Why government must pay for abortions.

OK, I’ve been very conflicted on this, but the recent spate of nutjobs that are trying to push draconian rules against abortion through with the health bill have pushed me over the edge.

This is actually quite simple. First, the Constitution acknowledges that no person shall be less privileged in our country because or their choice of religion. This was further spelled out in ’74 with the Souter court, that asserted that no religion shall take any precedence over another, nor religiosity over non-religiosity. So from a primary perspective, your religious notions of why someone else shouldn’t get an abortion are un-Constitutional.

But much more importantly, I don’t want my tax dollars used to kill Afghans. Or even prisoners (actually, we can’t even have a debate on capital punishment until we grapple with the reality that it is a cash cow for lawyers, yet provides little real justice to families of the victims). So I’ll tell you what: if we can write a bill that says no tax dollar will be used to kill someone, then I’ll relax on my notion. But so long as you want the right to say that YOUR tax dollar can’t be used for abortions (even though I am perfectly willing to let mine be), then we’ll be at an impasse. Because I don’t want MY tax dollars used for a war of aggression in the middle east.

How’s that? Can we come to an agreement here? I realize that you righties have managed to prove that SOME life is sacred, can we go all the way and call it a day?


  1. Edgar says:


    “So from a primary perspective, your religious notions of why someone else shouldn’t get an abortion are un-Constitutional.”

    You wrote a nice article but this is a little vague. I know you are relating this to abortion but how? I don’t see the necessary connection.

    First of all, show me where in the Bible, Koran or what have you, where it says “abortion is wrong.” Of course we both know that it says no such thing. Let me shift a bit here. Let’s say that the Bible *does* specifically say, “Thou shalt not have abortions.” Okay, I’ve set it up.

    Now it’s time for us to make laws. Are you saying that *just because* the bible says that we shouldn’t have abortions, that makes any such law unconstitutional? What about murder? The ten commandments say, “Thou shall not kill” and in Genesis the story of Cain and Able exemplifies this, clearly.

    Is it therefore unconstitutional to make laws against murder because it is of a religious notion? I think not.

    How about this: let’s say the bible says, “Thou shall only wash dishes on Tuesday.” Now, if we pass a law in accordance to this imaginary biblical commandment *then* it would be quite arbitrary indeed.

    I doubt I’m teaching you anything because this is pretty obvious, yet, it addresses the vague point you were trying to make in your second paragraph. Being against abortion is not a purely religious idea and therefore it’s unfair to lump it in with other, more arbitrary religious notions.

    You have stated yourself that you are against abortion. Yes, I understand that you don’t want to push your individual belief on others via law, in this regard. But, nonetheless, you are against abortion. You wouldn’t want your wife to have one etc… However, you are not of religious notions are you?

    So we can see now that the issue of abortion transcends religion, thus making your first (unimportant as you put it) point irrelevant.

    However, painting the abortion controversy as a purely religious notion does have the advantage, if you are a liberal, of making it a much easier target to attack. It sets the issue up as a strawmam.

    @ “But much more importantly, I don’t want my tax dollars used to kill Afghans.”

    Afghans or terrorist muslims with a view to take over the world? Why are you treating the islamic fascists with kid gloves? Nobody in their right mind wants to kill, “Afhgans!” Your point is taken though, and you must be VERY upset with Obama at this point.

    We are ‘over there’ cutting bodies in half with machine gun fire, rolling thousands of new troops into the hills of afghanistan, killing civilians (unintentionally) and ruining their country. Meanwhile, Obama is accepting the NPP.

    Honestly Perk, what do you think of that? :popcorn:

  2. perkiset says:

    A well thought out and argued post Edgar. Nicely done.

    You are correct, disagreement with abortion is not strictly religiously based, nor should it be. However in this country that’s been the primary angle for the argument. As you point out, I am not religious and am pro choice, yet if my wife and I were in that situation, I believe we would both vote to have the child. Simultaneously, we would vote and assert vigorously and loudly that it is each individual family/person’s choice as to terminate a pregnancy, because their own beliefs about life etc are their own. (I think it would be best for us not to argue the correctness of abortion here, because that would simply divert from the primary point of the post – we could go on about that for days and get nowhere).

    My point, actually, is less about not wanting to kill Afghans as it is wanting a say in whom we kill. The predominant force coming from the right wing today is Christian evangelical belief, which has both (incongruously) decided that abortion is bad, killing others is OK – whether as punishment for crimes committed (terrorism, murder etc) or in the service of the perceived national threat. We have become embroiled in wars that we did not need to be in – Iraq not at all, and Afghanistan should have been completely different. COMPLETELY different. Now we have the unenviable position of figuring out how to extricate ourselves with the best possibility for the lives and safety of the most possible people. Unfortunately, the president has decided that we need to send more of our good people to get over the hump in Afghanistan – something he probably never would’ve needed to do or have done, had the job been done correctly in the first place.

    And I am not naive here: I am VERY VERY suspicious of the fact that bases are being built right down the path of the pipeline – again, so-called strategically important war. IMO, this is no better than Japan starting their imperialism prior to our entry into WWII.

    Re. the NPP: Total red herring on your part here – don’t confuse “peace prize” with bleeding heart limpness on our national part. I am an extraordinarily peaceful and patient man with a black belt and 3 national titles. Obama started neither war: he’s working us out of Iraq and has stated that he wants things to pull back in 2011. I’m unconvinced yet that he’ll do either and am wary, suspicious and cynical: but his efforts are much more akin to what I want to see done than the right wing has to offer, so I am willing to give him is shot.

    But all this again strays from the primary position in my post (which I’d like to stay truer to than we’ve been in the past) – my tax dollars support things that I don’t want to see happen. It is fair that your tax dollars do the same. That’s really the essence of the post.

  3. daviator says:

    I don’t really want to jump squarely in the middle of this one, I’m mostly on Perk’s side here, though I’m more willing than he to give Obama the benefit of the doubt (for now) re: Afghanistan. While I’d like to see the war over, I think it’s naive to think that we can just pull out tomorrow and let the cards fall where they may. On the other hand, I’m always watching for the justification that translates to “we had to kill them in order to save them.”

