http://mediamatters.org/items/200509280006

If you wanted to reduce crime ... if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." Bennett conceded that aborting all African-American babies "would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do," then added again, "but the crime rate would go down."

A caller to Bennett's radio program was saying we would have more tax revenue if Roe v. Wade hadn't passed because aborted fetuses would have been born and grown up to be taxpayers.

Bennett is claiming his remarks are about ridiculous hypotheticals and he said it would be a "morally reprehensible" thing to do. However, he did say unequivocally the crime rate would go down if no more Black children were ever born.  It couldn't be clearer, according to this statement, that Bennett believes Blacks are genetically more prone to crime than other races.

Again the Murdoch media is treating Bennett with kid gloves again.  FOX News invited Bennett on as a guest to defend his statements.  They did not present a guest to argue anything to the contrary.  Sorry, co-host  Alan Colmes doesn't count!

If a liberal, be they Al Franken, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Katrina Vanden Heuval, Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Krugman, had said the same thing, the right-wing media would be putting them through the meat grinder and extrapolating the remarks to accuse liberals and Democrats as a whole of being "racist."

I don't know how "racist" Dr. Bennett really is.  I've observed him for over fifteen years, and I believe he would rather send the message that Blacks are born criminals than send the message that high rates of crime in predominantly Black communities are the result of systemic economic deprivation.  The latter message is more complicated and may undercut the political agenda of big business.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200509280006

If you wanted to reduce crime ... if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." Bennett conceded that aborting all African-American babies "would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do," then added again, "but the crime rate would go down."

A caller to Bennett's radio program was saying we would have more tax revenue if Roe v. Wade hadn't passed because aborted fetuses would have been born and grown up to be taxpayers.

Bennett is claiming his remarks are about ridiculous hypotheticals and he said it would be a "morally reprehensible" thing to do. However, he did say unequivocally the crime rate would go down if no more Black children were ever born.  It couldn't be clearer, according to this statement, that Bennett believes Blacks are genetically more prone to crime than other races.

Again the Murdoch media is treating Bennett with kid gloves again.  FOX News invited Bennett on as a guest to defend his statements.  They did not present a guest to argue anything to the contrary.  Sorry, co-host  Alan Colmes doesn't count!

If a liberal, be they Al Franken, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Katrina Vanden Heuval, Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Krugman, had said the same thing, the right-wing media would be putting them through the <a  style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=meat%20grinder" onmouseover="window.status='meat grinder'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">meat grinder</a> and extrapolating the remarks to accuse liberals and Democrats as a whole of being "racist."

I don't know how "racist" Dr. Bennett really is.  I've observed him for over fifteen years, and I believe he would rather send the message that Blacks are born criminals than send the message that high rates of crime in predominantly Black communities are the result of systemic economic deprivation.  The latter message is more complicated and may undercut the political agenda of big business.




Liberals justify everything else.  Go ahead and get ticked off at me for saying that.  But justifying is what liberals do best.  If I ever am in trouble and need a lawyer I'm getting a liberal lawyer cause even if I'm guilty, I got a good chance of being aquitted cause he/she will justify what I did.  The need for an impurity is what the liberal side sees.  "Abortion, although not something I agree with on my own personal terms must seize to be allowed because of these reasons".  Thus, "Racism, although I am not a believer in it, must exist on these terms because...". 

Liberals justify everything else.  Go ahead and get ticked off at me for saying that.  But justifying is what liberals do best.  If I ever am in trouble and need a lawyer I'm getting a liberal lawyer cause even if I'm guilty, I got a good chance of being aquitted cause he/she will justify what I did.  The need for an impurity is what the liberal side sees.  "Abortion, although not something I agree with on my own personal terms must seize to be allowed because of these reasons".   Thus, "Racism, although I am not a believer in it, must exist on these terms because...". 



Yeah, whatever, dude, whatever. ::)

Yeah, whatever, dude, whatever. ::)



Justify, maxwell, justify.

Will everybody cut out the childish hateful "liberal" and "conservative" generalizations.  Its sickening.  If you have a problem with somebody, deal with them and there way of thinking.  But stop trying to pin stupid labels on everybody to try to make a whole group look evil, it's lazy and hateful and we all know what it leads to.

His ignorant statement is born of pure ignorance, not liberalism or conservatism. Face that fact, people!

His ignorant statement is born of pure ignorance, not liberalism or conservatism. Face that fact, people!


Pure ignorance?

Baby killing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

Christian Bashing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

A man with full boar AIDS is allowed to get Viagra pills paid for by medicare and then go out and spread his disease to young women because liberals justify it.

20,000 men's collegiate sports have been dropped in the past 35 years without just cause because liberals justify it.

I base my hypothesis on the facts before me.

...
I don't know how "racist" Dr. Bennett really is.  I've observed him for over fifteen years, and I believe he would rather send the message that Blacks are born criminals than send the message that high rates of crime in predominantly Black communities are the result of systemic economic deprivation.  The latter message is more complicated and may undercut the political agenda of big business.



You're funny. Keep it coming.
;D (no wait, I think I'll go with this one --  ::) )

Liberals justify everything else.  Go ahead and get ticked off at me for saying that.  But justifying is what liberals do best.  If I ever am in trouble and need a lawyer I'm getting a liberal lawyer cause even if I'm guilty, I got a good chance of being aquitted cause he/she will justify what I did.  The need for an impurity is what the liberal side sees.  "Abortion, although not something I agree with on my own personal terms must seize to be allowed because of these reasons".  Thus, "Racism, although I am not a believer in it, must exist on these terms because...". 





Wait just one friggin second.  Our legal  system says that you are innocent until proven guilty, that you have the right  to council, and to confront witnesses who testify against you.  Our new Chief Justice, no liberal he, defended people who were probably guilty, as has every lawyer who works in the criminal justice system, and wrote briefs and memos to promote the agenda anyone who paid his salary.  But I guess you are saying that we should return to trial by drowning - if you drown, you were innocent, if you float, you were guilty.

But why do I bother?  Your "liberal bashing" knows  no bounds, even though it often makes you sound like an i... better not say that.

William Bennett, is saying that he took the abortion and decline of crime argument from the new book
"Freakanomics", but in the book there wasn't any mention of race, he came up with that himself.  He
has made a living lecturing on the family and morality, but he is an inveterate gambler. He should just apologize and go home,(and stay there)  >:(

Pure ignorance?

Baby killing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

Christian Bashing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

A man with full boar AIDS is allowed to get Viagra pills paid for by medicare and then go out and spread his disease to young women because liberals justify it.

20,000 men's collegiate sports have been dropped in the past 35 years without just cause because liberals justify it.

I base my hypothesis on the facts before me.


Abortion rights, free speech and gender equality are not "liberal issues".  You sound more and more like a half-cocked crazy fanatic every frickin day.

Pure ignorance?

Baby killing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

Christian Bashing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

A man with full boar AIDS is allowed to get Viagra pills paid for by medicare and then go out and spread his disease to young women because liberals justify it.

