Local efforts are under way to help Oklahoma tornado victims. Find out how you can help here.
Shot by Dan
“Beauty, like ice, our footing does betray;
Who can tread sure on the smooth, slippery way:
Pleased with the surface, we glide swiftly on,
And see the dangers that we cannot shun.”
John Dryden
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
38 COMMENTS
Name is required
A valid email is required (test@test.com)
Comment is required
Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.
Wow, Santorum wants to do away with prenatal testing and public schools. He gets wilder everyday. He wants to stop prenatal testing to assure families go ahead with all births even if there is extreme birth defects. Of course, he never talks about funding to help those families devastated by the costs of having such a child. No, instead he wants to take away all health funding. So what is to be done with all the bankrupt families with disabled children? I guess Rickjust wants them to starve to death.
Public schools? Rick wants the federal government out and for the States to only give money to the localities without any say in how the money is to be used. Now that is good stewardship of government money. Let you local government have billions to spend as they wish. Talk about small Kingdoms and control by a few. Has Rick no concept of history and why State and federal governments stepped into education?
Rick Santorum, the Tea Party darling that speaks from his ultra right gut and happily ignores his brain should be his slogan.
#1 Not much to add to what you said, Richard. If Santorum does get the nod, which I still don’t think will happen, it shouldn’t be too hard to show him for the nutjob he is.
Right on Richard #1! All that and more. The morality police are at their hypocrite funniest when they are complaining about the corruption police, tax police or PC police. Geez, nanny by any other name is still nanny and Theocracy by any other name is still a Theocracy. No Sale, thanks for another 4 years!
Sandi Saunders, welcome back!
The funniest story of the weekend, IMHO, was about the previously in-the-closet and tough-on-immigration Arizona Sheriff who resigned as Romney’s state co-chair. The guy came out of the closet while defending himself against charges he’d threatened to have his former illegal immigrant boyfriend deported for breaking up with him.
I think the dude has taken the record for the number of RWer bugaboos you can breach at the same time.
In the United States, approximately 600,000 men per year have a vasectomy.
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/vasectomy/article_em.htm
Eleven million US women aged 15-44 years rely on sterilization [tubal ligation] as a means of birth control to prevent pregnancy. http://www.emedicinehealth.com/tubal_sterilization/article_em.htm
Approximately 23.9% of the US population is Catholic. [CIA Facebook]. Catholicism bans the use of these “artificial” forms of birth control, as well as the pill or condoms.
Yet now we have the federal government supporting the imposition of the Catholic faith’s religious dictates of banning “artificial” means of family planning, by permitting the denial of health insurance coverage for its employees in this private matter. Although Catholicism in America is not a monolithic Christian tradition, all women have been relegated to its religious convictions – whether they are Protestants, Jews, Muslim or any other of the 4,2000 religions of the world – they will be forced into these narrow Catholic beliefs.
http://www.adherents.com/
Santorum, a Catholic following his faith, is against contraception, “It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be” – his worldview is of only male virgins and female virgins marrying, having sex to procreate – end of story. He therefore sees no need for birth control pills. Or at least, not for the virtuous, and the rest of us be damned; and since condoms prevent pregnancy, following his medieval thinking, they too should be banned, forgetting that condoms also protect against disease. This is the slippery slope we are being forced to travel – unprotected from an antiquated religious ideology and its proponents. A Santorum presidency would be a return to the dark ages.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/under-god/post/rick-santorums-very-catholic-birth-control-beliefs/2012/02/16/gIQALczyHR_blog.html
Rick Santorum claims to be a pro-life candidate. The article linked below suggests perhaps not. He also opposes abortion in the cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is in danger. that last objection seems not to apply to when it’s his wife in danger. Evidence the decision they made in 1996 to have a medically induced miscarriage to save his wife’s life. I happen to agree with the Santorum’s decision in 1996. Suzie Q believes that makes me pro-abortion.
http://open.salon.com/blog/sarah_gale/2012/02/19/why_rick_santorum_would_have_killed_my_daughter_1
RJB, CPA,
I witnessed that interview too. God Bless America and all the mystery of how anything has ever happened.
With enough support and money behind a person hood, you too can be Prezidnet. I probably got the order wrong, money first, support can be a very small number.
Billy Graham tried to warn us in 1981. We didn’t listen.
http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/dstack/blog/2010/10/billy-graham-warned-evangelicals-against-formation-religious-right
That was indeed a funny story Dan. Pitiful, but funny.
I like Billy Graham. He really seems to have lived the life to back up what he preaches and took righteous evangelism to a whole new scale long before the plethora of crooked tax-exempt businesses masquerading as ministers.
