0
   

A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 10:17 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Do you have THIS BOOK on your night stand, c.i.?



No need: I see all I want to see about "republicanism" on these boards, and I have about six books I'm into that has more value on one page than the whole book you recommended.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 10:18 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Do you have THIS BOOK on your night stand, c.i.?



No need: I see all I want to see about "republicanism" on these boards, and I have about six books I'm into that has more value on one page than the whole book you recommended - and that includes the novels.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 10:21 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Do you have THIS BOOK on your night stand, c.i.?



No need: I see all I want to see about "republicanism" on these boards, and I have about six books I'm into that has more value on one page than the whole book you recommended - and that includes the novels.


I wasn't recommending the book, c.i. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 10:29 pm
Advocate wrote:
Republicans are adamant about their opposition to choice. I recently came upon the following.


"No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother."
Margaret Sanger

Is this the same Margaret Sanger that was also a devout racist, and that inspired Adolf Hitler to eliminate socially undesirable people? By the way, any woman can choose to not be a mother by not engaging in activity that causes motherhood. And what if a woman chooses to not be a mother after the baby is born, what then?

Margaret Sanger is hardly anyone that I would consider worth quoting, but then again, to each his own.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 08:08 am
McCain may not be a U.S. citizen!

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/john_mccains_birthright_fit_fo.html#more

Seems like the chance is slight -- that he most likely is, in fact, a citizen and eligible to run for office -- but thought it was interesting.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 11:09 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Advocate wrote:
Unborn children is oxymoronic.


Based on that response, it sounds as if you are fully supportive of late term or third-trimester partial-birth abortions, even after the baby is "viable"? Up until the point the baby has fully breached the birth canal, you are in favor of allowing the mother to kill it?

Something's moronic, but it's not that phrase.


God, you love those straw men. BTW, you don't have to be so nasty.

Regarding late-term abortions, should they be allowed were the fetus horribly deformed, indicating that the resultant child would live in terrible pain and die young? My understanding that,overwhelmingly, this is the the circumstance in most cases of late-term.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 11:17 am
sozobe wrote:
McCain may not be a U.S. citizen!

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/john_mccains_birthright_fit_fo.html#more

Seems like the chance is slight -- that he most likely is, in fact, a citizen and eligible to run for office -- but thought it was interesting.


Your link doesnt seem to be working.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 11:29 am
mysteryman wrote:

Your link doesnt seem to be working.


Works for me.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 11:35 am
You're right, MM, it needs a bit of tidying up to work.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/john_mccains_birthright_fit_fo.html





(but you could have found it yourself if you were interested in reading it)
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 11:56 am
ehBeth wrote:
You're right, MM, it needs a bit of tidying up to work.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/john_mccains_birthright_fit_fo.html





(but you could have found it yourself if you were interested in reading it)


I DID find it, after I posted that Icouldnt get your link to work.
The whole article was pure BS, as far as I am concerned.
If there are srious concerns about McCains citezenship, couldnt there also be concern about Obama's citizenship?
After all, it makes just as much "sense" to question Obama's citizenship, doesnt it?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 12:09 pm
mysteryman wrote:
I DID find it, after I posted that Icouldnt get your link to work.

<snip>


After all, it makes just as much "sense" to question Obama's citizenship, doesnt it?



Not my link.

I don't know about Obama's citizenship. Where was he born?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 12:11 pm
Oh, look.

Obama, born in Hawaii. Nothing to question re citizenship.

Nice effort, MM, but pointless.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 12:37 pm
ehBeth wrote:
Oh, look.

Obama, born in Hawaii. Nothing to question re citizenship.

Nice effort, MM, but pointless.


You missed my point, but its hard to do sarcasm on a board such as this.
I wasnt saying that Obama's citizenship should be questioned, I was saying, or attempting to say, that both of them are legally allowed to run, or neither of them would be running.
To question one, you might as well question the other.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 01:17 pm
Well since McCain's father and mother were both US Citizens--his father (and paternal grandfather) were both Navy Admirals--there is no question of McCain's citizenship.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 01:22 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
blatham wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
I guess he gained more votes than he lost with that. I suspect most people don't want their taxes going up.

Any particular reason you want yours increased?


Dishonest response.


Bite me.



Hate taxes on the rich! Just hate 'em to hell. Given this administration, God knows what the taxes rich people don't pay will not be going towards anyway...
Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/04/national-guard-education/
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 01:29 pm
Yeah, Bush's "support our troops" has a whole new meaning. Unfortunately, the neocons have no clue what they are talking about.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 02:30 pm
blatham wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
blatham wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
I guess he gained more votes than he lost with that. I suspect most people don't want their taxes going up.

Any particular reason you want yours increased?


Dishonest response.


Bite me.



Hate taxes on the rich! Just hate 'em to hell. Given this administration, God knows what the taxes rich people don't pay will not be going towards anyway...
Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/04/national-guard-education/


Wanna bet that gets changed so they are eligible for education bennies?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 02:41 pm
It might.

Which goes absolutely no distance at all to excusing the army's cutoff at one day prior to the deadline in an attempt to save some dollars at soldiers' expense.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 02:52 pm
blatham wrote:
It might.

Which goes absolutely no distance at all to excusing the army's cutoff at one day prior to the deadline in an attempt to save some dollars at soldiers' expense.


BTW, did you notice the date it was posted?

Quote:
Posted by Amanda October 4, 2007 7:08 pm


Its an old story that has already been reported on and corrected by the army.
Also, the GI Bill applies here, and it is available to EVERY service member, including the NG, that served.
Here is how it applies...

Quote:
Members of the Minnesota National Guard that have been Mobilized may apply for the following benefits:

Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) Reserve Education Assistance Program (REAP) 1607

Eligibility:

Mobilized 90 days or more ordered to active service in response to a war or national emergency declared by the President or the Congress
Disabled members who are injured or have an illness or disease incurred or aggravated in the line of duty and are released from active duty before completing 90 consecutive days are also eligible.
Benefit: (effective 1 Oct 05)

40% of the Active Duty MGIB - for 90 consecutive days but less than one continuous year;
60% of the Active Duty MGIB - for one continuous year but less than two continuous years; or
80% of the Active Duty MGIB - for two continuous years or more.


So you are actually reporting on a very old story.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 02:54 pm
I doubt it; Bush and company does everything to cut the cost at the expense of the soldier. You fight the war with what you have; cut veteran's benefits and services and add co-pay; don't treat the soldiers coming home with mental problems; and make big issues of little so-called "accomplishments" in Iraq as if they are successes. They'll continue to fund the defence contractors including Halliburton without bids and no accounability, but whoa be the politician who criticizes any of it.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

My Fellow Prisoners... - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Afred E. Smith Dinner - Discussion by cjhsa
mccain begs off - Discussion by dyslexia
If Biden And Obama Aren't Qualified - Discussion by Bi-Polar Bear
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain lies - Discussion by nimh
The Case Against John McCain - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/12/2025 at 01:24:45