Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Right-wing "science"
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Bill Shatzer
Oct 9, 2012, 5:22:39 PM10/9/12
to
hal lillywhite wrote:
> On 9 oct, 15:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>An exception Willard has seemingly not bothered to discuss.
>>>Why should he? Those are state laws and he is not running for state
>>>office.
>>"We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse
>>legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment s protections
>>apply to unborn children."
>>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> Which says nothing about ultrasound.
Which is not the point. The point is that:
a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
(1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
abortion."
> And Romney has already publicly
> stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
rape and how is that determined?
Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
peace and justice,
> On 9 oct, 15:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>An exception Willard has seemingly not bothered to discuss.
>>>Why should he? Those are state laws and he is not running for state
>>>office.
>>"We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse
>>legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment s protections
>>apply to unborn children."
>>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> Which says nothing about ultrasound.
Which is not the point. The point is that:
a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
(1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
abortion."
> And Romney has already publicly
> stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
rape and how is that determined?
Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
peace and justice,
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 9, 2012, 7:26:46 PM10/9/12
to
"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:k524i7$ncu$1...@dont-email.me...
> But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a rape
> and how is that determined?
In countries where that goes on, the duty falls to ultra-conservative,
religious leaders.
> But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a rape
> and how is that determined?
religious leaders.
Yer Pal Al
Oct 9, 2012, 10:03:36 PM10/9/12
to
On Oct 9, 2:22 pm, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> hal lillywhite wrote:
> > On 9 oct, 15:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>An exception Willard has seemingly not bothered to discuss.
> >>>Why should he? Those are state laws and he is not running for state
> >>>office.
> >>"We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse
> >>legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment s protections
> >>apply to unborn children."
> >>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> > Which says nothing about ultrasound.
>
> Which is not the point. The point is that:
>
> a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
>
> b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
Kind of like the liberal's restraints on gun ownership.
> hal lillywhite wrote:
> > On 9 oct, 15:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>An exception Willard has seemingly not bothered to discuss.
> >>>Why should he? Those are state laws and he is not running for state
> >>>office.
> >>"We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse
> >>legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment s protections
> >>apply to unborn children."
> >>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> > Which says nothing about ultrasound.
>
> Which is not the point. The point is that:
>
> a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
>
> b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
>
> (1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
> consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
> female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
> opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
> abortion."
regular OB/GYN examination where the sonographer puts acoustic gel on
the patient's abdomen and is scanned like the picture here:
http://www.healthcare.philips.com/main/products/ultrasound/Categories/women.wpd
With the right transducer you can get images like these:
http://www.healthcare.philips.com/asset.aspx?alt=31+Week+Face&p=http://www.healthcare.philips.com/pwc_hc/main/shared/Assets/Images/Ultrasound/Product/iU22/Clinical%20Images/OB/Large/1398_IU22_V6-2_OB_3D.jpg
More spectacular are movie clips of the baby making facial gestures,
hiccupping, etc.
A "transvaginal" exam uses what you are calling a "wand" and is used
to look at small parts within and near the womb like the ovaries.
> > And Romney has already publicly
> > stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
>
> And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
"My position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said.
"I'm in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest,
and the health and life of the mother."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57501172/romney-my-views-on-abortion-rights-are-clear-/
> But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
> rape and how is that determined?
> Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
> with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
from whence it comes.
Yer Pal Al
Oct 9, 2012, 10:04:30 PM10/9/12
to
On Oct 9, 4:27 pm, "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in messagenews:k524i7$ncu$1...@dont-email.me...
Is your mother making sure you are taking your medication? If you have
a smart phone you can get app to remind you.
> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in messagenews:k524i7$ncu$1...@dont-email.me...
a smart phone you can get app to remind you.
lib_o_matic
Oct 9, 2012, 11:18:42 PM10/9/12
to
On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> In countries where that goes on,
It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
> In countries where that goes on,
you are they way you are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------�---
Then the DotCom era turned me into an overpaid programmer. That's when
the NeoCons seized power here in the US - ending a period of screaming
prosperity. At the same time, I got hit with a case of Menningitis
(brain infection) and went a little coo-koo. Now I'm back to developing
web sites.
Read more: http://www.myspace.com/bvckvs#ixzz10eoO82ja
---------------------------------------------------------------------------�------
Then your twitter account has some more evidence of your mental state:
http://twitter.com/bvckvs
I am totally going to stop letting people like him, who do so little
for me, control how I think. So I'm going...
GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!!!
FYI - I have a whole nother identity on the web as
"sur...@kaufman.net". It's linked to Twit like my real ID is
I spy with my little eye... A jealous girlfriend hiding in the
closet, eavesdropping on her boyfriend's call home...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 12:15:11 AM10/10/12
to
On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> In countries where that goes on,
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 12:30:32 AM10/10/12
to
On 10/9/2012 3:22 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
> with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
>
> peace and justice,
I'm always reminded of YOUR very *special personal sentiments* regarding
> Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
> with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
>
> peace and justice,
the attacks of 911, Bill:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bill Shatzer wrote:
And over 4,000 Americans have paid with their lives for that little
adventure. Plus a half a trillion dollars in national treasure
You might compare that with the number of lives lost on 9-11. Or the
economic injury incurred from that event.
It would have been cheaper in both lives and money to just suffer
another 9-11 every six or seven years.
Peace and justice,
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think we can ALL do well to reflect on what kind of sick sociopath
would come up with those words in honor of 911...
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 10, 2012, 12:44:35 AM10/10/12
to
"Yer Pal Al" wrote in message
news:c117835a-ea1c-4cde...@m5g2000pbv.googlegroups.com...
> "My position has been clear throughout this campaign,"
"This" is the operative word here.
He has maintained that position during THIS one campaign.
In all his other campaigns, he tried to be honest, promised otherwise, and
lost.
So this time he's promising something different.
Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep any
of his promises.
He answers to a higher power.
news:c117835a-ea1c-4cde...@m5g2000pbv.googlegroups.com...
> "My position has been clear throughout this campaign,"
He has maintained that position during THIS one campaign.
In all his other campaigns, he tried to be honest, promised otherwise, and
lost.
So this time he's promising something different.
Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep any
of his promises.
He answers to a higher power.
George Plimpton
Oct 10, 2012, 12:56:54 AM10/10/12
to
On 10/9/2012 9:44 PM, Sanders Kaufman, far-left race-obsessed racist
lying cocksucker, lied:
> "Yer Pal Al" wrote in message
> news:c117835a-ea1c-4cde...@m5g2000pbv.googlegroups.com...
>
>> "My position has been clear throughout this campaign,"
>
> "This" is the operative word here.
Fuck off, racist race-obsessed cocksucker.
lying cocksucker, lied:
> "Yer Pal Al" wrote in message
> news:c117835a-ea1c-4cde...@m5g2000pbv.googlegroups.com...
>
>> "My position has been clear throughout this campaign,"
>
> "This" is the operative word here.
Yer Pal Al
Oct 10, 2012, 1:25:16 AM10/10/12
to
On Oct 9, 9:44 pm, "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Yer Pal Al" wrote in messagenews:c117835a-ea1c-4cde...@m5g2000pbv.googlegroups.com...
snacking in your bedroom? Now that you're out of a job make sure she
isn't cutting corners with mercury-laden tuna from China.
Is there a public service that caters to those with your condition?
Maybe you can visit the local food bank until your eligible for Meals
on Wheals?
I know you won't get better but maybe you can manage your behavior
with diet and medication.
> "Yer Pal Al" wrote in messagenews:c117835a-ea1c-4cde...@m5g2000pbv.googlegroups.com...
>
> > "My position has been clear throughout this campaign,"
>
> "This" is the operative word here.
Is your mom making you good nutritious meals 3 times a day or are you
> > "My position has been clear throughout this campaign,"
>
> "This" is the operative word here.
snacking in your bedroom? Now that you're out of a job make sure she
isn't cutting corners with mercury-laden tuna from China.
Is there a public service that caters to those with your condition?
Maybe you can visit the local food bank until your eligible for Meals
on Wheals?
I know you won't get better but maybe you can manage your behavior
with diet and medication.
Peace and Justice
Oct 10, 2012, 3:49:00 AM10/10/12
to
to toked up he doesn't know what the fuck is going on.
Obama is a sociopathic liar, and not a very bright one. Thank God he
will be out of office in January.
