Then why is Obama playing games with the military payroll?? Just a power play... Never mind it would save the tax payers a few Billion a year...

 

What would save a few billion per year?

I thought the Newt Gingrich/Clinton shut down was right after the Republican Revolution of '94. That would have seemed like the same type scenario.

 

One party didn't hold all three fingers of governement in that one. I'm not talking about the shutdown, I'm talking about one party holding the house, senate and white house and still not passing a budget for several months. It was due in May, they held all three for 8 months past that and didn't get it done. Pitiful. It may have happened before, I just don't recall it if it did.

Wasn't the issue with the D's not passing a budget due to not having 60 votes and the Rs threatening to filibuster? Is my memory somewhat correct on that?

 

So what? You have all three, you should get it done. If we accept that lack of leadership then we will never hold anyone accountable. That's as strong a position as I can recall in my over 50 years and they failed.

So what? You have all three, you should get it done. If we accept that lack of leadership then we will never hold anyone accountable. That's as strong a position as I can recall in my over 50 years and they failed.

 

I think we're so divided now that we'll see it more often.

Probably so if we can't get better people in there and hold them accountable. There's no leadership left in Washington.

I think we're so divided now that we'll see it more often.

 

I think you are right. Working in collaboration with one another is now a sign of weakness for a politician that could ultimately lead to not getting re-elected. And re-election is absolutely the single most important thing to every congressman, no matter what anyone says.

Probably so if we can't get better people in there and hold them accountable. There's no leadership left in Washington.

 

 

"Accountable" today means not working with the other side.

I tried to play nice and give you the benefit of the doubt but to no avail.

 

But I'll play along. What point did I fail to prove?

You tried to be nice by calling me unintelligent ?? Your point was that only the unintelligent raise the cry of murdering the innocent... There are some pretty smart folks that agree with me..

It doesn't really matter what PP does or doesn't do, what does matter is that its not the federal governments job or responsibility to fund them.

It doesn't really matter what PP does or doesn't do, what does matter is that its not the federal governments job or responsibility to fund them.

 

I disagree, so the point is debatable and should be debated on its own merits.

 

"Provide for the general welfare . . ."

I disagree, so the point is debatable and should be debated on its own merits.

 

"Provide for the general welfare . . ."

 

That's not "providing for the GENERAL welfare", is it? It's providing for a targeted welfare.

I just have to say, women are a part of the term general. It's as simple as that. The fact of the matter is that women need specific care, and without insurance, or sometimes even with, the cost of pap smears, mammograms, etc, are prohibitive to women getting the screenings they need in order to maintain good health. As well, women are primarily responsible for their own birth control. The cost is affordable through PP.

I just have to say, women are a part of the term general. It's as simple as that. The fact of the matter is that women need specific care, and without insurance, or sometimes even with, the cost of pap smears, mammograms, etc, are prohibitive to women getting the screenings they need in order to maintain good health. As well, women are primarily responsible for their own birth control. The cost is affordable through PP.

 

 

It is of no use RM. If it is not buying bombs and planes for the military it is not useful in the eyes of some. With these kinds of attitudes we will never reach the "beloved community". There is no understanding of the fact that if YOU suffer, I also suffer.

It is of no use RM. If it is not buying bombs and planes for the military it is not useful in the eyes of some. With these kinds of attitudes we will never reach the "beloved community". There is no understanding of the fact that if YOU suffer, I also suffer.

 

I know. I feel like that if I don't defend women's issues, though, they'll be ignored. That's why I keep fighting. :lol: I don't condone abortion, nor do I support it. But people need to understand that vilifying an organization does NOT END ABORTIONS. Nor does any federal money fund abortions.

 

And I find it extraordinarily ironic that those opposed to PP on the grounds of the abortion issue ignore the fact that an even larger number of women utilize PP to acquire birth control, precisely to prevent unwanted pregnancies that could result in abortions.

 

The argument as well that the federal government shouldn't provide monies for a program that doesn't provide for all is also deficient, in that it doesn't account for federal monies that fund OB/GYN care at private practices.

 

And then there's the question, how many people who oppose PP on the abortion issue also ask their private practice OB/GYN's their views on abortion.

 

The issue of abortion is so much more complex than simply it being legal or illegal. The job is NOT done if we make it difficult or illegal. I simply don't understand why people think their job is simply to speak against it and vote for politicians/legislation that oppose it. Neither of those things is enough. Not even close.

It is of no use RM. If it is not buying bombs and planes for the military it is not useful in the eyes of some. With these kinds of attitudes we will never reach the "beloved community". There is no understanding of the fact that if YOU suffer, I also suffer.

 

Classic argument used by those who want the government to be the mommy state taking care of everyone. Just because something is usefull doesn't mean the government should provide it. Otherwise, where doesn it stop?