I'm not the least bit surprised...

A couple of weeks before the election I was at my hair salon and the stylist next to mine who is 40 something and I have known for years, had NO idea what Roe Vs Wade was.

Matter of fact I had to explain to her what the SCOTUS was...

Prior to that, I believed she was fairly educated...

But just 62% of Americans even know that Roe v. Wade was about abortion.

It's core is about a womans right to choose. A womans right to privacy.

Period!

Almost two-thirds -- 63% -- believe it should not be overturned. (The numbers are basically the same between men and women.)

======

Assuming the implication is that somewhere near 37% believe it should be overturned, I would venture to say many of that same crowd are the same bemoaners of how the ACA is allegedly undercutting their relationship with their Dr.

Seeing that the case dealt with overturning 1st term abortions as a valid choice to made between a woman and her Dr based on the Right to Privacy, I would be interested in hearing from the same ACA detractors as to why Government intervention into this Patient, Dr. relationship is acceptable.

With liberals running the education field, why should this be a surprise.

Does it pass the "fairness liberal" tests?

chilled,

You also forgot to include murder...but that's ok...

Ah yes...when in doubt "the liberal run blah, blah, blah..." is always a trusted fall back.

Someone should probably let Wayne LaPierre know that liberals are "running the education field". He might want to re-think that brilliant idea about having them all carry concealed weapons.....

Prior to that, I believed she was fairly educated...

She probably was. At a college/university of higher learning indoctrination. Like most liberals. The plan is working.

Hey Fisty, when you go back, ask her what she knows about Benghazi. Many in the same age group thought that is was actually the name of a person who did something to one of our ambassadors (some even thought it was the name of the guy that made the movie that supposedly set it off).

With liberals running the education field, why should this be a surprise.

With the extremely conservative Texas school board consistently attempting to re-write history, this comes as no surprise. Have they finished white-washing history yet? If Santorum is any example, his Bla people comment would suggest they are close.

JK1963

chilled,

You also forgot to include murder...but that's ok...

=====

That seems to be a subjective argument rather than a lawful one. I'm pretty certain some lawyer has presented that as their argument to the Courts by now.

She probably was. At a college/university of higher learning indoctrination. Like most liberals. The plan is working.

Pfft - this coming from the one that purchased a degree from University of Somalia summa cum laude.

It's core is about a womans right to choose. A womans right to privacy. Period!

Chilled, minor correction ... a woman's right to choose/privacy, when she loses her period!

a woman's right to choose/privacy, when she loses her period!

That really is funny and I stand corrected RedDevPS.....

1funnygirl

With liberals running the education field, why should this be a surprise.

Au contraire. Unless all the ignorants are in the red states -- which would prove something else altogether -- it categorically proves there is no campaign of liberal indoctrination.

And you're not that funny.

TalktotheHand --

She probably was. At a college/university of higher learning indoctrination. Like most liberals. The plan is working.

Apparently not. Where did YOU learn logic, anyway?

1funnygirl

With liberals running the education field, why should this be a surprise.

look up the blue state education ranking vs red state education ranking and get back to me.

Allen,

I suppose if you were on the receiving end of having your life ended by a doctor, you might have a different perspective...

Talk to the Hand

Hey Fisty, when you go back, ask her what she knows about Benghazi. Many in the same age group thought that is was actually the name of a person who did something to one of our ambassadors (some even thought it was the name of the guy that made the movie that supposedly set it off).

the Republican Benghazi hypocrisy amazes me because, while they keep bringing it up, they tend to forget the total mishandling by the Republican Administration of 40+ intel memos screaming about al Qaeda plans to attack prior to 9/11.

Result? 3000 dead.

JK1963

I suppose if you were on the receiving end of having your life ended by a doctor, you might have a different perspective...

first of all, not a possible scenario..

2nd of all, tell me, why are Republicans so worried about embryos but give no sh*t about the children already born?

Look at TX stats for example: 1.2 million children have no health insurance, about the same live below poverty. A significant % of women go through pregnancy without prenatal care, etc.

Why is that?

bayllie,

Perhaps you could show me the documentation in all that intel memos that the twin towers, the pentagon, and the White House were the intended targets? People in Libya already knew that one specific location was undermanned, yet you want to equate the two...

@ JK1963 --

Perhaps you could show me the documentation in all that intel memos that the twin towers, the pentagon, and the White House were the intended targets?

Total red herring.

You didn't have to know the targets to figure out you should watch the airports and check out the schools where Arab pilots were being trained to fly planes in one direction.

Condi Rice tried to excuse the oversight by arguing no one could have known that people would actually fly suicide missions in airplanes.

Funny, because there have been suicide bombers in the Middle East since practically forever.

But then, she was a Russia expert, wasn't she?

JK1963

Allen,

I suppose if you were on the receiving end of having your life ended by a doctor, you might have a different perspective...

=============

That is kind of the point here...the perspective.

