I can name one thing one of our Senators has done. Hillary Clinton has continually voted for keeping women's rights. Which actually properly represents the general feeling of our state. I believe that to be an accomplishment, actually 2. To vote consistently on an issue, and to represent her constituents.
I can give you plenty of examples on how corrupt our government in, including the Alaskan bridge to no where, all of Byrd's "contributions" to the US government by housing all sorts of things for his state, Schumer for being one of the main masterminds of getting democrats elected in this last election, Senator Inhofe (R-OK) for pretty much being a follower of Sen. Trent Lott among others. Would you like me to go on? When you look at government, you must also look at the governed. Not enough people vote, not enough people care. Of those of us who do care, many get so frustrated with the system that they end up not caring.
Our system is based on the ideologies of liberals (not those of the left side of the government) -- let everyone be heard and decide for themselves what to believe. The problem is some people operating under a liberal government want to impose their beliefs on others (aka -- The Christian Right). Our entire system is broken, it's not just the Senators voting on whether or not to vote on something. It is all through our government, from people not voting, to the President who changed his ideology during his term.
The Dems want to increase taxes to cover the debt that we are accruing due to the massive spending on the military and defense. The reason for the debt is not necessarily the war, but because spending in other areas was not cut in order to spend more on the war. Think simple finances:
Say a person is living on a strict budget in order to pay his bills while also having some spending money per week. Say that spending money is $50, but his bills not only include necessary things like heat and water, but also digital cable with the HBO package, the best internet that the area has to offer, has an expensive Netflix package, and pays for an online game. All of a sudden his refrigerator dies. He has two options: pay it with a credit card and go into more debt, or cut some of his spending in order to be able to afford a new refrigerator. The government chose to pay with a credit card, and not cut out the cable package.
And something is already starting to change... South Carolina has a very large possibility of being a swing state. A DEEP SOUTH state has the ability to change who becomes president, depending on who campaigns better? When was the last time that happened?
And thanks to unrealistic numbers that fail to take into account previous shortfalls, making the growth prediction completely inaccurate, along with not taking the cost of the war into account properly.
According to the article you linked, anyways. Do you even read this stuff?
# Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus. (Oct 2005) # Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007) # Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006) # Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005) # Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004) # Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003) # Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women. (Apr 2001) # Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003) # Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
Embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with the rights of women. It can be collected from the placenta we don't need abortions for it.
Parents should know since they are responsible for the child's actions. Nothing to do with wonen's rights.
Giving kids contraceptives is not the answer to reducing teen pregnancy. Children are not women.
There should be a law for harming a fetus of a pregnant woman. Its morally reprehensible to hurt pregnant women and it should be punished severely. Nothing to do with women's rights. This is a moral issue.
Partial Birth abortions should be banned. Not a women's right. This is a moral issue.
Pro-choice does not equal womens rights. Womens rights involve discrimination in the work place and yadayadayada.
Ensuring that TEENS have contraceptives is, in fact, the answer to reducing teen pregnancy. Who mentioned kids? And, incidentally, education was mentioned prior to contraceptives. Just making sure that your stupid conservative friends don't raise children who are unaware of how pregnancy happens goes a long way towards minimizing unwanted pregnancies.
I don't know if there should be an additional law for hurting a non-child by accident during the commission of a crime. It is already illegal. This has nothing to do with pregnant women (who are already protected), and everything to do with trying to legislate fetuses as living humans via a silly technicality.
Partial birth abortions necessary for the health of the mother should not have been banned. It is a woman's right to receive the best health-care she needs. The statistics on this shit were all over the place; jesus-people had dr's testifying that no one ever needed this procedure ever, but the professional organization representing OB-GYNs said otherwise. I trust non-religious non-quacks more than I trust religious quacks.
Pro-choice does involve women's rights. Very simple. Fetuses are essentially PART of a woman's body throughout gestation. How is it not the right of the woman to deal with her body however she sees fit?
REsponsible decisions need to be made. If teens aka kids aren't willing to buy condoms then ehtey should be having sex period.
I agree it has to do with validating a fetus but it is beyond reprehensible to hurt a pregnant woman.
for partial birth abortions your saying Hillary voted wrong.
The fetus is a shared responsibility between the man and woman. If a man is expected to pay child support then he should have a say in whether that child is born or not. 2 people are needed to create the fetus. There are no immaculate conceptions.