20,000 men's collegiate sports have been dropped in the past 35 years without just cause because liberals justify it.

I base my hypothesis on the facts before me.


Abortion is legal because the United States Constitution gives us all the right to privacy

Christian bashing, like Muslin, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Liberal, Conservative bashing is justified by the FIRST AMENDMENT to the CONSTITUTION of the UNITED STATES which, like it or not, gives each of us the right to bash whoever the he11 we want to bash.

Knowingly speading AIDS is a crime, at least in Vermont.  If it isn't in your state, work to make it so.

Title IX requires parity between men's and women's sports, it doesn't dictate how that should be achieved.  The fault is not in the law, but in how college sports have been commercialized.  I had a very fine student (History/Athletic Training major) who wrote a paper on this topic, wish I had a copy to fax you.  He blames the colleges and the athletic directors for the problem, not the law.

Unfortunately, the facts that you choose to have before you are very limited, and predicated on your knee-jerk conservatism.

Now to get back to the topic, is it any wonder that neo-fascist creationists would blame the victim?  Bennet is a jerk, but let him spout.  The more these guys talk, the deeper hole they dig for themselves.  Lil' Mr H's tyrade is just another example of the conservative myopia, which is becoming harder and harder to sustain as more and more of the self ritious basta.., get hoisted by their own petute.  Tom DeLay today, Karl Rove next, Bill Frist is also on the agenda.  Soon, the threads will lead to the top.

Wait just one friggin second.  Our legal  system says that you are innocent until proven guilty, that you have the right  to council, and to confront witnesses who testify against you.  Our new Chief Justice, no liberal he, defended people who were probably guilty, as has every lawyer who works in the criminal justice system, and wrote briefs and memos to promote the agenda anyone who paid his salary.  But I guess you are saying that we should return to trial by drowning - if you drown, you were innocent, if you float, you were guilty.

But why do I bother?  Your "liberal bashing" knows  no bounds, even though it often makes you sound like an i... better not say that.


And you're better?

You do nothign but praise Liberal politics, you find absolutely no fault in them whatsoever.  You truly believe they're impeccable.

You find little to absolutely nothing right with conservative politics.

I've said this before, My head isn't stuck up my butt so far to where I can't see what the conservatives are doing wrong and see what the liberals are doing right.

World sure is gray when I point something out in black and white...but when you do, distinguishing the colors doesn't seem to be a problem.


"if you drown, you were innocent, if you float, you were guilty."  If things keep going the way the are, it won't be long before your defending this, and I'm fighting against it,  saying, "no, this isn't right".

Abortion rights, free speech and gender equality are not "liberal issues".  You sound more and more like a half-cocked crazy fanatic every frickin day.


If your gonna be a know it all, I suggest you know what your talking about.

YOu don't know jack squat.

Abortion rights are protected by liberals.  Free speech, is one thing, but there is such thing as limitations.

and about the gender equality, you don't know anything to have any right to say anything at all here. 

You wanna bash me, go ahead.

But for someone that doesn't know didly squat, I wouldn't be so hot to trot.

^ Not that I am getting into this little argument here, but how do you know that she doesn't know anything?

1. Abortion is legal because the United States Constitution gives us all the right to privacy

2. Christian bashing, like Muslin, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Liberal, Conservative bashing is justified by the FIRST AMENDMENT to the CONSTITUTION of the UNITED STATES which, like it or not, gives each of us the right to bash whoever the he11 we want to bash.

3. Knowingly speading AIDS is a crime, at least in Vermont.  If it isn't in your state, work to make it so.

4. Title IX requires parity between men's and women's sports, it doesn't dictate how that should be achieved.  The fault is not in the law, but in how college sports have been commercialized.  I had a very fine student (History/Athletic Training major) who wrote a paper on this topic, wish I had a copy to fax you.  He blames the colleges and the athletic directors for the problem, not the law.

5. Unfortunately, the facts that you choose to have before you are very limited, and predicated on your knee-jerk conservatism.

Now to get back to the topic, is it any wonder that neo-fascist creationists would blame the victim?  Bennet is a jerk, but let him spout.  The more these guys talk, the deeper hole they dig for themselves.  Lil' Mr H's tyrade is just another example of the conservative myopia, which is becoming harder and harder to sustain as more and more of the self ritious basta.., get hoisted by their own petute.  Tom DeLay today, Karl Rove next, Bill Frist is also on the agenda.  Soon, the threads will lead to the top.


1 Privacy to commit murder.  But I forgot you think it's not murder, therefore it's not.

2 Christian Bashing is allowed like no other, not even comparable.  Oh but I forgot, your not a christian and the liberals don't base there principals on rules and regulations set by a higher power, instead they all create they're own beliefs and the most powerful dictate.


3. If spreading AIDS is a crime then, why would my sister get fired and face criminal charges for warning a woman who was about to sleep with that man that he had AIDS?  Huh, there's your right to privacy right here.

4. The quota of proportionality is killing men's sports, ask 10,000 coaches who were laid off when they're jobs were cut by the school and 98% of them will tell you, "proportionality".  But I forgot, they can't possibly be right.  I mean even at a school without a football or men's basketball program, that had to cut it's men's swimming program, surely it still must be those commericial sports faults.

5. Unfortunately you look at one side, the liberal side of it, and refuse to see the other side of the coin.  Obviously 110% on the title IX issue.

^ Not that I am getting into this little argument here, but how do you know that she doesn't know anything?


What's the reason behind these things?

Men and women's sports would be actually equal and Title IX would do what it's supposed to do if we could just rewrite the clause so it will come down to more than just proportionality.  Who's stopping us? The Liberals.

Abortion wouldn't be a form of birth control, it'd have restrictions to where it was only done when necessary.  Who's making sure that if Sally wants to bang the guy she met that night at a party she doesn't have to worry about it, cause if she gets pregnant she can go have an abortion? The Liberals.

Who's pushing for atheism?  Can't blame it all on the liberals here, but good luck finding a conservative who has the nerve to pull the Santa Clause effect on a Christian.

I agree that a lot of users here are doctinaire and dogmatic but that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't know anything.

I agree that a lot of users here are doctinaire and dogmatic but that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't know anything.


I don't mind being bashed.

I get into agruments with good friends at home and school that are liberals but we discuss the issues. They back it up with facts and they're both man/woman enough to know when they're wrong.

My outlook on liberals really isn't that bad because I'm around some that actually have the common sense to know that they can't be right about absolutely everything.

If She wants to call me a "    ",  that's all fine and dandy, but do so with some dignity, freakin put up some real facts, instead of being a moron and just putting, "no, it isn't". 

I respect Don Carlos cause although he's "never wrong" about anything, and views his beliefs "perfect", he at least puts up an argument.

The Liberals on this board  talk about respecting peoples beliefs and they're right to choose what to believe when infact  The Liberal outlook on this message board is  every single Liberal beliefs IS right and the conservative beliefs are tolerated because conservatives "believe" they're right, even though they ARE wrong. 

