Gingrich suggests he will ‘ignore’ Roe v. Wade

Very interesting that you equate the killing of unborn babies with "birth control."

Very interesting that YOU equate birth control with the "killing of unborn babies".

No, using abortion as a means of birth control is "killing unborn babies."

It appears that you want to use euphemisms like "choice" in order to dissemble and hide what it REALLY means.

Roe v Wade should just be overturned in the courts. Then there will be nothing more to discuss.

I saw your profile. Which language do you translate?

I used to belong to the American Translators' Association. Do you know of it?

It's really too bad you have no understanding of constitutional powers.

And you have no idea what you are talking about but it does amuse me on a rainy Saturday morning. Actually, as you seem to be a liberal statist I am surprised you can spell Constitution.

Amuses? Nothing amuses right wingers. They have no sense of humor. They just allow things to get under their skin and then strike with insults like a coiled snake.

NO joey, you actually amuse me quite a bit and your reply about insults is a huge example. You may want to go back and read the things your loving, tolerant peers have said to and about me. If I didn't have a sense of humor it would have gotten to me long ago but as praise from those means nothing neither do their insults. I have been called virtually everything negative in the book as well as been threatened with violence. It provides me with quite a bit of amusement. Sport, insult is a glass house you don't want to enter.

Well, Paratusy, from what I've seen you deserve and ask for their insults. As for those who threatened you, that's hard to believe. The ineffective aren't worthy of threats, they're harmless.

Yes, it is very true that the Left is often vicious. They have actually wished cancer on me, that my parents rot in hell, and that I get some affliction and suffer the rest of my life. I had mentioned I was flying somewhere, and one Leftist wrote that he hoped it would crash. I could go on and on with these insults.

As with you, the personal ones do not bother me at all. What DOES bother me, however, is when they attack our Founding and revise history. It bothers me when they reflexively spout anti-capitalist talking points, and not because they are completely wrong, but that there is a possibility that they may influence others. And also because they can vote.

Interesting rationale you have joey. I post my opinions and you say I deserve the insults I receive. So, it's ok to to be derogatory and demeaning toward someone for having a differing view. Ahh the tolerant left wing but only tolerant of the ideas they like. Everyone else is stupid, wrong or deserving of violence for not being like you. No wonder liberalism, or statism, is so hateful and destructive. Perhaps there is a 12 step program for you guys joey. I think you can change and be tolerant of others or, at least, be able to engage differing views without wigging out. In the meantime I really enjoy our conversations. I DO find them entertaining.

Voted up, you are correct. It worries me if these wack jobs ever get total control of the country. The left are statists who believe ion the primacy of the state over the individual. In their world we are there to serve the state and perish the thought that there would be a dissenting view. They trade on hatred, envy and lies. The disaffected socialists eat it with a spoon.

"Tolerance" for the Left only means one thing: Acquiescing to THEIR agenda, or celebrating THEIR values.

This is especially noticeable in religion. Take the Catholic Church. The Left incessently and ruthlessly attacks the Church in any way it can, and why?

Because the Church does not yield to its intolerance and vicious, unrelenting demands and execrations. The Church will only let men become priests, and the radical elements of the Left cannot "tolerate" different ways of believing or action. The Church says gay sex and pre-marital sex are sins, and again, it does not bend to the vagaries and fashions of the times as the Left-wingers would dictate, so they attack - with a vengance.

Do you know David Horowitz? His parents were Communists, and he was a member of the radical far Left in America, but he saw the light and became a normal American, wanting to promote our Founding Principles. In an interview with a Conservative, he once said that if the LEFT-WINGERS had their way, they would imprison or even execute people like them.

And they would. I see the RAGE on threads like these. I have been wished dead many times for not acquiescing to their agenda. I never will. Never.

They have a history of wanting control. The Left wants to centralize power; that is their essence. It is not the specific issues per se, but an overall pattern of transferring power over the economy, our education, the rearing of our children, education, even our homes - to the central power, the federal government.

If allowed, they would manage our lives down to the smallest details: They actually tried to regulate the color one could paint one's car and the temperatures one could heat or cool one's home. There is no end to the demands from the Left, and there never can be.

They exist on conflict. Their existence actually NECESSITATES it.

The more Conservative Americans appreciate the country, even in the more difficult times. The more Conservative Americans draw inspiration from our Founding and today even look to them for advice. I finished a book with an interesting title that, in itself, shows some of the mindset of Real Americans: "What Would the Founders Do?"

