Sharron Angle hands election to Harry Reid

[GenuineRisk]

In defense of Angle's abortion position- she's actually being much more consistent than most of America. If one really believes abortion is murder, then it's murder no matter under what circumstances the baby was conceived. A baby conceived from rape is just as innoncent as one conceived from not using a condom.

Opposing abortion except in cases of rape and incest means simply that you are opposed to women having consensual sex for reasons other than procreation. Angle's position is considerably less offensive.

And Republicans have opposed Social Security since its inception. Angle is just being open about the right's position on these issues, rather than hiding behind doublespeak about trickle-down and self-reliance and states' rights and whatever other gobbledygook is spewed to cover up the objective of institutionalizing inequality. She's just being honest. And people are calling her crazy for it.

But yes, she is handing Reid the election on a silver platter. Which, for this liberal, sucks, as I'd rather see someone else in charge of the Senate.

[clyde]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

In defense of Angle's abortion position- she's actually being much more consistent than most of America. If one really believes abortion is murder, then it's murder no matter under what circumstances the baby was conceived. A baby conceived from rape is just as innoncent as one conceived from not using a condom.

Opposing abortion except in cases of rape and incest means simply that you are opposed to women having consensual sex for reasons other than procreation. Angle's position is considerably less offensive.

And Republicans have opposed Social Security since its inception. Angle is just being open about the right's position on these issues, rather than hiding behind doublespeak about trickle-down and self-reliance and states' rights and whatever other gobbledygook is spewed to cover up the objective of institutionalizing inequality. She's just being honest. And people are calling her crazy for it.

But yes, she is handing Reid the election on a silver platter. Which, for this liberal, sucks, as I'd rather see someone else in charge of the Senate.

Someone has spoken well of you...perhaps they o d'd on their antihistamines.


All the same...is there a way I can receive a photo of your boo bees today?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

In defense of Angle's abortion position- she's actually being much more consistent than most of America. If one really believes abortion is murder, then it's murder no matter under what circumstances the baby was conceived. A baby conceived from rape is just as innoncent as one conceived from not using a condom.

Opposing abortion except in cases of rape and incest means simply that you are opposed to women having consensual sex for reasons other than procreation. Angle's position is considerably less offensive.

And Republicans have opposed Social Security since its inception. Angle is just being open about the right's position on these issues, rather than hiding behind doublespeak about trickle-down and self-reliance and states' rights and whatever other gobbledygook is spewed to cover up the objective of institutionalizing inequality. She's just being honest. And people are calling her crazy for it.

But yes, she is handing Reid the election on a silver platter. Which, for this liberal, sucks, as I'd rather see someone else in charge of the Senate.

Good points, and she might be seen as radical in a blue state.

But if life does begin at conception, which is more likely than any other place, her position is not crazy.

And many oppose social security because of it being an actual Ponzi scheme that must crash, and people will be left holding the bag at retirement no matter how many adjustments are made. That is also not crazy.

But as I led out with in this response, it might be too far a departure from the positions of previous senators for this election.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

But if life does begin at conception, which is more likely than any other place, her position is not crazy.

Angles position is beyond crazy to women that think they should not be forced by law to incubate, birth, financially and physically support, and raise the child of the criminal who raped them.

I disagree that Angle is all that honest in reflecting her beliefs and intentions if elected to the Senate. She is going out of her way to hide those very values from public scrutiny, in an attempt to get elected, from taking her positions off her website to avoiding questions from the press and public.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Angles position is beyond crazy to women that think they should not be forced by law to incubate, birth, financially and physically support, and raise the child of the criminal who raped them.

I disagree that Angle is all that honest in reflecting her beliefs and intentions if elected to the Senate. She is going out of her way to hide those very values from public scrutiny, in an attempt to get elected, from taking her positions off her website to avoiding questions from the press and public.

Your first point illustrates what a problem the abortion issue is. You are correct in that of course the crime of rape should not carry longterm or life long additional damages for the woman. The problem is what to do with a life that is by its very definition, innocent. If there is a capital sentence in the crime, it ought not be carried out on an innocent life. No one has found a good answer to this yet.

Your second point seems to be that you fear that Angle will employ exactly the same tactics in getting elected -- I'll quote you here: "She is going out of her way to hide those very values from public scrutiny, in an attempt to get elected, from taking her positions off her website to avoiding questions from the press and public." -- as Obama did. It's just different values this time. She's not a socialist.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Your second point seems to be that you fear that Angle will employ exactly the same tactics in getting elected -- I'll quote you here: "She is going out of her way to hide those very values from public scrutiny, in an attempt to get elected, from taking her positions off her website to avoiding questions from the press and public." -- as Obama did. It's just different values this time. She's not a socialist.

Prior to election, Obama didn't avoid the press nor interviews as Angle is doing. He participated in multiple public candidate debates and press conferences. Obama didn't take controversial or extremist views and issues off his website to hide them from public view. If that's not true, perhaps you could point out what you are specifically talking about.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Prior to election, Obama didn't avoid the press nor interviews as Angle is doing. He participated in multiple public candidate debates and press conferences. Obama didn't take controversial or extremist views and issues off his website to hide them from public view. If that's not true, perhaps you could point out what you are specifically talking about.

He kept his views hidden, distancing himself from terrorist Bill Ayers, reverend Jeremiah Wright, and the radicals he has surrounded himself with for years, until he became president and could hire radicals like Van Jones, Cass Sundstein and Anita Dunn. And now he has a redistributionist for the new head of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, who is presumably the guy who will usher in ObamaCare.

He stopped talking about a civilian military-style security force because people were getting nervous. He slipped and told "Joe the Plumber" that he wanted to "spread the wealth around".

He did take things down off of his website, but that was after he was president-elect. The whole "forced volunteerism" thing was taken down in short order.

Without the stealth, the very polished political consultants, the implications of racism against his critics, the watered down "Yes we can" and "Change" slogans, he wouldn't have quite made it.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

He kept his views hidden, distancing himself from terrorist Bill Ayers, reverend Jeremiah Wright, and the radicals he has surrounded himself with for years, until he became president and could hire radicals like Van Jones, Cass Sundstein and Anita Dunn. And now he has a redistributionist for the new head of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, who is presumably the guy who will usher in ObamaCare.

He stopped talking about a civilian military-style security force because people were getting nervous. He slipped and told "Joe the Plumber" that he wanted to "spread the wealth around".

He did take things down off of his website, but that was after he was president-elect. The whole "forced volunteerism" thing was taken down in short order.

Without the stealth, the very polished political consultants, the implications of racism against his critics, the watered down "Yes we can" and "Change" slogans, he wouldn't have quite made it.

I am sure Glenn Beck loves you.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

In defense of Angle's abortion position- she's actually being much more consistent than most of America. If one really believes abortion is murder, then it's murder no matter under what circumstances the baby was conceived. A baby conceived from rape is just as innoncent as one conceived from not using a condom.

Opposing abortion except in cases of rape and incest means simply that you are opposed to women having consensual sex for reasons other than procreation. Angle's position is considerably less offensive.

And Republicans have opposed Social Security since its inception. Angle is just being open about the right's position on these issues, rather than hiding behind doublespeak about trickle-down and self-reliance and states' rights and whatever other gobbledygook is spewed to cover up the objective of institutionalizing inequality. She's just being honest. And people are calling her crazy for it.

But yes, she is handing Reid the election on a silver platter. Which, for this liberal, sucks, as I'd rather see someone else in charge of the Senate.