Oh dearie dear, we're back to the one about the government paying for the AIDS patient's Viagra.  Yawn.
BTW, the phrase you were looking for is "full-bore."  A boar, B-O-A-R, is a male pig--which brings us back to William Bennett.  All I was saying is conservatives have been swearing up and down that Bennett's not a racist when what he said affirms Bennett's racism beyond all doubt.  He made it clear he believes Blacks are genetically prone to crime.  Even the Bush White House has called for Bennett to apologise.
The tone of the media coverage had a liberal said the same thing would not be so apologetic.

After listening to the uproar, I noticed how FOX News DIDN'T conveniently include the second line after the comment and how the Today Show did!!!

I know someone who did the research, (see below), and what Bennett was referring to can be found TRUE..was it right to say?..HE CLEARLY POINTED OUT HOW REPUGNANT IT WOULD BE, as in a hypothetical case,...So who's calling him out for this comment.

Look up the facts and stats 50 or 51% guilty of  murder were black, and some of the unarmed crime stats make the point of 30% or so, were committed by blacks...

I am NOT saying anything RACIST here,...check out the figuring and you can say as well..If people were aborted, the rate would be different..as well as GED  and other societal measuring stats...

The White House had to follow up with SOMETHING so grumble grumble.."that's not a nice thing for him to say!"

Have you even heard the comment..it was reprinted in full earlier..HY-POTHETICAL....

As far as treatment of political figures versus others....Does anyone recall when former Police chief Daryl Gates of LA made a comment about using a chokehold on blacks he said something about how it is different than they way they would on a normal person? EVERYONE CALLED HIM RACIST AND BIGOTED..AND WENT CRAZY OVER IT..As they should have ....BUT THEN..When good 'ol Bill Clinton(maybe in office at the time),made the comment how BLACK PEOPLE watch tv the same as NORMAL people...oooooo where did everybody go,,uh the hearing aid battery was broke , I missed it huh?

THERE is your preferential treatment!!    
For any challenging to this info..it came from broadcaster larryelder.com and he did his research and tells it like it REALLY is.
   

After listening to the uproar, I noticed how FOX News DIDN'T conveniently include the second line after the comment and how the Today Show did!!!

I know someone who did the research, (see below), and what Bennett was referring to can be found TRUE..was it right to say?..HE CLEARLY POINTED OUT HOW REPUGNANT IT WOULD BE, as in a hypothetical case,...So who's calling him out for this comment.

Look up the facts and stats 50 or 51% guilty of  murder were black, and some of the unarmed crime stats make the point of 30% or so, were committed by blacks...

I am NOT saying anything RACIST here,...check out the figuring and you can say as well..If people were aborted, the rate would be different..as well as GED  and other societal measuring stats...

The White House had to follow up with SOMETHING so grumble grumble.."that's not a nice thing for him to say!"

Have you even heard the comment..it was reprinted in full earlier..HY-POTHETICAL....

As far as treatment of political figures versus others....Does anyone recall when former Police chief Daryl Gates of LA made a comment about using a chokehold on blacks he said something about how it is different than they way they would on a normal person? EVERYONE CALLED HIM RACIST AND BIGOTED..AND WENT CRAZY OVER IT..As they should have ....BUT THEN..When good 'ol Bill Clinton(maybe in office at the time),made the comment how BLACK PEOPLE watch tv the same as NORMAL people...oooooo where did everybody go,,uh the hearing aid battery was broke , I missed it huh?

THERE is your preferential treatment!!    
For any challenging to this info..it came from broadcaster larryelder.com and he did his research and tells it like it REALLY is.
   

You can dance around it all you like, but what Bennett said is still racist on its face.

You can dance around it all you like, but what Bennett said is still racist on its face.



So TYPICAL of the ignorant..ignoring FACTS that support a hypothetical comment..

and yet when the numbers prove it to be right..it's called racist on it's face..yeah let's forget that he called it wrong to say and yet you have people out there making an issue of it....

Anyone here jumping on the Delay indictment?  Yeah! He's guilty they got him....uh...er..The indictment was for what again????? Aren't you supposed to state what an indictment is for? ...Nice going Sherlocks... 

I

Oh dearie dear, we're back to the one about the government paying for the AIDS patient's Viagra.  Yawn.
BTW, the phrase you were looking for is "full-bore."  A boar, B-O-A-R, is a male pig--which brings us back to William Bennett.  All I was saying is conservatives have been swearing up and down that Bennett's not a racist when what he said affirms Bennett's racism beyond all doubt.  He made it clear he believes Blacks are genetically prone to crime.  Even the Bush White House has called for Bennett to apologise.
The tone of the media coverage had a liberal said the same thing would not be so apologetic.


Tell your little yawn story to the girl who slept with the guy and now has aids.

I admit that Bennett's comments were ludicrus, stupid, and downright wrong.

The main difference if a liberal would have said it, it would be justified, because of how he said it, why he said it, and all the other crap that is made up to avoid any punishment.


And uh...thanks for the grammar lesson.

If your gonna be a know it all, I suggest you know what your talking about.

YOu don't know jack squat.

Abortion rights are protected by liberals. Free speech, is one thing, but there is such thing as limitations.

and about the gender equality, you don't know anything to have any right to say anything at all here.

You wanna bash me, go ahead.

But for someone that doesn't know didly squat, I wouldn't be so hot to trot.


What is so know-it-all about saying those are not liberal issues?  You're an ass.  Christian my ass.  Youre as Christian as the frickin KKK.  Idiot.

First of all, if Al had said that.. well. He's Jewish, he controls the weather, EVIL EVIL MAN - ANTICHRIST.. etc..etc..etc. Ya see.. you like to talk about your whole 'I'm in the Christian Minority' spiel yet in terms of Religious prejudice, Islam and Judaism (probably the two most 'correct' - in terms of simple corelation of religious books - religions) are the two most ridiculed in the western world.

Baby killing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.


Or.. because that thingy, wadda ya call it.. errrm.. The supreme Court.. decided we could kill all the kiddy's we wanted. Cus we hate children.. if it was up to us (anybody you know.. with rational thought) we'd be killing anything under 5.


Christian Bashing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.


Or because of that whole.. Bill of rights thingy.


A man with full boar AIDS is allowed to get Viagra pills paid for by medicare and then go out and spread his disease to young women because liberals justify it.


Or, because the bureaucracy made a.. what do you call it now, those things that George does all the time, oh yes, a Mistake.


20,000 men's collegiate sports have been dropped in the past 35 years without just cause because liberals justify it.


I wasn't aware that 20,000 different sports existed, maybe sports programs. Yes, sports programmes. Now, i have to feel for you on this one, as Carlos stated, Title IX requires there to be at least an attempt for equality between men and women's sports in College. As i say, i feel for you, i enjoy amateur wrestling, but ya know.. I don't see it bringing Millions of dollars in to the college. That whole Capitalism thing works both ways.


I base my hypothesis on the facts before me.


Could i see them?