The Left would never even consider such a book. To them, the Founding is an outdated and antique time, and America was built on a foundation of greed, rapacity, racism and genocide. To them, that is what America is all about.

Yes, you are right, " It worries me if these wack jobs ever get total control of the country."

You and your right wing friend Mishima belong to the most intolerant party in the history of mankind and then accused others of being intolerant because we point out your hatred of all things non-republican. You can't stand the truth and misintepret it and twist it to your own means. Republicans 2012-Warped and Twisted.

I kinda hope he does win the nomination. It would be fun watching Obama Shred him to pieces. His position on Child Labor alone would destroy him with the Vast Majority of the people and would hand the Democrats a HUGE Landslide even bigger than 2008.

Ha, I hear you. The one good thing is that Obama will pretty much destroy any of these 'candidates'. At the very least, that will be fun to watch.

Agreed.

Santorum said something interesting: He replied that the Liberals can go on and on in the media trying to savage the Republican candidates because it is actually GOOD for them!

Why? Because it keeps the focus on the Republicans who are exposing Obama and teaching the American people about His failures, His socialism, His lack of support for the military, and the destructiveness of His plan for socializing medicine. (I capitalized "His" in deference to Obama's worshippers.)
I have a request: Please tell me where and how you learned how to read minds. I see you were able to read the mind of Newt. I would like to learn how to do that. Thanks.

I read several years ago that the president and the Congress actually CAN override the decisions of the Supreme Court according to Constitutional law. I am sorry that I cannot remember the precise process. Either that, or have it brought up to the court.

After the Republicans take the Executive and the Senate, they have an excellent chance to change the composition of the Supreme Court. One justice is 79; if she retires and they appoint a real justice - one that knows Original Intent is the best for liberty and America - it will tip the balance against the whacked-out Leftist justices, and we can see REAL reforms, reforms that go deeper than economic ones. We can get our country back.

No, you missed my point entirely. Read my post again. Sorry that I cannot poinpoint the precise process. If I come across it, I will be sure to apprise you.

I don't think he "missed" your point. I think he ignored it or maybe doesn't under stand it.

Would ignoring Supreme Court decisions be okay for Democratic Presidents too? Or do you think there should be a constitutional amendment giving this right to Republican Presidents alone? After all, I'm getting the impression from your "our country" statement that, in the United States, only Conservatives are true citizens.

No you didn't.

News flash honey the supreme court is already tilted to the right. Another news flash you never lost your country, its still here same as it was 50 years ago, we just have some different fads. Another pointer, the real problems, you know laws that openly and blatantly violate the constitution, you know like the patriot act, ya that was the repubs honey, well and the dems no one is innocent.

The precise process to overriding the supreme court is changing the constitution. That means 2/3's of the both the house and the senate must support the amendment at which point it goes to the state legislatures and 2/3's of the states must approve. The president is, now here is the shocker, not involved! The executive office has no power over the constitution. None. At all, congress passes laws, the supreme court interprets them, the president enforces them.

Nice picture of yourself.

But try reading my post again.

Thanks.

Well, I do not know the precise process, and I am guessing, but I believe that Congress can make a law that actually negates the one the Supreme Court has put into place. I wish I could remember the details of the explanation that I read years ago. If I have time, I will try to find it. I am certain, that, like an amendment, it is not something done lightly or frequently.

But Roe v. Wade should be overturned, of course. And Supreme Courts can overturn past decisions, the most famous one being the Dred Scott decision. Even an amendment can be overturned, or we could not enjoy a brandy now and then - legally, that is....

Well, it needs to go MORE to the Original Intent position. Do you know about the Federalist Society? Please look it up.

Ed Meese under the great Ronald Reagan brought back Original Intent. The Left hates him for it because it means that they cannot override our Rule of Law and it also means that there are some "permanent" things, refuting the Left-winger idea of nothing having permanence which leads to the concept of the GOVERNMENT creating rights, not their being inherent in humans.

Newt would lead the way, of course. The best bet would be to wait until the 79 year old retires, then get some good conservatives on the courts and overturn Roe v. Wade, etc.

Did you try reading it again? Thanks.

Yes, The Supreme Court can overturn their own past decisions. But the Supreme Court decisions are protected by the Constitution. A president can do nothing to repeal these decisions. Can Obama ignore Citizens United and ban all corporate money from politics? That was the worst decision in Supreme Court history.

Picking on a 22 year old is truly bad form. Why not try picking on me some more ? I enjoy slamming your comments right into the bleachers.

