Pro-Life is Anti-Woman- Humorous But True

[rOckNrOllsCar11]

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MrXvDXVhqfU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MrXvDXVhqfU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[Psychoblues]

Many Republicans would prefer that women, people other than white ones, non-property owners even if they are white and certainly no one with a criminal history no matter how insignificant should be allowed to vote at all. Is that just as humorous for you?

 

[Gunny]

Many Republicans would prefer that women, people other than white ones, non-property owners even if they are white and certainly no one with a criminal history no matter how insignificant should be allowed to vote at all. Is that just as humorous for you?

Do you type all that crap you know is a load of crap with a straight face?

 

[rOckNrOllsCar11]

Do you type all that crap you know is a load of crap with a straight face?

Aside from that being very poorly written, although I did understand what you were trying to say GunnyL. PBS could probably make a case for such a statement. In debatable terms of course. But lets be honest GunnyL. People who appreciate the label "Republican" in terms of qualifying themselves to you, me and the world, usually do have an attitude that is shall we say; "holier than thou".

 

[AllieBaba]

Aside from that being very poorly written, although I did understand what you were trying to say GunnyL. PBS could probably make a case for such a statement. In debatable terms of course. But lets be honest GunnyL. People who appreciate the label "Republican" in terms of qualifying themselves to you, me and the world, usually do have an attitude that is shall we say; "holier than thou".

How odd then that Republicans were the driving force behind abolition.

And getting the vote for women.

Perhaps a history lesson is in order?

 

[jillian]

How odd then that Republicans were the driving force behind abolition.

And getting the vote for women.

Perhaps a history lesson is in order?

Perhaps more in order is an understanding that the current configuration of the Republican Party is not the ideological heir of the original republican party. It carries the same name, but in no way reflects its past values, which were good ones, incorporated into Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive Bull Moose/Republican Party.

Heck, Republicans wouldn't even nominate Nixon for president today. And they'd certainly reject Goldwater's version of conservatism.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

he is a baffoon, again its the if you dont agree with me, you an idiot theology.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MrXvDXVhqfU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MrXvDXVhqfU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[AllieBaba]

Perhaps more in order is an understanding that the current configuration of the Republican Party is not the ideological heir of the original republican party. It carries the same name, but in no way reflects its past values, which were good ones, incorporated into Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive Bull Moose/Republican Party.

Heck, Republicans wouldn't even nominate Nixon for president today. And they'd certainly reject Goldwater's version of conservatism.

This is where libs get all confused.

Republicans do still hold the same values. The political climate has changed, and with it the politicians...but we still have the same values driving us. Respect for man and his rights, a belief in the sacredness of life (in the past the fight we made was for blacks, then women. Now it's for the unborn) and a basic belief that men and women are capable of taking care of themselves, and should be left to it.

 

[Psychoblues]

OK, let's get all this straight.

Do you type all that crap you know is a load of crap with a straight face?

1. Republicans agreed to give the slaves, Irish and African, 3/5ths of a vote? True or False?

2. Republicans feverishly fought against the right of women to vote? True or False?

3. Republicans again fought feverishly against the Civil Rights Act of 1964? True or False?

4. The Repupublicans have never accepted or even understood the Voting Rights Act of 1965. True or False?

Yeah, I post with a straight face, gunny. I accept your ignorance as such as well. Duh?!?!!?!??!?!?!!??!?!?!?!?

 

[jillian]

1. I don't think there was a Republican party when the constitution was passed. I think it was Federalists and Whigs. But could be wrong.

2. Women's sufferage. Not really.

3. Civil Rights' Act. No. Technically, it was the southern democrats who fought against it. Other than that, the Civil Rights Act was pretty much bi-partisan.

4.I think the voting rights act was also bi-partisan.

That said, none of those things would be supported by today's republican party.

 

[Gunny]

OK, let's get all this straight.




1. Republicans agreed to give the slaves, Irish and African, 3/5ths of a vote? True or False?

2. Republicans feverishly fought against the right of women to vote? True or False?

3. Republicans again fought feverishly against the Civil Rights Act of 1964? True or False?

4. The Repupublicans have never accepted or even understood the Voting Rights Act of 1965. True or False?

Yeah, I post with a straight face, gunny. I accept your ignorance as such as well. Duh?!?!!?!??!?!?!!??!?!?!?!?

You couldn't possibly have a straight face when posting such dishonest crap. I would assume you would be reaching the point of disgust with yourself before you finished the first sentence.

If you want to go back that far to make your argument, Republicans FREED the slaves while Dems wanted to continue to keep them slaves.

Republicans nowadays, and even Democrats, have switched stances on those issues so more times than you have careers. To try and hold Republican now accountable for what was even done by Republicans in the 50s is just BS, plain and simple.

 

[razorskater135]

George Carlin can always put a spin on these controversial issues. But too bad his arguments wouldn't really work in a real debate.

 

[tigerbob]

he is a baffoon, again its the if you dont agree with me, you an idiot theology.

Doesn't that apply to many of the posts on this board?

 

[liberalogic]

3. Civil Rights' Act. No. Technically, it was the southern democrats who fought against it. Other than that, the Civil Rights Act was pretty much bi-partisan.

True, but who did all of these southern democrats become? Many became the republicans that we know and love today during the realignment period.

 

[liberalogic]

This is where libs get all confused.

Republicans do still hold the same values. The political climate has changed, and with it the politicians...but we still have the same values driving us. Respect for man and his rights, a belief in the sacredness of life (in the past the fight we made was for blacks, then women. Now it's for the unborn) and a basic belief that men and women are capable of taking care of themselves, and should be left to it.

When have republicans ever been adamantly behind women and blacks? I think the overriding similarity has been respect for people's rights and their ability to take care of themselves, which has been consistent throughout the last half century and was probably best articulated in the Goldwater campaign.

 

[William Joyce]

We're no better than chickens? I think George's politics are running a little ahead of his humor here.

There's nothing funny about abortion.