After listening to the uproar, I noticed how FOX News DIDN'T conveniently include the second line after the comment and how the Today Show did!!!

I know someone who did the research, (see below), and what Bennett was referring to can be found TRUE..was it right to say?..HE CLEARLY POINTED OUT HOW REPUGNANT IT WOULD BE, as in a hypothetical case,...So who's calling him out for this comment.

Look up the facts and stats 50 or 51% guilty of  murder were black, and some of the unarmed crime stats make the point of 30% or so, were committed by blacks...

I am NOT saying anything RACIST here,...check out the figuring and you can say as well..If people were aborted, the rate would be different..as well as GED  and other societal measuring stats...

The White House had to follow up with SOMETHING so grumble grumble.."that's not a nice thing for him to say!"

Have you even heard the comment..it was reprinted in full earlier..HY-POTHETICAL....

As far as treatment of political figures versus others....Does anyone recall when former Police chief Daryl Gates of LA made a comment about using a chokehold on blacks he said something about how it is different than they way they would on a normal person? EVERYONE CALLED HIM RACIST AND BIGOTED..AND WENT CRAZY OVER IT..As they should have ....BUT THEN..When good 'ol Bill Clinton(maybe in office at the time),made the comment how BLACK PEOPLE watch tv the same as NORMAL people...oooooo where did everybody go,,uh the hearing aid battery was broke , I missed it huh?

THERE is your preferential treatment!!    
For any challenging to this info..it came from broadcaster larryelder.com and he did his research and tells it like it REALLY is.
   


Someone is being racist when they try to show people in a bad way because of there race.  You don't have to like black people or asians or white people or whatever, but if you say something about that race to make it look like they tend to be a certain way, that's racist. You can use whatever statistics you want, but if you are trying to say that certain people act a certain way because of there race, its racist.  Just because you can make an arguement for something does not make it not racist.  Did you ever meet a racist that could not give you a reason to explain why he felt that way?  So what?  Do you think that makes them not racist?

It couldn't be clearer, according to this statement, that Bennett believes Blacks are genetically more prone to crime than other races.



He might actually think that, but its really not right to say that thats what the comment means.  He is saying that black people DO more crimes, but that doesn't NECESSARILY mean he thinks that is genetic. It is still racist of course.

What is so know-it-all about saying those are not liberal issues?  You're an ass.  Christian my ass.  Youre as Christian as the frickin KKK.  Idiot.


You remind me a kid that I pinned once in 25 seconds, yet he had the nerve to tell me that I sucked.

First of all, if Al had said that.. well. He's Jewish, he controls the weather, EVIL EVIL MAN - ANTICHRIST.. etc..etc..etc. Ya see.. you like to talk about your whole 'I'm in the Christian Minority' spiel yet in terms of Religious prejudice, Islam and Judaism (probably the two most 'correct' - in terms of simple corelation of religious books - religions) are the two most ridiculed in the western world.
Or.. because that thingy, wadda ya call it.. errrm.. The supreme Court.. decided we could kill all the kiddy's we wanted. Cus we hate children.. if it was up to us (anybody you know.. with rational thought) we'd be killing anything under 5.

Or because of that whole.. Bill of rights thingy.

Or, because the bureaucracy made a.. what do you call it now, those things that George does all the time, oh yes, a Mistake.

I wasn't aware that 20,000 different sports existed, maybe sports programs. Yes, sports programmes. Now, i have to feel for you on this one, as Carlos stated, Title IX requires there to be at least an attempt for equality between men and women's sports in College. As i say, i feel for you, i enjoy amateur wrestling, but ya know.. I don't see it bringing Millions of dollars in to the college. That whole Capitalism thing works both ways.

Could i see them?


Give me the reason why the supreme court couldn't change what is wrong.  Why is everything have to be in stone. Slavery obviously was abolished, women not being able to not vote was abolished, the 12 hour work day was abolished, why is it back in the history of the United States when something evil and unmoral was happening it was ok to change it, but today it isn't.  Why is there such an arrogance that absolutely nothing is wrong with the way things are and they don't need to be changed?  I thank the Good lord that things were different back in the day when is something was wrong, it got changed.

You make jokes all you want, The Roman's had a system of infanticide that was highly sociably acceptable.  If Infanticide existed in the U.S.A. today I'd be getting in fights with a lot of members on this board, cause I'd be the same way on it that I am on abortion.

Well I don't see it near as heavily everywhere, although I still see it.  On  this board you say anything even remotely offensive to aetheism you face the highest criminal charge, yet the highest bashing of christianity has the slightest charge avaible = NONE.



Look on the Topic about what Bush has done right.  If you care to know the real deal on Title IX read what I wrote.  More questions ask, cause I know.

Someone is being racist when they try to show people in a bad way because of there race.  You don't have to like black people or asians or white people or whatever, but if you say something about that race to make it look like they tend to be a certain way, that's racist. You can use whatever statistics you want, but if you are trying to say that certain people act a certain way because of there race, its racist.  Just because you can make an arguement for something does not make it not racist.  Did you ever meet a racist that could not give you a reason to explain why he felt that way?  So what?  Do you think that makes them not racist?


DID HE OUTRIGHT EXPRESS THIS AS HIS OPINION...NO!

He said it as an example WHICH IS BACKED BY TRUTH..IF YOU FEEL FACTS IS A WAY TO COVER UP WHAT IS PROOF.

If he  or anyone chose to use as a hypothetical: If we get rid of those red cars on the roads there would be fewer deaths by speed. IT SEEMS YOU WOULD BE ONE TO SCREAM DISCRIMINATION..WHEN FACTS POINT TO RED CARS IN MORE ACCIDENTS CAUSED FROM SPEEDING!

The statement was backed up with Bennett acknowledging how ridiculous it would be  to do yet some are only hearing the first part of the scene..that is disturbing.

He didn't say what he said to make a race look any way, his point comes down to blacks(being the subject) seem to cause more crime and we wouldn't have that set up if etc..
(TRUTH)..What's not to understand a point = all be it a ridiculous way to make it- being made with a question of 'IF'?

'IF we just stop eating(an ethnic groups) beans, we wouldn't have as much awful smelly farts...oooooo! Logically/TRUTHFULLY, perhaps (ethnic groups) beans cause much abdominal gas than other types(TRUTH)..should someone be called racist for 'picking on a race of peoples food' which ISN'T WHAT THEY ARE EVEN CALLING TO DO, BUT JUST USING THAT SCENARIO and hearing it from the illogical people complain how the person making the statement really FEELS that way about (ethnic group) food overall.

That's called logic.  Use it to understand WHY the statement ISN'T racist. And unless you know that Bennett  expresses racism with some SOLID proof rather than heresay ..he made a point-as dumb as it sounds- but WASN'T being racist.     

He might actually think that, but its really not right to say that thats what the comment means.  He is saying that black people DO more crimes, but that doesn't NECESSARILY mean he thinks that is genetic. It is still racist of course.

OK, now listen to me very carefully.