I'm mean, look at it this way. You have a perspective that says you consider abortion to be murder. But, if you were to be asked your perspective about whether the criminal charge of 'murder' should be applied to woman who may have had many different types of overall health issues with her body, but at the same time because of what she believes her faith leads her, she chose not to see a Dr during her pregnancy and the pregnancy terminates.

Is it your 'perspective' that when addressing this woman's scenario that you call that termination 'murder'?

Your answer isn't what I care about. The point is that, your perspective may lead you to say 'no', while others perspectives, may lead them to say 'yes'.

Perspectives/opinions are a dime a dozen. We've defined as a Country what the 'act of murder' is and 1st term abortions as a decision made between a woman and her Dr aren't it.

1funnygirl

With liberals running the education field, why should this be a surprise

Bayllie,

Thanks for the copy & paste, I have the creature on ignore!

Not sure why he chose 1funnygirl as his screen name. "It's" about as funny as a pedaphiles "to do" list!

Bayllie,

So why don't you give a damn about unborn children that are murdered every day at the drop of a hat from irresponsbile women who choose to end a life rather than kill an unborn child. Nevermind...I know I'm talking to useless cause.

Allen,

The problem with not caring what the right answer is that an unborn human being's life is ended. And quite frankly, that child wouldn't care what either of our perspectives are, because in the end given that women have a "choice" that human being is dead.

JK1963

Perhaps you could show me the documentation in all that intel memos that the twin towers, the pentagon, and the White House were the intended targets?

I can provide documentation released by the CIA that detail the meticulousness of al-Qaeda's plot against the United States and CIA attempts to counter the rising terrorist threat.

The direct warnings to Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001 and continued through Aug. 6, 2001. Bush received a classified review of the threats posed by bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11.

Nowhere did I imply the specific targets but the point is that even with all this overwhelming intelligence given to Bush, Bush decided to continue to play a role of a landscaper at his TX ranch instead of throwing his presidential weight behind prevention.

if Righties want to point out presidential f*ck ups that cost lives, they should start with this one since it cost 3000 lives. Then, they should move on to the Iraqi war that cost thousands of American lives as well because this f*ck up was based on lies, misinformation and manipulation of the Bush Administration.

Here is a link to what has been released by the CIA:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB381/

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Not sure why he chose 1funnygirl as his screen name. "It's" about as funny as a pedaphiles "to do" list!

it's a "he"? One of possibilities is that this is he will ever get to a girl (by pretending to be one). Another possibility is that he wants to be in the vagina club. Another possibility is that this is his FEMALE rereg account.

Crawl up my skirt to see there scumbag!

JK1963

So why don't you give a damn about unborn children that are murdered every day at the drop of a hat from irresponsbile women who choose to end a life rather than kill an unborn child.

1. because it is none of my business and it is constitutionally legal.

2. you want to prevent these "irresponsible" women from having more kids? Give them free birth control. Oh, wait, that for some reason OFFENDS Republicans as well.

Again, why do Republicans worry more about embryos than children already born?

why cut eduction, health insurance, food stamps, after school programs, financial aid, etc. etc. etc?

it's all about controlling WOMEN because if it was really about the kids, Republicans would be DEMOCRATS.

The Constitution and major Supreme Court decisions (the Roe decision is masterfully written) should be mandatory topics of discussion in High School...but good luck improving education when we have a powerful political party which opposes the Theory of Evolution as being "a lie from the pit of hell". Pitiful.

Another possibility is that he wants to be in the vagina club

There seems to be a lot of that going on around here lately! lol

They're not nearly as clever as they believe they are! Not by a longshot! ;o)

JK1963

Bayllie,

So why don't you give a damn about unborn children that are murdered every day at the drop of a hat from irresponsbile women who choose to end a life rather than kill an unborn child. Nevermind...I know I'm talking to useless cause.

Allen,

The problem with not caring what the right answer is that an unborn human being's life is ended. And quite frankly, that child wouldn't care what either of our perspectives are, because in the end given that women have a "choice" that human being is dead.

=============

I hear you, but you still didn't answer my question. If your bottom line is that child is dead, do you call the death of that child by a woman who doesn't take the necessary medical steps to aid in the prevention of terminating the pregnancy as a murderer if the pregnancy is ended under the term miscarriage....or do you support that an investigation should happen for every miscarriage to somehow 'prove' that the result of the miscarriage was 100% out of the control of the woman?

If your outrage is that a child is dead, you'd be equally down the throats of woman who drink, smoke, do drugs, choose not to see medical help for every reason under the sun that have miscarriages as you would about a woman who chooses to have a 1 term abortion.

Now I see your fire on the abortion front. I'm just asking to see the fire on all other fronts where a pregnancy is terminated.

If you're gonna be all in...then be all in.

1funnygirl

Crawl up my skirt to see there scumbag!

I know, funnygirl was home-schooled!

Allen - Omaha

What these fools fail to understand is that no Liberals cheer abortion. It is an awful act that no human being should have to go through. That being said, abortion is a personal matter between a woman, her doctor and god if she believes in one. It is not anyone's business and no one has the right to judge especially if they have never been in that situation (whatever the reason).

