Father Pflegler

[Jon]

You understand that it doesn't matter, no matter how much you want to swiftboat him. Pretty messed up.

And you no longer have any crediblity on the subject, anyway.

It's fine, most people on these forums haven't had any credibility in a very long time.

 

[Shogun]

It's fine, most people on these forums haven't had any credibility in a very long time.

oh hey, at least we have YOU to dance around like a brilliant golden calf!

 

[Zoomie1980]

Pfleger's disgusting. Just another one of Obama's "spiritual leaders" who he has to now cast aside. That makes 3 so far. It seems all the most influential people in Obama's past are the ones he's having to reject now. Funny how Americans still trust the piece of shit after all this.

What's going to really hurt Obama in the general election is not so much his policies (they will be a problem but no more than any other left-wing candidate), not his ability to communicate or his public presence. But the guy's past associations are going to continue to beat him down hard. The people he chose to side with to help get him started in politics are going to the be the people that may end his political career.....

You can't simply lie with dogs to get ahead then expect people to not notice you have that dog-bed smell following you around...

 

[Jon]

What's going to really hurt Obama in the general election is not so much his policies (they will be a problem but no more than any other left-wing candidate), not his ability to communicate or his public presence. But the guy's past associations are going to continue to beat him down hard. The people he chose to side with to help get him started in politics are going to the be the people that may end his political career.....

You can't simply lie with dogs to get ahead then expect people to not notice you have that dog-bed smell following you around...

I hope you're right, and I hope to God the McCain campaign uses these associations against Obama. I think, if they see the need to, they will. It depends on how close the polls get and how desperate McCain comes for a winning blow. During all the debates Clinton had, she had so many chances to land that blow on Obama, and she never took it. It would have won her this primary. Hopefully McCain will use it.

The thing is, the media's giving it enough attention that people shouldn't need McCain to point it out. But people just don't seem to be listening anymore. The media's flooded with so much bullshit on a daily basis, the public has grown immune to it.

The sad thing is...if Hillary or McCain use this against Obama, it will be considered "dirty politics." In my opinion, there's nothing dirty about telling the truth. If Hillary outright turned her back on Obama at this point and said she refused to campaign for him because she doesn't agree with his views, I think she'd earn a lot more respect than people are making her believe she would. I'm tired of everyone having to tiptoe around Obama just because he's black. It's such bullshit.

 

[Dr Grump]

You can't simply lie with dogs to get ahead then expect people to not notice you have that dog-bed smell following you around...

Didn't seem to affect Bush one iota..TWICE!

 

[Jon]

Hey cool, an Obamanite compared Obama to Bush to save me the trouble.

 

[SingingMongoose]

(Found this here with a google search)

Back in 1948, during his first race for the U.S. Senate, Lyndon Johnson was running about ten points behind, with only nine days to go. He was sunk in despair. He was desperate. And it was just before noon on a Monday, they say, when he called his equally depressed campaign manager and instructed him to call a press conference for just before lunch on a slow news day and accuse his high-riding opponent, a pig farmer, of having routine carnal knowledge of his barnyard sows, despite the pleas of his wife and children.

His campaign manager was shocked. “We can’t say that, Lyndon,” he supposedly said. “You know it’s not true.”

“Of course it’s not true!” Johnson barked at him. “But let’s make the bastard deny it!”

The anecdote itself may or may not have happened, but it's certainly truthful in spirit, isn't it?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You understand that it doesn't matter, no matter how much you want to swiftboat him. Pretty messed up.

And you no longer have any crediblity on the subject, anyway.

The one with no credibility is you, you have already said any person that has a D behind their name is who you will vote for NO MATTER WHAT.

Obama could shoot someone and you would still vote for him. He could announce he is a racist through and through and YOU would vote for him.

YOU refuse to acknowledge the things HE has done. And yet you want us to take YOU seriously.
Give me a break.

 

[jillian]

The one with no credibility is you, you have already said any person that has a D behind their name is who you will vote for NO MATTER WHAT.