    But the real point I wanted to make is this: The debate over abortion is difficult to solve because of the zealotry that exists, mostly on the side of the so-called pro-life folks. Compromise requires that both sides give something up, which zealots are never willing to do. In fact, the very definition of a successful compromise is one in which both sides are equally unhappy with the results. If one side, or both, are unwilling to bend, then compromise cannot be reached.

    If all people were reasonable, this kind of dispute could be solved via compromise as Perk suggests. Sadly, all people are not, and I fear that the compromises du jour will be those which are thrust upon us by court decisions or politically-motivated legislative action.

  4. WillyP says:

    You know, I am very saddened by the fact that this discussion is always decided legally by men. Usually they are white men, when they are in government, they are most often well off, and if they or their family are in this dilemma, they could afford to send the woman in difficulty out of the country to get the abortion that they would refuse to our poorer neighbors. I would like to hear this debate carried out by women. I would love to hear a debate between Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem, Michelle Obama, and Rachel Maddow, VS Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Laura Bush and Anne Coulter. It could be a classic, and it would show the true nature of those who support individual rights and privacy, against those who want to tie a woman down. One can dream. . .

  5. perkiset says:

    NICELY state WP. That would be the debate of a lifetime.

  6. Edgar says:

    “You know, I am very saddened by the fact that this discussion is always decided legally by men. Usually they are white men…”

    Those damn white guys are always ruining everything!! Oh Willy, my heart is BREAKING… :cry:

  7. WillyP says:

    Well Edgar, I’m glad you finally get it.

  8. Edgar says:

    Harry Reid is *so* good for us conservatives (notice I didn’t say republicans)

    He thought Obama was electable because, basically, he wasn’t that black! LMAO!!

    I love it!! The REAL racists are shown for what they are. Remember Biden’s weird comment? What was it? Something like, “Obama? Oh yes, he’s a good, clean well behaved negro” or something like that.


    Hey Perk and Willy, what happened to the public option?

    So let’s see: Obama has escalated the bloodshed in afghanistan, refused to pull out of Iraq (which many liberals are totally pissed about – I listen to randi rhoads and Hartman), he has a total buffoon for a homeland security secretary who refuses to step down despite embarrassing the administration, he bows when he should shake, hasn’t backed the pro democracy movement in Iran, bent over for Russia only to embolden them…

    Yeah, it’s going GREAT!!

    What a loser! This guy is starting to be compared to Jimmy Carter *EVEN* on the liberal talk radio networks.

    No wonder you have posted anything lately, it’s all disgustingly bad news for conservatives AND liberal progressives.

    I’ll just be on my way now, whistling a happy tune :D


  9. perkiset says:

    Given that the current conservative posture is simply to obstruct and destroy America, I understand you. And your notion of “Real Racists?” Wow. Best look around. The only “real racism” is coming from your side pal… like Rush saying that the only reason Obama was helping Haiti was to impress black people.

    Really, the lunacy is breathtaking.

  10. Edgar says:

    Reid is taking a dive bomb in the polls and it’s not the conservatives who elected him, it’s the liberals. So it seems to me that the liberals in his constituency aren’t liking the fact that his racism has been exposed and publicized. So much for the racism coming from the conservatives.

    What about Clinton saying to Kennedy about Obama, “Come on man, a few years ago this guy would be bringing us coffee…”

    What’s THAT supposed to mean? Well, if Rush had said that you would be calling him a racist.

    I can’t wait to vote for Scott Brown on Tuesday!! He’s ahead in the polls now and hopefully he’ll take the seat. We need a real American to represent us normal people from Massachusetts. Around here, all the liberal democrats are all in cahoots with the mafia and whatnot. No one else could get in. It’s not that we are mostly liberal in Massachusetts but rather it’s the fact that the system, dominated by liberals with no morals, is crooked.

    Screw paying for abortions nation wide! Are you kidding me? To wrap that up into the health care bill is just absurd! It doesn’t surprise me though, liberals have no moral compass.

    I have about 15 people coming with me on Tuesday to vote and who knows, our little group could be the one that kills the health care bill! Who knows Perk, when you think about it I could be the very person who saves America from the evils of socialism. Little ol’ me.


  11. perkiset says:

    @ Reid: His number are in the dumper because he’s wet toilet paper, not because he’s a racist. It’s really stupid to be drumming it up that way.

    @ paying for abortion: Yes, conservatives deciding to kill 100s of thousands of people for oil is so very much more “moral” than letting a mother make that decision. As I mentioned: Allow me to keep my money from going to wars you start and I’ll let you have an abortion clause. Until then, we all get to pay for killing people.

    Tell me Edgar: When did the party of personal liberty and keeping the government out of personal lives switch over to being the party of moralistic intervention and the party of big brother?

    @ healthcare: And if that’s the end game, how proud you will be – to have managed to keep the insurance conglomerates sucking the money out of our pockets, while simultaneously limiting or eliminating the options for health to so very many people in our nation.

    How proud you should be.

  12. Edgar says:

    “Yes, conservatives deciding to kill 100s of thousands of people for oil is so very much more “moral” than letting a mother make that decision.”

    You aren’t getting away with *anything* as long as I’m here. Congress (liberals and conservatives) gave the ‘thumbs up’ to go to war in Iraq! “I voted for the war before I voted against the war (when it became unpopular)”

    So don’t blame the war on conservatives you silly liberal. Now that I trashed that point completely…


    Yes, his numbers are in the dumper because he is wet toilet paper, but, they have dived further into the dumper after his racist remarks have been flown on the flagpole. He’s OUT!


    Abortion is a moral abomination if it’s done for any reason other than to save the life of the mother. Period. Americans don’t want to pay for “party moms”, who sleep with ten men a week, to have abortions. See, here’s the deal: sluts like to have sex with many, many partners and simply don’t want to be responsible for a baby. You have to understand that a baby seriously interferes with a sluts party schedule. It’s an inconvenience.