I wonder if someone like JK1963 has ever got off his pompous azz and fostered raped children, abused children, children out of incest....

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

There seems to be a lot of that going on around here lately! lol

I don't blame them - I like my vagina, too.

vagina, vagina, vagina...

ooohhh....I can just see the hypocrites squirm every time they see/hear this word.

Allen - Omaha,

Your comment #1.30 was superb.

Typical deflection...so why don't you answer this...why don't you give a care about those that we lost in Libya? What, they don't count, because they were lost under a Democratic president rather than a Republican? Or is because they were only a handful that got killed and not the thousands. And yet, here we go again....Obama's administration knew exactly the location (rather than your allegation that planes might be used/ might not be used) rather than specific targets on 9/11. The fact that you can't pinpoint the exact location given the size of our nation, the number of potential targets that might have been struck, how many targets might selected, etc....leads me to beleive that you are just another liberal on a rant about the past actions of a former president and could care less (or worse, give a free pass) to the current president's f*ck up...

Ah yes....the fruits of 60 yrs of liberal influence on public education....an ignorant electorate. Just what the left wing was trying to create.

Wow, 44% is awfully close to 47%.

Coincidence?

Nah.....can't be.

[Wow, 44% is awfully close to 47%.]

Still haven't washed that sand from your vagina, eh Captian Cupholder?

1funnygirl --

Crawl up my skirt to see there scumbag!

Tempting.

But like I said, not all that funny.

WCA --

Wow, 44% is awfully close to 47%.

Coincidence?

Nah.....can't be

What on earth are you talking about? The 44 percent are under 30. Most of the 47 percent are senior citizens, and people like combat soldiers.

Still spreading confusion, I see. Seems like some things never change.

Zathrose - nah, your ignorance is definitely NOT due to the liberal influence. It's all the far right and your dumbing down really took, didn't it? Home schooled I'm guessing????

Still haven't washed that sand from your vagina, eh Captian Cupholder?

Mickey,

Poor little thing got a whiff of the he/she's skirt and just couldn't resist the smell of sardines! LMAO!

Bon Appetite, there White Collar Criminal! lol

Crawl up my skirt to see there scumbag!

NOT on my best day would I want to blind myself! Keep your smelly snatch to yourself and spare the rest of us... Tootsie! ;o)

Allen,

You and I are in agreement 100% Women should be held accountable. Mothers that don't seek adequate prenatal care that result in a miscarriage should be tried for murder. Mothers who drink, smoke, or do anything to harm the unborn child should be held accountable for their actions. I'm all in (as you say...). There is no middle ground when the fate of an unborn child. Now...with that being said, unlike some religous zealots on the fringe right, I do believe that a woman should have a choice whether or not to become pregnant in as such as those woman that are raped should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy or if the mother's life is threatened should have the opportunity to terminate the pregnancy. I know it sounds as if I'm being hypocritical, but in these instances, a woman should have a choice whether or not to become pregnant or whether or not her life is mortally at risk. For all reasons, women who CHOOSE to become pregnant should be held accountable for the health and well being of their unborn child.

@ JK1963 --

Are you aware of the CIA agents who almost quit in the summer of 2001 because they didn't want to get blamed when the attack came? They didn't do it because there wasn't enough time to train their replacements.

That was in July, 2001.

Do you think they failed to tell George W. Bush? Guess again. He knew enough to act but did nothing. The only question is why he did nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=0

The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible ....

The U.S. is not the target of a disinformation campaign by Usama Bin Laden,” the daily brief of June 29 read, using the government’s transliteration of Bin Laden’s first name. Going on for more than a page, the document recited much of the evidence, including an interview that month with a Middle Eastern journalist in which Bin Laden aides warned of a coming attack, as well as competitive pressures that the terrorist leader was feeling, given the number of Islamists being recruited for the separatist Russian region of Chechnya.

And the C.I.A. repeated the warnings in the briefs that followed. Operatives connected to Bin Laden, one reported on June 29, expected the planned near-term attacks to have “dramatic consequences,” including major casualties. On July 1, the brief stated that the operation had been delayed, but “will occur soon.” Some of the briefs again reminded Mr. Bush that the attack timing was flexible, and that, despite any perceived delay, the planned assault was on track ....

On July 9, at a meeting of the counterterrorism group, one official suggested that the staff put in for a transfer so that somebody else would be responsible when the attack took place, two people who were there told me in interviews. The suggestion was batted down, they said, because there would be no time to train anyone else.

That same day in Chechnya, according to intelligence I reviewed, Ibn Al-Khattab, an extremist who was known for his brutality and his links to Al Qaeda, told his followers that there would soon be very big news. Within 48 hours, an intelligence official told me, that information was conveyed to the White House, providing more data supporting the C.I.A.’s warnings. Still, the alarm bells didn’t sound.