Who is 22 years old, how do you know that, and why are you interested?

Amazing how the votes keep changing back and forth here when it's only you and I ,and we supposedly only have one vote each. Odd.
The person you directed that smug comment to is 22. I look at people's profiles( which you never bother to complete) that's how I know. And why I'm interested is none of your concern.

I have noticed that on a number of different forums. I think that there are many people who either are unsure of what to write themselves, or may not have the confidence, or other personal reasons. They just vote.

Hi Mishima. Canada calling. The country that has none of your problems because we do everything you say a country shouldn't! It's not data Mishima. It's not data Mishima, it's what it is like to live here. I didn't have to research anything. Do you think the value of a country is measured on whether Americans choose to live there. And yes mashima, they pick Canada. Toronto is the most racially diverse city in the world, and 1 out of every 4 Canadians was not born here.

Hey Warren Merrill, do you get pregnant? How many of those babies that you see fit to have born are you going to take care of? How many have you adopted already?

Who is Warren Merrill?

You.

Explain. I have no idea who this person is.

That is the convoluted logic of the Republican Party, Bill. Pretty sad.

You come onto these posts and stalk certain people (I have always been a favorite target of yours) vote down the comment only because it doesn't fit in with your warped view of society and then leave to piss in another pond. Classic Warren_Merrill under a different screen name. I calls 'em like I sees 'em. And I see Warren_Merrill fingerprints all over your typical right wing talking points posts. You can pretend to be some new person, but we all know better. If you're not WM, your his exact clone. If this is how you get your jollies, you need a life. You've clearly never lived the life I have, but always feel you can comment in an opposing view thinking you know better. Guess what? You don't. So don't bother trying to impart wisdom you don't possess about certain aspects of life. You don't know it all. I know that's a tough pill to swallow, but learn to except facts.

That's it in a word, Bill.

Hey mis-guided,good luck courting the womens vote after turning them into second class citizens.You know,like the good old days,Put those n(word)in their place too.That Juan Williams hould know better than to be so uppity on the T.V....right.Your opinions are that of a typical apologist for a group whose only aim is to divide and cripple the laboring classes.

close to merril,but the writing seems younger,less worldly...still wrong,of course!

I do not know Warren, not am his sockpuppet.

I have seen this pattern before: What is happening is that Left-wingers isolate themselves from other modes of thought, and they support one another. They never go outside of their coterie. So, when someone comes along who does not align with, or acquiese to, their dogma and blather, they are shocked and invariably summarily condemn and revile the person, usually by name-calling and taking the high moral ground.

Then, if another person appears, they assume - because they have insulated themselves - that it couldn't possibly be ANOTHER person who does not agree with the Leftist ideology, so in order to relieve the cognitive dissonance, they insist that the new person is really a previous one.

Sorry. Probably all you have to do is compare the times the other person posted. I live abroad.

Younger? Less worldly?

Funny. Right now, I am writing for a foreign country.

LOL

Hey, as far as "worldly" goes, try this: 貴様は馬鹿

If you know any Japanese people, check it out. Chinese will be able to get the essence of the meaning, too.

For someone who spins as fast in a circle as you do trying to impress others with your meaningless examples of greater intelligence, suggests alone that you are not who you purport to be on the intellectual ladder. You are writing "for" a foreign country? What? Are you saying that youy are their "spokesperson"? Writing their history as it unfolds? That is funny, but not in the way you intended. In a prior post you used "cognitive dissonance" in attempt to show that intelligence but it also backfires because it does not relate to anything. My definition of it is actions conflicting with beliefs. Where does that apply. But at least you've heard the term. That says something I guess. The problem you have here is that you sound exactly like many other right wing ideologues parroting the same talking points that Merrill and many do. To walk lock step defeats your attempts to show independent intellect. Keep trying though. And don't lose your dictionary and/or translation books to prove that intellect. Oh yes, and if you live abroad, we shouldn't put too much stock in what find odious in our ways. You clearly have a disconnect there.

Right on leen. You are like Harry Truman, you don't give them hell, you tell the truth and they think it's hell.

Does Ted live abroad too?

The foreign country he's writing from is New Jersey.

Notice how he bristled when you suggested that he had regressed in maturity category? Sure seems like Warren to me. LOL!

Thank you joe! :))

It's W alright. I have been embroiled in a battle with him for weeks. He's almost admitted it several times. He also has another part of his split personality patrolling the pages here. This was after the other 6 ones were banned after W was banned.

