General John Kelly: "He said that, in his opinion, Mr. Trump met the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator if allowed, and had no understanding of the Constitution or the concept of rule of law."
Thursday, May 16, 2019
11 comments:
Not MY President
said...
More proof that the NUTS are running the asylum
Franco Aragosta May 15, 2019 at 5:05 PM
We should be much more concerned about who has the fattest HEAD, Rusty, don't ya think?
There's a L OT of competition there with all those DemonRats running for the Whote House and all those incredibly stupid RINO buttheads out there
Shaw... to be fair, it looks like that idea from Texas was voted down in April.
The abortion wars are indeed heating up though. States are working hard to limit access to abortion at all levels but again, I wonder.
Years ago President Clinton used to say he wanted abortions to be "safe, legal and rare." As a centrist, I believe he saw a problem with abortion being used as a method of birth control, a sort of last minute stop gap "if you got pregnant." That desire, in my opinion was a noble one. But now the Democratic Party cannot publicly affirm those values. Because to do so seems to acknowledge that in the desire to keep them rare, there must be a negative attached to the procedure, and they do not want to say that.
But to pretend that there is no heartbeat, and thus no life, at a very young age, or time of gestation, is just not credible.
The GOP has become very good at demagoguing this issue and consistency is nowhere to be found in their points either. At least the Alabama bill comes close. If you believe abortion is murder, then consistency should dictate that you cannot have exceptions for rape or incest. Murder is murder. But they weaseled, offering an exception. In their law, it's alright to kill an innocent child, or life, if another person would dies as a result of having that baby. Somehow, they see that at least in theory, "murder" of an innocent is alright.
I think the large majority of the country believes that abortion late in the third term is a terrible idea and will accept some limitations on the procedure. But to classify it as murder, and criminalize it, is beyond the pale.
Sadly, both sides seems trapped behind their political Maginot lines, unable or unwilling to consider ideas aimed at breaking the impasse. Because to do so would take a very potent issue off the battlefield.
Dave, there is no abortion in the 3rd trimester for birth control reasons!
The only reasons for a rare 3rd trimester abortion is if the mother's life is in danger ( say she has a rare form of cancer and the pregnancy cannot contine, this has happe, ned, believe me), even then, if the fetus is viable, it is saved. There is no such thing as a "partial birth abortion" or as trump dangerously claimed, when a 9-month fetusnis born, the doctor and mother decide to kill it. That was a mentally deranged idiot claiming that.
The reason we don't want any exceptions is that nature is not perfect and horrible thing can happen during a pregnancy with both the mother and the fetus and it is insane to tie the hands of medical people who would know how to save either or both lives. None of the people who voted for this bill, that I'm aware of, are ob-gyn docs who have actually seen heartbreaking cases where horrible decision on lives have to be made.
The GOP is even against birth control, and the after sex pill that aborts a zygote. A zygote has fewer chromosomes than someone's toenail clippings! It's NOT a baby. But the GOP is against easy access to birth control and then want to punish women for getting pregnant or being raped.
The government needs to stay the hell away from this issue! Let the medical profession, whose oath is, "First, do no harm" handle it.
The GOP is NOT believe every life is sacred. Otherwise it would be marching in the streets against babies and children being separated from their parents and who may very well never see them again.
If every life is sacred, those living, breathing babies and children should have the GOP's support as well.
It's ever so easy to be concerned inutero, but unconcerned once that fetus is out.
Well Les... the positions advanced in the second article do point out the consistency struggles many Dems seem to have, as do many in the GOP. It's a good, thought provoking read.
Shaw, while there may well be a ban on third trimester abortions, do you think the Dems support this? I doubt it. I truly believe that the great majority of Dem politicians prefer no limitations at all, because any limitation is based on life before birth and they can't go there.
Dave, I know Democrats who do not support abortion at all. There isn't wall-to-wall agreement on this very difficult issue. Again, there is no such thing as what trump claimed -- killing live born babies as a form of abortion. Third trimester abortions in rare medical emergencies DO exist. Should doctors be prohibited from saving either the mother or child? The human body is very complicated and horrible things happen. Why put a definitive ban on a procedure that could save a life? I personally believe in the morning after pill, which the GOP does not support, as it does not support contraceptives.
