.

FYP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States

Makes a bit of a difference

http://www.ers.usda.gov/StateFacts/US.htm


50,157,328 Rural

253,902,396 Urban

304,059,724 Total US

So focusing on rural voters is probably not an efficient way to campaign.

But they're real Americans and urban voters only count 60% as much.

3/5ths actually,

but only in the democrat controlled south

So the AP assigned 11 'reporters' to fact-check Palin's new book.

They found 6 'errors'

If you can call them errors, more like stretches of accusation that the reporters needed to make to keep in the good graces of the leftist cadre' of socialist reporters.




Can any of you remember one democrat politician who had his/her book fact-checked by any news organization?


I know that Algore was eventually required to post a disclaimer for all the serious errors and lies in his movie that he got an Academy Award for, but that was a judge, not some reporters, they all gave him a huge azz-kissing A+ for the movie/book.


Obama got to write a book about his father who was traveling the world depositing his seed in between drunken bouts of violence...but I don't think anyone checked for any facts being wrong. Pretty sure when he said he was a coke-head we all just believed him.

When Clinton wrote My Lie there were no fact-checking squads even from Fox News.



Why would a former VP candidate and former Governor merit such scrutiny from the AP?

Are they afraid of her?

Must be.

Must be.


Or, of course, it could be that if they found any glaring errors, it would make the news (through no fault of their own), and people would watch it because (for some reason) people are interested in Sarah Palin. And, as a result, the reporter and the news organization they represent would make more money.

So, maybe it's about fear. Or, maybe it's simply about searching for the base, moronic stories that the public eats up. See also: pretty much any story about a Hollywood actor or actress (unless you also think those stories are made out of fear).

Real Americans like this

just one, an Obama Presidency

I am actually wondering if you know the history of the 3/5's compromise...

I dont recall saying this. Altho I dont see how one act mutually excludes the other.

Palin's interview with Rush:

It would be easier to quote parts of that if you didn't put it in quote tags.

It's just commonsense.

By quoting I was avoiding any issues with copyright, but here you go, LET ME BREAK THE LAW for your convenience




RUSH: We are going to open this hour with a rare personal interview, a rare guest. It doesn't happen much on this program, but we are happy to have with us former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, whose book, Going Rogue, hits the shelves today and it's already headed for I think a record in sales. Governor Palin, thanks for making time. It's great to talk to you again. We spoke last Thursday in an interview for the Limbaugh Letter, but it's great to have you here on the radio.

GOV. PALIN: Hey, thank you so much, and dittos from an Alaskan.

RUSH: Where are you, by the way? Where are we speaking to you from?

GOV. PALIN: In a hotel room in New York City. I'm going to do a couple of interviews after that and then head to Grand Rapids for the kickoff of the book tour.

RUSH: This is going to be exciting. Are you looking forward to that?

GOV. PALIN: I am so looking forward to this. I cannot wait to meet some of these good Americans all across this country. It's going to be a blast.

RUSH: They can't wait to meet you, judging by the reception you got during the campaign. Now, ladies and gentlemen, Governor Palin, when we spoke last Thursday I spoke to her a lot about the things in her book regarding the campaign. That stuff you'll read in the Limbaugh Letter, and I predicted to Governor Palin then that much of her book would be ignored in light of the dirt that she was supposedly dishing from the campaign. So Governor Palin what I'd like to do here is go some different directions from what we did in the newsletter interview and start with the economy. We have 10.2% unemployment. We see no end in sight. The administration and others are suggesting next year could be just as bad with unemployment going up to 11%. What would you do differently than is being done now?

GOV. PALIN: It's over 10%, and in fact it could be closer to 17 or 18 when you consider those who have kind of given up and are not applying for unemployment benefits. So it's bad, it's really bad and then of course Fed Chair Bernanke announced that there are still weak job prospects for the very short term and probably long term, and that's an uncomfortable place for our country to be. What we need to do is shift gears and really head in another direction because what we're doing right now with the Fed, it's not working. We need to cut taxes on the job creators. This is all about jobs, creating jobs. We have to ramp up industry here in America, and of course reduce the federal debt, quit piling on and growing more. But those commonsense solutions there, especially with the cutting taxes on the job creators, that's not even being discussed. In fact, increased taxes is the direction it sounds like Obama wants to go.

RUSH: You mean that you don't even hear it being discussed on the Republican side or within the administration?

