent job creators” and servants of mammon running the show, rigging the system, writing our laws, and hoarding the wealth.
You want government coercion to do what a fair economic environment and social justice will do better, and with more freedom and equality for we the people.
Yes, women are people, sentient beings with names, eye color, hair, intelligence, emotion, and personality. A zygote has none of these qualities of personhood. It has DNA. An acorn has DNA, but it is not an oak tree. It is a potential tree. A zygote is a potential person, having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
None of your “opinions, plain-English and scientific definitions, millennia of natural law, and common sense” change these facts.
This is why your entire argument must be based on beliefs.
And because you hold the equivalent of the belief that there is a global conspiracy of evil climate scientists, I will question each and every one of your beliefs.
Some I may even share. Remember I am a Second Amendment supporter. I own several firearms, some are semi-automatic. Our positions are on the same side, but differ only by degree.
I don’t think owning high capacity magazines, incendiary ammo, machine guns or mortars or flamethrowers should be a right for irresponsible fools like the Bundy militia nuts. Maybe you do. If not, then we both support the root notion that there should be reasonable limits to certain rights.
I saw a documentary about Russian orphanages a while back, it sort of fits into what would happen if T.Paine had his way. Babies in cribs were warehoused by the hundreds, it seems there is very little abortion in Russia for what ever reason. All the babies were clothed,fed and kept warm but they got very little physical contact because there were too few caretakers and they were left alone most of the time.
Consequently they all suffered severe lifelong developmental and emotional problems. Their IQ was affected and most were wards of the state for the rest of their lives.
The way Republicans love to cut social services, huge state run orphanages here would be even worse or not built at all.
This is why your entire argument must be based on beliefs.
Kind of like Man caused climate change?
How about some facts.
Like whats the percent of people who have because of social welfare programs no longer are on them?
"You also blithely ignore the certain and countless deaths, of both woman and fetus, with back alley abortions."
Got some numbers there for us Davy? Like the numbers of death due to back ally abortions?
Dave, we seem to have back-slid here. Even though we disagreed, we were civilly stating our arguments for the most part. I am not sure why, but I seem to have noticed a distinct change in tone on your last two posts, my friend. This makes me sad.
Do you really think the United States is going to create embryo police so that they can go about arresting every woman that has a spontaneous miscarriage? If that were the case, then I would be in agreement with you.
And let’s talk about the unborn life when it gets to the stage where it isn’t simply a zygote anymore. What about those recognizable human babies or even viable ones that Planned Parenthood so prizes for their parts? Is it acceptable to kill that life at that point too? According to our president, who voted FOR partial birth abortions, it would appear he wants no restrictions on abortion right up until the time of natural birth. It is far easier to rationalize that it is not a human life when it is still a “cell cluster”, but it requires quite the intellectual acrobatics to convince reasonable people that it isn’t a human child you are killing later on in the development process. And yet, we still are accused of “taking away a woman’s reproductive rights” if we advocate passing laws to prevent her from terminating a late second trimester, or God forbid a third trimester, unborn child.
“If you want to dance around the definition of murder, Bush’s starting an unprovoked war was murder in the greatest sense of human folly and evil He unleashed unspeakable violence and murder.”
Quit with the vain attempts at moral equivalency, Dave. Whether you like it or not and whether you admit it or not, President Bush was enforcing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, which passed with a unanimous 15 to 0 vote. Bush then led an international coalition (not leading from behind) of 38 countries to enforce the resolution. And he did all of this with bipartisan congressional approval, including that of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry.
“War is murder on both an industrial and personal scale. Ask a combat veteran.”
There is a stark difference between killing and murder. Killing in self-defense or in the case of a just war is NOT morally considered murder. There are whole philosophical lines of thought on just war theory. You can argue your points against the war, but there is more than ample evidence, congressional approval, and international support that justified this war from a moral standpoint. Surely you aren’t accusing those soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines of murder for executing an unjust war, are you, Dave? Yes, they killed many Iraqis who supported Saddam’s tyrannical regime, but they did not murder them. There is a distinct moral difference. It is a difference that cannot be applied to abortion, my friend.
And having served in the first Gulf War, I can tell you that no sane person wants to have to fight and kill others, but sometimes it is necessary in order to stop evil and/or protect the innocent. Abortion on the other hand is killing a child without having a moral bedrock on which to justify that decision. It is taking the life of a truly innocent child, whereas fighting in a just war against an enemy who is supporting a tyrannical, oppressive, and expansionist-minded evil regime is justified. Otherwise, why do we have police officers that are justified in using deadly force in defense of the innocent? Are they too committing murder in your eyes when they have to defend themselves or civilians?
As for women seeking “back alley abortions” if the hopeful case of abortion once again being made illegal, while absolutely sad, those numbers would be minimal. They certainly would pale in comparison to the over 50 million unborn children killed since 1973 and the Roe v. Wade decision. Even Norma McCorvey or “Jane Roe” of the infamous decision has since come to realize that abortion is morally wrong and favors a ban on it.
And I agree that the number of abortions probably does indeed increase in economically tough times. This just goes to prove my point. It is often times (not always) a decision based on selfishness and the parents own desires. Further, you should be looking to President Obama and the Democrats who have grotesquely created millions more living in poverty and on social welfare under their “leadership”. Looking at the job participation rate, we still have less people working than when Bush was in office. So much for the Democrat recovery. Keep blaming the rich and the corporations, Dave. I hope you realize that many of them are run by hypocritical progressives though. You and I agree, I think, that those that use monopolistic practices, unfair labor practices, or violations of egregious environmental laws should be punished to the greatest extent the law will allow. That said, even economic issues should not ever justify the killing of our most innocent unborn lives, sir.
Mr. Hansen, I would like to think that orphanages would be significantly different here in America than how they are run in Russia. I do know that there are some very good Catholic orphanages that provide for, educate, and love such orphaned children. That said, we are definitely in need of revamping how our orphanages and foster kids are cared for. Right now our governmental red tape makes adopting a U.S. child very difficult, expensive, and time consuming. Indeed, I have a friend from high school who with her husband have adopted two children from one of those Russian orphanages directly because of those very reasons. I know fairly recently that Vladimir Putin had stopped Americans from adopting Russian children after our complaints of his aggression in annexing the Crimea from Ukraine, without any further U.S. sanctions being enacted.
Yes, I assume that mothers adopting out their children would increase if abortion would ever be banned once again. I also realize that orphanages and foster homes are not always ideal situations, but I think that is far more preferable than the expedient and brutal method of simply killing those children before they are born in order to save us the hassle and them the less than perfect living situation. Why don’t we work to find a moral solution to the problem? Why don’t we work to cut the red tape and expenses so that more Americans can adopt children here instead of having to go to China or Russia to find a child? That seems like a far better scenario then simply paying a half a billion dollars of tax payer money to Planned Parenthood every year so they can just “eliminate” the problem for us, sir.
T.Pain writes novels that say nothing.
Chucky rolls in to pat him on the back, and the cycle continues.
"Novels that say nothing"? Really? Should I put my comments in bullet point format so they will look like the DNC talking points to which you evidently subscribe, sir? :) Perhaps that will make them easier to comprehend, Mr. Mozart.
Don't bother Mr Paine, you would be just wasting your time.
Some people choose to not comprehend what they read, I got out of that as exactly as you meant it, that it would be interesting to know but that would have been put on the woman probably as and accidental over dose. That was at the time of Quaaludes Tommy no?
Standing alone your " WHY wait so long to come forward", is a tricky one .
Post a Comment
<< Home