On July 24, Mr. Bush was notified that the attack was still being readied, but that it had been postponed, perhaps by a few months. But the president did not feel the briefings on potential attacks were sufficient, one intelligence official told me, and instead asked for a broader analysis on Al Qaeda, its aspirations and its history. In response, the C.I.A. set to work on the Aug. 6 brief.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush officials attempted to deflect criticism that they had ignored C.I.A. warnings by saying they had not been told when and where the attack would occur. That is true, as far as it goes, but it misses the point. Throughout that summer, there were events that might have exposed the plans, had the government been on high alert. Indeed, even as the Aug. 6 brief was being prepared, Mohamed al-Kahtani, a Saudi believed to have been assigned a role in the 9/11 attacks, was stopped at an airport in Orlando, Fla., by a suspicious customs agent and sent back overseas on Aug. 4. Two weeks later, another co-conspirator, Zacarias Moussaoui, was arrested on immigration charges in Minnesota after arousing suspicions at a flight school. But the dots were not connected, and Washington did not react.

(emphasis added)

Ewwwww, sardines

JFK1963 - wow! How male of you! What about the men who get women pregnant? Did you flunk science? It takes two but you place all of the responsibility on women. What about the man who gets a woman pregnant then walks away? What about them? Oh, right, it's ALL the woman's fault!

Typical right wing ignorance!

Nice to see you losers still jump when I say jump.

Holy crap AM, you are really off your game, you got anything non-biased to back up that senior citizen/combat soldiers claim?

44% of any demographic is still nearly 47% sweetie. Good thing you're a lawyer and not a math teacher.

Perhaps you could show me the documentation in all that intel memos that the twin towers, the pentagon, and the White House were the intended targets?

Hey Bayliar, still waiting for those intel memos..................tick tock, tick tock, tick tock........

Hey two face sanity...

The topic of male in the equation never came up...but since you seem to want to know. I 100% agree that males should be equal partners in both raising their child. I also agree that the courts have traditionally skewed custody to women for no other reason than because of bigotry that women are "supposed" be the child's custodian. However, I can since you are the usual flaming low intelligence liberal that you just ASSUMED that I would answer to your opposite. Naturally, you are proved wrong again.

Anna Molly,

Again with the deflection regarding what responsibility you want to attribute to Obama...obviously nothing, which again doesn't surprise me since you an Obama fan... That's ok...perhaps you can still point to me, since Bayille was unable to point to the reference, the exact intelligence information that specifically states which targets would be targeted, when that would happen and who would be involved. Obviously, you on the left want to equate the tradegy of 9/11 to the totally preventable tradegy in Libya. But go ahead and keep the fan base going with Obama. I think he is going to have a tough 4 years with that pesty Libya issues hanging around his neck. And yes, I read your post, which says absolutely nothing about when and where the attack would commence. And similiar to the usual "handling" that is mentioned in article, that sounds remarkedly similiar to Obama's handlers in discussing the tradegy in Libya. Of course you overlooked that as well...

1.2 MILLION children MURDERED every year and the left does not care.......

26 children murdered by a derranged madman and our Constitutional rights are VOID.........

Hypocracy at it's highest.....

1.2 MILLION children MURDERED every year and the left does not care.......

26 children murdered by a derranged madman and our Constitutional rights are VOID.........

Hypocracy at it's highest.....

Steve,

The hyprocrisy of the left is unbelievable...

Bayllie,

Of course you don't care about the unborn, naturally, you are liberal. "Give" them free birth control?? You see this is why people have such issues with people like you. You talk about not having the government involved in a woman's "choice", but you have no trouble with taking the government's money for women who choose to be irresponsible. It's really too bad that your mom didn't exercise her right to choice and abort you...

Wow, it went there. Not that my opinion matters...but it all comes down to a lack of respect for human life. I think pretty much everyone agrees that abortion is wrong. Why do so many stand by and use the excuse that "it's a constitutional right"? At one time, so was slavery. Even though most believed it was wrong, they stood by and let it happen because...it was "a right". Just because something is allowed, doesn't mean that we shouldn't work to stop it. There is no reason that abortion should be used as a method of birth control. In this day and age there are countless was to prevent a pregnancy. I hear such things as, "free birth control should be available"...County Health Departments everywhere hand out condoms like candy at Halloween, they just need to be used, "rape victims shouldn't have to carry their attackers baby"...There is such a thing as the "Morning After Pill" and it should be protocol for every rape victim (I feel the need to mention here that only 1% of all abortions are due to this reason), "women's health is being exploited"...Honey, if you are so concerned with your vaginal health, why are you having unprotected sex?...last time I checked...Herpes can't be aborted, "it's my business, not yours"...well my dear, if you were responsible enough to take care of your business, you wouldn't need that abortion, now would you? But I guess it's okay to use my tax dollars to take care of your business? Uh, no. Oh, and if you think that places like Planned Parenthood and the like give two craps about your rights or your health...think again...it's all about the money. They don't care about you, in fact...the more you screw up...er, screw...the more money they have to line their pockets. You people need to wake up. Wrong is wrong. Either you stand by and let it happen, or you do your damndest to make it right. I choose to make it right.

I think pretty much everyone agrees that abortion is wrong. Why do so many stand by and use the excuse that "it's a constitutional right"?