    Screw that! Enough is enough already. Abortion makes a lot of people a lot of money, and you back that huh? That’s evil and evil needs to be purged.


    Leave Rush alone. You take everything the guy says totally out of context, and everyone else knows it. Maybe the people who listen to Randi Rhoads eat that shit up but the rest of America doesn’t.

    @Health care

    I don’t want any health care reform that includes funding for abortions. It’s disgustingly immoral and I won’t support it. I’d rather see the rich fat-cats get richer then see my tax dollars funding abortion, any day.

    Let’s just hope that Brown makes it in to that coveted senate seat so we can put those left-wing LOONS in check! I’m really excited about this special election of which I get to take part.

    You know perk, I might look into that whole Tea Party movement thing. It might just be for me. Active, forceful conservatism.

    I need an army…

  13. Vickee says:

    Edgar. your so closed minded. Obama may not be the best thing that ever happened to the usa, but he sure is better than the alternative. Why cant you see that. We NEED someone like obama to clean up the mess you conservatives have left. not an easy task. it’s gonna take awhile for him to clean everything up. bush was in there screwing things up for eight years and you want obama to magicly wave his wand and clean it up in one year. Nobody can do that. get a clue!
    Great site perkiset.

  14. Edgar says:


    When you say we NEED someone like Obama, what exactly do you mean? Someone like Obama. Hmm…what is Obama like?

    Let’s see if I can answer for you: Obama is a masterful, experienced leader who…hasn’t lead anything in his life. Obama is an economic genius who has never even run a lemonade stand, let alone a company or corporation. Obama is a gifted diplomat who…has divided the country even more than Bush. Obama is a man of the world who can’t get the russians to back off one bit, can’t land the olympics (even though he tried), can’t effectively negotiate his precious global warming agenda, bows when he should shake hands…

    At least he is a good judge of character. Oh wait, he befriended known terrorist Bill Ayers, appointed a communist to one of his czar posts (who is now long gone) and selected an entire administration of tax cheats – including Tom Daschle who had to step aside.

    Well at least he keeps his word! Oh wait, Guantanamo is still in operation, we are still *STILL* in Iraq and the the war in afghanistan is reaching new heights.

    The fact is that Obama is following closely in Bush’s footsteps. Pursuing the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, bailing out his rich buddies on wallstreet etc…

    Think about it Vicky, really think about it.

  15. Edgar says:


    Scott Brown baby!!


  16. perkiset says:

    Interestingly Edgar, you completely ignore the fact that the loyal opposition has been utterly rigid in requiring that the Dems have 60 votes even to call for a potty break. I’ve never seen such obstructionist behavior and it’s disgusting.

    The pseudo-conservatives will win some battles: we the people will lose. And how proud you’ll all be.

    And @ your horseshit about Bill Ayers, Gitmo, global warming etc: you’re just wrong. So wrong that I don’t even choose to take the time to prove why. You must really believe that if you just repeat those lies long and loud enough, they’ll become public opinion enough that you can do something with them.

    You’re a lemming, Edgar, like the rest of the right wing today. No critical thought, only talking points. No desire for the country to be better, only to defeat Dems for any reason and at any cost. No attention to facts, only what you can say loud enough to try to make people believe you.


  17. Edgar says:

    Perk, don’t accuse me of being blind, foolish and partisan about Obama. Even the Huffington Post – a cesspool of liberalism – agrees with my assessment.


    Wake up and smell the coffee man. NOBODY wants Obama anymore. He’s like Bush, but embarrassingly ineffective.

    The Huffington Post, known for its delusional left-wing rhetoric (staffed with writers that have historically denied the obvious) is absolutely chock-full of “Obama ain’t that great” articles! Amazing really.

    Well, I’ve been right all along, and now even the hard left is forced to agree with me.

    Read the article from the post Perk – then tell me I’m just a blind, conservative partisan.


  18. perkiset says:

    LOL @ “Nobody wants Obama anymore.”

    You are blind, conservative and partisan.

    The primary difference between your side and ours, is that unlike you lemmings, we continually work to refine our leaders and make them toe the line for what they ran on. Your side not only takes what Fox tells them on faith, they actually believe it.

    It’s frightening as hell.

  19. Edgar says:

    How do you know what Fox “tells them” if you don’t watch Fox? On the other hand, if Fox is complete bullshit, then why would you waste your time watching it? Do you not value your time?

    The people of Massachusetts actually spoke for the country when they voted against a leftist agenda on Tuesday the 19th. They voted against Obama via the proxy, coakley.

    Obama has since admitted that he has lost touch with regular americans and needs to reconnect.

    The fact of the matter is that people don’t like Obama, at all. They voted for change and got more of the same – and they change they did get, they don’t like on bit!

    The liberals are upset with Obama because he dropped their agenda, the conservatives are upset because Obama has scary, marxist designs for the coutnry – and the ignorant are upset because, “They ain’t getting none of that Obama money” … You know, from “His Stash”


    Fact: Guantanamo is nowhere NEAR closed

    Fact: We are STIL in iraq

    Fact: Obama has escalated the bloodshed in afghanistan

    Fact: The economy has gotten worse with unemployment over 10 percent, though Obama said it would cap at 8.

    Fact: Obama hasn’t done a single thing to help the Gay Agenda (thank god he’s so inept)

    Fact: Obama hasn’t done a DAMN thing to resolve the israeli/palistinian problem

    Fact: Obama failed to galvanize his own party in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts

    But I’m sure you’ll say those facts are just partisan nonsense. The tea-party mindset is taking over perk. Get out of the way.

  20. perkiset says:

    Edgar, let’s make sure we’ve got a couple things straight – because you want to do nothing but distort:

    The people of Mass spoke up against a horrible Dem candidate that was an embarrassment to the state – and elected a reasonably liberal Repub. She was awful and deserved to lose. Her loss had NOTHING AT ALL to do with the national agenda, nor was it a referendum on Obama or healthcare or the totally incorrect and hyperbolic notion of a “socialist agenda.”