That isn't what I said. And you know it. What I said was I wouldn't vote for McCain.

Obama could shoot someone and you would still vote for him. He could announce he is a racist through and through and YOU would vote for him.

Obama hasn't shot anyone, though. And barring unforeseen circumstances, I will vote against McCain or any other candidate who trades my rights to the religious right.

YOU refuse to acknowledge the things HE has done. And yet you want us to take YOU seriously.

Give me a break.

I don't care what kool aid drinkers like you take seriously.And Obama hasn't done anything to make me think his policies would be impaired by nebulous associations. Especially when touted by loonies who still think Iraq had "ties" to OBL.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That isn't what I said. And you know it. What I said was I wouldn't vote for McCain.



Obama hasn't shot anyone, though. And barring unforeseen circumstances, I will vote against McCain or any other candidate who trades my rights to the religious right.



I don't care what kool aid drinkers like you take seriously.And Obama hasn't done anything to make me think his policies would be impaired by nebulous associations. Especially when touted by loonies who still think Iraq had "ties" to OBL.

Nice lie, none of us think Saddam Hussein had ties to OBL. We do think there is evidence he WANTED ties. We also KNOW there is evidence he had his people meet with OBL and his people on more than one occasion, I guess they were sipping Tea on the Veranda?

 

[jillian]

Nice lie, none of us think Saddam Hussein had ties to OBL. We do think there is evidence he WANTED ties. We also KNOW there is evidence he had his people meet with OBL and his people on more than one occasion, I guess they were sipping Tea on the Veranda?

I do so love the distortions of the right. The LAST thing Saddam Hussein wanted in his country was fundies.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Obama hasn't shot anyone, though. And barring unforeseen circumstances, I will vote against McCain or any other candidate who trades my rights to the religious right.

Of course you will....Obama may not have "shot" anyone (with a gun) but still he consistently votes to "shoot" babies (with deadly chemicals) all the way to 9 months (and most likely beyond)....even though other Democrats don't vote for that.

Killing babies is obviously what you and Obama consider to be your "religious right"....

....disrepect for human life is certainly one of the "religious" tenets of the Far Left.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Of course you will....Obama may not have "shot" anyone (with a gun) but still he consistently votes to "shoot" babies (with deadly chemicals) all the way to 9 months (and most likely beyond)....even though other Democrats don't vote for that.

Killing babies is obviously what you and Obama consider to be your "religious right"....

....disrepect for human life is certainly one of the "religious" tenets of the Far Left.

If an objective observer is to take your words very seriously, then ScreamingEagle must believe a person who takes the life of a living human being is murder.

And since it is, by your definition, pre-meditated murder then you must believe females and doctors who perform such operations are conspirators in murder.

And if that is the case, the objective observer must conclude ScreamingEagle believes in, and supports lengthy incarcerations or the death penalty for the guilty parties.

Is this accurate? Because if you do not believe violators of what you feel is a direct act of murder deserve the same punishment as 'common' murderers' then you are not being serious when you say you believe a fetus is a living human being.

Again, following your logic, the punishment should even be more severe since purposefully killing such a young innocent child is generally more repugnant than adult-on-adult murder.

Personally, I think anyone who believes in jailing or administering the death penalty for women who have abortions is extreme, sexist and completely devoid of reality.

But again, implying a fetus is a living human being is not a serious claim.

And you cannot possibly mean what you say.

And what is even more alarming is a deep fanatical belief in jailing and treating Americans who have abortions on the same level as a violent career criminal.

That is a crazy position, unsupported by a large swath of the population.

 

[Ravi]

Shep, remind me again why you support McCain.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I do so love the distortions of the right. The LAST thing Saddam Hussein wanted in his country was fundies.

And yet the absolute proof is available that he sought out OBL and his organization and tried to make deals with them, go figure.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Shep, remind me again why you support McCain.

Because he is the most pragmatic of the candidates.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

If an objective observer is to take your words very seriously, then ScreamingEagle must believe a person who takes the life of a living human being is murder.