Strange, the article says that 63% of Americans do not want Roe overturned and only 29% want it overturned. It's been a losing argument for forty years, and it's a big part of why Romney/Ryan got handed their lunch.

Roe v. Wade about abortion?

I thought it was about the GOP exploiting it for political gain.

Talk to the Hand

Hey Bayliar, still waiting for those intel memos..................tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.....

are you blind? I posted a whole list of them - just click on the link.

your 3rd grader level of playfully using nicks as your only REBUTTAL is outstanding and so original. Well done, Sir. Well done!

I'm going to ask you a question. Which of the following would you agree with most:

1. The Bush Administration was either incompetent and/or negligent because it ignored all the intel provided by the CIA.

2. CIA is lying about all the attempts to warn the Bush Administration.

Pick one. And before you tell me that 9/11 might not have been prevented even if the Bush Administration at least investigated it, yes, you are right. There is always that possibility. But because the Bush Administration decided to totally and completely ignore all the warnings, we will never know if something, anything could have been done and all or any of the 3000 souls could have been spared.

I will ask another question, Talk to the Hand:

1. I am equally outraged at the Bush Administration for 9/11

2. I'm a hypocrite who will blame the Obama Administration for a f*ck up (yes, ultimately it is always president's responsibility) but give a pass to the Bush Administration for ONE OF THE 2 BIGGEST F*UCK UPS of our history (the other being war in Iraq)

pick one.

JK1963

It's really too bad that your mom didn't exercise her right to choice and abort you...

wow, here it is ladies and gentlemen. This is an example of what you call a Total Christian Hypocrite. I'll bet you go to church every Sunday, too..

If my mom decided to abort me, it would not have made a difference - I wouldn't know about it, would I?

Of course you don't care about the unborn, naturally, you are liberal.

1. don't claim to know what is in my head and heart - it's very pompous of you

2. didn't the Bible teach you not to judge?

"Give" them free birth control?? You see this is why people have such issues with people like you. You talk about not having the government involved in a woman's "choice", but you have no trouble with taking the government's money for women who choose to be irresponsible.

People LIKE ME see why the Republican Party is so disliked by anyone who is not a white male. You keep referring to THESE WOMEN like criminals but where is your equal outrage for the men spreading the seed? Have you ever taken biology? Oh, that's right. Righties are not strong believers of science...

stop pushing your religious beliefs on others. Practice what you preach and stop being the Almighty Judge.

Did I mention anywhere about GOD? Sorry to disappoint your liberal brain, but don't go to church and don't believe in organized religion, however, I do believe in life. Something that is foreign to you. I don't believe that you stand and defend a woman's right to not have her body be interfered with by the government, and yet, want the government to bear the cost for women to make decisions about their body. So which is it flip flopper? Sure, throw the male into the mix. Again, did I say anything about males in the conversation? Of course not, but since you are delusional on who is responsible, men are equally responsible, but since you are all about women's right, then take some responsibility for a change and own up to your responsibilities. I mean isn't that what you are all a twitter about...women's rights? And yes, I stand by my earlier comment that your mother should have exercised her "choice" and we would not have another confused liberal running around in the world...

JK1963

I don't believe that you stand and defend a woman's right to not have her body be interfered with by the government, and yet, want the government to bear the cost for women to make decisions about their body.

I didn't say you have to -show me where I did say you had to. All I said is to prevent the IRRESSPONSIBLE women (as you you called them) from getting pregnant, give them access to free birth control. The Republicans don't want to do that so STFU already.

BTW, do you have a vagina? No, then you have no right to tell a person who has one what she can or cannot do. And stop blaming the irresponsibility on women alone. Men are 50% guilty in unwanted pregnancies. Why don't people like you ever blame the men for unzipping THEIR PANTS. Hypocrite!

And if you want to SAVE THE CHILDREN - go foster kids that were raped or beaten and then get back to me.

If liberals are running the educational system, wouldn't they make sure everyone knew what Roe v Wade was about????

I'm confused.

TO: 1funnygirl who wrote:

"With liberals running the education field, why should this be a surprise..."

Somebody needs to "run it".

Republicans don't feel the need to educate American Children at all, and we learned that when the illiterate Texas Governor running for President of the United States promised to eliminate the Department of Education, as did other Republican candidates for the top spot.

Not to mention the fact that nearly every single Republican politician ALWAYS finds their first budget cuts coming out of Education.

TO: Sarah-3043284 who wrote:

"If liberals are running the educational system, wouldn't they make sure everyone knew what Roe v Wade was about????

I'm confused."

Being "confused" is synonymous with being a Republican.

At what age do Republicans recommend that children need to be taught that they are "free", or maybe the question should be, since when did Republicans start believing that children should be educated?

Republicans believe in having babies, NOT educating them.

American,

I'm just thinking, Republicans feel that liberals are "all about" abortion, so then if we're running the educational system and "indoctrinating" their children, you would think we'd be teaching them all about Roe v. Wade???

Even their conspiracy theories aren't consistent.