    You make clear, with every single post, how much you are simply a water carrier for that crap. “Marxist agenda?” You’d simply make me laugh Edgar, if it weren’t for the reality that there are plenty more like you out there.

    @ Gitmo, Iraq, Afghanistan : he’s doing exactly what he said he would. To imagine that he’d get hired, wave his magic wand and it’s over is stupid and you know it. Gitmo would be a lot easier if the right wing wasn’t so perpetually trying to make these people more than they are – from the “NOT IN MY STATE” and “they must be tried in a military tribunal” notions you’d think that these guys were all T1000 terminators. Stupidity. Relax man. It’ll happen.

    @ Economy: wow, you must live on a different planet. You’re simply wrong here. The unemployment has gone up, but that was expected and talked about when he INHERITED THIS CRAP from the previous administrations. Yes, plural: Clinton participated in this and drank the Reaganonics koolaid as well. Disgraceful. But look at the market, the return of housing and mortgage starts, all the leading indicators say that we are on the right track. But since the right wing has neither any understanding of the process or memory of the past, I can understand why you’d think that we should all be rich again instantly.

    @ Israeli Palestine issue: Now you’re really grabbing for straws. Given the issues here, you’d expect him to fix that as well … within his first year? FFS Edgar, get real.

    @ Tea Party: Good luck with all that. Although, in fact there are several places that I agree with the Teabaggers, the majority of people, correctly, do not. A tempest in a teacup, whipped up by people that know they can control others with mindless pseudo-patriotic and FUD based arguments, for their own agenda of selfish greed.

  21. Edgar says:

    Wave his magic wand? Perk! He’s been in office a full year. Like it takes a whole effin year to close a prison. Oh, brother. And Gitmo is NO WHERE NEAR being closed.

    The economy: Obama said if he needed to pass the last stimulus to keep unemployment from rising NO HIGER THAN 8%. Look it up at politfact or whatever that site is. Unemployment is over 10% and most economists believe it will STILL be over 10% in november. That’s what has democrats worried – they are going to have a tough time getting elected if unemployment is STILL that high come Nov. And it’s projected to be. The economy is totally in the shitter and Obama has done nothing except:

    Bail out his wallstreet buddies!!

    @Israel – Palestine

    Look man, if he can’t multitask then he shouldn’t be president. A president should have mega talent and mega capabilities. Maybe the average joe couldn’t handle such tasks but the pres of the USA is not supposed to be an average joe.

    Furthermore, he’s your Messiah! Surely the Messiah should be able to hand a bit of foreign policy! Pfft, again, give me a break. He hasn’t done SHIT!

    You are a very, very smart man though perk. I know this because you carefully avoided talking about Iraq, Afghanistan, The Gay Agenda (Obama is supposed to be “fighting right along side you guys”) and he’s not – thank God he’s so inept and unqualified to do even more damage.

    You’re smart for not replying to my point about how he failed to galvanize his party in Virginia, Jersey and Massachusetts.

    You’re smart for not talking about his utter, abject failure in Copenhagen. Well, all the same – people are freezing their asses off everywhere, worse than ever. Europe, Florida, you name it – they are freezing! LMAO!! GLobab warming my ass.

    Obama has been an embarrassment to the country at large. The people of Massachusetts voted against Obama’s marxist agenda, that’s what this was all about. There hasn’t been a conservative in that seat in decades. Fact is, this is the only way the people could show their utter disgust with the current administration..

    I know it hurst perk, but even the libs at the Huffington Post agree with ME.

    Tea Party is the new movement and it’s grassroots all the way. A REAL american party for Real Americans. Not faggy, socialist/marxist ideologues who have their heads in the clouds. The party is OVER for you and your liberal agenda!! Tough luck. :D

  22. WillyP says:

    I am so happy to see that you are into the new “grassroots” movement, the tea baggers. Yeah, Obama’s been in for a year now and I have to agree with you, he’s no George Bush! Remember friend, the dirtiest job in the circus is cleaning up after the elephants. That last batch of elephants shat all over the country and the mess will take a while to clean up. I can’t wait to see who the dimwit will be that the tea baggers push forward in 2012. Could it be the “imbecilla from Wasilla,” or the “Brown stain” from Massachusetts. You guys are such losers and such minimalists when it comes to critical thinking.

  23. perkiset says:

    LOL nicely said WP.

    @ Edgar: Actually, your comments were just not even worth the time to consider, although thanks for the sarcastic props.

    You’re really pretty funny Edgar. Utterly disconnected from reality, self centered and a lemming, but pretty damn funny nonetheless. A “REAL american party for Real Americans.” MAN you make me laugh.

  24. Edgar says:


    @tea baggers – How can an intelligent, wise-old-man such as yourself, embrace such juvenile humor? Really silly…

    “Yeah, Obama’s been in for a year now and I have to agree with you, he’s no George Bush!”

    Bush stayed in Iraq, Obama stayed in Iraq.
    Bush stayed in Afghanistan, Obama stayed in Afghanistan.
    Bush bailed out his wallstreet buddies, Obama bailed out *the same* wallstreet buddies
    Bush was a divisive figure, Obama is a divisive figure.
    Bush kept guantanamo open, Obama kept guantanamo open.
    Bush couldn’t get shit done with congress, Obama can’t get shit done with congress.
    Bush couldn’t improve relations with Iran, Obama couldn’t improve relations with Iran.
    Bush believed Marriage was between a man and a woman, Obama believes marriage is between a man and a woman.
    Bush was a “church-goer”, Obama was a “church-goer”
    Bush appointed Gates to the Secretary of Defense, Obama has kept him there.
    Bush’s friend Dick Cheney shot his friend by accident, Obama’s friend Bill Ayers blew up bombs here in the US.
    Bush was soft on illegal immigration, Obama is soft on illegal immigration.

    So Bush and Obama have a lot in common.

    Obama said he was going to pull out of Iraq right away, but he lied. I guess you could say, “Obama lied, people died!”

  25. Edgar says:


    “Actually, your comments were just not even worth the time to consider, ”

    You’re such a LIBERAL!