408 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 10, 2012, 4:19:38 AM10/10/12
to
>He answers to a higher power.
hal lillywhite
Oct 10, 2012, 9:08:28 AM10/10/12
to
On 9 oct, 16:22, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> > Which says nothing about ultrasound.
>
> Which is not the point. The point is that:
>
> a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> >>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> > Which says nothing about ultrasound.
>
> Which is not the point. The point is that:
>
> a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
not all.
> b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
> The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
>
> (1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
> consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
> female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
> opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
> abortion."
> > And Romney has already publicly
> > stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
>
> And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
> rape and how is that determined?
suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 12:00:16 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/9/2012 10:44 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep
> any of his promises.
> He answers to a higher power.
> Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep
> any of his promises.
> He answers to a higher power.
lu...@mahadeen.it
Oct 10, 2012, 1:43:57 PM10/10/12
to
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 21:18:42 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> In countries where that goes on,
>
>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>you are they way you are:
>
Here you go again. Do you have a bullshit guage so you know when
>On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> In countries where that goes on,
>
>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>you are they way you are:
>
you're running out? Oh, you never run out do you?
sw...@mahadeen.in
Oct 10, 2012, 1:47:14 PM10/10/12
to
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 22:15:11 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> In countries where that goes on,
>
>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>you are they way you are:
>
OMG! They aren't listening. You're in their spam toilet again.
>On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> In countries where that goes on,
>
>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>you are they way you are:
>
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 1:49:41 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 11:43 AM, lu...@mahadeen.it wrote:
> Here you go again.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/05/in-north-carolina-student-insurance-costs-rise-under-obamacare/
In North Carolina, student insurance costs rise under Obamacare
Posted by
CNN Political Reporter Peter Hamby
Charlotte, North Carolina (CNN) - President Obama's health care reform
law, which expands preventative care and lets young people remain on
their parents' health insurance plans well into their 20s, is a central
part of his election year pitch to college students.
And perhaps nowhere are students more critical to the president's
re-election chances than in North Carolina, a state jam-packed with
colleges and universities that were blitzed by Obama campaign organizers
in 2008.
p and Calculator and game out your own strategy for November.
But as the president fights to keep the conservative-leaning state in
his column this November, education officials here are complicating his
campaign message by citing "Obamacare" as a reason for the rising cost
of student health insurance plans on campuses from Asheville to Wilmington.
In April, Tom Ross, the president of the University of North Carolina
system, sent a letter to the university's board of governors announcing
that students should brace for a hike in the cost of university-provided
insurance plans.
Ross explained that at least 64,000 North Carolina college students -
roughly a third of those enrolled in the state's 17 public universities
- should expect to see "substantial" increases in health coverage costs
for the 2012-2013 academic year.
"Based on more than three semesters of actual claims experience, as well
as the new provisions of the Affordable Care Act, we are facing large
increases in premiums for our students," Ross wrote in the letter.
In North Carolina, college students are required to have proof of health
insurance, either through their university, their parents or a private
provider.
Students who purchase insurance plans from North Carolina public
universities this fall will be shelling out $709 per semester. That's up
significantly from a cost of $460 per semester last year.
> Here you go again.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/05/in-north-carolina-student-insurance-costs-rise-under-obamacare/
In North Carolina, student insurance costs rise under Obamacare
Posted by
CNN Political Reporter Peter Hamby
Charlotte, North Carolina (CNN) - President Obama's health care reform
law, which expands preventative care and lets young people remain on
their parents' health insurance plans well into their 20s, is a central
part of his election year pitch to college students.
And perhaps nowhere are students more critical to the president's
re-election chances than in North Carolina, a state jam-packed with
colleges and universities that were blitzed by Obama campaign organizers
in 2008.
p and Calculator and game out your own strategy for November.
But as the president fights to keep the conservative-leaning state in
his column this November, education officials here are complicating his
campaign message by citing "Obamacare" as a reason for the rising cost
of student health insurance plans on campuses from Asheville to Wilmington.
In April, Tom Ross, the president of the University of North Carolina
system, sent a letter to the university's board of governors announcing
that students should brace for a hike in the cost of university-provided
insurance plans.
Ross explained that at least 64,000 North Carolina college students -
roughly a third of those enrolled in the state's 17 public universities
- should expect to see "substantial" increases in health coverage costs
for the 2012-2013 academic year.
"Based on more than three semesters of actual claims experience, as well
as the new provisions of the Affordable Care Act, we are facing large
increases in premiums for our students," Ross wrote in the letter.
In North Carolina, college students are required to have proof of health
insurance, either through their university, their parents or a private
provider.
Students who purchase insurance plans from North Carolina public
universities this fall will be shelling out $709 per semester. That's up
significantly from a cost of $460 per semester last year.
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 1:50:24 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 11:47 AM, sw...@mahadeen.in wrote:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/080312-620954-barack-obama-heads-for-a-loss-in-november.htm?p=full
The social experiment that was Barack Obama's election and presidency is
over. Way over. As one who was born in the heart of Boston and worked
the political world of Washington for 20 years, I know quite a few
Democrats. Some are family, and many are close friends. Most voted for
Obama in 2008. None at this point is inclined to vote for him in 2012.
Why? Because they view him as an abject failure ...
Read More At IBD:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/080312-620954-barack-obama-heads-for-a-loss-in-november.htm#ixzz28uzfGOqz
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/080312-620954-barack-obama-heads-for-a-loss-in-november.htm?p=full
The social experiment that was Barack Obama's election and presidency is
over. Way over. As one who was born in the heart of Boston and worked
the political world of Washington for 20 years, I know quite a few
Democrats. Some are family, and many are close friends. Most voted for
Obama in 2008. None at this point is inclined to vote for him in 2012.
Why? Because they view him as an abject failure ...
Read More At IBD:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/080312-620954-barack-obama-heads-for-a-loss-in-november.htm#ixzz28uzfGOqz
fr...@mahadeen.ger
Oct 10, 2012, 1:51:28 PM10/10/12
to
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 22:30:32 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>On 10/9/2012 3:22 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>> Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
>> with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
>>
>> peace and justice,
>
>I'm always reminded of YOUR very *special personal sentiments* regarding
>the attacks of 911, Bill:
>
Given the age of this bullshit spammy, you have surpassed the level of
>On 10/9/2012 3:22 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>> Curt has raised this issue on a couple of occasions and it's been met
>> with a deafening silence. But it IS a rather important point.
>>
>> peace and justice,
>
>I'm always reminded of YOUR very *special personal sentiments* regarding
>the attacks of 911, Bill:
>
an icon.....Wow, this one is so old it carries cobwebs...
sw...@mahadeen.in
Oct 10, 2012, 1:58:15 PM10/10/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:00:16 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>On 10/9/2012 10:44 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep
>> any of his promises.
>> He answers to a higher power.
>
>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>you are they way you are:
>
"The Folks" know where you're coming from Spammy. Unlike you they
>On 10/9/2012 10:44 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep
>> any of his promises.
>> He answers to a higher power.
>
>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>you are they way you are:
>
don't need 5000 copies of the same bullshit. They all smell the same.
Bill Shatzer
Oct 10, 2012, 3:29:59 PM10/10/12
to
hal lillywhite wrote:
> On 9 oct, 16:22, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
>>>Which says nothing about ultrasound.
>>Which is not the point. The point is that:
>>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
>>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
> More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> not all.
One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> On 9 oct, 16:22, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
>>>Which says nothing about ultrasound.
>>Which is not the point. The point is that:
>>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
>>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
> More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> not all.
represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
>>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
>>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
> I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
> be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
practice, yes.
Specifically, mandating expensive procedures which are of no benefit to
the patient.
>>The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
>>(1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
>>consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
>>female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
>>opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
>>abortion."
> Transabdominal Bill. You call that rape?
original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
Original text was:
"Except in the case of a medical emergency, at least 24 hours before the
performance of an abortion a qualified medical professional trained in
sonography and working under the direct supervision of a physician
licensed in the Commonwealth shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and
auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the
abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age."
Transvaginal ultrasound is the only reliable means of determining
gestational age during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
>>>And Romney has already publicly
>>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
>>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
>>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>>But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
>>administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
>>rape and how is that determined?