TO: Sarah-3043284 who wrote:

"American, I'm just thinking, Republicans feel that liberals are "all about" abortion, so then if we're running the educational system and "indoctrinating" their children, you would think we'd be teaching them all about Roe v. Wade???"

Ok, so what do you suggest, that children be taught that there used to be a day when they DIDN'T have the right to make their own decisions, and perhaps ask them which would they like best, for someone to make their decisions for them, or that they make their own decisions?

I suspect that everyone would prefer to make their own decisions.

I can't even imagine why it should be any other way.

Sure, it's easy to say "No" to everything, when it doesn't affect you personally, which is why it's always better to leave it up to the person who has to either suffer the consequences, or bear the responsibility, to make their own decisions.

In other words, "You have to pay the costs, if you want to be the boss."

There you go again...FREE...who pays? Why don't they exercise self-restraint? Or better yet, why don't they PAY for birth control? And as for the guy....as I said before, the guy is equally responsible, but unless the woman spreads her legs it's hard to get a guy to knock up a girl, let alone have the girl exercise her right to say NO. I know that goes over your head and you think that women just lay around all day without exercising the right to procreate or not without getting FREE birth control, or that they must get pregnant because a guy says he wants to have sex with her. Gee...why don't you give women credit for a bit for exercising self control? And here you go again about giving birth control...here's a thought...why don't they PAY for it?? And I've already made my point about women who were raped or who have life threatening conditions to carry a pregnancy... I'm talking about the (yes...I know you are one of them) IRRESPONSIBLE women. Try knocking some sense into them about keeping their legs closed and tell their idiot boyfriends that NO means NO and if they choose to have sex that they BOTH go BUY BIRTH CONTROL! Is that so hard?? That way the government stays out their lives and those that choose to be irresponsible stay out of my wallet.

American girl,

Why don't you explain that here in California why is that our Democratic governor was so quick to cut education and not public pensions? Why is that they use children as hostages everytime they mismanage their budgets. Now before you go off on Republicans, remember that California has been Democratically controlled in both houses for over 30 years... It makes you wonder who really cares about education, right?

I'm not really suggesting anything. Well, except that some people on the right don't make any sense.

I'm seeing all these posts with Republicans complaining about Liberals and abortions.

But, it's not "liberals" who are having all these abortions.

All we need to look at is which race or nationality is dwindling, and we know it's NOT Latinos, we know it's NOT blacks, and we know that most other minorities, or "liberals", are multiplying to the point where caucasians are quickly becoming the "minority".

So, I'd have to say it's the caucasians that are having the majority of these abortions, since caucasians are the ones whose population is in decline.

TO: JK1963 who wrote:

"... American girl, Why don't you explain that here in California why is that our Democratic governor was so quick to cut education and not public pensions? Why is that they use children as hostages everytime they mismanage their budgets. Now before you go off on Republicans, remember that California has been Democratically controlled in both houses for over 30 years... It makes you wonder who really cares about education, right?"

If you live in California, you must not be a voter.

We just voted last November to a temporary increase in our sales taxes to save our schools, which passed.

Yes, I do live in Calif....and yes, we were blackmailed by scare tactics from Gov. Brown into having the highest tax rate in this country in order to preserve our bloated teacher pension system. If you think it was to save our kids, you are truly mis-informed. And you do realize that with the resolution of fiscal cliff, and now this tax increase in California, the top tax burden for those over $400k in Calif. is now 51%. Did you ever think you would live in a time when the government took more than 1/2 of what you earn?

Gov. Brown has still yet to offer any REAL pension reform to truly resolve our financial mess. Add to that, we are now in this mess for a high speed rail line to the tune of $95B+. A rail project that by all measures will never make money, will endanger our environment, will not serve the great good. So I ask, why is Gov. Moonbeam after this high cost, high speed choo-choo to nowhere?

Sarah,

I ask myself that same question about liberals each and every day, however, the only response I get is hate filled replies.

And when us tax paying caucasians are a thing of the past, it will be amusing to watch those that don't pay their fair share see where their next benfit is going to come...

TO: JK1963 who wrote:

"Steve, The hyprocrisy of the left is unbelievable..."

Care to share an example, or is name-calling your only thing?

TO: JK1963 who wrote:

"Yes, I do live in Calif....and yes, we were blackmailed by scare tactics from Gov. Brown into having the highest tax rate in this country in order to preserve our bloated teacher pension system. If you think it was to save our kids, you are truly mis-informed. And you do realize that with the resolution of fiscal cliff, and now this tax increase in California, the top tax burden for those over $400k in Calif. is now 51%. Did you ever think you would live in a time when the government took more than 1/2 of what you earn?

Gov. Brown has still yet to offer any REAL pension reform to truly resolve our financial mess. Add to that, we are now in this mess for a high speed rail line to the tune of $95B+. A rail project that by all measures will never make money, will endanger our environment, will not serve the great good. So I ask, why is Gov. Moonbeam after this high cost, high speed choo-choo to nowhere?"

Blackmailed? No one forced you or anyone else to vote in favor of a sales tax increase to save our schools.