Gallup now has Rick up by 8 points. Gingrich had the same margin, so we’ll see if it holds up. Romney can’t really get a handle on how to go after Santorum. He can’t go the religion route, so he has to try to paint him as a big spender which is hardly believable. As expected, 0bama’s goons have gone with the lies about Rick wanting to abolish birth control. But unlike past Republican weaklings, Santorum refuses to play defense. Instead he goes on the offensive against 0bama’s godless regime, and his lead only widens. I wish the primaries were this week, but we’ll have to see what kind of slime the left throws up against Santorum the nine days. We know the MSM will carry the water on whatever their talking points are. Dan here will do his part. We’ll see if Rick slips like those conservatives before him or if God has other plans.
Again, never underestimate the power of prayer.
Rick Santorum, up by 8 points against Obama?
You’re dreaming. And damn, my Achilles tendon is hurting.
I would like to personally thank Idiot Boy for handing over 10 million Catholic votes to Rick Santorum by picking a fight with the bishops. Going after Rick as being “too religious” is a tack i don’t think this bunch wants to stay with much longer. It’s would be sort of like the Clinton campaign saying “That guy is a prude” The more he says it, the more people flock to Santorum.
Rick would be the first genuine Catholic president ever. i.e. practicing Catholic. People might say JFK, but Rick doesn’t have an Judith Campbell type mistresses waiting in the wings as far as I know. Kennedy was a CINO.
I love how Screwzie calls Santorum, ‘Rick’, as if they’re BFFs.
I would like to personally thank Virgil Goode for declaring his candidacy for the Constitution Party. Because that act, as insignificant as it may be nationally (Roseanne Barr will pull many more vote for the Greens) will win my bet on the outcome of Virginia with Suzie. She’ll have to fork over $20 to the charity of my choice (Ron’s college). Plus, terps will have to buy me 2 lunches, because he recently doubled down on Obama’s loss in Virginia, which won’t happen.
Thank you, Virgil. And Suzie, and terps.
”It’s would be….”
Correction: IT would be
“…Rick doesn’t have an Judith Campbell type mistresses….”
Correction: A Judith Campbell-type mistress…
or
Correction: anY Judith Campbell-type mistresses…
Put the wine down, Screwzie. Buzzed-posting doesn’t become you. You’re getting sloppy.
“11.Gallup now has Rick up by 8 points. Gingrich had the same margin, so we’ll see if it holds up.”
I don’t doubt that they do; I just wonder why.
“I wish the primaries were this week…”
I just wish they were all on the same day. The media playing on every state week to week sways a lot of people. If they were all on the same day, voters would have to make a judgment and go with it without the media conjecturing who should win what state and why. Momentum should not have anything to do with a candidate’s viability. The current system is too much like American Idol.
So Suzie, without limitation to the current choices, who is you #1 pick for president? You can choose ANYBODY.
OMG John Wilburn
Surely you know that Suzie’s candidate of choice would be “the great one”
I can just see Rush on the campaign circuit now, beady eyes glowing and the words tumbling out in a cascade of oxycontin induced paranoia. And after the election, when he goes back to his daily radio spot having received an astounding 18 % of the vote and carrying Mississippi in the electoral college, he can have someone ghost write a new book for him.
In that book he can explain how his candidacy allowed Democrats to take over both the Senate and The House with 70% margins because the MSM targeted him and all real Americans with their all powerful propaganda machines. This of course will doom us all to hell for eternity and lead to the establishment of Sharia law by the year 2015. Or they can just nominate Rick Santorum and accomplish almost the same thing.
And John
I’m with
you on the primaries thing. This whole preelection season needs to be condensed into three months, June-July-August. The Republican candidates as of this week will have had 21 televised debates. That’s at least 16 too many. But its been great for the SNL show and all the late night talk
show comedians.
I would like to personally thank Virgil Goode for declaring his candidacy for the Constitution Party. Because that act, as insignificant as it may be nationally (Roseanne Barr will pull many more vote for the Greens) will win my bet on the outcome of Virginia with Suzie. She’ll have to fork over $20 to the charity of my choice (Ron’s college). Plus, terps will have to buy me 2 lunches, because he recently doubled down on Obama’s loss in Virginia, which won’t happen.
Thank you, Virgil. And Suzie, and terps.
You know, I’ve tried to help Dan by giving him the scoop on the Giles Co. 10 Commandments lawsuit, but he continues to remain deaf. That protraccted lawsuit in which state conservatives baited the ACLU into suing tiny, but strategic Giles county was designed to play out in 2012. But 0bama’s special gift of 10 million Catholic votes and enthusiastic support of all evangelical Christian groups to the Republicans was an unexpected bonus.