GOV. PALIN: Within the administration, and as it is discussed on the Republican side, Republicans need to be bolder about it. Independents need to be bolder about that solution that has got to be considered and plugged in. This is the only solution that will be successful. We need to rehash some history that proves its success. Let's go back to what Reagan did in the early eighties and stay committed to those commonsense free market principles that worked. He faced a tougher recession than what we're facing today. He cut those taxes, ramped up industry, and we pulled out of that recession. We need to revisit that.

RUSH: Why do you think this administration is ignoring that blueprint? What is their ultimate objective here? They're sitting in the middle of abject failure of their number-one stated goal, and that's job creation. So what are they really trying to do here do you think?

GOV. PALIN: Well, you wonder, you wonder because history proves what will work and you wonder if they're realizing that and if it's just perhaps a stubbornness at this point that they are so committed to going down this road of growing government and interjecting the Feds' control in the private sector more and more, which will prove to be more failure. I don't know if it's obstinate thinking that they're engaged in right now or if they truly just do not believe what the free market, free enterprise economic solutions are that built up this country.

RUSH: Do you think this is going to be a major issue in the congressional elections in 2010, and if so, how would you advise Republicans to pursue it?

GOV. PALIN: It better be a major issue, absolutely. Of course, national security will be, too, and hopefully we'll talk a little bit about some of the decisions being made in that arena that cause so many of us concern but, yeah, the economy, that's what it's going to be because it's all about jobs, it's all about Americans who are hurting right now and what those solutions are that are so obvious, so commonsense that need to be plugged in. And those are Republican, they're commonsense conservative principles that we just need to apply.

RUSH: New York-23 is being portrayed as a race in which you and I -- because we supposedly went up there -- handpicked Doug Hoffman, he supposedly lost, even though that race, they still haven't finished counting the votes. It's two weeks! This is not Chicago. They haven't finished counting the votes. He says he wishes he could un-concede now. But they're trying to diminish conservatism, and I think in the process intimidate the Republican Party from going in that direction. What's your read on New York-23?

GOV. PALIN: I think this is exciting. It's encouraging. No matter the outcome even with his recount of some of those, well, uncounted ballots, it's exciting that the race is going to be even closer, and it's a clearer and clearer picture that what Americans are seeking, even in a district there in New York, they are seeking commonsense, conservative solutions to all the challenges that we're facing. I'm glad to see this.

RUSH: So the positive thing there is that the Republican Party was rebuffed in nominating essentially a RINO, a liberal?
GOV. PALIN: Well, I think what you saw there is -- and of course it's not just the Republican machine, it's the Democrat machine, too. You know, if you're not the anointed one within the machine, sometimes you have a much tougher row to hoe and that's what Hoffman faced. He was the underdog. I think great timing for him, though, to stand strong on his conservative credentials and essentially come out of nowhere and prove that an American without that resume, without that machine backing can truly make a difference in an election like this.

RUSH: Well, now, you used the term, "If you're not the anointed one by the party machine, you're the underdog and you have a tough row to hoe." Based on things that I read, the Republican establishment would not anoint you to be a nominee of their party should you choose to go that way. I'm not asking you the question because I know you're not going to answer and give away what your plans are in 2012.

GOV. PALIN: (chuckles)

RUSH: Do you consider yourself one of these unanointed ones within your own party?

GOV. PALIN: Well, to some in both parties, politics is more of a business. It's not so much a commitment to an agenda or a person or values or issues. It's more of a business -- and, no, I'm not a part of that. So if they're going to keep using that way of thinking in their decisions on who they anoint, who they will support or not then, no. I'll never be a part of that. But hopefully we're going to see a shift with independents, with the Republican Party and the Democrat Party, and we're going to get back to what the issues are, what really matters, and then hopefully we're going to go from there, which will be much fairer to the electorate.

RUSH: All right, independents, slash, third party. A lot of people -- mistakenly, in my view -- are looking at New York-23 as evidence that, see, a third party could actually do well. But that's not a good example because there was no primary there. As you said, the party bosses chose Dede Scozzafava on the Republican side and a Democrat. Had there been a primary, New York-23 would not have been constituted as it was. So what are your thoughts now on the viability of a third party if the Republican Party can't be brought around?