    You wouldn’t DARE to actually engage in any of the points I put forth. You just don’t have enough pieces on the board for a checkmate. Don’t feel bad though, if I were in your untenable position, I too would find it impossible to come up with a substantive rebuttal.

    At least Alan Colmes would actually engage in the issues – head on.

    Here’s an idea Perk: When you run out of intellectual ammunition, just turn on Randi Rhodes and fill back up.

    Oh yeah, before I forget: It’s TOO BAD that Air America got shit-canned! LMAO!! LMAO!!

    Nobody wants to listen to that faggy, liberal horseshit! It’s so blatantly unamerican and twisted…garbage. We win again. :D

  26. Edgar says:


    Funny how liberals, who are either fags themselves, or fag lovers, are always talking about Tea-Bagging. I didn’t even know what the hell that was; I had to look it up on google. I just never heard that term used like that before.

    What I wonder about is why liberals LOVE to say “Tea Bagger” ?? I doubt liberals would mock Gay Tea-Baggers (the TRUE tea-baggers) but I guess it’s only straight, close-minded, conservative tea-baggers that they hate.

    Maybe I’m wrong though. Maybe liberals do find gay tea-bagging to be utterly disgusting. In fact, the liberals from California voted against Gay Tea-Bagging via prop8. So, while liberals support pro-gay-tea-bagging in the public arena, behind closed doors they are, deep down inside, very much Anti-Gay-Tea-Bagger at heart.

  27. perkiset says:


    roflmao: roflmao: roflmao:

    ohMAN are you off base. Delusional as well. Literally, not worth the typing time it takes to discuss it.

  28. Edgar says:


    You’re in denial. Obama is flunking the presidency like a high school stoner flunking algebra. Not only that but he’s sinking his the democratic party faster than any republican attack machine could.

    Now that he’s completed a full year, people are taking the time to actually evaluate his performance critically. Do you realize that democratic support for the president is slipping? Do you realize that among people who aren’t affiliated with either party, Obama only gets about 23% approval?

    He’s been working with a super-majority in congress and still can’t get the healthcare bill – his signature piece of policy – off the ground. Do you realize that over 70% of Americans still believe the economy is in a recession?

    Even if you don’t see things that way you have to realize that Obama has realized that he is in a critical position. He called in his old campaign manager to help him try to salvage his deplorable situation. While Obama and the democrats in congress were pushing socialized health care, at the exclusion of everything else, the American people were expecting a shift in priorities – JOBS!!

    Obama and the dems are so confoundedly disconnected from what REAL Americans expect and deserve that it took Scott Brown’s upset victory to wake them up. Only now are they beginning to realize that America wants job creation and not health care reform.

    I live in Massachusetts and I can tell you, first hand, that this vote for Scott Brown WAS a referendum on Obama, Reid, Pelosi and the rest of the hard-left liberal marxists. It was a giant middle finger given to the administration and spoke for the country at large.

  29. perkiset says:

    Spin as you wish Edgar, it doesn’t make it so. 23% approval? We know what you watch and listen to.

    Yes, he is in a critical position and here’s where you and we are different: we continually are evaluating and pushing our representatives to be what we asked, and to do what we hired them for – as opposed to you water carriers for the looney right that simply regurgitate what you’re told.

    In fairness, the Brown victory, whether because Choaker was an idiot or not, is worthy cause for him to look deeply at his first year and reflect on the correct future path.

    But simply because I don’t think we’ve EVER SEEN a party of “No” like we are right now in the Repubs gives Obama more slack – anyone that thinks knows he and the Dems will be thwarted at every turn – and cuckold by the pseudo-Dems.

    It is unfortunate that you seem to take such glee in his troubles edgar, because frankly it’d be much more fun to debate with someone that was actually interested in bettering the lot of the American populace, than simply wanting Obama to fail. Unfortunate indeed.

  30. Edgar says:

    Perk, I got those numbers from various pollsters.

    @Party of NO

    You sound like Gordon Brown. I guess you were around for when Bush was president and the democrats were the party of NO.

    Indeed, Obama took the Brown election as a referendum on himself. He’s looking for a way to reconnect with the American people. You know what that means? That means he’s realizing that Americans just don’t want a socialist/marxist leader.

    Obama is a socialist. He wants America to evolve into a socialist nation. A marxist would prefer revolution – so I might not have good reason to call Obama a marxist, but then again, look at his friends.

    We say NO to big gov’t, big deficits (which is why Bush became so unpopular with conservatives) and we say NO to Obama handling every single foreign policy matter like an indecisive…scratch that- let’s just say we said NO to carter too.

    Cut taxes, freeze spending (like Mcain wanted to) and either win the war in Afghanistan or get out.

    Solutions from the conservative side.

  31. WillyP says:

    what foolishness you spew. Look at the record. Republicans, starting with Reagan, are the ones who have blown the budgets and enlarged the government. You have this mythology of the past, thinking that Repubs are so fiscally sound. It just ain’t true. Every time a Democrat has come into office since the tired actor, he has had to clean up the mess (hence my circus metaphor) left by the GOP. Let’s face it, you guys are great at sniping, but have no capability for governing.

    As far as the Brown election in Mass: it is interesting that he has now disowned the tea baggers and is becoming just another Republican. And, he’s pro choice as well. He might even become a supporter of the new health care program. By the way, the public option is now back in play and, just wait, we will have a complete health care law in place soon.

    I sure enjoyed the “discussion” Obama had with the Repubs in congress. He devastated them; helped them show themselves to be the fools that they really are. The game isn’t over dear Edgar. I hope you are marinating a big, fat crow. I believe you will be eating it soon.

  32. Edgar says:


    “I sure enjoyed the “discussion” Obama had with the Repubs in congress. He devastated them; helped them show themselves to be the fools that they really are.”

    I have no problem with Obama letting everyone know just how he feels. If he thinks the supreme court ruling was idiotic then he should say so, in no uncertain terms. See, I’m not one of those guys who thinks Obama stepped out of line when he condemned the court’s ruling. I hate the way political correctness has stifled free speech. It’s bullshit and I’m actually happy that Obama expressed himself clearly and strongly.