The more the Giles case is in the news, the more it helps our candidate, especiallly in Virginia. And if Santorum becomes the nominee, it helps even more.
Thank you Idiot Boy. Thank you, ACLU. And thank you Dan for reporting on this last fall. Let’s have some more stories. Keep this puppy in the news.
So Suzie, without limitation to the current choices, who is you #1 pick for president? You can choose ANYBODY.
Great question, John, It may be Santorum, because he’s getting better and better. He’s someone who is finally saying talking about freedom and how great America can be. He seems to be the only one who is not afraid of the media, because he’s not apologizing for anything. He’s actually taking the page from the Democrats; he dismisses the charge then goes on offense. I also really liked Michele Bachmann because she did the same, but just never caught on.
I think the media succeeded in portraying Bachmann as crazy, and it’s too bad because I think she could be another Maragaret Thatcher. Unfortunately the MSM’s influence is still strong enough that it convinces a lot of people who don’t pay attention. My hope with Santorum is the know-nothings will be far outnumbered by those who are outraged that the left is speaking badly about Christianity and religion.
What I love about Santorum is he doesn’t posture like a politician. He’s genuine. He doesn’t have any baggage he has to deal with like the others. That’s what happens when you live what you preach. The left’s ONLY hope right now is to openly make up stories about Rick and hope enough dumb people believe them.
I just wish they were all on the same day. The media playing on every state week to week sways a lot of people. If they were all on the same day, voters would have to make a judgment and go with it without the media conjecturing who should win what state and why. Momentum should not have anything to do with a candidate’s viability. The current system is too much like American Idol.
I sort of agree and sort of don’t. I agree in that great people can get chased out of a race because of lies created against them, as with Herman Cain and Sarah Palin. But it is also possible a strong person shines through in a protracted race after a slow start, as is happening with Rick Santorum. But the race could still go back to Romney. One would hope the best person would prevail after a long battle. But it doesn’t always happen.
The left can’t really paint Santorum as a religious nut like they did Bachmann. The reason is Catholicism is viewed as more mainstream. A lot of erstwhile Democrats are Catholic. But in reality, Catholics and evangelical protestants have far more in common than they have differences. We are both allies against godless secularism.
#11 At least Santorum has admitted that he wants to do away with pre-natal testing (to heck with those kids whose lives it saves) and he admits that his presidency would be totally based on religion, something our Constitution outlaws. And he has already declared that birth control is bad for the nation. It’s obvious that he wants to ban it.
BTW, troll suzie, I think Contra is right. Your late evening posts have been filled with more and more mistakes, er, “typos.”
As a practicing Catholic (ie weekly mass and an envelope in the basket), the bishops certainly don’t speak for me. Now Suzie may dispute my self-declared designation as a Catholic if she means those who march in lock-step with the upper echelons of the Church.
And as an aside, I was no fan of former President GWBush but feel that civility requires he be addressed as President and not as “shrub”, – although it always makes me laugh. The same courtesy should be extended to our current president. The terms that some on this blog use to refer to President Obama say more about those posters than our elected President.
#22 Just as suzie proclaims Santorum her dream candidate, Richard Beason, on another thread, reminds us of some of the things Santorum stands for. Perfect timing.
From Richard:
“Rick Santorum is the perfect GOP candidate. He is exactly who he says he is. That is also his problem. He is a ultra right-wing blue collar religious zealot. The need to get ahead has caused him a few problems with deal making, but overall he is just a guy from the far, far right that believes we should incorporate Christian laws into our laws, go to Mass, have lots of children, keep the little lady in the kitchen, attack Iran, keep the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, do away with taxes on the most prosperous, only have sex to procreate, make Gays and Lesbians be straight or a the least keep them in the closet, do away with public schools, do away with social security and medicare, keep families from knowing if they are about to have disabled or deformed children, do away with medicaid and food stamps and WIC, give more money to big oil to encourage them to drill more and trickle down gasoline to us, flatten tax so the wealthy pay less and the middle class pays more,and do away with the mortgage interest deduction, tax credits for education, tax credits for child care … .”
#24 suzie, I can without hesitation pain anybody who believes some of the stuff Santorum believes a religious nut. No problem whatsoever.