If he doesn't believe the cause is genetic, then it must be environmental.  The liberal argument is that poverty creates immorality.  The conservative argument is that immorality creates poverty.  The old eugenicist argument says immorality, criminality, and feeble-mindedness originate from inferior genes.  It is intrinsic. It is the nature of the beast.

If you say crime originates from extant economic circumstances, you make a liberal argument.  Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime because they are disproportionately excluded from social advantages.  Said exclusion comes from racism of the past and lack of will correct the iniquities of the present.  Again, this is a liberal argument.  Bennett spends his life bashing liberals and their ideas, so why would he make a liberal argument?

Bennett did not say the crime rate would go down if you aborted every Black baby born into poverty.  He said "every Black baby."  Period.  Maybe for economy of words he didn't specify.  If he meant "every Black baby born into poverty," he is acknowledging the economic system is immoral, but it's great for us rich guys, so it's not worth reforming.  If he meant literally "every Black baby, then he would have to admit Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, and Bill Cosby should never have been born.

Are poor Whites more likely to commit crimes than rich Whites? (ditto Asians, Latinos, etc.)  If so, Bennett could not limit his hypopthetical to just "every Black baby."  He would say, "every poor baby."  From there one must ask what racial types are blamed for crime, and what types do do demographic studies prove actually commit most crimes.  One also has to ask whether the stigma of economic segregation and negative stereotyping play a role in criminality.  The question is complex.

I have no evidence that Bennett isn't sincerely against all abortion.  I'm not saying he was suggesting on the sly that society exterminate Black people.  I am saying the remark is indicative of Bennett's prejudices.  He is responding on the fly to a caller's suggestion that fewer abortions would produce more taxpayers.  The first thing on Bennett's mind in responding is the amount of crime committed by Blacks.  The fact that a man as intelligent as Bennett did not restrain himself from uttering the argument he did reveals a conviction that "crime" is more of a Black problem than a White problem.  Bennett isn't ignorant.  He's thought the crime issue out, and that's what he believes.  I think he is morally wrong.

Thus, Bennett's statement is not about abortion so much as it is about crime and who we blame first.  Whether by nature or nurture, Bennett thinks Blacks are foremost to blame.


What is so know-it-all about saying those are not liberal issues?  You're an ass.  Christian my ass.  Youre as Christian as the frickin KKK.  Idiot.

Hey, hey, ixnay on the name-calling!  I don't want this thread to get locked up or deleted. 
>:(

Give me the reason why the supreme court couldn't change what is wrong.  Why is everything have to be in stone. Slavery obviously was abolished,



Yes, but then they allowed the "black codes" during Reconstruction.  The Supreme Court can right wrongs,
but they can also reverse what was right with a different set of wrongs

You remind me a kid that I pinned once in 25 seconds, yet he had the nerve to tell me that I sucked.


logic is not your strong point, is it.

OK, now listen to me very carefully.

Dont talk down to people.  We are not stupid.

logic is not your strong point, is it.


Yes it is my strong point.  You who don't know near as much as I do about Title IX, have the nerve to tell me that I know nothing and you know it all.  When the fact of the matter is, I could run circles around you when it comes to Title IX.

The anology was of very good logic.  The kid told me I sucked, how much better he was than me and made fun of me.  We shook hands and  the ref blew the whistle.  I snapped him down, threw a snake, and he was pinned. I helped him up, patted him on the back, and wondered to myself if he still thought I sucked.

Yes it is my strong point. You who don't know near as much as I do about Title IX, have the nerve to tell me that I know nothing and you know it all. When the fact of the matter is, I could run circles around you when it comes to Title IX.

No, you are irrational or confused or making up a lie dilliberately. I never said anything about being expert in Title IX or anything else.  All I said was


Abortion rights, free speech and gender equality are not "liberal issues". You sound more and more like a half-cocked crazy fanatic every frickin day.


Where am I talking about being expert in Title IX or anything else?  Hmm.  Can't wait to hear your next illogical response.  Come on, wacko, entertain us some more.  Pat Robertson is counting on you.

No, you are irrational or confused or making up a lie dilliberately. I never said anything about being expert in Title IX or anything else.  All I said was

Where am I talking about being expert in Title IX or anything else?  Hmm.  Can't wait to hear your next illogical response.  Come on, wacko, entertain us some more.  Pat Robertson is counting on you.


I sure hope Pat Robertson isn't counting on me, cause I think he's an idiot. 

You claim to know about "gender equality" rights...are you stupid enough not to know that Title IX deals with this stuff.  Infact it's what Title IX is all about. 

I'll put it to you straight up.  Title IX is in effect and going strong by standards of proportionality like no other because of the liberal party.  Walk on male athletes are being eliminated at high percentages because Title IX refuses to look at the differences in interest between males and females.  You claim that Title IX is not a liberal issue.  Let me reassure you that, it is a liberal issue.  It's  a battle between the Conversative and the liberals.  With The school saying, "We don't have enough girls interested in playing softball this year, we just can't get the girls to go out for the team"  and the liberals saying, "Ok then, cut the men's baseball team" and the conservatives saying, "hey, hold on a second, the school's not at fault for the girls not being interested in softball, you can't cut the men's baseball".  Then the battle of Title IX's original intention Vs Title IX's method of proportionality is under way.

Pure ignorance?

Baby killing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

Christian Bashing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

A man with full boar AIDS is allowed to get Viagra pills paid for by medicare and then go out and spread his disease to young women because liberals justify it.

20,000 men's collegiate sports have been dropped in the past 35 years without just cause because liberals justify it.

I base my hypothesis on the facts before me.


Stop avoiding the content of my statement. What does this have to do with what that person said about blacks and the crime rate (which by the way, isn't correctly linked to blacks and other minorities at all)? I tell what - nothing and you proved my point.

I sure hope Pat Robertson isn't counting on me, cause I think he's an idiot.

You claim to know about "gender equality" rights...are you stupid enough not to know that Title IX deals with this stuff. Infact it's what Title IX is all about.

I'll put it to you straight up. Title IX is in effect and going strong by standards of proportionality like no other because of the liberal party. Walk on male athletes are being eliminated at high percentages because Title IX refuses to look at the differences in interest between males and females. You claim that Title IX is not a liberal issue. Let me reassure you that, it is a liberal issue. It's a battle between the Conversative and the liberals. With The school saying, "We don't have enough girls interested in playing softball this year, we just can't get the girls to go out for the team" and the liberals saying, "Ok then, cut the men's baseball team" and the conservatives saying, "hey, hold on a second, the school's not at fault for the girls not being interested in softball, you can't cut the men's baseball". Then the battle of Title IX's original intention Vs Title IX's method of proportionality is under way.


Take algebra and geometry, they will teach you how to think in sequence.  Try to get at least a C.  Then take philosophy, that will teach you how to think about ideas. Then get back to me.  Or maybe you tried to study these and you failed.  Or maybe your just a fanatic.  Or maybe your a troll who just likes pretending hes stupid.  Whatever it is, its hard to take you serious.  :D

Look up the facts and stats 50 or 51% guilty of  murder were black, and some of the unarmed crime stats make the point of 30% or so, were committed by blacks...