51% tax on incomes over $400,000? It seems to me that you can't tell the difference between Federal Tax and sales tax.

Nevertheless, I have a solution for you: Move to Idaho.

American,

California also raised the state INCOME tax as well...or did you forget that? In addition to the sales tax being increased, the state income tax was also raised. You know if you can't handle the prop's that were passed and the impact perhaps you should be the one to move.

Save our schools? Again, with that mantra...that's its all for the children. You truly do live in a fantasy land!! I noticed that you didn't address the other points I made about California's outrageous spending habits, but that's ok...i figure you to be one of those state workers that will be able to retire after you are 50 with full benefits and expect the rest of us to support you.

TO: JK1963 who wrote:

"American ... In addition to the sales tax being increased, the state income tax was also raised. You know if you can't handle the prop's that were passed and the impact perhaps you should be the one to move... I noticed that you didn't address the other points I made..."

I haven't heard anything at all about California raising State Taxes. Got a link?

You are the one who has all those bitter complaints. I merely suggested you move to Idaho because, well, it seems you'd fit in pretty good with that Idaho mentality.

As for your "other points", I can only deal with so much drama at one time, or else I might puke.

Geez...ok for voting something without knowing WHAT you vote for...

From balletpedia.org

Proposition 30:

• Raises California’s sales tax to 7.5% from 7.25%, a 3.45% percentage increase over current law. (Under the Brown Tax Hike, the sales tax would have increased to 7.75%)^[3][4]
• Creates four high-income tax brackets for taxpayers with taxable incomes exceeding $250,000, $300,000, $500,000 and $1,000,000. This increased tax will be in effect for 7 years.^[3][5][6]
• Imposes a 10.3% tax rate on taxable income over $250,000 but less than $300,000--a percentage increase of 10.6% over current policy of 9.3%. The 10.3% income tax rate is currently only paid by taxpayers with over $1,000,000 in taxable income.^[7].
• Imposes an 11.3% tax rate on taxable income over $300,000 but less than $500,000--a percentage increase of 21.5% over current policy of 9.3%.
• Imposes a 12.3% tax rate on taxable income over $500,000 up to $1,000,000--a percentage increase of 32.26% over current policy of 9.3%.
• Imposes a 13.3% tax rate on taxable income over $1,000,000--a percentage increase of 29.13% over current "millionaires tax" policy of 10.3%.
• If this proposition is passed in November, 2012, the income tax will apply retroactively to all income earned or received since the first of the year (1 January, 2012).
• Based on California Franchise Tax Board data for 2009^[8], the additional income tax is imposed on the top 3% of California taxpayers.

This just proves that without even thinking for one second of what the ramifications are for a proposition, you voted for it, because you bought into the scare tactics of the unions and Gov. Brown. And let me ask you this...did you ever stop to think where the MILLIONS of dollars go with the California Lottery? That was sold to the public as being the end all to alleviate the school funding problem.

And as for the drama...well..I guess reality is much too hard for you to deal with, so perhaps you should move to a place like the insane asylum where you can dream happy thoughts all day long...

And btw...you're welcome...

Maybe some of you that think you understand Roe v Wade should read the decision. It was very specific that it was referring to abortions in the first trimester. SCOTUS agreed with the Texas Abortion law that the life of the mother was the only reason for an abortion to be performed.

A bill was proposed in the Illinois legislature that would have required doctors to treat a fetus that was alive and viable after an abortion was performed. This generally refers to late term abortions. President, then Senator, Obama voted against that bill. Just leave and let it die.

A bill was proposed in the Illinois legislature that would have required doctors to treat a fetus that was alive and viable after an abortion was performed. This generally refers to late term abortions. President, then Senator, Obama voted against that bill. Just leave and let it die.

I suppose that depends on the definition of viable. Most late terms are performed for one of two reasons. The first being a danger to the mothers life, in which case I'm certain the doctor will do his/her best to save the fetus during/after ensuring the mother is okay. The second being that the fetus has a defect that makes it incompatible with life. Attempting to "save" such a fetus will only prolong his/her suffering.

Hey G-Dog...

They didn't poll the entire United States, you moron, so you can't lump all Americans in that poll. If they had, I bet the numbers would have been a little different. Ever hear of the word "demographics"? I wonder...if you go to a bar and do a poll on banning alcohol, do you think that percentages would be pretty high in favor of "no"? I know, I know...it takes some commen sense, so you're excused. Supposing that 44% of the people that were polled had no clue what the hell the case was even about, I'd say that the percentage of those that chose "no" was a bit skewed, don't you think?

Perhaps you would be willing to discuss, with your fellow right wing freaks, a plan to stop focusing on abortion!!

Oscar Rules -

Which party is it that keeps introducing legislation like "Personhood Amendments" that would severely restrict a woman's right to choose?

I thought the House was going to focus on "jobs-jobs-jobs" instead all they did was vote to repeal Obamacare multiple times and name a few Post Offices.

I also apologize if you feel like the Sandy Hook massacre was a "diversion" that required no action. You probably think that investigating the Benghazi "cover up" takes precidence over trying to save lives.