And since it is, by your definition, pre-meditated murder then you must believe females and doctors who perform such operations are conspirators in murder.

And if that is the case, the objective observer must conclude ScreamingEagle believes in, and supports lengthy incarcerations or the death penalty for the guilty parties.

Is this accurate? Because if you do not believe violators of what you feel is a direct act of murder deserve the same punishment as 'common' murderers' then you are not being serious when you say you believe a fetus is a living human being.

Again, following your logic, the punishment should even be more severe since purposefully killing such a young innocent child is generally more repugnant than adult-on-adult murder.

Personally, I think anyone who believes in jailing or administering the death penalty for women who have abortions is extreme, sexist and completely devoid of reality.

But again, implying a fetus is a living human being is not a serious claim.

And you cannot possibly mean what you say.

And what is even more alarming is a deep fanatical belief in jailing and treating Americans who have abortions on the same level as a violent career criminal.

That is a crazy position, unsupported by a large swath of the population.

Your slick-talking and fast-walking don't change the horrific facts about abortion.

Abortion Has Killed Millions More Than War

36,000,000 to 52,000,000 or an average of 46,000,000; these are very big numbers. They happen to represent the number of babies that are killed worldwide each year by abortion. These numbers were not fabricated for propaganda purposes; they were compiled by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the statistical wing of the largest and deadliest abortion institution in America, Planned Parenthood.

Unlike the false, over inflated, numbers that were once fed the nation in order to cajole America into legalizing abortion, these numbers are now recognized by both sides as legitimate. The horrific toll since then, however, has been all too real. And the millions upon millions of innocent babies that have been butchered in the womb will only continue to mount, until this nation, and the world, repents of this abomination.

As we come to another grim anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must never forget how this was accomplished. We now know it was done by using fraudulent facts, and a perjured rape testimony. It was furthered by the lie, given to expectant mothers, that what is in their womb is not a baby. This coupled with the lie that abortion has no negative consequences for women, these lies have been told millions of times over.

For those who continuously push the travesty of abortion aside, a closer look at the statistics can help put the issue into perspective. Since there are so many who are concerned about the tragedy of war, but have no such concern for the taking of innocent lives of babies, a comparison of the deaths between the two seems appropriate.

Michael White, writing for the Twentieth Century Atlas, has compiled an intriguing list of body counts, attributable to the worst known acts of war, and other human atrocities, dating back to the fall of Rome. I will venture to briefly list them here by count and century:


55 million, Second World War (20C); 40 million, under Mao Zedong (20C); 40 million, Mongol Conquests(13C); 36 million, An Lushan Revolt(8C); 25 million, Fall of the Ming Dynasty(17C); 20 million, Taiping Rebellion(19C); 20 million, toll of American Indians, (15C-19C), 20 million, under Joseph Stalin(20C); 19 million, Mideast Slave Trade(7C-19C); 18 million, Atlantic Slave Trade(15C-); 17 million, Islamic Conquest of India(14C-15C); 17 million, British India(19C); 15 million, First World War(20C); 9 million, Russian Civil War(20C); 9 million, Hindu Thuggee cult killings(13C-19C); 8 million, Fall of Rome(3C-5C); 8 million, Congo Free State(19C – 20C); 7 million, Thirty Years War(17C); 5 million, Russia's Time of Troubles(16C-17C), 4 million, Napoleonic Wars(19C); 3 million, Chinese Civil War(20C); 3 million, French Wars of Religion(16C).


Taken all together, we have 401 million deaths over nearly 2000 years of war and barbarism. Just for the sake of argument, let’s add another 10%, or 40 million, to cover margins of error, and other wars. This would bring our total to 441 million deaths over the last 20 centuries.

Now, what about abortion? At the low end of the Guttmacher scale, even if we ignore all abortions done prior to 1980 when accurate numbers are a little more difficult to ascertain, abortion accounts for more than twice the number of deaths by war! In just the last 25 years, the ghastly toll for abortion has totaled over 900 million dead babies. Taking the more probable mean average, the toll rises to well over 1 billion babies; or nearly three times the amount of deaths due to war.