Yes Mishima. Left-wingers isolate themselves from other forms of thought. That's why they are considered progressives. However, Republicans are open to new ideas and the concept of change. We can also take note of how insulated the left is by recalling what happened in the last Presidential election. You know, the one that got rid of a Republican President who came into power with a budget surplus left behind by a lefty, and left office 2920 days later with the largest budget deficit your country has ever seen. What is it that you hope to accomplish by posting on this site. Are you trying to convince the never changing mind of progressives that the always evolving mind of the Republican Conservative is the answer? Do you even know what the word conserve means? It means never change a thing. Not the land, not the objects, not the state of affairs and certainly not your mind. Why do you think Liberal is the root word for terms like liberate and liberty. You will notice that I have started using the term Republican, or Republican Conservative of late. Here's why. All countries have Conservatives. France has Conservatives. Germany has Conservatives. Australia has Conservatives. All countries have Conservatives as a juxtaposition to Liberals. Canada has had a Conservative Prime Minister in power since 2006, and in our summer election we gave the Conservatives the house until 2016. I have voted for Conservatives before in both federal and provincial elections. What no other country is stupid enough to have is Republicans. All you have ever managed to accomplish by posting on this site, is to convince me, and most of the others gathered here, of how stupid and single minded Republicans and their voters truly are. And for that we have to thank you. So by all means, continue to show us how the Republican Conservative mind works. It's fascinating.

Tell me Mishima(??????) Does Calista's half million dollar account at Tiffany's qualify her as a high class call girl, or is she just another low life street hooker?

I think you're on to something, joe. He does sound like he's auditioning to be Chris Christie's press secretary.

Bravo,and bravo again!

You always have the perfect retort , Scooter. You have my undying admiration.

Based on what? See there is a lot of talk about abortion, but if you ask me no one has presented a viable legal argument to overturn Roe vs Wade, they spout a good number of bible verses but heres the thing with that, I and many other Americans put no weight to a bible verse when it comes to questions of law. So tell me how does our constitution say that abortion can or should be illegal.

Loved the video Buckeye..It says in one word what many of us think about the GOP.

Well thank you, joe. I take that as high praise. I think we have a pretty good serve and volley game between the two of us.

country called ignorance...have to spin the globe to find that one.

such a weak understanding of our past,so i had to assume ....test tube baby.. lol

....WHAT EXIT!... LOL

LMAO!

Typing error. "From" a foreign country.

"Cognitive dissonance" is a commonly used term. It is not necessarily actions conflicting with beliefs; it is more often beliefs conflicting. Or a person has a belief system, and what he sees or hears does not fit with what he believes.

I remember one perfect example that is both sad and possibly humorous. I used to supervise teachers in a very rural county. The teacher in one middle-school class was Jewish. The students REALLY liked her. One day, something about religion or the like came up, and she mentioned she was Jewish. One kid actually got up and went really close to her, scrutinizing her. (PLEAAAASSSE remember the kids really liked her alot.) He shrugged and said, "You don't look no different!"

She was obviously the first "Jew" he ever saw, and who knows what he was taught. He liked her, and she was fun, generous and so on. Whatever his original idea was, she did not "compute" with it.

In the kid's case, it did not matter either way. He heard some stereotypes, but if she did not fit them, he obviously did not care. So, he adjusted quickly, realizing he was wrong. But if he had something "invested" in this - say he was a Klansman or whatever - then he would be driven to make adjustments that would be difficult for him.

>you sound exactly like many other right wing ideologues parroting the same talking points that Merrill and many do

Well, I am not Merrill. I even went to Wiki to see who he was. I thought you were referencing someone in the news or politics.

Instead of reflexively assuming that if certain types of things are said, they must be 'talking points," why not examine the statements and challenge them?

I have noticed something that is consistent: If a person is parroting "talking points," they will virtually never be able to explain and defend them when challenged. What the typical response of a "talking points" person is - is rage, name-calling, labeling, and shifting the subject.

A bit about "living abroad." Please notice that I only wrote about it in response to some ludricious charge that I have no "worldly experience." Otherwise, if you look at any other post, there is not a single reference to it.

But now that it is out, I will respond to another absurd charge you wrote: " if you live abroad, we shouldn't put too much stock in what find odious in our ways. You clearly have a disconnect there."

On the contrary; when someone lives abroad - ON ANOTHER ECONOMY - one more fully understands one's own homeland.