I am NOT saying anything RACIST here,...check out the figuring and you can say as well..If people were aborted, the rate would be different..as well as GED  and other societal measuring stats...

The White House had to follow up with SOMETHING so grumble grumble.."that's not a nice thing for him to say!"

Have you even heard the comment..it was reprinted in full earlier..HY-POTHETICAL....

As far as treatment of political figures versus others....Does anyone recall when former Police chief Daryl Gates of LA made a comment about using a chokehold on blacks he said something about how it is different than they way they would on a normal person? EVERYONE CALLED HIM RACIST AND BIGOTED..AND WENT CRAZY OVER IT..As they should have ....BUT THEN..When good 'ol Bill Clinton(maybe in office at the time),made the comment how BLACK PEOPLE watch tv the same as NORMAL people...oooooo where did everybody go,,uh the hearing aid battery was broke , I missed it huh?

THERE is your preferential treatment!!    
For any challenging to this info..it came from broadcaster larryelder.com and he did his research and tells it like it REALLY is.
   


B/c 50% of blacks were found guilty, that makes them guilty? The justice system is known to have found innocent people guilty. If you would dig further into the numbers, the actual number would fall. There are plenty of guilty whites that go free, especially when clear guilt was in front of them. Give me a break.

Abortions do not fix stats at all, especially when it comes to race. A black baby could be aborted that would elevate society, while a white baby could grow to be a domestic terrorist (and how many have we had, actually - think about it).

Larry Elder? He has many issues and I wouldn't use him as a proper reference.

DID HE OUTRIGHT EXPRESS THIS AS HIS OPINION...NO!



I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying.  I am not saying I think the comment is racist because he really thinks black people should be aborted or because his statistics are wrong.  I think it is racist because its meant to make a negative comment about a race of people. 

If I say "every woman I ever made a Vice President in my company has been a big failure, but that doesn't make it right for me not to hire and promote women" you could say that comment is not sexist because I am saying that EVEN IF "women tend to fail" I should still hire them.  BUT when I make that comment the point I am probably making is that "women tend to fail".  Technically, I am saying I will hire them, but it still probably shows that I generally think of women as not good business people.  Even if I can PROVE with STATISTICS that every woman I hired as a VP did a really bad job, that comment probably still shows that I have a negative view of women executives in general, right?

Also, a lot of people confuse racist comments with bad people.  People have prejidices and stereotypes because of the society they live in.  I say sexist things sometimes, but that doesn't make me a bad person.  I grew up with some stereotypes.  My friend told me she went to a new doctor and I asked her "what did he say"?  That is sexist thinking.  That does not mean I think women are incompetent and should not be doctors.  If you say I say something sexist, I don't get all defensive.  But if you say somebody says something racist everybody goes crazy and starts saying he's not racist, you are and all kinds of stupid stuff.

B/c 50% of blacks were found guilty, that makes them guilty? The justice system is known to have found innocent people guilty. If you would dig further into the numbers, the actual number would fall. There are plenty of guilty whites that go free, especially when clear guilt was in front of them. Give me a break.

Abortions do not fix stats at all, especially when it comes to race. A black baby could be aborted that would elevate society, while a white baby could grow to be a domestic terrorist (and how many have we had, actually - think about it).

Larry Elder? He has many issues and I wouldn't use him as a proper reference.


Ever notice how many charged with a crime are innocent? Yes, there are flaws in the system but SOMEONE is keeping track of those convicted and some may keeptrack of those convicted THEN overturned.  The numbers were researched and used to cover the point that was probably on Bennetts mind.

The numbers of whites and *other ethnicities are also considered in the figures, you can keep digging to say the numbers would go down by asking-if the blacks arrested had a million$ lawyer how many would be free? But the numbers used are supporting Bennetts claim based on the figures..sure other races could then satrt to dominate the list,that is like researching if most serial kilers were white, it depends what point you are making when it comes to crime.

I have no comment on abortion.

Larry Elder makes some good points about the direct remark..for other things which he speaks on, it might be a matter of his opinion..I was just using him as the reference for this topic.
He had the numbers and people still wouldn't hear how it applies.

As for IZ:  I  am a rather playful/no hrm intended person..I remember when a girl I knew from hanging around other friends,said she just turned 21 , I (used to my own innocent world of fun), reached behind her and started giving her 21 light fanny pats when she nearly BLEW UP and nearly freaked out!!! My friend had to clam her down and let her know I am just being playful,and NOT trying to make a move on her - she apparently didn't like people touching her lower body or thought this guy is another SEXIST maniac and trying to grab my butt!

So whether it's something s done or said I look at it overall..If Bennett is one who likes to pick on a race by nature, or if he made a stupid point based on something on his mind,I askwhere is he coming from and not look to condemn one remark...i

Take algebra and geometry, they will teach you how to think in sequence.  Try to get at least a C.  Then take philosophy, that will teach you how to think about ideas. Then get back to me.  Or maybe you tried to study these and you failed.  Or maybe your just a fanatic.  Or maybe your a troll who just likes pretending hes stupid.  Whatever it is, its hard to take you serious.  :D


I got a B+ in Philosophy last year. 

You need to go back to Kindergarden and learn that winning an argument is done by attacking the issue.  Then learn what respect is. How to admit when your wrong and how to not whine when someone cleary out does you.

THis might seem a bit off topic, but has anyone heard of a book called The Bell Curve?  It accurately points out that black people (in the US) score lower on IQ tests than white people.  It then draws the conclusion that therefore black people will always be an under class because they are innately inferior.  What it fails to explain is that Catholics in Northern Ireland also score significantly lower than Protestants, and that Koreans living in Japan also score lower than Japanese.  I refer you all back to Max's post.

A LOT of people in America must be using some formof that BELL CURVE when I hear Yellow skinned people are good at arithmetic and people with slanted eyes drive slower than others..and on and on..

Basically someone is using their own bell curve..right or wrong .

If theydidn't use race as a curve, they may be limited to having to point out people with tattoos can fix cars better than those without or -they may have said this already...people with elongated faces are more trustworthy than others(ala Lincoln and I think they tried to use that on Kerry the last year)..but I don't think that proves out fully. ;) 

A LOT of people in America must be using some formof that BELL CURVE when I hear Yellow skinned people are good at arithmetic and people with slanted eyes drive slower than others..and on and on..

Basically someone is using their own bell curve..right or wrong .

If theydidn't use race as a curve, they may be limited to having to point out people with tattoos can fix cars better than those without or -they may have said this already...people with elongated faces are more trustworthy than others(ala Lincoln and I think they tried to use that on Kerry the last year)..but I don't think that proves out fully. ;) 


They are using stereotypes b/c they are too lazy to find out the truth.