Some religions believe that there is a "soul" in a fertilized zygote, and that's why there are prohibitions to the morning after pill. But that's a RELIGIOUS belief, not supported by medical science, and a law supporting the prohibition is wrong. To give a fertilized zygote the same rights as an impregnated girl or woman is insane.
Less choices, less liberty and freedom. Americans need to stop telling their neighbors how to live and learn to live with each other's choices. If you think abortion is murder, fine, but don't force your thinking on everyone else.
I truly believe that the great majority of Dem politicians prefer no limitations at all, because any limitation is based on life before birth and they can't go there.
I have never been supportive of third trimester abortion UNLESS the reason for it is because of danger to the pregnant women's health/life, or, the medical professional responsible for the women and developing child determines the fetus would likely be born with serious health issues/defects.Aside from that it has ALWAYS seemed reasonable to me that the standard beyond the point of viability should require a medical reason certified by a doctor.
In the vast majority of pregnancies women should be able to determine whether abortion is the course they wish to take in the 1st trimester and certainly by the end of the 2nd trimester.
I realize there are cases that fall outside the norm and frankly I'm not sure exactly how to handle that other than a case by case basis. Obviously standards would have to bve developed and I imagine that wouldn't be easy.
Shaw, I do post, on WordPress. My farewell on blogger 1 1/2 months ago was a farewell to blogger. I finally had enough of the, excuse my language please, bullshit from characters like many found on WYD and other weblogs. So, I moved on. There are far fewer of those types and WordPress does a by far better job of sending spam to spam automatically.
Even with MUCH reduced traffic and FAR fewer comments I'm still MUCH happier than I was on blogger.
Life is good. There is SO much positive stuff out there about the less time spent watching TV, listening to the 24/7 continual loop of BS on cable "news" networks, or spending ones day reading negative BS the better life becomes. I know. It's what I've done the past 6 weeks. (For the most part :) ...)
11 comments:
More proof that the NUTS are running the asylum
Franco Aragosta May 15, 2019 at 5:05 PM
We should be much more concerned about who has the fattest HEAD, Rusty, don't ya think?
There's a L OT of competition there with all those DemonRats running for the Whote House and all those incredibly stupid RINO buttheads out there
Shaw... to be fair, it looks like that idea from Texas was voted down in April.
The abortion wars are indeed heating up though. States are working hard to limit access to abortion at all levels but again, I wonder.
Years ago President Clinton used to say he wanted abortions to be "safe, legal and rare." As a centrist, I believe he saw a problem with abortion being used as a method of birth control, a sort of last minute stop gap "if you got pregnant." That desire, in my opinion was a noble one. But now the Democratic Party cannot publicly affirm those values. Because to do so seems to acknowledge that in the desire to keep them rare, there must be a negative attached to the procedure, and they do not want to say that.
But to pretend that there is no heartbeat, and thus no life, at a very young age, or time of gestation, is just not credible.
The GOP has become very good at demagoguing this issue and consistency is nowhere to be found in their points either. At least the Alabama bill comes close. If you believe abortion is murder, then consistency should dictate that you cannot have exceptions for rape or incest. Murder is murder. But they weaseled, offering an exception. In their law, it's alright to kill an innocent child, or life, if another person would dies as a result of having that baby. Somehow, they see that at least in theory, "murder" of an innocent is alright.
I think the large majority of the country believes that abortion late in the third term is a terrible idea and will accept some limitations on the procedure. But to classify it as murder, and criminalize it, is beyond the pale.
Sadly, both sides seems trapped behind their political Maginot lines, unable or unwilling to consider ideas aimed at breaking the impasse. Because to do so would take a very potent issue off the battlefield.
Dave, there is no abortion in the 3rd trimester for birth control reasons!
The only reasons for a rare 3rd trimester abortion is if the mother's life is in danger ( say she has a rare form of cancer and the pregnancy cannot contine, this has happe, ned, believe me), even then, if the fetus is viable, it is saved. There is no such thing as a "partial birth abortion" or as trump dangerously claimed, when a 9-month fetusnis born, the doctor and mother decide to kill it. That was a mentally deranged idiot claiming that.