    @Brown – We’ll see.

    @Democrats cleaning up Republican mess

    What am I supposed to do, spend my time defending the republicans? I owe no allegiance to the republican party. In my mind, they are not conservative enough – a bunch of Rino’s. Having said that, didn’t Nixon inherit Vietnam from the democrats? What about Ike inheriting the Korean war from Truman? How about Uncle Ronnie inheriting Carter’s MESS? How about Bush inheriting the Glass Steagall Reversal from B.J. Clinton?

    Try being intellectually honest once in a while, professor.

    Hey Willy, did you know that Bush foresaw the problems with Freddie and Fannie and actually tried to increase regulations back in 2003? It was in the NYTimes (the link to that article is buried somewhere on this blog). Obama, Barney Frank and Dodd where the ones who opposed Bush’s remedy, saying he just hated minorities and didn’t want them to have homes.

    Let me know if you don’t agree with the facts, I will find the links for you.

  33. WillyP says:

    I’d like to see them.

  34. Edgar says:

    For starters go to the post perk wrote about the financial collapse. Scroll through the comments and you’ll find my link to the NYT article.

  35. Edgar says:

    Willy, here’s an article from the NYT.

    From the Wall Street Journal

    “House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 10, 2003:

    Bush proposed increased regulations (to the dismay of his fellow republicans) on Freddie and Fannie in 2003/2004. His basic premise was that F&F were showing signs of systemic and fundamental instability that needed to be dealt with immediately and aggressively. The dems in congress just didn’t see anything really wrong (wow!!) with F&F. Below are some quotes from the hearing in Sept 2003, referenced from the above link to the WSJ.

    Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): “I worry, frankly, that there’s a tension here. The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. . . .”

    So Frank took a good look at F&F and came to the opposite conclusion of GWB. There were no major problems with F&F in Barney’s eyes.

    Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), speaking to Housing and Urban Development Secretary Mel Martinez:

    “Secretary Martinez, if it ain’t broke, why do you want to fix it? Have the GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises] ever missed their housing goals?”

    Waters makes clear that there is nothing wrong with F&F (the GSE in question), I think especially because GWB would get credit for fixing the problem. This is called cock-blocking the president and all-be-damned the country.

    House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:

    Rep. Frank:
    “I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. . . .”

    Frank doesn’t want to focus on little things like “soundnes and safety,” he just want’s to “roll the dice” with subsidized housing! That’s a damning statement – because he lost that roll.

    House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:
    Rep. Waters:
    “Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines. Everything in the 1992 act has worked just fine. In fact, the GSEs have exceeded their housing goals. . .”

    Mrs Waters is brilliant eh? That’s a great example of an affirmative action congresswoman. Everything worked “just fine” and there are no problems with F&F. Read ‘em and weep…

    Rep. Frank:
    “I believe there has been more alarm raised about potential unsafety and unsoundness than, in fact, exists.”

    Yes Barney, we know. Barney makes it clear that he sees nothing that needs fixing in F&F.

    The liberal democrats sunk our country. They were, in effect, buying votes by enabling F&F to back these crappy mortgages. The dems knew that the recipients of such mortgages would largely be blacks and other minorities – and they would forever have those voters in their pockets.

    Another factor that motivated the dems (frank, waters, dodd etc…) to cock-block the much needed overhaul of F&F is the Hate George Bush Syndrome. The fact is that these corrupt assholes (whom you love) would rather sink our economy than let GWB receive any credit for doing anything good.

    These dems are either corrupt, incompetent or both. Of course, the same people who got us into this mess (definitely not Bush) are at the helm right now! We deserve everything we get for letting these people ruin the whole friggen country. If I were emperor…off with their heads.

  36. Edgar says:

    Willy, my last comment gives you some quotes and links to check out. Perk has to approve the comment because it had 2 links.

    On another note, you should love Sarah Palin. If she becomes the front-runner for 2012 then Obama will get to serve his next term. I think she’s alright, I guess, but I hardly think that she’s electable. I don’t want her near the Tea Party either, she’ll ruin it.

    I don’t buy any of that phony outrage either, regarding the ‘retarded’ comment. I’m not a fan of Rohm’s by any means, but give the guy a break. That’s crappy politics.

    Not as crappy as Obama’s policies though; he’s not even addressed Ahmedinejad’s feb 11 threat. I though Obama was a persuasive genius? He was just supposed to fly over to Iran, respectfully reason with the wackos, bow down and kiss their asses, and solve our foreign policy problems.

    I thought the problem was GWB? Guess not.

  37. Edgar says:


  38. jairez says:

    q: when is a conservative NOT a conservative?

    a: when he’s a Republican



  39. Edgar says:

    Obama extends the Patriot Act!


    When GWB was president the liberals were ALL OVER him about the patriot act and the erosion of our civil liberties. I don’t expect liberals to hold Obama to the same standard as they held Bush though. They will make excuses for Obama and, somehow, learn to see the Patriot Act in a different, more tolerant way – I’m sure


  40. perkiset says:

    Nope – the Patriot Act is an abomination. Needs to be repealed or at least redrafted. I’m gonna need to see some reasoning why.

  41. Edgar says:

    Once again we see Obama marching *right in* uncle George’s footsteps! The “Black Bush” is amazing to me. I just can’t get over the nightmare he must be for you liberals.

    Funny how we are still in Iraq. I remember back when Iraq was a ball of fire, with bombs going off in Bagdad every day. 200 killed, 175 killed – every day. The democrats judged the war to be a lost cause. They said we should bring our troops home NOW. When republicans tried to make the case that, if we pull out the troops now, Iraq will self destruct, the democrats argued that Iraq needs to learn to take care of itself. We needed to pull out to encourage Iraq to “get it together.”

    Where are these democrats now? What happened to that sizzling sense of urgency? Maybe the liberals didn’t *really* care about what was happening in Iraq. Maybe it was all just trumped up, phony outrage. A manufactured moral high-ground from which they could indulge in an intense Hate Bush fest. A Bush Hate-a-thon.