GOV. PALIN: You know, to be brutally honest, I think that it's a bit naive when you talk about the pragmatism that has to be applied in America's political system. And we are a two-party system. Ideally, sure, a third party or an independent party would be able to soar and thrive and put candidates forth and have them elected, but I don't think America is ready for that. I think that it is... Granted it's quite conventional and traditional, but in a good way that we have our two parties, and I think that that's what will remain. And I say that, though, acknowledging that I'm not an obsessive panther, I understand why people -- good people like my own husband -- refuse to register in a party. Todd's not a Republican and yet he's got more commonsense conservatism than a whole lot of Republicans that I know because he is one who sees the idiosyncrasies of the characters within the machine and it frustrates him along with a whole lot of other Americans who choose to be independent. But in answer to your question, I don't think that the third party movement will be what's necessary to usher in some commonsense conservative ideals.

RUSH: Now, you mentioned independents. We need to get independents. Independents right now are abandoning the Democrat Party. They did so in New Jersey. They did so in Virginia. And the White House pretty much proves this because the White House was out prior to the election saying, "Ah, Republican Party identification in polls is as low as it's ever been." Therefore, for Republicans to win these races there had to be independents moving in their direction. Now, I know you're not in politics now but you have political experience. I'm not in politics. I've never gone out and gotten votes. I've always been curious about the professional politicians' insistence that we go out and "get independents." Sure you want to shore up the base. But these magical, whatever it is, 20% of people that are not identified or do not self-identify themselves with either party, what's the way to get them?

GOV. PALIN: I think just naturally independents are going to gravitate towards that Republican agenda and Republican platform because the planks in our platform are the strongest to build a healthy America. We're all about cutting taxes and shrinking government and respecting the inherent rights of the individual and strengthening families and respecting life and equality. You have to shake your head and say, "Who wouldn't embrace that? Who wouldn't want to come on over?" They don't have to necessarily be registered within the Republican Party in order to hook up with us and join us with that agenda standing on those planks. In Alaska, about 70% of Alaskans are independent. So that's my base. That's where I am from and that's been my training ground, is just implementing commonsense conservative solutions. Independents appreciate that. You're going to see more and more of that attraction to the GOP by these independents as the days go on.

RUSH: If the GOP articulates what you just articulated. I've always believed the way to get them... Reagan got them by just being who he was, articulating conservatism. Conservatism is nothing different than the founding principles of the country. Therefore, the key to getting independents is Republicans who can articulate those beliefs.

GOV. PALIN: You know another key to this, too, is to not hesitate duking it out within the party. This is what I appreciate about the Republican Party. We have contested, aggressive, competitive primaries. We're not like this herd mentality like a bunch of sheep -- with the fighting instincts of sheep, as Horowitz would say -- like some in the Democrat Party; where, heaven forbid, you take a stand and you oppose somebody within your own party because it's the right thing to do. I appreciate that in the Republican Party. Some on the other side say -- you know, they're observing what goes on in the GOP and say -- "That's infighting, and they can't get along, and there's no consensus there." No. This is healthy debate, good competition that makes candidates work harder. It makes for a better product, if you will, at the end of the day. I appreciate that about our party.

RUSH: We are talking to Governor Sarah Palin. We take a brief prosperity time-out. We'll be back and continue with Governor Palin right after this.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: And we're back. Our remaining moments with former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, starting her book tour today. Let's talk about your book tour, your career in general, Governor Palin. Who are you trying to reach, and for what purpose, with the book and your book tour? What's your goal here?

GOV. PALIN: I'm not trying to reach the liberal elites in this country, and it's a good thing I'm not trying to, because I'm not succeeding there. Just everyday, hardworking Americans who want government back on their side and I want to help them have their voice be heard. And the book is all about that, and the book is about my record and my accomplishments as a mayor and as a governor that kind of lay the foundation for Americans to see where it was that I was and how I got to where I am. It was just a lot of hard work and it was a lot of very commonsense measures that I undertook politically and practically speaking, and the book is about that, and hopefully people will read it and enjoy it and learn something from it.

RUSH: What's our biggest energy challenge as a country? Do you believe at all or some or a lot in the modern-day go-green movement of solar and wind and all of these nefarious things that really don't produce anything yet?