> I already said that the minimum is a police report. I would also
> suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
rapes are NOT reported, whether because of shame, embarassment or a fear
of getting involved in the legal process.
http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/rape-notification.htm
When a rape victim discovers she is pregnant six weeks after the fact,
it's a little late for a "rape team exam". Or even a police report.
peace and justice,
lu...@mahadeen.it
Oct 10, 2012, 3:32:24 PM10/10/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:49:41 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>On 10/10/2012 11:43 AM, lu...@mahadeen.it wrote:
>> Here you go again.
>
Oh, no shit? Something old, something borrowed, something else but
>On 10/10/2012 11:43 AM, lu...@mahadeen.it wrote:
>> Here you go again.
>
new? Gee, we're surprised, Idiot.
You've been given the truth about that. NOthing to do with Obama.
Just insurance companies doing business as usual. Sticking us with
the bills.
sw...@mahadeen.in
Oct 10, 2012, 3:39:26 PM10/10/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:50:24 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>On 10/10/2012 11:47 AM, sw...@mahadeen.in wrote:
>
That's been covered more than once.
>On 10/10/2012 11:47 AM, sw...@mahadeen.in wrote:
>
>
>Read More At IBD:
>
Nah, just more spammy bullshit.
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 10, 2012, 3:45:06 PM10/10/12
to
"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
news:840da882-2f95-4919...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
> More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> not all.
In this case, it's *All*.
They may not LIKE or even KNOW that they support Christian breeding laws.
But every time they contribute or work to the party, they're supporting
those laws.
What you did there, by not pointing out that supporting the party supports
anti-abortion laws; that fallacy is called the "appeal to ignorance".
It's the most common strategy for evangelicals and racists to adopt.
That's because you can't recruit such scumbags by appealing to anyone's
INTELLECT.
news:840da882-2f95-4919...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
> More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> not all.
They may not LIKE or even KNOW that they support Christian breeding laws.
But every time they contribute or work to the party, they're supporting
those laws.
What you did there, by not pointing out that supporting the party supports
anti-abortion laws; that fallacy is called the "appeal to ignorance".
It's the most common strategy for evangelicals and racists to adopt.
That's because you can't recruit such scumbags by appealing to anyone's
INTELLECT.
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 10, 2012, 3:49:58 PM10/10/12
to
"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:k54iav$gtm$1...@dont-email.me...
> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
Yeah - prior to Bush's presidency and the emergence of the Tea Party, they
were much more united.
It's like I always say - without any real outside enemy to fight,
Republicans will always, always, always turn against each other.
> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
were much more united.
It's like I always say - without any real outside enemy to fight,
Republicans will always, always, always turn against each other.
Mike...@outlook.net
Oct 10, 2012, 3:51:11 PM10/10/12
to
to be pro-life. They want to decide. The test is to ask if they
support the death penalty. Almost always, they do. Save the fetus,
save the guns so we can dispose of them when they are old enough.
Then claim to be pro-life.
The more people, the more problems, the more poor people, the
more socialism and they blame that on everyone but themselves.
Quite a plan.
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 10, 2012, 3:56:06 PM10/10/12
to
wrote in message news:j6kb78hns0p7j0k8n...@4ax.com...
> The more people, the more problems, the more poor people, the
> more socialism and they blame that on everyone but themselves.
> Quite a plan.
So - if we just get rid of the people - or at least stop them from
socializing, it will be a Republican paradise.
a
> The more people, the more problems, the more poor people, the
> more socialism and they blame that on everyone but themselves.
> Quite a plan.
socializing, it will be a Republican paradise.
a
No Spam
Oct 10, 2012, 4:14:41 PM10/10/12
to
they didn't have the left, they would have to fight with each other.
They've proven that. Fighting a battle is far more important to them
than who wins or loses.
Nature may slow down the population growth as well as wars but people
do like to screw.
If Muslims did manage to become the predominate creed on earth, they
would do the same, The Sunnis would be in a never ending fight with
the Shias.
If the population of the entire earth was down to two people. One
would pick up a stick and beat the other to death. The winner would
never be happy without an enemy, he would have to kill himself. And
then there were none.
Peace and Justice
Oct 10, 2012, 5:51:32 PM10/10/12
to
See how the Dems are turning against the Kenyan village idiot now that
he has exposed his stupidity publicly.
Tar Baby also got caught in his lies about Libya and the intelligence
community and State Department employees are throwing him and Hillary
under the bus today.
Turns out the two assholes Hillary and Barry would not reinforce
security to protect the America embassy because they wanted it to appear
that there was no threat from Libya. Then they tried to blame their
incompetence on some American who made a short video about the Muslim
Jihadists.
It's now obvious that Hillary lied to Congress, and Barry the Fairy lied
to the world at the United Nations.
Bwaaahhhhhhhhh......
Peace and Justice
Oct 10, 2012, 5:53:30 PM10/10/12
to
The Hopey Changey thing didn't work real well did it Bucky?
Your sister still has to live with a porch monkey, and you have to live
with mom in that Dallas shack with no garage.
Peace and Justice
Oct 10, 2012, 5:55:28 PM10/10/12
to
wants to ban guns and you agree because you fear inanimate objects that
could be shoved up your ass if you misbehave. Both of you must also fear
women because they are stronger than you.
Yer Pal Al
Oct 10, 2012, 6:52:11 PM10/10/12
to
what they have - her SS and his unemployment. We are all lucky that he
has a nice mom to take care of him otherwise he'd be on a street
corner somewhere. If you don't have a car you don't need a garage and
without the appropriate therapy driving is out of the question anyway.
We should be encouraging Sanders that he can come to the defense of
Big Bird and that he can identify BO as a black. He had his brain
fried by meningitis - probably through no fault of his own - and these
are big accomplishments for him.
Bill Shatzer
Oct 10, 2012, 6:57:24 PM10/10/12
to
brethern.
It's no a pretty sight.
peace and justice,
No Spam
Oct 10, 2012, 10:12:54 PM10/10/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:51:32 -0700, Peace and Justice <he...@mitt.com>
wrote:
>On 10/10/2012 12:49 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:k54iav$gtm$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>>> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>>
>> Yeah - prior to Bush's presidency and the emergence of the Tea Party,
>> they were much more united.
>> It's like I always say - without any real outside enemy to fight,
>> Republicans will always, always, always turn against each other.
>>
>>
>Did you learn that at the "home" from one of the other patients?
>
Bullshit flushed. We are all "patient" of you, spammy. you're not
good enough to be a hair on Obama's ass. We hope you grow up, throw up
and fall out a 30 story window, whichever comes first.
mean Powell) when he lied to the UN about Iraq. He couldn't even look
at himself after that, and he quit. Is that it, Spammy, just because
the guy is black. You must be green with envy. See, you got yourself
flushed again!!!!
wrote:
>On 10/10/2012 12:49 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:k54iav$gtm$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>>> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>>
>> Yeah - prior to Bush's presidency and the emergence of the Tea Party,
>> they were much more united.
>> It's like I always say - without any real outside enemy to fight,
>> Republicans will always, always, always turn against each other.
>>
>>
>Did you learn that at the "home" from one of the other patients?
>
good enough to be a hair on Obama's ass. We hope you grow up, throw up
and fall out a 30 story window, whichever comes first.
>
>Turns out the two assholes
>
Another courtesy flush, spammy.
>Turns out the two assholes
>
>It's now obvious that Hillary lied to Congress, and Barry the Fairy lied
>to the world at the United Nations.
>
You really lost it, fruitcake. Now your talking about Colon Blow (I
>to the world at the United Nations.
>
mean Powell) when he lied to the UN about Iraq. He couldn't even look
at himself after that, and he quit. Is that it, Spammy, just because
the guy is black. You must be green with envy. See, you got yourself
flushed again!!!!
No Spam
Oct 10, 2012, 10:15:44 PM10/10/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:53:30 -0700, Peace and Justice <he...@mitt.com>
wrote:
Hahah, Appeal to Ignorance is the GOP mantra and always has been. No
one could take that from them, spammy, not even you. Can you see the
ocean from that cardboard box you live in? Ever go looking for
needles?
wrote:
one could take that from them, spammy, not even you. Can you see the
ocean from that cardboard box you live in? Ever go looking for
needles?