Oscar Rules

I'll have a chat with the pollsters and see if they can laser focus on your concerns.

BCWC - dude, you are on fire today! ;-)

Ah yes....the fruits of 60 yrs of liberal influence on public education....an ignorant electorate. Just what the left wing was trying to create.

Zathrose - again, your ignorance is clearly a result of conservative "education" - oxymoron if I ever heard one. Your ignorance is your problem - don't make it ours!

Great point, Da Noid.

To give Domenico the benefit of the doubt, I assume he meant the SCOTUS passage of its ruling which made abortion legal; poor choice of words, though.

I believe a reporter is supposed to remove the doubt...

Lil Michelle,

*snap*

Perhaps its the quality of our younger generation. Perhaps it's that they expect to have things handed to them, lack of proactivity...you know the kind that was raised by liberal parents that are passing down from generaton to generation of the finest quality of education...

1.2 MILLION children MURDERED every year and the left does not care.......

26 children murdered by a derranged madman and our Constitutional rights are VOID.........

Hypocracy at it's highest.....

But, but......educating our kids about Roe v Wade will make them have abortions! After all, educating them about the risks of pregnancy and STD's is what makes them have sex, right? :)

If you feel that way, then you would be ok with no public funding for birth control or abortions, right? I mean that is an example of the government involving itself in a woman's reproductive life.

then you would be ok with no public funding for birth control or abortions, right?

There is no public funding for abortions, per the Hyde Amendment! Birth control is a woman's health issue. But if you're against abortion, then you should be all for funding of birth control.

Wonder how he feels about funding viagra.

Actually, the government does help fund Planned Parenthood. So.....yeah. But on the same note...not only should birth control be funded, it should be mandatory for anyone relying on government assistance. If you can't afford what you have, you don't need any more.

1.2 MILLION children MURDERED every year and the left does not care.......

26 children murdered by a derranged madman and our Constitutional rights are VOID.........

Hypocracy at it's highest.....

Tzootsie - you mean like the Texas school system that refuses to teach real history and only teaches what they want????

Howdy SeekingSanity. We see evidence of collective sanity even in Texas. Sure, there are the individual Louie Gohmert types - but their efforts to influence the national textbook drew more attention than they could handle (and much of their agenda solidly rebuffed).

As far as I am concerned, it is in approximately the fifth week. When there is a detected heartbeat. But the screaming libs will jump all over that. I imagine some lame argument like "it is just an organism being supported by the woman's body. Much like bacteria that can be treated with penicillin.

1.2 MILLION children MURDERED every year and the left does not care.......

26 children murdered by a derranged madman and our Constitutional rights are VOID.........

Hypocracy at it's highest.....

Hypocracy at it's highest.....

Post 13.1: ignorance at it's highest!

remember over 3200 children will NEVER learn to laugh, smile at a butterfly, run in a park, or share their lives with another.... because of "women's rights"

Nice attempt to appeal to emotion. But epic fail!

The cost is too high for the pleasure of the moment

That depends on the individual's involved, now doesn't it?

SEX is the choice, not the child

A child, no. But keeping or expelling a fetus is! And it's exclusively the choice of the woman in question, and hers alone! It's also no one else's business!

What is the difference in MURDER and ABORTION?

Viability.

Within the mother's womb, the CHILD has all the protection of the law.

Really? What "laws" would those be?

If the mother is on drugs, the law can step in to protect the CHILD. If the mother is harmed in a violent act, the CHILD is also part of the charges brought against the criminal.

That's entirely dependent on the age of gestation and individual state laws.

If the CHILD'S head emerges from the womb, it enjoys all the protections of the law.

Once you're born, you have rights.

But if the CHILD is MURDERED within the womb by a DOCTOR..... it's abortion.

No, it's malpractice. But abortion isn't murder!

So basically, if you can't survive on your own, you don't have any rights? Does that mean we can start offing people that require assistance from the government in order to survive? Ooh, how about when our parents get too old and we have to start taking care of them...since they are our responsibilty and they can no longer survive on their own, do we get to decide whether or not they can live, too? I mean there are TONS of people who would never survive in this world without relying on someone else at some point in there lives. HEY...I think we found an answer to this whole over-population of the earth thing...we'll just use the whole "viability" thing. It'll be "Hey, sorry, but uh...unless you can survive without relying on anyone else, um...we get to kill you if we don't want you around." That is an awesome excuse to get rid of unwanted people! No, no, I didn't mean excuse...I meant a perfectly logical and scientifically sound justification...

a father married or not, can not compel a birth to be carried to term or compel abortion, yet he can be legally forced to pay support for 18 years. Why is it wrong to compel a woman for 9 months but okay to compel a man for 18 years?

Because there is a difference between child bearing and child rearing, and the laws reflect that.

And don't bother with the health issue of pregnancy, it can be no more risky than 18 years of labor and industrial hazards.

A false equivalency.

Four, persons holding personal opinions number two or three, please see item number one.

Not only that, but belief does not equal fact or make the laws of the land. So one's belief in the matter is irrelevant.