GOV. PALIN: I think there's a lot of snake oil science involved in that and somebody's making a whole lot of money off people's fears that the world is... It's kind of tough to figure out with the shady science right now, what are we supposed to be doing right now with our climate. Are we warming or are we cooling? I don't think Americans are even told anymore if it's global warming or just climate change. And I don't attribute all the changes to man's activities. I think that this is, in a lot of respects, cyclical and the earth does cool and it warms. And our greatest challenge with energy is that we're not tapping it to the abundant domestic supplies that God created right underfoot on American soil and under our waters. It's ridiculous that we are circulating hundreds of billions of dollars a year in foreign countries, asking them to ramp up production so that we can purchase it from them -- especially from the regimes that can control us via energy, using it as a weapon against us, potentially. It's nonsense that this administration and past administrations haven't really understood yet that inherent link between energy and security. I think more and more Americans are waking up to the fact, though, and we will hopefully see changes there soon.

RUSH: Vice President Biden chided you, saying, "It's a little bit more complicated," Governor Palin, than "Drill, Baby, Drill," which is one of your chapter titles. What's complicated about drilling for oil?

GOV. PALIN: Exactly. What is complicated about tapping into abundant, safe domestic supplies that could provide stability for our country and security for our country? I know Alaska has billions of barrels of oil underfoot, and we have the natural gas that's waiting to be tapped, too; and other states do, too. It's not that complicated. It's political, and that's what is the shame in this, is that for political reasons we're not allowing to tap these domestic supplies.

RUSH: What are your thoughts on the congressional health care reform bills going through the House and the Senate?

GOV. PALIN: Well, we don't really know, do we, what's in that Senate version, the Senate consideration? It will be soon but we have no idea of costs. We don't know how many will be insured. We're waiting to hear that. We don't know if the tax funding of abortions will be in this new version that's sitting over on the Senate side. We don't know if those who choose not to purchase this government-mandated level of coverage will face jail time as punishment. There are so many questions unanswered. I don't like the idea, in general, of the federal government thinking it needs to take over health care -- which essentially this is -- and control one-sixth of our economy. Not when there are commonsense solutions to meeting health care challenges in our country, like allowing the intra- and interstate competition with insurers, tort reform, cutting down on the waste and fraud that the Obama administration insists if we just did that we'll pay for this one-point-some trillion-dollar health care reform package. So lots of commonsense solutions that need to be plugged in before ever considering federal government taking it over.

RUSH: You mentioned earlier you wanted to talk about national security, that you hoped it came up. Well, here it is: What do we face? What are our threats, and are we prepared, or not?

GOV. PALIN: Well, I think domestically a threat that we're facing right now is the dithering and hesitation in sending a message to the terrorists that we're going to claim what Ronald Reagan claimed. Our motto is going to be: "We win, you lose." The way that we do that is allow McChrystal to have the reinforcements that he's asking for in Afghanistan. That sends that message to the terrorists over there that we're going to end this thing with our victory. We need to start facing Iran with tougher and tougher sanctions that need to be considered. We need to work our allies with the Iranian issues, like Britain and France and not allow access to favorable international monetary deals. That's a great threat that I think would kind of shake up Ahmadinejad and get him to listen. We need to look at halting Iran's imports of refined petroleum products. They're quite reliant on imported gasoline, and we need to use that hammer to wake up the leadership there, too. Those are two big challenges that we have right now, domestically and in naming those two countries, Afghanistan and Iran. Two big challenges there, too.

RUSH: Thirty seconds: Immigration. Can you do it in 30 seconds before we have to go?

GOV. PALIN: I can't do it in 30 seconds but just know that... You know, let me put it simply: Illegal immigrants are called "illegal" for a reason. We need to crack down on this. We need to listen to the border states where the governors there have some solutions and we need to get serious about that.

RUSH: Governor Palin, thanks very much. It's been a pleasure. It's been fun. Thanks for last week as well and good luck on what I know is going to be a life-changing book and book tour.

GOV. PALIN: Hey, thank you. Keep up the good work.

RUSH: Thank you.

GOV. PALIN: And all the best to all your listeners.~

I'm not afraid that she might out-debate me, or beat me at chess.

I'm not afraid that she might beat me up.

Am I afraid that someone as dumb as her might be elected to a meaningful public office? Well, that seems like a reasonable fear to me.

Oh I'm not going to read all that.

yea..cause Biden sets that bar so high....

You have too, otherwise who will I get to argue about it with since I haven't read it either?

I forgot, you were governor of what state again?

Gotta be pretty dumb to be chief executive of a state

Wait, what?

I honestly don't get what you are saying.... you're saying that being elected makes you smart? what?

It must...Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for being elected.