Opinions should never be counted as research, which I'm seeing far too much of. Numbers can be deviated to show the perspective of those handling them. It's up to the individual to take the time to use their entire brain to figure that out, which unfortunately isn't be done today. Using generalizations is a clear sign of ignorance, take the time to find out specifics.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200509280006

If you wanted to reduce crime ... if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." Bennett conceded that aborting all African-American babies "would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do," then added again, "but the crime rate would go down."

A caller to Bennett's radio program was saying we would have more tax revenue if Roe v. Wade hadn't passed because aborted fetuses would have been born and grown up to be taxpayers.

Bennett is claiming his remarks are about ridiculous hypotheticals and he said it would be a "morally reprehensible" thing to do. However, he did say unequivocally the crime rate would go down if no more Black children were ever born.  It couldn't be clearer, according to this statement, that Bennett believes Blacks are genetically more prone to crime than other races.

Again the Murdoch media is treating Bennett with kid gloves again.  FOX News invited Bennett on as a guest to defend his statements.  They did not present a guest to argue anything to the contrary.  Sorry, co-host  Alan Colmes doesn't count!

If a liberal, be they Al Franken, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Katrina Vanden Heuval, Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Krugman, had said the same thing, the right-wing media would be putting them through the meat grinder and extrapolating the remarks to accuse liberals and Democrats as a whole of being "racist."

I don't know how "racist" Dr. Bennett really is.  I've observed him for over fifteen years, and I believe he would rather send the message that Blacks are born criminals than send the message that high rates of crime in predominantly Black communities are the result of systemic economic deprivation.  The latter message is more complicated and may undercut the political agenda of big business.





Bennett sounds like a genocidal whacko. I can't believe he visited my HS in 1988. I wish I could have barfed on his shoes!

Dont talk down to people.  We are not stupid.

Not to you, to someone in particular, you know who you are!

Bennett sounds like a genocidal whacko. I can't believe he visited my HS in 1988. I wish I could have barfed on his shoes!

Yeah, he did always come across like some kind fo Nazi, so it was no surprise to me what he said...and he was also palzy-walsy with Bell Curver Charles Murray.  It all comes from the inscestuous pool big petroleum money-funded think tanks  Bennett's at the Hudson Intitute and Murray is at the Hoover Institute, but it's all the same military-industrial white-male-supremecy soup of iniquities!

B/c 50% of blacks were found guilty, that makes them guilty? The justice system is known to have found innocent people guilty. If you would dig further into the numbers, the actual number would fall. There are plenty of guilty whites that go free, especially when clear guilt was in front of them. Give me a break.

Abortions do not fix stats at all, especially when it comes to race. A black baby could be aborted that would elevate society, while a white baby could grow to be a domestic terrorist (and how many have we had, actually - think about it).

Larry Elder? He has many issues and I wouldn't use him as a proper reference.


Larry Elder?
What issues does he have?

Here, read what he has to say...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/archives.asp?AUTHOR_ID=20

I got a B+ in Philosophy last year.

You need to go back to Kindergarden and learn that winning an argument is done by attacking the issue. Then learn what respect is. How to admit when your wrong and how to not whine when someone cleary out does you.


You make arguments out of nothing.  Only a fanatic would say civil rights and free speech are liberal issues.  You so crazy!  :D  ;D :D

You make arguments out of nothing.  Only a fanatic would say civil rights and free speech are liberal issues.  You so crazy!  :D  ;D :D


I'm crazy? I'm making my arguements outta nothing.  Let's take a look at how truly smart you really are.

A You're the one making issues out to be analytical.  What does it matter if I did good at algebra or geometry?  These issues have no clear cut answers, obviously they can't cause no one can see eye to eye on them.  1 + 1 = 2...now that's analytical, that's something you can not argue.  If you say anything else but 2, you are wrong.  You say 2, you are right.  These issues inwhich I discuss are nothing like that whatsoever, although you among some other liberals on this board make it out to be as if they are indeed analytical and there is a right answer.  You make something that can only be clearly judged subjectively and stupidly thinking you can make objective judgements upon it.


B  Every issue I've named the liberals feel strongly about. Whether to defend or try and put an end to, the liberals are on top of what I have named.  To say that they aren't issues that involve Liberal standings, is absolutely stupid.  The Liberals have they're opinions, and they're forced opinions on subject matters as well as they're politcal movements.  You're niave like no other, if you truly think that the liberals have nothing to do with it.

So If you want to try and put me down just because I offer the other voice, the other side of the coin when everyone else only sees one side of the story go ahead.  But may I suggest you PM one of the other members of the board, so they can tell you what to say to put me down. Cause clearly you ain't worth a hoot at it.

Ahem, Harmonica, shes been banned..

Ahem, Harmonica, shes been banned..



??? I don't think so. She is not appearing as a "guest".





Cat

Larry Elder?
What issues does he have?

Here, read what he has to say...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/archives.asp?AUTHOR_ID=20




I don't agree with most of what he says. I listen to his radio show every day and I used to watch his tv show before it got canceled.

The conservatives and liberals certainly have their differences, but I don't think free speech and civil rights are included in those differences  ???

??? I don't think so. She is not appearing as a "guest".





Cat


It says banned under her name.  Either Chucky banned her but didn't delete her account or she changed her title to banned.  Who knows. ???

I warned her about that name-calling, she was putting up  a lot of good posts.  But NOOOOOOO!!!!
::)

I don't agree with most of what he says. I listen to his radio show every day and I used to watch his tv show before it got canceled.


I've read two of his books and unlike Rush Limbaugh, he's humorous and his books are more interesting. He's the first conservative (actually Liberatrian) author I liked, starting with "The Ten Things You Can't Say In America".

And I didn't know he had a tv show?

Pure ignorance?

Baby killing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

Christian Bashing is allowed in this country cause liberals justify it.

A man with full boar AIDS is allowed to get Viagra pills paid for by medicare and then go out and spread his disease to young women because liberals justify it.

20,000 men's collegiate sports have been dropped in the past 35 years without just cause because liberals justify it.

I base my hypothesis on the facts before me.


These are what you call facts? WTF? You cannot possibly prove any of these statements you've just made here. I gotta go.

These are what you call facts? WTF? You cannot possibly prove any of these statements you've just made here. I gotta go.


The majority of conservatives are pro life.

The Majority of Conservatives aren't for medicare paying for absolutely everything, especially Viagra to an AIDS infested patient. 

A large sum of liberals are Aetheist.

A majority of liberals support Title IX's use full use of proportionality although out of that majority the majority of them don't even know what it is or how it works.

I think the majority of liberals are against giving  free viagra to people with AIDS. I know I don't support that.

Lack of religious beliefs does not equal christian bashing

How many women's collegiate sports wouldn't exist if conservatives had their way? And 20,000 sounds like an exaggerated number.

Abortion is not baby killing. Fetuses are not babies. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and abortion can reverse the mistake of an accidental conception. Therefore, abortion is not always wrong.

I think the majority of liberals are against giving  free viagra to people with AIDS. I know I don't support that.