The nice thing about Rick Santorum is that nobody on the Progressive side has to spend any money painting him as a religious nut. He just goes out and does that all by himself every day with some new outrageous statement
perfectly designed for the America of the 1600′s. Just let him keep talking and he self destructs every other time he opens his mouth.He is our dream candidate. And can’t you just see a ticket with him at the top and with Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin for VP.? Talk abouta loser!
pre-natal testing
Ah yes, another leftwing buzzword. pre-natal testing = amniocentesis, used for detecting birth defects that, when found, lead 99% of the time to abortion.
Notice leftwingers can NEVER be honest with their intentions. That’s why they have to doctor the language.
As a practicing Catholic (ie weekly mass and an envelope in the basket), the bishops certainly don’t speak for me. Now Suzie may dispute my self-declared designation as a Catholic if she means those who march in lock-step with the upper echelons of the Church
Sorry Blacksburg (a red flag if there ever was one) Suz.
If you do not go along with the Catholic Church’s teaching on abortion, you are NOT a practicing Catholic. That’s just common sense.
How long you Catholics have to practice Catholicism before you get it right? Are there like, pop quizzes along the way, with a Final Exam at the end?
“Suzie says:
pre-natal testing
Ah yes, another leftwing buzzword. pre-natal testing = amniocentesis, used for detecting birth defects that, when found, lead 99% of the time to abortion.”
I’d like to see a reliable, impartial source on that statistic.
I would think that if parents knew early in the pregnancy that there were any problems or ‘defects’, that knowledge would allow them to prepare for any special needs the child is going to face. It would allow them time to begin educating themselves on said needs and challenges. It would give them time to establish a support system for their family. Prenatal testing may reveal a need or an option for in utero surgery.
When doctors became able to determine the sex of the baby before birth, people said that would lead to an increase in abortions by parents who were trying for a specific gender of child. Has that really happened? I doubt it. Knowledge is power and prenatal testing is a tool of empowerment.
I’m sure some people do choose to terminate the pregnancy, but I bet it’s nowhere near 99%.
Seriously Suzie, you are the gift that keeps on giving, or the mole who keeps on digging, but either way, you are wrong…again.
“pre-natal testing
Ah yes, another leftwing buzzword. pre-natal testing = amniocentesis, used for detecting birth defects that, when found, lead 99% of the time to abortion.
Notice leftwingers can NEVER be honest with their intentions. That’s why they have to doctor the language.”
Coming from the people who invented the term “partial birth abortion” just to gain political points, you are a riot.
Apparently you and Rick Santorum are the last two adults on the planet not to know that pre-natal testing confirms gestation in the case of C-sections, and finds defects that either require in-utero surgery to correct for a viable life or the preparedness of immediate action upon birth. Babies with “defects” are born every day, many to prominent people, so that 99% lie is pretty obvious too.
What is wrong with you?
I know this is going to look like a left-wing trick, but for those whose minds are not closed:
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/prenataltesting/
“Amniocentesis detects chromosome abnormalities, neural tube defects and genetic disorders. Down syndrome or Trisomy 21 is the most common chromosome abnormality. Genetic disorders include disorders like cystic fibrosis. The most common neural tube defect is spina bifida.
Amniocentesis is occasionally used late in pregnancy to assess whether the baby’s lungs are mature enough for the baby to breathe on his own.
Amniocentesis also provides access to DNA for paternity testing prior to delivery. DNA is collected from the potential father and is compared to DNA obtained from the baby during amniocentesis. The results are accurate (99%) for determining paternity.”
http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/258/43/
Showing your ignorance is always appreciated however misleading it is for others.
“32.How long you Catholics have to practice Catholicism before you get it right? Are there like, pop quizzes along the way, with a Final Exam at the end?”
HAHAHA… You have to give Contrasuzie credit for being funny. Almost as funny as what she’s talking about.
I would think that if parents knew early in the pregnancy that there were any problems or ‘defects’, that knowledge would allow them to prepare for any special needs the child is going to face. It would allow them time to begin educating themselves on said needs and challenges. It would give them time to establish a support system for their family. Prenatal testing may reveal a need or an option for in utero surgery
That’s exactly the message the folks who re-label amniocentesis as “pre-natal testing” are pushing. Sounds like yo’ve bought it. It’s not reality.
“That’s exactly the message the folks who re-label amniocentesis as “pre-natal testing” are pushing. Sounds like yo’ve bought it. It’s not reality.”
I noticed you ignored the part about citing a reliable, non-partisan source for your 99% ‘statistic’.
Funny thing is, the two sets of parents who I know personally who have children with special needs are grateful for the early detection that amniocentesis provided. They were the ones who gave me the reasons in favor of it in my other post. They assured me they are not the only parents of special needs kids who are thankful for the advantages of early detection.