    After all, where is the outrage now?

  42. perkiset says:

    “After all, where is the outrage now?”

    Interesting, that makes it clear that you do not listen to anything even remotely middle of the road, much less progressive. This is one of the defining differences between us, Edgar: unlike the Repubs that walk lock-step, regardless of the ill effect on the American people, we liberals challenge our leaders and challenge their leadership. Obama is taking a *lot* of flack from the left because he’s just to busy trying to be loved by the assholes on the right.

    He may or may not wind up being a nightmare for liberals, but he has 75% of his presidency left to sort things out. I realize that you are more interested in seeing him fail than seeing the American people succeed, and that’s unfortunate – but he does have 3 years left on his contract. We’ll see if he’s worthy of another 4, soon.

  43. Edgar says:


    “After all, where is the outrage now?”

    Interesting, that makes it clear that you do not listen to anything even remotely middle of the road, much less progressive.”

    Bull! You couldn’t turn on the radio or the TV (any news channel) without seeing all the outrage. Now we have to dig for it. Gimme a break…

    Did you notice that what’s his name rode the Tea Party thing to victory in Texas? Obama is creating a backlash like he never imagined.

  44. perkiset says:

    @ dig for it: well, if you’re looking for progressives to hate Obama you’re not going to find it. There’s no syndrome on our side, only frustration that he’s not going far enough. But based on the stupid yet vehement opposition from your side, it’s amazing we’ll get much done at all. Stupak? Are you kidding? The guy needs to be removed.

    @ backlash: LOL you’ll read it any way you want it. Despite GOP whining, Bloomberg reports that the economy is stabilizing, the market’s up, housing starts are up, joblessless as a whole is moving down … Congress’ approval is still on the way down but Obama’s is holding firm.

    And I’m REALLY LOL that you’d assume that a Republican or tea partier getting elected in TX is any big deal

  45. Edgar says:


    “And I’m REALLY LOL that you’d assume that a Republican or tea partier getting elected in TX is any big deal”

    Well, the tea party is new, and it appears to be getting some traction. It’s interesting, don’t you think?

  46. perkiset says:

    I think there is genuine and viable anger coming from people in this country. I have no argument with Teabaggers wanting change – in fact, that’s healthy. They have been misdirected, to a certain extent, on where to place their anger, but I agree with several points with tea baggers. I disagree on methods and some important particulars, but that’s democracy for you.

    IMO, the tea party movement is people, like you and me, pissed off that we are not getting what we’re paying for, and are tired of feeling screwed. The important point is that they don’t realize that the government is not the only one screwing them – they’ve been lead to believe that corporations are the free market, and that free market is what’s best for them. It’s a comedic level of ignorance about corporate America and what corporations actually exist to do (profit off them).

    I think that if the people in the party knew exactly how they were being played by the large corporations, the insurance industry, lobbyists etc etc they’d be pissed off at a lot more than our government. Certainly, our government deserves plenty scrutiny and cleaning out. But they ignore the much larger demon when they focus only there.

    But back to Texas, there’s no surprise there. They want to secede from the union, FCOL. Texas electing a right wing reactionary is no surprise at all.

  47. Edgar says:


    “But back to Texas, there’s no surprise there. They want to secede from the union, FCOL. Texas electing a right wing reactionary is no surprise at all.”

    Well, what I find interesting is the dynamic that exists in an electoral sense. To put it simply, many republicans, while they have a certain kinship with the teaparty, ultimately reject the notion of a third part – especially a conservative one like the TP.

    Republicans basically think that it would be electoral suicide to allow the TP to become a major political party. They basically think that this would do nothing more than fragment the republican party – which would lead to democratic victories.

    That makes sense, right? It would split (or so they say) the conservative vote between the republican party and the TP, leaving the democrats in a stronger position.

    So, in that sense, it’s interesting that a TeaPartier was *allowed* to win in Texas. See what I mean?

    Republicans are afraid that the TP will divide conservatives, thus committing electoral suicide.

    What do you think? Is the TP good, bad or irrelevant?

  48. perkiset says:

    @ Good, Bad or Irrelevant: Good because people are involved, badly manipulated by huge forces with ulterior motives, and not irrelevant from a democratic standpoint (small d) because dissent and vocalizing opinions is a good thing – but perhaps ultimately irrelevant from a electoral perspective because they don’t really have enough strength to shift the balance of power. That may change, but I don’t think so right now.

    Partisanship from the right is causing a lot of the dissent, as is their perception that the Liberal agenda is something other than what it is. Even though I disagree with much of what the tea partyers say (although I speculate if they knew more some of their opinions might sway) I like the fact that they are in the game for what they perceive to be better for AMERICA, rather than a party. Partisanship is perhaps what pisses me off the most.

    I think that Republican partisanship, has played nasty against some conservatives, because partisanship trumps conservative values – which a true conservative despises (exactly the way partisanship from the left pisses a true Liberal off). The Tea Partyers are clearly a symptom of Republican loss of way.

    Don’t like all they have to say, but I like the American democracy of it all :)

  49. Edgar says:

    Hey Perk,

    Long time no argue…

    “I think that Republican partisanship, has played nasty against some conservatives, because partisanship trumps conservative values – which a true conservative despises”

    I totally agree, although I’m not a Tea Partyer yet.

    Well, back in 2008 Obama promised the “get out of war NOW” that we’d bring the boys back home. Now in 2010 we are still at war.

    Looks like another war might be brewing in earnest re north and south korea. The administration gave full backing to the south koreans. We are about to run some maritime war games off the coast of the two koreas. Not looking so good.

    Why is Obama such a warmonger? I’m shocked.

    Now Perk, you are definitely slacking. There’s so much to bitch about if you are a liberal. What about the new Arizona law? Hmm? What about the great state of Texas and their more middle-of-the-road amendments to school curriculum textbooks?