Lack of religious beliefs does not equal christian bashing

How many women's collegiate sports wouldn't exist if conservatives had their way? And 20,000 sounds like an exaggerated number.

Abortion is not baby killing. Fetuses are not babies. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and abortion can reverse the mistake of an accidental conception. Therefore, abortion is not always wrong.


Hey, the man supports liberals and he hates bush, and he's liberal all the way.  He gave my sister an earfull on why, full hour's worth. Very detailed too.

If Conservatives had there way, all women's college sports would exist.  At the level where girls who wanted to play, played.  No girls being begged to go out for a sport they never heard of.  Porportionality would be thrown out the window.  Girls would have just as much opportunity as boys to play.  Scholarships wouldn't work in the manor they do now. Not every single girl who's out for a sport in DI, DI and NAIA sports would be on scholarship of some sort.  Walk on male athletes wouldn't be discouraged either.  And 20,000 isn't an exagerated number, if anything it's an underestimated estimate.  Taking every single male athletic program that has been dropped from all NAIA, NCJAA, DI, DII, and DIII school since 1972.

That is strichtly your belief and the beliefs of others.  My belief that life begins at conception based on biblical verses, therefore it is wrong to murder at the time.  Your belief it is not murder, based on what someone of beliefs like John Robertson has told you.

The majority of conservatives are pro life.

The Majority of Conservatives aren't for medicare paying for absolutely everything, especially Viagra to an AIDS infested patient. 

A large sum of liberals are Aetheist.

A majority of liberals support Title IX's use full use of proportionality although out of that majority the majority of them don't even know what it is or how it works.

Oh no, not the AIDS patient with the Viagra again!
:D

I think there are plenty of pro-choice "conservatives."  They tend be libertarian conservatives rather than cultural conservatives.  The only "conservative" atheists I can think of are your Ayn Rand disciples, but Ayn Rand is only conservative as far as one defines "libertarian" and favoring free enterprise as "conservative."  Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson (cultural conservatives) would say dislike of "big government" and saying "hooray for capitalism" alone don't make one a conservartive.  They link conservatism to more than just economic values, but moral and religious values too.

I'm afraid if conservatives had their way on scholastic sports, women would be once again reduced to cheerleading squad and "powder puff" football!
::)

The Bible was obviously against abortion performed by it's followers so that they would "be fruitful and multiply" and therefore more people would follow the bible. That was also in a time when the Earth could support as many people as pre-existing people could create. That no longer applies, and neither do biblical teachings dependent on a lack of overpopulation.

The Bible was obviously against abortion performed by it's followers so that they would "be fruitful and multiply" and therefore more people would follow the bible. That was also in a time when the Earth could support as many people as pre-existing people could create. That no longer applies, and neither do biblical teachings dependent on a lack of overpopulation.


and according to John Robertson and a good handful of liberals neither does abstinence.

I'll take my view from the other side.

Oh no, not the AIDS patient with the Viagra again!
:D

I think there are plenty of pro-choice "conservatives."  They tend be libertarian conservatives rather than cultural conservatives.  The only "conservative" atheists I can think of are your Ayn Rand disciples, but Ayn Rand is only conservative as far as one defines "libertarian" and favoring free enterprise as "conservative."  Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson (cultural conservatives) would say dislike of "big government" and saying "hooray for capitalism" alone don't make one a conservartive.  They link conservatism to more than just economic values, but moral and religious values too.

I'm afraid if conservatives had their way on scholastic sports, women would be once again reduced to cheerleading squad and "<a  style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=powder%20puff" onmouseover="window.status='powder puff'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">powder puff</a>" football!
::)


yeah, he's not my favorite person in the world either.

I know some liberal pro life people.  Find that hard to say, find it harder to believe, but I do.

I'll play by your rules.  If liberals had there way,  men's basketball and Men's football would be the only male sports througout all of college.  Baseball, Track and Field, Wrestling, Swimming, Golf, Lacrosse, Tennis, Water Polo, Diving, and anyone that I missed, would all be put to an obilvion.

The Bible was obviously against abortion performed by it's followers so that they would "be fruitful and multiply" and therefore more people would follow the bible. That was also in a time when the Earth could support as many people as pre-existing people could create. That no longer applies, and neither do biblical teachings dependent on a lack of overpopulation.

"No longer applies"?  'heck do ya mean?  God doesn't change his mind!  I mean, gentiles can eat pork, but us gentiles aren't really the Chosen People anyway.
:P

I've read two of his books and unlike Rush Limbaugh, he's humorous and his books are more interesting. He's the first conservative (actually Liberatrian) author I liked, starting with "The Ten Things You Can't Say In America".

And I didn't know he had a tv show?



You're not the only not to know. LOL

Doesn't change his mind, huh? And how would you know? Does he talk to you? Since he talked to me last night and said he decided he doesn't exist anymore. Anything is possible when one is omnipotent.

Speaking of not existing, I googled John Robertson and couldn't find whoever it is that Harmonica is talking about. Seems like he's some sort of fictional ultra-liberal bogeyman.

Liberals want to eliminate everything but basketball and football? What? This seriously makes no sense? Are these actual people who have expressed such desires or more imaginary demons?

Doesn't change his mind, huh? And how would you know? Does he talk to you? Since he talked to me last night and said he decided he doesn't exist anymore. Anything is possible when one is omnipotent.

Speaking of not existing, I googled John Robertson and couldn't find whoever it is that Harmonica is talking about. Seems like he's some sort of fictional ultra-liberal bogeyman.

Liberals want to eliminate everything but basketball and football? What? This seriously makes no sense? Are these actual people who have expressed such desires or more imaginary demons?

That's the new super-conservative they created at the Heritage Foundation labs.  He's a genetic cross between John Roberts and Pat Robertson.
;D

Doesn't change his mind, huh? And how would you know? Does he talk to you? Since he talked to me last night and said he decided he doesn't exist anymore. Anything is possible when one is omnipotent.

Speaking of not existing, I googled John Robertson and couldn't find whoever it is that Harmonica is talking about. Seems like he's some sort of fictional ultra-liberal bogeyman.

Liberals want to eliminate everything but basketball and football? What? This seriously makes no sense? Are these actual people who have expressed such desires or more imaginary demons?


The Bible clearly say's he will not, that's how people know. I wonder myself sometimes, but my faith is stronger than my wonder.  I also wonder how in the world you sit right here and bash me left and right and no one gives a rats, and won't say anything. Unless that is to deny it.

I'll get you  on freaking making me out to be a liar.  I was gonna go to bed, but I'm sick of being made out to be a liar, when I'm not.  I'll find ole Roberston for you.

Man, you ever seen some title Ix activist?  Wrestling, swimming, and gymnastics wouldn't exist at all if they had there way.  And yes I know this, I've been in plenty of Title Ix debates before.  You F'n want a list of names, I'll give them to you and you F'n wanna make me out to be a liar again, I'll give you there email addresses.

I can't find an offical site for him, but he exist.

http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/titles/5411.html  a link to one of the books he wrote.


and a picture of his as well.