He hasn't done anything else ever, so it must have been for being elected

I said she must clearly be stupid. I mean how could she possibly be smart. It is like soooooooo easy to run a state and all... any one could do it...

I think you should try and run California...nah try something very simple instead- take on Alaska first. Have success there, then move back to your liberal panacea and take on the mess in California. Get that fixed and then get Obama's mop and clean up his mess

ok then.

Blazing saddles was a comedy, mel brooks was not a real gov.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_RKPGS2vwM...feature=related

This isn't how sarcasm works.

Ironic isn't it?

I don't know about any of you, but if my wife looks that hot at 45, I will be a happy man.

http://reason.com/archives/2009/11/18/the-palin-experience

These days, where you fall on the crucial issue of Sarah Palin tells the rest of us all we need to know about your character. You're either A) a scum-sucking, terror-loving elitist or a radical, tea bag-loving simpleton.

Yet believe it or not, one can (as I do) admire Palin's charisma and roots, appreciate her dissent on the policy experiments brainy folks in Washington are cooking up, and, at the same time, believe she has no business running for president in 2012.

In fact, all you haters out there motivate me to root for her.

There's nothing wrong, for instance, with The Associated Press' assigning a crack team of investigative journalists to sift through every word of Palin's book, Going Rogue, for inaccuracies. You only wish similarly methodical muckraking were applied to President Barack Obama's two self-aggrandizing tomes—or even the health care or cap-and-trade bills, for that matter.

The widely read blogger and purveyor of all truth, Andrew Sullivan, was impelled to blog 17 times on the subject of Palin on the same day Americans learned that the Obama administration had awarded $6.7 billion in stimulus money to nonexistent congressional districts—which did not merit a single mention. To see what is in front of one's nose demands a constant struggle, I guess.

And it's not just bloggers. What choice do media outlets have but to provide comprehensive coverage of pistachio salesman and Playgirl-posing Levi Johnston, doltish erstwhile father of Palin's grandchild, a man whose only discernible talents are the possession of operational sperm and the ability to humiliate the former vice presidential nominee?

How could a major magazine such as Newsweek be expected to use a cover photo of Palin campaigning or spending time with her child who has Down syndrome when editors simply could borrow a shot of the 45-year-old mother of five decked out in her exercise tights—nudge nudge, wink wink—from a Runner's World piece and slap the headline "How Do You Solve A Problem Like Sarah?" onto it?

Newsweek must have a point. Palin is a populist dead end. "Just over half of Americans," a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds, "have an unfavorable opinion" of Palin overall, "as many say they wouldn't consider supporting her for president and more—six in 10—see her as unqualified for the job."

Similarly, a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll recently found that 48 percent of Americans disapprove of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a woman busy writing policy that affects all of us. Does this not require a "How Do You Solve A Problem Like Nancy?" headline from the venerable magazine?

Who knows what is to become of Palin? Today, though, there is little doubt the left is using her to create ugly stereotypes and attack limited-government types across the country.

Palin claims that a presidential run is not on her "radar screen right now." She may have gone rogue on John McCain—joining the rest of America—but Palin will have to work to articulate her positions, show more intellectual curiosity, and fuse her magnetism with more substantive thinking.

But because of the stupendously nasty campaign waged against her, she might not get the chance.

At least, that's this scum-sucking elitist's opinion.

.

But if elected president, she will bring the sport of hockey out of the backrooms of nowhereness into the front lights of NBC contracts!

Most of those things have logical explanations. Take Andrew Sullivan. He's gay; therefore, he knows the worst thing that can happen (for him) is a Palin presidency because she supports several hot button issues that are in direct opposition to homosexuals.

The reason I can't stand her is related. I find her social policy ideas to be in direct opposition to my own. That is the most important thing to me right now (and supreme court justices which is related to this as well). So I oppose her more strongly than any other politician.

Also Henry, they did not award money to non-existent districts. There were paperwork errors (which is still bad and shows weaknesses of central planning but is not as bad as how you phrased it).

This is less an orchestrated conspiracy from the left and more a predictable reaction from the left to a woman whose social agenda is in direct opposition. You call her a limited gov type. Only on certain things. On social issues she has no problem with the gov telling people how to live.

You think she is more right than Bush?

What did Bush do on social issues that was so bad?


Seems to me that these social issues are largely ways to keep the base voting against the other side.

I don't expect a republican to ban abortions or make gays register and where pink stars, but I know they won't enact new laws that push the issues down out throats.