    Well, I wonder when Obama is going to fix:

    illegal immigration
    his buddies on wallstreet
    the partisan divide
    our relationships with our allies

    Cameron is the new King of England and Israel all but spit on Joe Biden.

    No wonder it’s so quite in the liberal lunchroom.


  50. perkiset says:

    You’re right Edgar, been a long time. Welcome back :)

    No inference should be drawn from my silence other than the fact that my business life has been so very slammed that I cannot even put enough time together to post something reasonably well thought out. And as you point out, certainly not for lack of content. The AZ law alone could be a career in posting.

    Interesting list and worthy of comment – but alas I am not currently able. It’s always funny to me that the conservative argument moves to whatever hasn’t been done yet. You must really believe that guy is God to be able to have tackled all that has been done so far and all the rest of that as well. I’m impressed by your obvious admiration for the guy.

    Go well Edgar – I’ll try to post here sometime soon.

  51. Edgar says:

    Interesting article in Time today. Here’s the part that got my attention:

    “South Carolina’s unexpected Democratic nominee for the US Senate, mystery man Alvin Greene, says he wants to play golf with Barack Obama. But in Texas, another surprise Democratic primary winner, congressional nominee Kesha Rogers, wants to impeach the President. So while South Carolina party officials are still unsure of what to do about Greene’s success at the ballot box, Texas Democrats have no such reservations – they wasted little time in casting Rogers into exile and offering no support or recognition of her campaign to win what once was Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s old seat.

    Rogers, 33, told TIME she is a “full time political activist” in the Lyndon LaRouche Youth Movement, a recruiting arm of the LaRouche political organization that is active on many college campuses. The LYM espouses LaRouche opposition to free trade and “globalism” (the UN, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund) and it also calls for a return to a humanist classical education, emphasizing the works of Plato and Leibnitz. On her professional looking campaign website, kesharogers.com, she touts the LaRouche political philosophy – a mix of support for the economic policies of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the impeachment of President Obama – and calls Obama a “London and Wall Street backed puppet” whose policies will destroy the Democratic Party. During the campaign, she was photographed carrying an oversized portrait of the President with a Hitler-style moustache penciled on his lip.”

    Hylton, H. (June 21, 2010). Texas Dems Grapple with Their own Alvin Greene.

  52. Willyp says:

    Perk and Edgar,
    Good to see some considered discourse again. It has been a very crazy time. We may be seeing a major shift in the United States, in which something resembling the formation that (I can’t recall the author) the book “The nine nations of North America” suggested. In all my 70 years, I have never seen the US so polarized, and sadly so uneducated.

    I have to say that I do have some real regrets about Obama, as so much of his political capital was piddled away over trying to get one or two repub votes. When you reflect upon his campaign promises, you see that he has come up short in so many important ones. That is not to say that he has accomplished little. This congressional session, albeit constantly struggling with opposition nay votes to everything, has been one of the most productive for years. I am frustrated that the man negotiates from such a soft rather than aggressive position. I truly believe much more could have been done and ultimately, more Dems elected in November.

    As to the Repubs and the TP (another interesting nickname) I agree with Perk that the democracy of the process is, optically, a positive thing, but the reality of the corporate underpinnings of the movement make it anything but a positive contribution to the American political discourse. The sad thing for me is that there isn’t a voice in the Repub/TP party that is willing or capable of a discussion that involves intelligent, thoughtful discussion of issues. In my opinion, there are no “conservatives” on the right today. The desire is only to win, not set a positive agenda for the country. Barry Goldwater is rolling around in his grave. And what has been done to his beloved Arizona . . . that is truly sad.

  53. Edgar says:

    Hi Willy,

    Nice to hear from you again. It’s been a long time since we discussed anything on this blog, but I guess Perk has been busy making a living.

    Willy, I agree with much of what you said actually. There are no “conservatives” in the republican party today. It’s all about power, greed and money – as it always has been. I don’t know any real conservatives, as I like to consider myself, who are happy at all with the repubs. We’re sick of them all.

    I’ve heard many left leaning people express their regret with Obama as well. That’s why the tea party is growing and gaining in credibility. People on both sides of the isle are feeling somewhat disconnected with their parties – more so the repubs than the dems though.

  54. Willyp says:

    Sorry that this took so long, but I have been out on the road and, being somewhat technically challenged, I haven’t been on line at all. It is interesting watching the breakdown of critical thinking in this country. It seems that the homage to empty-headedness is growing. I think it to be most interesting how you, Perk and I seem to be driven together, with minor differences and little animosity. I truly fear for my country when I consider that “God is just.” I wish I had invented that line, but it was Jefferson’s.

    I’ll be back.

  55. Edgar says:

    I don’t know exactly what it is, Willy, but there are some strange forces at work when the likes of us three don’t have much to argue about. There’s a strange, ominous feeling in the air. My father always said that there was no difference between the political parties. He always says that behind closed doors, they are all tipping back drinks together, talking about the “show” they’ll put on tomorrow, and helping each other make money – hand over fist. I’ve always dismissed such talk as mere skepticism, but now I might have to start agreeing with him.

    Of courser, on the grass roots level, I think there is a difference between Dems and Repubs, certainly ideologically. But as people rise to power, it seems that their idealism becomes quickly diluted. All these underhanded deals go masquerading around as compromise – and who’s going to argue with the idea of compromise?

    I wish we could harmlessly squabble about little left & right issues, but we need to get this country back on its feet. We need jobs and more jobs. It’s getting worse out there. Not only has manufacturing been successfully exported to China and other countries who exploit child labor, but now (more and more) white collar jobs are being “shipped” over seas as well. Business process outsourcing (BPO’s) companies in India, Moldova and so on, are taking a big bite out of the IT industry here in the states.

    How can we bring jobs back home? How can we safeguard our existing jobs and, at least somewhat, insulate them from the global economy?

    Then there’s the war. What is there to say about the war that hasn’t already been said? At least there’s a significant draw-down in Iraq happening. But what’s next? What about Afghanistan? Iran? North Korea? What a mess. I wish we could all agree on a 10 year world treaty. Just 10 years of peace ought to do everyone some good.