Support NeoGAF

[Dolphin]

I certainly don't want people to die in wars, but for the most part, I don't believe innocent civilians are deliberately targeted.

Abortion is much more troubling to me because it's the taking of an innocent life, and almost never for a remotely justifiable reason.

How much would you say the nature of the cause of death matters to the innocent men women and children? Would you say innocents are more harmed by the bullet intended to kill them, or the bullet that accidentally kills them? Furthermore, which desire do you believe is more likely to be met by inauguration of the correct candidate? The republican administration has been in place for 8 years already and has no intention of pulling out of Iraq, and the abortion status-quo has been relatively maintained.

 

[speculawyer]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/09/lawmakers_vote_for_subpoenas_f.php

They actually went through with it. But not Palin herself.

The big question will be the email messages. I think if they get access to email messages, all hell will break loose.

 

[Branduil]

APF is a necessary antagonist.

If GAF was conservative he would still argue with everybody.

 

[reilo]

so APF is tolerable now? is that the concensus?

APF is, if I may, on his own island.

 

[Stinkles]

You say "adapting the document to fit the times," I say, "viewing a legal document through the lens of postmodernism, divorcing author's intent, and having it mean whatever we say it does."
.

The original author rode a horse to work and owned slaves. The original author wore tights and a powdered wig. The original author would have laughed gaily at the idea of a woman voting and could easily have dropped dead of the common flu. The original author took three weeks to travel from Boston to London. The original author wouldn't recognize a RISK map, never mind an actual map. The original author's intent should be re-examined continually.

Postmodernism in this instance is a negative semantic shift on contemporary common sense.

 

[Hitokage]

Um....of all people JayDubya can't get baited into getting banned.

Indeed, and he actually stands his ground and defends himself.

So basically, you're saying that people that are unfond of Obama are polluting your lovefest?

I thought lovefests were supposed to be full of positive emotions.

 

[Evlar]

I wouldn't have supported Lincoln's refusal to consider abolishing slavery either. I would've been cheering Frederick Douglass's abolition movement.

Because it should be seen on this page.

 

[JayDubya]

To be fair, Gaborn and Branduil aren't on the level of minus, 148.5, or JayDubya.Those guys are just trolls.

I'm not trolling; it's just that Digital seems to be singling out everyone here that doesn't kowtow to the majority as being "disruptive."

If we say we don't like Obama, people ask us why. If we say why, people accuse us of moving the conversation off-topic, even when discussing specific political issues in which we disagree with a given candidate.

Granted, not everyone can defend their positions very well with high-falutin' rhetoric, but that goes for both sides.

 

[Blader]

I thought lovefests were supposed to be full of positive emotions.

McCain hatefest, then.

 

[Dolphin]

And Dolphin, it's not like you can assume that everyone anti-abortion is pro-Iraq war. As for myself there are only three issue that are really "must have" issues anti-Iraq war, anti-capital punishment and anti-abortion. Basically every thing else I'll allow myself to compromise on to vote for who I consider a better candidate. It's just a shame that those must have issues almost always end up getting split between the two major parties and I'm probably going to end up abstaining this year. I'm not about to apologize to you or Lamonster for refusing to vote for a candidate who violates what I consider a moral necessity in a president.

I don't recall making that assumption at all. However, I believe that it would be fair to assume that considering the issues are divided, the people that vote for the Republican candidate are more invested in deaths from abortion than from deaths in the Iraq war, or the death penalty. Furthermore, considering the lack of "progress" (I'm pro-choice) on the abortion issue from the Republican administration for their last 3 presidencies (Bush Sr/Jr), to me it implies that the abortion issue is more valuable as political leverage than as a genuine cause.

 

[reilo]

I'm not trolling; it's just that Digital seems to be singling out everyone here that doesn't kowtow to the majority as being "disruptive."

If we say we don't like Obama, people ask us why. If we say why, people accuse us of moving the conversation off-topic, even when discussing specific political issues in which we disagree with a given candidate.

It's your comment proclaiming that you are "polluting an Obama love fest" that is on the level of 148.5 and minus.

I'm just baffled why you would support McCain after these past 8 years of soaring debt, government incompetency, and the shit that the GOP took on your beloved constitution.

 

[Branduil]

How much would you say the nature of the cause of death matters to the innocent men women and children? Would you say innocents are more harmed by the bullet intended to kill them, or the bullet that accidentally kills them? Furthermore, which desire do you believe is more likely to be met by inauguration of the correct candidate? The republican administration has been in place for 8 years already and has no intention of pulling out of Iraq, and the abortion status-quo has been relatively maintained.