I can give you plenty of examples on how corrupt our government in, including the Alaskan bridge to no where, all of Byrd's "contributions" to the US government by housing all sorts of things for his state, Schumer for being one of the main masterminds of getting democrats elected in this last election, Senator Inhofe (R-OK) for pretty much being a follower of Sen. Trent Lott among others. Would you like me to go on? When you look at government, you must also look at the governed. Not enough people vote, not enough people care. Of those of us who do care, many get so frustrated with the system that they end up not caring.
Our system is based on the ideologies of liberals (not those of the left side of the government) -- let everyone be heard and decide for themselves what to believe. The problem is some people operating under a liberal government want to impose their beliefs on others (aka -- The Christian Right). Our entire system is broken, it's not just the Senators voting on whether or not to vote on something. It is all through our government, from people not voting, to the President who changed his ideology during his term.
The Dems want to increase taxes to cover the debt that we are accruing due to the massive spending on the military and defense. The reason for the debt is not necessarily the war, but because spending in other areas was not cut in order to spend more on the war. Think simple finances:
Say a person is living on a strict budget in order to pay his bills while also having some spending money per week. Say that spending money is $50, but his bills not only include necessary things like heat and water, but also digital cable with the HBO package, the best internet that the area has to offer, has an expensive Netflix package, and pays for an online game. All of a sudden his refrigerator dies. He has two options: pay it with a credit card and go into more debt, or cut some of his spending in order to be able to afford a new refrigerator. The government chose to pay with a credit card, and not cut out the cable package.
And something is already starting to change... South Carolina has a very large possibility of being a swing state. A DEEP SOUTH state has the ability to change who becomes president, depending on who campaigns better? When was the last time that happened?
Reply
Reply
Here is the story
Reply
According to the article you linked, anyways. Do you even read this stuff?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Consistency here is destroyed by her consistency on Iraq.
Reply
# Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
# Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
# Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
# Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
# Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
# Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women. (Apr 2001)
# Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
# Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
Courtesy of ontheissues.org
Reply
Parents should know since they are responsible for the child's actions. Nothing to do with wonen's rights.
Giving kids contraceptives is not the answer to reducing teen pregnancy. Children are not women.
There should be a law for harming a fetus of a pregnant woman. Its morally reprehensible to hurt pregnant women and it should be punished severely. Nothing to do with women's rights. This is a moral issue.
Partial Birth abortions should be banned. Not a women's right. This is a moral issue.
Pro-choice does not equal womens rights. Womens rights involve discrimination in the work place and yadayadayada.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Parents who are responsible WILL know.
Ensuring that TEENS have contraceptives is, in fact, the answer to reducing teen pregnancy. Who mentioned kids? And, incidentally, education was mentioned prior to contraceptives. Just making sure that your stupid conservative friends don't raise children who are unaware of how pregnancy happens goes a long way towards minimizing unwanted pregnancies.
I don't know if there should be an additional law for hurting a non-child by accident during the commission of a crime. It is already illegal. This has nothing to do with pregnant women (who are already protected), and everything to do with trying to legislate fetuses as living humans via a silly technicality.
Partial birth abortions necessary for the health of the mother should not have been banned. It is a woman's right to receive the best health-care she needs. The statistics on this shit were all over the place; jesus-people had dr's testifying that no one ever needed this procedure ever, but the professional organization representing OB-GYNs said otherwise. I trust non-religious non-quacks more than I trust religious quacks.
Pro-choice does involve women's rights. Very simple. Fetuses are essentially PART of a woman's body throughout gestation. How is it not the right of the woman to deal with her body however she sees fit?
Reply
REsponsible decisions need to be made. If teens aka kids aren't willing to buy condoms then ehtey should be having sex period.
I agree it has to do with validating a fetus but it is beyond reprehensible to hurt a pregnant woman.
for partial birth abortions your saying Hillary voted wrong.
The fetus is a shared responsibility between the man and woman. If a man is expected to pay child support then he should have a say in whether that child is born or not. 2 people are needed to create the fetus. There are no immaculate conceptions.
Reply
Responsible decisions need to be made. If teens aka kids aren't willing to buy condoms then they shouldn't be having sex period.
Reply
Leave a comment