No Spam
Oct 10, 2012, 10:18:34 PM10/10/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:55:28 -0700, Peace and Justice <he...@mitt.com>
wrote:
Very funny coming from a useless turd hiding behind his computer
screen. He doesn't want to ban all guns, Spammy, just yours AND
it's for your own good...you know, so you don't hurt yourself. You are
afraid of everyone. IF you weren't so insignificant, the sedition
police would have you in a straight jacket by now.
wrote:
screen. He doesn't want to ban all guns, Spammy, just yours AND
it's for your own good...you know, so you don't hurt yourself. You are
afraid of everyone. IF you weren't so insignificant, the sedition
police would have you in a straight jacket by now.
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:05:20 PM10/10/12
to
You Libs are so cavalier about selling America out.
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:07:42 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 11:58 AM, sw...@mahadeen.in wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:00:16 -0600, lib_o_matic<r...@co.bass> wrote:
>
>> On 10/9/2012 10:44 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>>> Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep
>>> any of his promises.
>>> He answers to a higher power.
>>
>> It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>> you are they way you are:
>>
> "The Folks" know where you're coming from
Sure do:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:00:16 -0600, lib_o_matic<r...@co.bass> wrote:
>
>> On 10/9/2012 10:44 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>>> Not that it matters - he's not an honest man and doesn't intend to keep
>>> any of his promises.
>>> He answers to a higher power.
>>
>> It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>> you are they way you are:
>>
> "The Folks" know where you're coming from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKMUHcgsbag
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:21:29 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 1:32 PM, lu...@mahadeen.it wrote:
> Gee, we're surprised, Idiot.
>
> You've been given the truth about that. NOthing to do with Obama.
> Just insurance companies doing business as usual. Sticking us with
> the bills.
Due to OBAMACARE!!!!
> Gee, we're surprised, Idiot.
>
> You've been given the truth about that. NOthing to do with Obama.
> Just insurance companies doing business as usual. Sticking us with
> the bills.
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:24:00 PM10/10/12
to
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/time_for_democrats_for_romney_AUZ6cjhzmQwugmwm4pEt6J
Almost all of my friends are Democrats; all of them voted for Barack
Obama in 2008.
Ask them these days, as I have, if they plan to vote for Obama this
November, and they�ll give you an �Oh shucks� sad smile, look down, look
back up with guilty eyes and say �I�m disappointed.�
Then they play the party line and say. �But Romney? But Ryan?�
I�m not talking about those African Americans, Latinos and lockstep
Democrats who�ll blindly vote for Obama no matter how high unemployment
may be or what shape this country may be in.
I�m talking about a good number of intelligent, caring, middle-class
Democrats who are a soft nudge away from casting their vote for Romney.
All they need to know is that they�re not alone.
Democrats were disappointed in 1980. They�d had, under President Jimmy
Carter, four years of inflation, unemployment and gas rationing. Yet,
when asked, they said, �But Reagan?�
At this point in 1980, Carter was nine points ahead of Ronald Reagan in
the polls. Reagan had been slimed by the press and pro-Jimmy Carter
forces as being dumb and bumbling. Sound familiar?
Carter treated Reagan as a ridiculous figure who, among other things,
was ignorant of details of nuclear-weapons policy. Reagan cheerfully
promised economic growth and asked Democrats, �Are you better off than
you were four years ago?�
In the end, Reagan proved that good-natured conservatism could win by
huge margins. But a lot of credit for the win must go to �Democrats for
Reagan.�
Almost all of my friends are Democrats; all of them voted for Barack
Obama in 2008.
Ask them these days, as I have, if they plan to vote for Obama this
November, and they�ll give you an �Oh shucks� sad smile, look down, look
back up with guilty eyes and say �I�m disappointed.�
Then they play the party line and say. �But Romney? But Ryan?�
I�m not talking about those African Americans, Latinos and lockstep
Democrats who�ll blindly vote for Obama no matter how high unemployment
may be or what shape this country may be in.
I�m talking about a good number of intelligent, caring, middle-class
Democrats who are a soft nudge away from casting their vote for Romney.
All they need to know is that they�re not alone.
Democrats were disappointed in 1980. They�d had, under President Jimmy
Carter, four years of inflation, unemployment and gas rationing. Yet,
when asked, they said, �But Reagan?�
At this point in 1980, Carter was nine points ahead of Ronald Reagan in
the polls. Reagan had been slimed by the press and pro-Jimmy Carter
forces as being dumb and bumbling. Sound familiar?
Carter treated Reagan as a ridiculous figure who, among other things,
was ignorant of details of nuclear-weapons policy. Reagan cheerfully
promised economic growth and asked Democrats, �Are you better off than
you were four years ago?�
In the end, Reagan proved that good-natured conservatism could win by
huge margins. But a lot of credit for the win must go to �Democrats for
Reagan.�
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:26:01 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 1:51 PM, Mike...@outlook.net wrote:
> Republicans are almost entirely pro-choice especially those who claim
> to be pro-life.
Yes, they favor choices - smart moral ones.
> Republicans are almost entirely pro-choice especially those who claim
> to be pro-life.
Unlike you libitards.
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:33:35 PM10/10/12
to
It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
you are they way you are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------�---
you are they way you are:
Then the DotCom era turned me into an overpaid programmer. That's when
the NeoCons seized power here in the US - ending a period of screaming
prosperity. At the same time, I got hit with a case of Menningitis
(brain infection) and went a little coo-koo. Now I'm back to developing
web sites.
Read more: http://www.myspace.com/bvckvs#ixzz10eoO82ja
---------------------------------------------------------------------------�------
Then your twitter account has some more evidence of your mental state:
http://twitter.com/bvckvs
I am totally going to stop letting people like him, who do so little
for me, control how I think. So I'm going...
GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!!!
FYI - I have a whole nother identity on the web as
"sur...@kaufman.net". It's linked to Twit like my real ID is
I spy with my little eye... A jealous girlfriend hiding in the
closet, eavesdropping on her boyfriend's call home...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:34:13 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 1:49 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:k54iav$gtm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>
> Yeah - prior to Bush's presidency and
> "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message news:k54iav$gtm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>
> Yeah - prior to Bush's presidency and
lib_o_matic
Oct 10, 2012, 11:34:28 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 1:45 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> That's because you can't recruit such scumbags by appealing to anyone's
> INTELLECT.
> That's because you can't recruit such scumbags by appealing to anyone's
> INTELLECT.
lib_o_matic
Oct 11, 2012, 12:03:28 AM10/11/12
to
On 10/10/2012 4:57 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Behold Harold, the language and "thought" processes of your rightwing
> brethern.
>
> It's no a pretty sight.
>
> peace and justice,
> Behold Harold, the language and "thought" processes of your rightwing
> brethern.
>
> It's no a pretty sight.
>
> peace and justice,
I'm always reminded of YOUR very *special personal sentiments* regarding
the attacks of 911, Bill:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the attacks of 911, Bill:
Bill Shatzer wrote:
And over 4,000 Americans have paid with their lives for that little
adventure. Plus a half a trillion dollars in national treasure
You might compare that with the number of lives lost on 9-11. Or the
economic injury incurred from that event.
It would have been cheaper in both lives and money to just suffer
another 9-11 every six or seven years.
Peace and justice,
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think we can ALL do well to reflect on what kind of sick sociopath
would come up with those words in honor of 911...
lib_o_matic
Oct 11, 2012, 12:03:55 AM10/11/12
to
lib_o_matic
Oct 11, 2012, 12:04:08 AM10/11/12
to
On 10/9/2012 3:22 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Which is not the point. The point is that:
hal lillywhite
Oct 11, 2012, 10:19:44 AM10/11/12
to
On 10 oct, 14:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> >>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
distanced himself from that part of the platform.
> >>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> >>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> >>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> > Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
> > I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
> > be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
>
> When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
> practice, yes.
There are two sides to that. Clearly some boyfriends and others
pressure the woman to have the abortion and it is good for her to have
time to think about it.
...
> Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
>
> Original text was:
Meaningless since it was replaced.
...
> >>>And Romney has already publicly
> >>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
> >>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> >>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> > Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>
> How 'bout YOU answer it.
Read what Al wrote and that is my answer. Why in the world do you
expect me to repeat what he already wrote?
> >>But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> >>administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
> >>rape and how is that determined?
> > I already said that the minimum is a police report. I would also
> > suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
>
> You know, there is considerable evidence that a significant portion of
> rapes are NOT reported, whether because of shame, embarassment or a fear
> of getting involved in the legal process.