It doesn't matter to most people how they died after the fact. But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. Just because people die in car accidents does not mean I can crash my car into someone deliberately. Deliberate, unjustified murder should never be sanctioned by the government.

Changing abortion law requires overturning supreme court decisions. That's only possible if more liberal justices are replaced with conservative ones. A small chance is larger than no chance.

 

[giga]

 

[Stoney Mason]

I wouldn't have supported Lincoln's refusal to consider abolishing slavery either. I would've been cheering Frederick Douglass's abolition movement.

I'll say this and table the debate because I've never agreed with your position that Mccain is good for gay rights or the mass of the Republican party is in any way.

DADT is a perfect example of how the world actually works but people refuse to admit. Clinton wanted to do full integration. There was a big uproar and stink from the military. DADT is a compromise position that while clearly not ideal at least sets up a test case and puts the issue out front. Flashforward to the future where society is a bit more tolerant and now Democrats wants to do full integration. Now Republicans who were always against DADT don't tell think it's a good policy (even though they didn't then) but we still can't have gays in the military because don't fix what isn't broken. So we have Democrats pushing for more rights and Republicans constantly pushing back against rights on the issue. But somehow the Republicans are good for gay right and the dems are wrong. Makes literally no sense to me but you are entitled to your opinion. Society is always a series of slow progressions. That's real world and not fantasy world politics.

 

[Hitokage]

McCain hatefest, then.

I was referring to the poll induced pandemonium.

 

[JayDubya]

I'm just baffled why you would support McCain after these past 8 years of soaring debt, government incompetency, and the shit that the GOP took on your beloved constitution.

Issues calculus. Thankfully, a de facto two party state is not an actual two-party state, and my options are greater than Giant Douche, Turd Sandwich, or none of the above.

 

[Branduil]

Clearly Obama needs to run a platform of "free porn in every house(even more than there is now)."

 

[Stinkles]

It's your comment proclaiming that you are "polluting an Obama love fest" that is on the level of 148.5 and minus.

I'm just baffled why you would support McCain after these past 8 years of soaring debt, government incompetency, and the shit that the GOP took on your beloved constitution.

There are two obvious reasons:

Cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy.

Or a single issue outweighing all others.

I suspect Jay is in the latter camp. I also suspect he's more Republican than he likes to admit. His alleged independence is comical when you simply measure his post history.

 

[soul creator]

I don't recall making that assumption at all. However, I believe that it would be fair to assume that considering the issues are divided, the people that vote for the Republican candidate are more invested in deaths from abortion than from deaths in the Iraq war, or the death penalty. Furthermore, considering the lack of "progress" (I'm pro-choice) on the abortion issue from the Republican administration for their last 3 presidencies (Bush Sr/Jr), to me it implies that the abortion issue is more valuable as political leverage than as a genuine cause.

never mind the fact that a democratic administration would likely do more to actually prevent pregnancies in the first place, therefore removing any need for abortion.

 

[sevenchaos]

So basically, you're saying that people that are unfond of Obama are polluting your lovefest?

You're just..ruining the moment...

 

[thekad]

I wouldn't have supported Lincoln's refusal to consider abolishing slavery either. I would've been cheering Frederick Douglass's abolition movement.

No, you wouldn't. Douglass was bad for civil rights tomorrow.

I recognize the Republican party as the sheet anchor of the colored man's political hopes and the ark of his safety.

 

[Gaborn]

Because it should be seen on this page.

Yep, why Stoney would think anyone could support a man's election who said:

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

Who is not a Klansman or otherwise a racist boggles the mind. The emancipation proclamation was a nice start, the 13th amendment was the only thing with actual teeth.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Eh. It's simple. Liberal GAF knows how to present the facts while the conservative Gaffers receive the talking points from the right, resulting to an eventual ban.

 

[Blader]

I was referring to the poll induced pandemonium.

Poll induced pandemonium, then.

 

[Zeliard]

What the hell is wrong with you? When I did ever use the word "messiah" in my posts other than "of course Obama isn't treated as the messiah." My point was that liberals praise Obama for his tolerance and reluctance to attack the other side, something that those same liberals--or at least the liberals here--don't practice themselves. See: Anihawk's posts.