A couple of references:

John Harmon McElroy, in "American Beliefs", described American cultural beliefs. He began with the premise that one can more fully appreciate one’s home country after being abroad. He quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson and Jefferson, respectively:

Emerson: "Americans who go to Europe are 'Americanized' "(his word) and Thomas Jefferson’s statement…: “My God! how little do my countrymen know what precious blessing that are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy. I confess I had no idea of it myself [until I came to Europe].”

Seymour Martin Lipset, in "American Exceptionalism" concurred: “As I have frequently argued, it is impossible to understand a country without seeing how it varies from others. Those who know only one country know no country.”

It is PRECISELY because I have lived abroad I can more fully appeciate America! Of course, I have lived in America, and I spend 2 months every summer there now.

And your last supercilious charge: "don't lose your dictionary and/or translation books"

I can type Japanese with my computer. If you have a relatively new computer, you can put set it up so you can type in almost any language - Chinese, Arabic, Bahasa, etc. I can let you know how if you like. I did not use a translator to write in Japanese. I don't need one to do that.

Who is Ted, and why do you care?

Look up "classical" liberalism. You will see that it practically defines today's conservatives.

In fact, if you look it up on Wiki, it actually lists Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek as examples of "classical" liberals.

Simple example of the TRUTH:

Today's "liberals" (the term "statist" or "left-winger" is probably better), want to defer practically every issue of importance to the FEDERAL government. They reject local and state decision making, and they certainly do not say "hands off" and just leave things alone.

Now, if one REALLY thinks it through, which country would be truly more "diverse?" One that consolidates power at the federal level, or one that allows more and more decisions to be made at the state and local levels - WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM THE CENTRAL AUTHORITY?

You need to think through your statement before posting them.

I smell envy.

E..N..V..Y

Many on the left exude this.

The "right" to privacy is a travesty of the Constitution, an abomination. Let the states handle it individually.

Like I said Mishima, fascinating. Liberals do not want to defer every issue to the government. They are simply not stupid enough to think the government has no role. And I agree, they don't say hands off, leave things alone. To conserve, leave things alone, hands off, is a Conservative mantra. Hell Mishima, you are making my point for me! Do you realize you just said Conservatives are practically classic Liberals. Does that mean you admire the idea of classic Liberalism? Would that make today's Liberals classic Conservatives? No Mishima, American Conservatives are not classic Liberals. They are classic American Conservatives. What happened Mishima, did you decide to look up the meaning of Liberal, finally realized what it meant, and wanted to claim those virtues for Conservatives? It looks to me as though you did a little research, and all of a sudden your calling Conservatives, Liberals. Never heard you say that before your little foray into Wiki. I'm willing to bet that you went to Wiki to find out about American Conservatism too. Not a pretty picture was it Mishima? Especially the part about the correlation between educated American Conservatives and racism. How about the contention that "It is a characteristic of the conservative temperament to value established identity's, to praise habit and to respect prejudice". Or, that during the late 18th and early 20th century "Conservatism in the United States existed only in the American South, where the plantation system and slavery where ideally suited for an ideology that emphasized the importance of the hierarchical community". I especially like the statement that Conservatives are "skeptics toward reason and science". That alone goes a long way to explain your posts and responses. You have a classic American Conservative skepticism of reason. I can certainly understand why you would want to claim that you are a classic Liberal. Call some of your Tea Party friends and tell them they are being classic Liberals. What kind of response do you think you will get. Now I expect some convoluted response telling me how I misunderstood you. Your single minded Republican Conservatism makes you that predictable. Oh, and envy means wanting to be what the other guy already is. You classic Liberal you.

I only claimed that you were less worldly because by comparison W.Merrill stated his accomplishments ,whereas you do not...Gov Schwartsenegger decided he would come to America and become a conservative after watching a Nixon speech.He only had to leave his hollywood bubble to govern, and learn what most here already know,conservative ideals work in theory,but are less successful when applied this complicated nation.

Envy? Right, only republicans have money and lead successful lives.Some of us succeed and still remember our roots instead of becoming out of touch elitists who no longer relate to others. And some of us consider it our obligation to help those who are struggling to pull themselves up; others climb into their ivory towers and spit down on those who haven't obtained the dream. A " let them eat cake " attitude will one day lead to an ugly end. Bolt the gates, the barbarians are coming and heads will fly.

Who is Ted? Why ask me? Seems as though you are aquainted on a much more intimate level than I. Actually, I think he's part of a multiple personality disorder that could give Sybill
a run for her money.

Very well said!

Huh?

Very well said jimstoner!