That is a problem we should fix. When rape is not reported the rapist
is almost certain to repeat the offense. We need to convince women
that the rapist is guilty and they are innocent victims and should
report it.
> http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/rape-notificatio...
>
> When a rape victim discovers she is pregnant six weeks after the fact,
> it's a little late for a "rape team exam". Or even a police report.
More reason to convince them to report it when it happens.
> >>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> >>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
> > More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> > not all.
>
> > not all.
>
> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
distanced himself from that part of the platform.
> >>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> >>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> >>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> > Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
> > I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
> > be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
>
> When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
> practice, yes.
There are two sides to that. Clearly some boyfriends and others
pressure the woman to have the abortion and it is good for her to have
time to think about it.
...
> Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
>
> Original text was:
Meaningless since it was replaced.
...
> >>>And Romney has already publicly
> >>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
> >>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> >>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> > Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>
> How 'bout YOU answer it.
Read what Al wrote and that is my answer. Why in the world do you
expect me to repeat what he already wrote?
> >>But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> >>administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
> >>rape and how is that determined?
> > I already said that the minimum is a police report. I would also
> > suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
>
> You know, there is considerable evidence that a significant portion of
> rapes are NOT reported, whether because of shame, embarassment or a fear
> of getting involved in the legal process.
That is a problem we should fix. When rape is not reported the rapist
is almost certain to repeat the offense. We need to convince women
that the rapist is guilty and they are innocent victims and should
report it.
> http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/rape-notificatio...
>
> When a rape victim discovers she is pregnant six weeks after the fact,
> it's a little late for a "rape team exam". Or even a police report.
More reason to convince them to report it when it happens.
hal lillywhite
Oct 11, 2012, 10:22:40 AM10/11/12
to
On 10 oct, 17:56, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> Peace and Justice wrote:
> > On 10/10/2012 12:56 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>
> >> wrote in messagenews:j6kb78hns0p7j0k8n...@4ax.com...
> Peace and Justice wrote:
> > On 10/10/2012 12:56 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>
>
> >>> The more people, the more problems, the more poor people, the
> >>> more socialism and they blame that on everyone but themselves.
> >>> Quite a plan.
> >> So - if we just get rid of the people - or at least stop them from
> >> socializing, it will be a Republican paradise.
> >> a
> > Just the Mexicans and you parasites that drain our economy. That asshole
> > wants to ban guns and you agree because you fear inanimate objects that
> > could be shoved up your ass if you misbehave. Both of you must also fear
> > women because they are stronger than you.
>
> Behold Harold, the language and "thought" processes of your rightwing
> brethern.
The attributions on the above are difficult to follow but it appears
> >>> The more people, the more problems, the more poor people, the
> >>> more socialism and they blame that on everyone but themselves.
> >>> Quite a plan.
> >> So - if we just get rid of the people - or at least stop them from
> >> socializing, it will be a Republican paradise.
> >> a
> > Just the Mexicans and you parasites that drain our economy. That asshole
> > wants to ban guns and you agree because you fear inanimate objects that
> > could be shoved up your ass if you misbehave. Both of you must also fear
> > women because they are stronger than you.
>
> Behold Harold, the language and "thought" processes of your rightwing
> brethern.
to me that only one of the writers is on the right and he is clearly
one of the loose cannons. There appear to be two more writers,
Kaufman and someone else, both clearly loose cannons from the left.
Seems more of an indictment of the left than of the right.
Yer Pal Al
Oct 11, 2012, 12:44:20 PM10/11/12
to
On Oct 10, 12:29 pm, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> hal lillywhite wrote:
> > On 9 oct, 16:22, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> >>>Which says nothing about ultrasound.
WRT abortion has to be done at the national level.
> >>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> >>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> >>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> > Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
> > I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
> > be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
>
> When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
> practice, yes.
We are talking about something that was established on a national
level 40 years ago. Obviously technology has come a long way since
then. Would like a glass of juice before your labotomy?
> Specifically, mandating expensive procedures which are of no benefit to
> the patient.
In almost all cases abortion is elective. It's important for the
Left's culture of death to keep the patients in the dark about what is
going to happen to them and their baby.
> >>The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
> >>(1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
> >>consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
> >>female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
> >>opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
> >>abortion."
> > Transabdominal Bill. You call that rape?
> performance of an abortion a qualified medical professional trained in
> sonography and working under the direct supervision of a physician
> licensed in the Commonwealth shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and
> auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the
> abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age."
>
> Transvaginal ultrasound is the only reliable means of determining
> gestational age during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The law is well written now.
> >>>And Romney has already publicly
> >>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
> >>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> >>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> > Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>
> How 'bout YOU answer it.
Talk about a coward losing an argument and grasping for straws. Why
don't you do you're on Google search. I found the refutation of your
lie in about 5 seconds.
> >>But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> >>administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
> >>rape and how is that determined?
> > I already said that the minimum is a police report. I would also
> > suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
>
> You know, there is considerable evidence that a significant portion of
> rapes are NOT reported, whether because of shame, embarassment or a fear
> of getting involved in the legal process.
The morning after pill isn't available? What you are saying is that
you want the system to accomodate women that don't have the courage to
come forward allowing their rapist to rape again?
I'm pretty sure rapists agree with you.
> http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/rape-notificatio...
>
> When a rape victim discovers she is pregnant six weeks after the fact,
> it's a little late for a "rape team exam". Or even a police report.
You failed as a lawyer because? I understand that it's not all Perry
Mason but even a 6th grader understands how DNA is used in a criminal
investigation. The victims testimony is useful as well.
> hal lillywhite wrote:
> > On 9 oct, 16:22, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>- Republican 2012 National Party Platform -
> >>>Which says nothing about ultrasound.
> >>Which is not the point. The point is that:
> >>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
> >>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
> > More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> > not all.
>
> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
The 14th amendment applied Roe to the 50 states. A lot of legislation
> >>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
> > More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
> > not all.
>
> One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
WRT abortion has to be done at the national level.
> >>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> >>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> >>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> > Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
> > I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
> > be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
>
> When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
> practice, yes.
level 40 years ago. Obviously technology has come a long way since
then. Would like a glass of juice before your labotomy?
> Specifically, mandating expensive procedures which are of no benefit to
> the patient.
In almost all cases abortion is elective. It's important for the
Left's culture of death to keep the patients in the dark about what is
going to happen to them and their baby.
> >>The wand rape bill was justified under the rubric of "informed consent"(1)
> >>(1) From the bill summary, "Requires that, as a component of informed
> >>consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant
> >>female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an
> >>opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the
> >>abortion."
> > Transabdominal Bill. You call that rape?
>
> Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
>
> Original text was:
>
> "Except in the case of a medical emergency, at least 24 hours before the
> Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
>
> Original text was:
>
> performance of an abortion a qualified medical professional trained in
> sonography and working under the direct supervision of a physician
> licensed in the Commonwealth shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and
> auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the
> abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age."
>
> Transvaginal ultrasound is the only reliable means of determining
> gestational age during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The law is well written now.
> >>>And Romney has already publicly
> >>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
> >>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> >>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> > Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>
> How 'bout YOU answer it.
don't you do you're on Google search. I found the refutation of your
lie in about 5 seconds.
> >>But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
> >>administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
> >>rape and how is that determined?
> > I already said that the minimum is a police report. I would also
> > suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
>
> You know, there is considerable evidence that a significant portion of
> rapes are NOT reported, whether because of shame, embarassment or a fear
> of getting involved in the legal process.
you want the system to accomodate women that don't have the courage to
come forward allowing their rapist to rape again?
I'm pretty sure rapists agree with you.
> http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/rape-notificatio...
>
> When a rape victim discovers she is pregnant six weeks after the fact,
> it's a little late for a "rape team exam". Or even a police report.
Mason but even a 6th grader understands how DNA is used in a criminal
investigation. The victims testimony is useful as well.
Bill Shatzer
Oct 11, 2012, 2:52:43 PM10/11/12
to
hal lillywhite wrote:
> On 10 oct, 14:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
>>>>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
>>>More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
>>>not all.
>>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
> Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> distanced himself from that part of the platform.
A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> On 10 oct, 14:29, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>a) The elephants ARE willing, nay, eager, to take on abortion at the
>>>>federal level despite your assertion that "those are state laws", and,
>>>More fallacy of composition. Some Republicans fit that category but
>>>not all.