In case you haven't been paying attention, a lot of us have been criticizing Obama for not going hard enough at McCain and Palin, while others think he should try to stay above the fray. I don't personally believe the latter has been shown to work in recent times. Democrats lose elections by thinking that the mud doesn't stick to them and acting accordingly by trying to brush it away.

 

[The Lamonster]

The original author rode a horse to work and owned slaves. The original author wore tights and a powdered wig. The original author would have laughed gaily at the idea of a woman voting and could easily have dropped dead of the common flu. The original author took three weeks to travel from Boston to London. The original author wouldn't recognize a RISK map, never mind an actual map. The original author's intent should be re-examined continually.

Postmodernism in this instance is a negative semantic shift on contemporary common sense.

QFT

Spoiler

You sir, may be too good for these measly internet message boards.

 

[Hitokage]

Eh. It's simple. Liberal GAF knows how to present the facts while the conservative Gaffers receive the talking points from the right, resulting to an eventual ban.

No, liberal idiots just blend in better.

 

[The Lamonster]

No, liberal idiots just blend in better.

On an unrelated(?) note, whatever happened to Lefty420?

 

[Flo_Evans]

I don't see how the presidents view on abortion really has anything to do with casting your vote. Row v Wade was in 1973.

How likely is it that McCain could change the supreme court enough to overturn it? Hell McCain is probably the most pro-choice republican nominated in quite awhile.

 

[John_B]

If Obama released a sex tape of him and Michelle this election would be over.

 

[Zeliard]

I don't see how the presidents view on abortion really has anything to do with casting your vote. Row v Wade was in 1973.

How likely is it that McCain could change the supreme court enough to overturn it? Hell McCain is probably the most pro-choice republican nominated in quite awhile.

It still has ramifications. I don't doubt that abortion is probably the only real reason that Tom Ridge wasn't picked. It's still a big deal in much of the country.

 

[The Lamonster]

I don't see how the presidents view on abortion really has anything to do with casting your vote. Row v Wade was in 1973.

How likely is it that McCain could change the supreme court enough to overturn it? Hell McCain is probably the most pro-choice republican nominated in quite awhile.

But more importantly, the idea of single-issue voting is laughable.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Yep, why Stoney would think anyone could support a man's election who said:

Because I don't live in fantasy land. I realize politics is always compromise. And that to actually get anything done you have to actually move in steps. Which is why Southerners were terrified of Lincoln back then. Which is why we had a secession in the first place. Because politics isn't an abstract game of ideological absolutes.

 

[mckmas8808]

Obama still favored in the Iowa Electronic Market:

http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/Pres08_quotes.html

GAF just to let you know the Iowa Electronic Market is MORE accurate than polls.

It predicted the last 2 elections by 2 tenths of a point. It predicted every election right since 1988!

 

[Tamanon]

I don't see how the presidents view on abortion really has anything to do with casting your vote. Row v Wade was in 1973.

How likely is it that McCain could change the supreme court enough to overturn it? Hell McCain is probably the most pro-choice republican nominated in quite awhile.

Well, the decision basically survives 5-4 right now. And the next 2 justices most likely to retire are liberal ones.

 

[Dolphin]

It doesn't matter to most people how they died after the fact. But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. Just because people die in car accidents does not mean I can crash my car into someone deliberately. Deliberate, unjustified murder should never be sanctioned by the government.

Lets rephrase. To a child, it seems to me that the cause of suffering isn't of much consequence, so much as the suffering itself. It doesn't matter to a wounded child in Iraq if their wound was caused by a stray bullet, or a targeted one.

Changing abortion law requires overturning supreme court decisions. That's only possible if more liberal justices are replaced with conservative ones. A small chance is larger than no chance.

Couldn't social action in the form of protest, communication with women in trouble and support for alternatives to abortion indeed be more effective than your vote, considering the lack of progress on the issue politically? Wouldn't it be more logical to contribute your vote to a cause you're more likely to change, and contribute your individual effort towards the cause for which you're most able to make a difference?

 

[laserbeam]

I don't see how the presidents view on abortion really has anything to do with casting your vote. Row v Wade was in 1973.

How likely is it that McCain could change the supreme court enough to overturn it? Hell McCain is probably the most pro-choice republican nominated in quite awhile.

I think the danger is overstated. When Justice Stevens was nominated the world was gonna end abortion was gonna be overturned etc etc etc etc.

Stevens is now a hero of the left even though a republican Nominated him and Stevens was "conservative" and the left smeared him to no end when nominated.