The reason we don't want any exceptions is that nature is not perfect and horrible thing can happen during a pregnancy with both the mother and the fetus and it is insane to tie the hands of medical people who would know how to save either or both lives. None of the people who voted for this bill, that I'm aware of, are ob-gyn docs who have actually seen heartbreaking cases where horrible decision on lives have to be made.
The GOP is even against birth control, and the after sex pill that aborts a zygote. A zygote has fewer chromosomes than someone's toenail clippings! It's NOT a baby. But the GOP is against easy access to birth control and then want to punish women for getting pregnant or being raped.
The government needs to stay the hell away from this issue! Let the medical profession, whose oath is, "First, do no harm" handle it.
The GOP is NOT believe every life is sacred. Otherwise it would be marching in the streets against babies and children being separated from their parents and who may very well never see them again.
If every life is sacred, those living, breathing babies and children should have the GOP's support as well.
It's ever so easy to be concerned inutero, but unconcerned once that fetus is out.
Sorry for all the typos. Typing on the run.
You might find the following interesting.
Article one
Article two
Well Les... the positions advanced in the second article do point out the consistency struggles many Dems seem to have, as do many in the GOP. It's a good, thought provoking read.
Shaw, while there may well be a ban on third trimester abortions, do you think the Dems support this? I doubt it. I truly believe that the great majority of Dem politicians prefer no limitations at all, because any limitation is based on life before birth and they can't go there.
Re typos... so hard to get it right on a phone.
Dave, I know Democrats who do not support abortion at all. There isn't wall-to-wall agreement on this very difficult issue. Again, there is no such thing as what trump claimed -- killing live born babies as a form of abortion. Third trimester abortions in rare medical emergencies DO exist. Should doctors be prohibited from saving either the mother or child? The human body is very complicated and horrible things happen. Why put a definitive ban on a procedure that could save a life? I personally believe in the morning after pill, which the GOP does not support, as it does not support contraceptives.
Some religions believe that there is a "soul" in a fertilized zygote, and that's why there are prohibitions to the morning after pill. But that's a RELIGIOUS belief, not supported by medical science, and a law supporting the prohibition is wrong. To give a fertilized zygote the same rights as an impregnated girl or woman is insane.
Les, those articles are good for discussions. I'm sorry you don't post on your blog anymore. They would make interesting arguments back and forth.
Less choices, less liberty and freedom.
Americans need to stop telling their neighbors how to live and learn to live with each other's choices. If you think abortion is murder, fine, but don't force your thinking on everyone else.
I truly believe that the great majority of Dem politicians prefer no limitations at all, because any limitation is based on life before birth and they can't go there.
I have never been supportive of third trimester abortion UNLESS the reason for it is because of danger to the pregnant women's health/life, or, the medical professional responsible for the women and developing child determines the fetus would likely be born with serious health issues/defects.Aside from that it has ALWAYS seemed reasonable to me that the standard beyond the point of viability should require a medical reason certified by a doctor.
In the vast majority of pregnancies women should be able to determine whether abortion is the course they wish to take in the 1st trimester and certainly by the end of the 2nd trimester.
I realize there are cases that fall outside the norm and frankly I'm not sure exactly how to handle that other than a case by case basis. Obviously standards would have to bve developed and I imagine that wouldn't be easy.
Shaw, I do post, on WordPress. My farewell on blogger 1 1/2 months ago was a farewell to blogger. I finally had enough of the, excuse my language please, bullshit from characters like many found on WYD and other weblogs. So, I moved on. There are far fewer of those types and WordPress does a by far better job of sending spam to spam automatically.
Even with MUCH reduced traffic and FAR fewer comments I'm still MUCH happier than I was on blogger.
Life is good. There is SO much positive stuff out there about the less time spent watching TV, listening to the 24/7 continual loop of BS on cable "news" networks, or spending ones day reading negative BS the better life becomes. I know. It's what I've done the past 6 weeks. (For the most part :) ...)
Post a Comment