>>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
> Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> distanced himself from that part of the platform.
without any discernible "nays".
>>>>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
>>>>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
>>>>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
>>>Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
>>>I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
>>>be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
>>When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
>>practice, yes.
> There are two sides to that. Clearly some boyfriends and others
> pressure the woman to have the abortion and it is good for her to have
> time to think about it.
of no discernible benefit to the patient to give "her time to think
about it"?
How 'bout throwing in an appendectomy as well? That'll give her lots of
time to "think".
>>Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
>>original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
>>Original text was:
> Meaningless since it was replaced.
mind and what they think about women.
>>>>>And Romney has already publicly
>>>>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
>>>>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
>>>>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
>>>Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>>How 'bout YOU answer it.
> Read what Al wrote and that is my answer. Why in the world do you
> expect me to repeat what he already wrote?
'Sides, I'm not discussing (arguing?) this issue with Al, I'm doing it
with you.
How 'bout YOU answer it?
>>>>But, I repeat my previous inquiry; how would a rape exception be
>>>>administered? Who determines whether the pregnancy is the result of a
>>>>rape and how is that determined?
>>>I already said that the minimum is a police report. I would also
>>>suggest that the rape team exam be consistent with rape.
>>You know, there is considerable evidence that a significant portion of
>>rapes are NOT reported, whether because of shame, embarassment or a fear
>>of getting involved in the legal process.
> That is a problem we should fix. When rape is not reported the rapist
> is almost certain to repeat the offense. We need to convince women
> that the rapist is guilty and they are innocent victims and should
> report it.
government?) re-education program to take full effect, you're going to
require victims to bear their rapist's child?
>>http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/rape-notificatio...
>>When a rape victim discovers she is pregnant six weeks after the fact,
>>it's a little late for a "rape team exam". Or even a police report.
> More reason to convince them to report it when it happens.
Willard's) she's just stuck?
It's her own damn fault for having such a 20th century sense of guilt,
shame or embarassment or just being daunted by the prospect of spending
the next six months or year of her life in and out of court relating the
details of her rape (and her sex life in general) to legions of police
officers, district attorneys, judges, juries, and the like?
That is NOT a workable solution!
peace and justice,
Gov. Smirk
Oct 11, 2012, 2:57:01 PM10/11/12
to
On 10/10/2012 4:57 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>
>
> It's no a pretty sight.
>
> peace and justice,
>
> peace and justice,
Gov. Smirk
Oct 11, 2012, 2:58:43 PM10/11/12
to
On 10/11/2012 12:52 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> without any discernible "nays".
> A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> without any discernible "nays".
Yer Pal Al
Oct 11, 2012, 5:18:47 PM10/11/12
to
ultrasound and I correctly and frequently identify you as the coward
you are:
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 12, 2012, 12:13:31 AM10/12/12
to
"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
news:2d5dc215-c07d-4e58...@v19g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
> The attributions on the above are difficult to follow but it appears
You're so obsessed with personal attacks - you've *completely* forgot to
address the issue.
That kind of bad character absolutely *plagues* the Republican party.
What kind of slimebag does that?
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 12, 2012, 12:15:12 AM10/12/12
to
"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
news:2f253578-4fb8-46b1...@tr7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
>distanced himself from that part of the platform.
That's not distancing himself from them; that’s going on their payroll.
But since he's the white candidate, you defend him.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 12:16:53 AM10/12/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:15 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> He takes their money and attacks their enemies.
> He takes their money and attacks their enemies.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 12:17:07 AM10/12/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:13 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> What kind of slimebag does that?
> What kind of slimebag does that?
George Plimpton
Oct 12, 2012, 12:44:06 AM10/12/12
to
all its vile squalor. sandee-baby has nothing, so it resorts to race -
every time.
410 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 12, 2012, 4:15:33 AM10/12/12
to
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:43:57 -0400, lu...@mahadeen.it wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 21:18:42 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>
>>On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>>> In countries where that goes on,
>you're running out? Oh, you never run out do you?
Obviously not - you're still here.
>On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 21:18:42 -0600, lib_o_matic <r...@co.bass> wrote:
>
>>On 10/9/2012 5:26 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>>> In countries where that goes on,
>>
>>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>>you are they way you are:
>>
>Here you go again. Do you have a bullshit guage so you know when
>>It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
>>you are they way you are:
>>
>you're running out? Oh, you never run out do you?
Obviously not - you're still here.
410 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 12, 2012, 4:25:00 AM10/12/12
to
time.
410 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 12, 2012, 4:31:08 AM10/12/12
to
On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:13:31 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
<bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
>news:2d5dc215-c07d-4e58...@v19g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
>> The attributions on the above are difficult to follow but it appears
>
>The important part is the facts that are presented - not the authors.
>You're so obsessed with personal attacks - you've *completely* forgot to
>address the issue.
No, you edited it out of your reply.
<bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
>news:2d5dc215-c07d-4e58...@v19g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
>> The attributions on the above are difficult to follow but it appears
>
>The important part is the facts that are presented - not the authors.
>You're so obsessed with personal attacks - you've *completely* forgot to
>address the issue.
>What kind of slimebag does that?
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 11:01:12 AM10/12/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:13 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> What kind of slimebag does that?
Biden.
It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
you are they way you are:
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 11:01:31 AM10/12/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:15 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> But since he's the white candidate, you defend him.
> But since he's the white candidate, you defend him.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 11:02:55 AM10/12/12
to
go on facts.
Of course that was an unmitigated disaster, and so we have Bucky the
Bigot today.
hal lillywhite
Oct 12, 2012, 11:14:22 AM10/12/12
to
On 11 oct, 13:52, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> >>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
> > Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> > distanced himself from that part of the platform.
>
> A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> without any discernible "nays".
Political conventions, of both parties, remind me more of a circus
> >>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> >>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
> > Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> > distanced himself from that part of the platform.
>
> A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> without any discernible "nays".
than of anything where people actually think. I tend to disregard
what happens there beyond selection of candidates.
> >>>>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
> >>>>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
> >>>>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
> >>>Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
> >>>I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
> >>>be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
> >>When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
> >>practice, yes.
> > There are two sides to that. Clearly some boyfriends and others
> > pressure the woman to have the abortion and it is good for her to have
> > time to think about it.
>
> So you would have her required to undergo an expensive medical procedure
> of no discernible benefit to the patient to give "her time to think
> about it"?
explain why some might.
> How 'bout throwing in an appendectomy as well? That'll give her lots of
> time to "think".
>
> >>Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> >>original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
> >>Original text was:
> > Meaningless since it was replaced.
>
> Rather meaningful as it demonstrates just what VA republicans had in
> mind and what they think about women.
wanted that are hardly the majority.
> >>>>>And Romney has already publicly
> >>>>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
> >>>>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> >>>>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> >>>Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
> >>How 'bout YOU answer it.
> > Read what Al wrote and that is my answer. Why in the world do you
> > expect me to repeat what he already wrote?
>
> Al tends to get my "delete" key as often as not.
>
> 'Sides, I'm not discussing (arguing?) this issue with Al, I'm doing it
> with you.
>
> How 'bout YOU answer it?
answer, complete with a link to a solid reference showing that you
were wrong. My objective is to get the truth out, not make myself
appear knowledgeable.
...
> > That is a problem we should fix. When rape is not reported the rapist
> > is almost certain to repeat the offense. We need to convince women
> > that the rapist is guilty and they are innocent victims and should
> > report it.
> And in the meantime, while we're waiting for this massive (big
> government?) re-education program to take full effect, you're going to
> require victims to bear their rapist's child?
programs. If women know that reporting it will be a requirement
should the want an abortion I suspect that will increase the reporting
rate rather significantly.
Peace and Justice
Oct 12, 2012, 1:48:44 PM10/12/12
to
the Kenyan village idiot as voted for blow job Bill Clinton.
How do you think the Kenyan got elected when only 15 % of the population
are porch monkeys, and a third of them too young to vote even if they
could find their way to the polls.
You have to stop pandering Negroes just to please your sister's
boyfriends, it makes you look even dumber.