If anything Both political parties need Roe V Wade. Its both parties ralying cry

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

If Obama released a sex tape of him and Michelle this election would be over.

an inspirational Sex tape?

 

[NullPointer]

The original author rode a horse to work and owned slaves. The original author wore tights and a powdered wig. The original author would have laughed gaily at the idea of a woman voting and could easily have dropped dead of the common flu. The original author took three weeks to travel from Boston to London. The original author wouldn't recognize a RISK map, never mind an actual map. The original author's intent should be re-examined continually.

Postmodernism in this instance is a negative semantic shift on contemporary common sense.

Damn am I glad that you're using your powers for good OWV.

 

[JayDubya]

I don't see how the presidents view on abortion really has anything to do with casting your vote. Row v Wade was in 1973.

How likely is it that McCain could change the supreme court enough to overturn it? Hell McCain is probably the most pro-choice republican nominated in quite awhile.

Bad Supreme Court decisions require a lot to overturn. Because only the Supreme Court can overturn the Supreme Court. And that's part of why "SCotUS activism" is so goddamn repulsive.

a) Almost all the original voters in favor of the bad decision have to die.

b) The "oh noes, stare decisis!!1!" group has to either be in the minority, or also comprise a larger group that is more concerned with rectifying the previous wrong.

c) Most obviously, the people that want to overturn the bad decision have to number 5 or higher.

Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito vs. Ginsburg, Stevens, Souter, Breyer

with Kennedy being a centrist overly concerned with stare decisis = no dice.

 

[Gaborn]

Because I don't live in fantasy land. I realize politics is always compromise. And that to actually get anything done you have to actually move in steps. Which is why Southerners were terrified of Lincoln back then. Which is why we had a secession in the first place. Because politics isn't an abstract game of ideological absolutes.

Sure, but I said I supported Lincoln's support for the 13th amendment, from there you pointed out he did not initially support that, and I stated that I never claimed I'd support Lincoln's election.

 

[TheFightingFish]

I don't recall making that assumption at all. However, I believe that it would be fair to assume that considering the issues are divided, the people that vote for the Republican candidate are more invested in deaths from abortion than from deaths in the Iraq war, or the death penalty. Furthermore, considering the lack of "progress" (I'm pro-choice) on the abortion issue from the Republican administration for their last 3 presidencies (Bush Sr/Jr), to me it implies that the abortion issue is more valuable as political leverage than as a genuine cause.

That one extra justice on the Supreme Court who upheld the partial birth abortion ban made all the difference in 2007 and that ban was very, very big progress in my book. The fact that a ban on partial birth abortion even needed a 5-4 choice is actually really sad for me. While I'm not going to vote for McCain I'd be ashamed if I help to elect Obama and he changes the balance of the court too far pro-choice.

 

[polyh3dron]

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Patriot Act sez hai

oh and wow Babar really made a funny!

 

[HolyStar]

Eh. It's simple. Liberal GAF knows how to present the facts while the conservative Gaffers receive the talking points from the right, resulting to an eventual ban.

No more like GAF's hive mind mentality jumps in and you have 1 guy vs 10 others. Any claim made by the conservative side will have :lol :lol :lol as a reputal without any explaination so they don't bother to post.

 

[soul creator]

if only the posters here agreed to do town halls together, maybe this thread wouldn't be so negative

 

[140.85]

Love the porn spikes on the weekends. Looks like Saturday is porn day. :lol

 

[Tamanon]

No more like GAF's hive mind mentality jumps in and you have 1 guy vs 10 others. Any claim made by the conservative side will have :lol :lol :lol as a reputal without any explaination so they don't bother to post.

Que? Did you just miss the past several pages?

 

[polyh3dron]

No more like GAF's hive mind mentality jumps in and you have 1 guy vs 10 others. Any claim made by the conservative side will have :lol :lol :lol as a reputal without any explaination so they don't bother to post.

:lol :lol :lol

 

[Evlar]

if only the posters here agreed to do town halls together, maybe this thread wouldn't be so negative

I think GAF town halls would involve folding chairs and spandex.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Sure, but I said I supported Lincoln's support for the 13th amendment, from there you pointed out he did not initially support that, and I stated that I never claimed I'd support Lincoln's election.

I know. You would vote for nobody I'm assuming and the issue would stay the same as long as Republicans are in control yet argue they are better for gay rights across the board.