How many millions more need die before we understand that abortion is wrong?

Abortion - Abortion Has Killed Millions More Than War

 

[Anguille]

And yet the absolute proof is available that he sought out OBL and his organization and tried to make deals with them, go figure.

There are plenty of rumors that OBL met with the CIA as well.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Your slick-talking and fast-walking don't change the horrific facts about abortion.

Abortion Has Killed Millions More Than War

36,000,000 to 52,000,000 or an average of 46,000,000; these are very big numbers. They happen to represent the number of babies that are killed worldwide each year by abortion. These numbers were not fabricated for propaganda purposes; they were compiled by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the statistical wing of the largest and deadliest abortion institution in America, Planned Parenthood.

Unlike the false, over inflated, numbers that were once fed the nation in order to cajole America into legalizing abortion, these numbers are now recognized by both sides as legitimate. The horrific toll since then, however, has been all too real. And the millions upon millions of innocent babies that have been butchered in the womb will only continue to mount, until this nation, and the world, repents of this abomination.

As we come to another grim anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must never forget how this was accomplished. We now know it was done by using fraudulent facts, and a perjured rape testimony. It was furthered by the lie, given to expectant mothers, that what is in their womb is not a baby. This coupled with the lie that abortion has no negative consequences for women, these lies have been told millions of times over.

For those who continuously push the travesty of abortion aside, a closer look at the statistics can help put the issue into perspective. Since there are so many who are concerned about the tragedy of war, but have no such concern for the taking of innocent lives of babies, a comparison of the deaths between the two seems appropriate.

Michael White, writing for the Twentieth Century Atlas, has compiled an intriguing list of body counts, attributable to the worst known acts of war, and other human atrocities, dating back to the fall of Rome. I will venture to briefly list them here by count and century:


55 million, Second World War (20C); 40 million, under Mao Zedong (20C); 40 million, Mongol Conquests(13C); 36 million, An Lushan Revolt(8C); 25 million, Fall of the Ming Dynasty(17C); 20 million, Taiping Rebellion(19C); 20 million, toll of American Indians, (15C-19C), 20 million, under Joseph Stalin(20C); 19 million, Mideast Slave Trade(7C-19C); 18 million, Atlantic Slave Trade(15C-); 17 million, Islamic Conquest of India(14C-15C); 17 million, British India(19C); 15 million, First World War(20C); 9 million, Russian Civil War(20C); 9 million, Hindu Thuggee cult killings(13C-19C); 8 million, Fall of Rome(3C-5C); 8 million, Congo Free State(19C – 20C); 7 million, Thirty Years War(17C); 5 million, Russia's Time of Troubles(16C-17C), 4 million, Napoleonic Wars(19C); 3 million, Chinese Civil War(20C); 3 million, French Wars of Religion(16C).


Taken all together, we have 401 million deaths over nearly 2000 years of war and barbarism. Just for the sake of argument, let’s add another 10%, or 40 million, to cover margins of error, and other wars. This would bring our total to 441 million deaths over the last 20 centuries.

Now, what about abortion? At the low end of the Guttmacher scale, even if we ignore all abortions done prior to 1980 when accurate numbers are a little more difficult to ascertain, abortion accounts for more than twice the number of deaths by war! In just the last 25 years, the ghastly toll for abortion has totaled over 900 million dead babies. Taking the more probable mean average, the toll rises to well over 1 billion babies; or nearly three times the amount of deaths due to war.

How many millions more need die before we understand that abortion is wrong?

Abortion - Abortion Has Killed Millions More Than War

I asked a very simple question intended to gauge the seriousness and passion of your position which states "abortion is murder."

Do you think females, families who support their decision to get an abortion, doctors and nurses etc should serve lengthy jail sentences as conspirators for the crime of infanticide?

Yes or no?

 

[Anguille]

I do so love the distortions of the right. The LAST thing Saddam Hussein wanted in his country was fundies.

The right doesn't understand the complexity of other cultures because they simply can't see beyond their own noses.