No Spam
Oct 12, 2012, 3:51:20 PM10/12/12
to
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 10:48:44 -0700, Peace and Justice <he...@mitt.com>
wrote:
When you mouth off like that, you diminish your own credibility as if
you had any in the first place. You continue to voice lies that have
been refuted over and over again and the people that matter know that
they are. Hint: You don't matter.
wrote:
you had any in the first place. You continue to voice lies that have
been refuted over and over again and the people that matter know that
they are. Hint: You don't matter.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 4:00:19 PM10/12/12
to
only way you'll score any points at all here.
Have you seen the new Biden video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDeWWAkwogA
Peace and Justice
Oct 12, 2012, 4:22:01 PM10/12/12
to
true. Nothing has been refuted except in the interests of revising
history by liberals or being PC,
Peace and Justice
Oct 12, 2012, 4:23:07 PM10/12/12
to
Gov. Smirk
Oct 12, 2012, 4:39:09 PM10/12/12
to
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 13, 2012, 12:08:55 AM10/13/12
to
"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
news:272d8835-a86e-45d6...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
> Political conventions, of both parties, remind me more of a circus
ourselves.
Bill Shatzer
Oct 13, 2012, 12:43:05 AM10/13/12
to
hal lillywhite wrote:
> On 11 oct, 13:52, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>>>>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>>>Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
>>>distanced himself from that part of the platform.
>>A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
>>without any discernible "nays".
> Political conventions, of both parties, remind me more of a circus
> than of anything where people actually think. I tend to disregard
> what happens there beyond selection of candidates.
You ignore at your peril. These folks really want to do what's in their
> On 11 oct, 13:52, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
>>>>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
>>>>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
>>>Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
>>>distanced himself from that part of the platform.
>>A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
>>without any discernible "nays".
> Political conventions, of both parties, remind me more of a circus
> than of anything where people actually think. I tend to disregard
> what happens there beyond selection of candidates.
platform.
Folks mostly ignored Mein Kampf.
>>>>>>b) "We also salute the many states that have passed laws for informed
>>>>>>consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health
>>>>>>protective clinic regulation". 2012 R party platform.
>>>>>Informed consent is bad? Regulation of clinics is bad? Sheesh! And
>>>>>I do think that it is good to avoid rush to judgment, abortion cannot
>>>>>be undone if the woman is pressured into it by a boyfriend etc.
>>>>When it is mandated to go beyond what is required by good medical
>>>>practice, yes.
>>>There are two sides to that. Clearly some boyfriends and others
>>>pressure the woman to have the abortion and it is good for her to have
>>>time to think about it.
>>So you would have her required to undergo an expensive medical procedure
>>of no discernible benefit to the patient to give "her time to think
>>about it"?
> I never claimed to support that requirement. I was only trying to
> explain why some might.
I doubt many women go in for an abortion without having thought about
it. A lot.
>>How 'bout throwing in an appendectomy as well? That'll give her lots of
>>time to "think".
>>>>Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
>>>>original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
>>>>Original text was:
>>>Meaningless since it was replaced.
>>
>>Rather meaningful as it demonstrates just what VA republicans had in
>>mind and what they think about women.
>
>
> What *some* think. Since it was modified it would seem that those who
> wanted that are hardly the majority.
And the VA senate was all set to adopt it as well until the sh*t hit the
metaphorical fan and the Governor threatened to veto it unless it was
amended to strike the wand rape provisions.
>>>>>>>And Romney has already publicly
>>>>>>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
>>>>>>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
>>>>>>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
>>>>>Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
>>>>How 'bout YOU answer it.
>>>Read what Al wrote and that is my answer. Why in the world do you
>>>expect me to repeat what he already wrote?
>>Al tends to get my "delete" key as often as not.
>>'Sides, I'm not discussing (arguing?) this issue with Al, I'm doing it
>>with you.
>>How 'bout YOU answer it?
> I am not going to play your silly games.
I'm quite serious.
> He gave a perfectly good
> answer, complete with a link to a solid reference showing that you
> were wrong.
appreciable portions of his. Perhaps you might repost it under your name
- I read almost everything you post - with the exception of the times
when traffic on this amUsenet group becomes overwhelming and I have to
use a wholesale dump to keep up.
> My objective is to get the truth out, not make myself
> appear knowledgeable.
>>>That is a problem we should fix. When rape is not reported the rapist
>>>is almost certain to repeat the offense. We need to convince women
>>>that the rapist is guilty and they are innocent victims and should
>>>report it.
>>And in the meantime, while we're waiting for this massive (big
>>government?) re-education program to take full effect, you're going to
>>require victims to bear their rapist's child?
> Incentives tend to be more effective than massive reducation
> programs. If women know that reporting it will be a requirement
> should the want an abortion I suspect that will increase the reporting
> rate rather significantly.
contrary to Akin's claims.
But with only a one in twenty chance of actual pregnancy, I fear too
many will prefer to play the odds.
You'll certainly never get 100% compliance in any case. And you would
require a victim to bear her rapist's child just because she was slow to
report?
peace and justice,
Peace and Justice
Oct 13, 2012, 3:53:32 AM10/13/12
to
your boogers. Your women don't shave their smelly armpits either.
BTW, if you really want to govern yourself, get a job and vote for an
American instead of living on worthless promises and foodstamps from the
Kenyan Communist.
Peace and Justice
Oct 13, 2012, 3:54:53 AM10/13/12
to
411 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 13, 2012, 6:08:49 AM10/13/12
to
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:23:07 -0700, Peace and Justice <he...@mitt.com>
That, or somebody smeared tabasco sauce on his tampon before the
debate...
debate...
hal lillywhite
Oct 13, 2012, 9:52:40 AM10/13/12
to
On Oct 12, 11:43 pm, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> >>>>original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
> >>>>Original text was:
> >>>Meaningless since it was replaced.
>
> >>Rather meaningful as it demonstrates just what VA republicans had in
> >>mind and what they think about women.
>
> > What *some* think. Since it was modified it would seem that those who
> > wanted that are hardly the majority.
>
> How did it pass the VA house then if not by a majority?
>
> And the VA senate was all set to adopt it as well until the sh*t hit the
> metaphorical fan and the Governor threatened to veto it unless it was
> amended to strike the wand rape provisions.
And that political pressure means that there was not a significant
> >>>>Sorry. Referenced the final bill as amended rather than the text of the
> >>>>original bill as it existed before the sh*t hit the fan.
> >>>>Original text was:
> >>>Meaningless since it was replaced.
>
> >>Rather meaningful as it demonstrates just what VA republicans had in
> >>mind and what they think about women.
>
> > What *some* think. Since it was modified it would seem that those who
> > wanted that are hardly the majority.
>
> How did it pass the VA house then if not by a majority?
>
> And the VA senate was all set to adopt it as well until the sh*t hit the
> metaphorical fan and the Governor threatened to veto it unless it was
> amended to strike the wand rape provisions.
consensus in the state to keep the original language.
> >>>>>>>And Romney has already publicly
> >>>>>>>stated that he supports exceptions for rape.
> >>>>>>And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> >>>>>>or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
> >>>>>Answered by 'Your Pal Al.' You are wrong on that.
> >>>>How 'bout YOU answer it.
> >>>Read what Al wrote and that is my answer. Why in the world do you
> >>>expect me to repeat what he already wrote?
> >>Al tends to get my "delete" key as often as not.
> >>'Sides, I'm not discussing (arguing?) this issue with Al, I'm doing it
> >>with you.
> >>How 'bout YOU answer it?
> > I am not going to play your silly games.
>
> I'm sorry you feel it a game and even more so that you think it silly.
>
> I'm quite serious.
>
> > He gave a perfectly good
> > answer, complete with a link to a solid reference showing that you
> > were wrong.
>
> Then I apparently dumped that particular posting as I do with an
> appreciable portions of his.
> Perhaps you might repost it under your name
saying, Google is your friend (or in this case your enemy since it
shows that you were wrong).
(Begin quote)
> And he has said nothing about exceptions where the pregnancy endangers
> or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
That would be another lie:
> or is likely to endanger the life or health of the woman.
"My position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said.
"I'm in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest,
and the health and life of the mother."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57501172/romney-my-views-on-abo...
(End quote)
> >>>That is a problem we should fix. When rape is not reported the rapist
> >>>is almost certain to repeat the offense. We need to convince women
> >>>that the rapist is guilty and they are innocent victims and should
> >>>report it.
> >>And in the meantime, while we're waiting for this massive (big
> >>government?) re-education program to take full effect, you're going to
> >>require victims to bear their rapist's child?