The left says they are so worried about he right taking away their rights...yet it's been state ballots refusing Gay marriage i.e. the majority of the voters, not any president doing these dastardly things. The only thing Bush did with regards to abortion is to try to outlaw post-viability abortions where the baby is partially removed from the birth canal and a metal rod is shoved into it's brain stem to kill it before it reaches air...hardly a fringe position to be against that.

Looking forward to the many paperwork errors when it comes to health care

yes she is way to the right of Bush on social issues, imo. I agree Bush left much of this to the states. I believe Palin would try to get federal amendments to ban gay marriage and would fight like hell to ban abortion. I also believe she would further entrench a wrong-headed view on sex education. I would put more thought into this response but I am having a hot run playing PLO.

I believe gay marriage has come up for a vote 31 times in the states and has been voted down each time..

The AP has scheduled a former intern and a barista to investigate any errors in the health bill, so relax

First..stay on the run..plo is fun..stay focused man. We're rooting for you

second...you idiot, are you completely brain dead? Did you wipe your butt with your law degree?

There is no way that in the next 10 years any president, even Obama himself should he denounce his Muslim upbringing and embrace true Christianity, will get abortions outlawed.

Pretending that it's safety is on a precipe and could fall at any moment shows you as the koolaid drinking sheep that the democrat party depends on.

I didnt say she could do it! I said she would try. If we legalize drugs, I doubt America will turn into Sodom and Gomorrah but many kool-aid GOPers think it will. I just dont want to waste any more time on what has been law for decades. And with her in charge we would, imo.

that was such a great use of precipice and then you misspelled it. Probably because you already have like 19 posts in this forum today already. Slow day in Cali?

The ban on gay marriage, the sex ed stuff, the continuation of dont ask dont tell are all stuff that could and just might happen with Sarah in charge in addition to a reversal of Obama's reversals on stem cells and such. It is a way of thought.....not just an abortion issue.

Just off the top of my head,

- ban on fed money for stem cell research
- continuing the DEA's 'war on drugs'

both things that Obama reversed immediately.



The last time roe v wade was challenged it was upheld 5-4 by SCOTUS. Isn't that kind of hanging on a precipice? Assuming ginsberg retires or dies before Obama is out of office, it should be safe for a while. But this last election I think did have huge consequences. If Palin got to choose two justices, that would have been the difference.

DANG ITTTTT

Stupid moxilla Firefox spell checker!





I find it funny that twice now you leftist have expressed fear and trepidation at the thought of a republican president leaving in place things that a democrat president put into place ( Don't ask and current WOD )

So you're number one examples of radical social agenda changes with Bush were:
- a science funding one based on nothing but politics. ( they wouldn't need government funding if there was true promise, because that would be how a health company would get patents and be in the forefront of a truly promising venture )

- that bush left the existing plans in place that Clinton also allowed/implemented


I think you need to rethink the words 'social changes'




Funny that RvW has kind of always been a 5-4 issue, and yet you guys act like it's in the constitution and any thoughts to change it back to how it was for 80% of this countries history is some social evil. Maybe the fact that it is barely legal should be the most telling part.

I can't think about Sarah Palin without thinking about Tina Fey going "Pew pew" (hand in shape of a gun) on SNL.

PEW PEW!

I read a thing recently that most of America thinks that 2-3 quotes that Tina fey did on SNL were actually said by Palin and they use this as their main excuses for hating her.


I think it was the "see russia from my house" and the wildly convoluted quote in answer to some question about something

I agree (sorry). It's a tricky gray area issue that the population as a whole is undecided on. That's why it matters politically.

If only we had a high morality to confirm our decision against...

What did Buddha say about it? And if we follow the Vatican on this one, can we follow them on capital punishment too? It's fun to play pick and choose which part of the bible to legislate. I vote we start stoning adulterers again. And we should start picketing divorce attorneys too.


I got an e-card from my mom this morning. IT's not a special occasion so I was confused.

The text of the card:

"Someday I'd like to have a #1 bestseller for failing to become VP, quitting as governor, and not aborting a child."

Yeah, my mom is a crazy democrat.

Oh the many fallacies in the post... they are like teeth scratching on the blackboard of my mind.




Your mom and my mom would get along great as they dusted off a couple boxes of wine.

Yeah that would make things easier, right? Probably the #1 reason people allow themselves to believe falsehoods.