> > Incentives tend to be more effective than massive reducation
> > programs. If women know that reporting it will be a requirement
> > should the want an abortion I suspect that will increase the reporting
> > rate rather significantly.
>
> Rapes result in pregnancy about five to six percent of the time -
> contrary to Akin's claims.
has that record. A woman is only fertile for a few days each month,
many are on birth control, or beyond child-bearing age or not yet at
that age. That number strikes me as a bit high.
> But with only a one in twenty chance of actual pregnancy, I fear too
> many will prefer to play the odds.
convincing women to report rape and get the slimeballs locked up where
they belong?
> You'll certainly never get 100% compliance in any case.
to stop trying.
>And you would
> require a victim to bear her rapist's child just because she was slow to
> report?
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:43:49 AM10/13/12
to
On 10/12/2012 10:43 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Then I apparently dumped that particular posting as I do with an
> appreciable portions of his.
I'm always reminded of YOUR very *special personal sentiments* regarding
> Then I apparently dumped that particular posting as I do with an
> appreciable portions of his.
the attacks of 911, Bill:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bill Shatzer wrote:
And over 4,000 Americans have paid with their lives for that little
adventure. Plus a half a trillion dollars in national treasure
You might compare that with the number of lives lost on 9-11. Or the
economic injury incurred from that event.
It would have been cheaper in both lives and money to just suffer
another 9-11 every six or seven years.
Peace and justice,
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
would come up with those words in honor of 911...
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:44:32 AM10/13/12
to
On 10/12/2012 10:08 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> Yeah - you right wing psychos never did have much respect for how we
> govern ourselves.
> Yeah - you right wing psychos never did have much respect for how we
> govern ourselves.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:44:41 AM10/13/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:15 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> He takes their money and attacks their enemies.
> He takes their money and attacks their enemies.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:44:58 AM10/13/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:13 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> You're so obsessed with personal attacks - you've *completely* forgot to
> address the issue.
> address the issue.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:53:56 AM10/13/12
to
On 10/12/2012 10:43 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> I'll mark that down as "Refused to Answer".
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:54:27 AM10/13/12
to
On 10/12/2012 10:08 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>
>
> Yeah - you right wing psychos never did have much respect for how we
> govern ourselves.
> govern ourselves.
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 12:12:36 PM10/13/12
to
On 10/12/2012 10:43 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Folks mostly ignored Mein Kampf.
Godwins law!
414 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 13, 2012, 11:46:35 PM10/13/12
to
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 10:12:36 -0600, "Gov. Smirk" <sim...@fi.fum>
wrote:
>On 10/12/2012 10:43 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>> Folks mostly ignored Mein Kampf.
>
>Godwins law!
Shatz keeps his copy under his pillow.
wrote:
>On 10/12/2012 10:43 PM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>> Folks mostly ignored Mein Kampf.
>
>Godwins law!
Gov. Smirk
Oct 13, 2012, 11:51:49 PM10/13/12
to
On 10/13/2012 9:46 PM, 414 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
wrote:
...and refers to it often ;-)
wrote:
Sanders Kaufman
Oct 14, 2012, 4:44:53 AM10/14/12
to
"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
news:04b56c32-08b1-4ed5...@r8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
"My position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said.
lib_o_matic
Oct 14, 2012, 11:54:07 AM10/14/12
to
On 10/14/2012 2:44 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
private sector's doing 'fine'
Oct 14, 2012, 11:51:00 PM10/14/12
to
On 10/12/2012 10:08 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> Yeah - you right wing psychos never did have much respect for how we
> govern ourselves.
> govern ourselves.
private sector's doing 'fine'
Oct 14, 2012, 11:51:12 PM10/14/12
to
On 10/14/2012 2:44 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
Peace and Justice
Oct 15, 2012, 2:44:25 AM10/15/12
to
relationship with "Bibi?" Biden spewed so much shit, he couldn't keep
track of it himself.
If Romney was campaigning from a prison, he would be more trustworthy
than the Tar Baby and the Buffoon.
Peace and Justice
Oct 15, 2012, 2:45:05 AM10/15/12
to
On 10/14/2012 08:51 PM, private sector's doing 'fine' wrote:
> On 10/14/2012 2:44 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
>
>
>
>
> It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
> you are they way you are:
>
It's all because Bucky's father is his mother's brother.
> On 10/14/2012 2:44 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
>
>
>
>
> It's useful for folks to understand what happened to your brain and why
> you are they way you are:
>
414 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
Oct 15, 2012, 8:19:23 AM10/15/12
to
private sector's doing 'fine'
Oct 15, 2012, 10:46:21 AM10/15/12
to
On 10/15/2012 6:19 AM, 414 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
wrote:
This is precisely what occurred.
wrote:
Yer Pal Al
Oct 15, 2012, 2:07:20 PM10/15/12
to
On Oct 12, 9:43 pm, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> hal lillywhite wrote:
> > On 11 oct, 13:52, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> >>>>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
> >>>Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> >>>distanced himself from that part of the platform.
> >>A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> >>without any discernible "nays".
> > Political conventions, of both parties, remind me more of a circus
> > than of anything where people actually think. I tend to disregard
> > what happens there beyond selection of candidates.
>
> You ignore at your peril. These folks really want to do what's in their
> platform.
>
> Folks mostly ignored Mein Kampf.
Sorry. Still not sympathetic to your failing to influence society.
> hal lillywhite wrote:
> > On 11 oct, 13:52, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote:
> >>>>One would suppose that a plank in the republican national platform
> >>>>represents the views of something more than just "some republicans".
> >>>Put together by a small group of Republicans and Romney has already
> >>>distanced himself from that part of the platform.
> >>A "small group"? It was adopted by the entire convention on a voice vote
> >>without any discernible "nays".
> > Political conventions, of both parties, remind me more of a circus
> > than of anything where people actually think. I tend to disregard
> > what happens there beyond selection of candidates.
>
> You ignore at your peril. These folks really want to do what's in their
> platform.
>
> Folks mostly ignored Mein Kampf.
Maybe you can try with Mao's Little Red Book? You can probably get a
night in the guest tent at Occupy Portland.
mma...@spam_me.not
Oct 15, 2012, 3:07:12 PM10/15/12
to
to hell."
mma...@spam_me.not
Oct 15, 2012, 3:07:49 PM10/15/12
to
private sector's doing 'fine'
Oct 15, 2012, 3:20:41 PM10/15/12
to
On 10/15/2012 1:07 PM, mmastor@spam_me.not wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 05:19:23 -0700, 414 murdered in Obama's 'organized
> communities'<flush...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Oct 2012 03:44:53 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "hal lillywhite" wrote in message
>>> news:04b56c32-08b1-4ed5...@r8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> "My position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said.
>>>
>>> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
>>
>> Obama lied. Americans died.
>>
> Nope.
Yep.
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 05:19:23 -0700, 414 murdered in Obama's 'organized
> communities'<flush...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Oct 2012 03:44:53 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "hal lillywhite" wrote in message
>>> news:04b56c32-08b1-4ed5...@r8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> "My position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said.
>>>
>>> That one always gets me - as I'm sure it does many other voters.
>>
>> Obama lied. Americans died.
>>
> Nope.
He refused requests for enhanced embassy security.
private sector's doing 'fine'
Oct 15, 2012, 3:24:34 PM10/15/12
to
On 10/15/2012 1:07 PM, mmastor@spam_me.not wrote:
http://www.independentsentinel.com/2012/10/new-email-surfaces-showing-state-department-refused-aid-to-libyan-embassy/
New Email Surfaces Showing State Department Refused Aid to Libyan Embassy
Meanwhile:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/state-dept-confirms-marines-91112-were-protecting-us-embassy-barbados
(CNSNews.com) -- When terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in
Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11 of this year and killed the U.S. ambassador
and three other Americans, there were no U.S. Marines deployed in Libya
to defend U.S. diplomats, diplomatic facilities and classified
information and equipment.
However, says the State Department, a Marine Security Detachment was
deployed on that day to carry out those duties at the U.S. Embassy in
Bridgetown, Barbados.
“U.S. Marine Security Guards serve at the U.S. Embassy in Bridgetown,
and at other diplomatic missions around the world, to protect and
safeguard American diplomacy,” Rebecca Ross, the U.S. Embassy to
Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean Counselor for Public Affairs, said in
a statement to CNSNews.com.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages