Democrats Speaker of the House to Resign!

[shocka khan]

Would attempting to abolish slavery have been worthy of a government shutdown?

Depends on whether you're talking about John Brown and William Quantrill (more like today's politicians) or the house and senate of the 1850's, who actually tried to get along and make compromises. i.e. the Missouri compromise of 1820, the Great Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas Nebraska act of 1854.

No, today's politicians on both sides (but on this issue mostly the republicans) are acting more like John Brown, who believed that he had the right to murder any one who disagreed with him on the issue of slavery and William Quantrill, who burned Lawrence down.

In the time leading up to the civil war, politicians tried to work together and forge compromises on the slavery issue, which actually postponed the Civil War. Today's house republicans don't want to compromise. They want to use poorly edited videos that were cherry picked to get their way and don't mind taking government hostage.

Let's recap......we've had about 6 states investigate the whole PP thing with a grand total of zero of them finding PP guilty of any wrongdoing. Some of those investigations are in states where the governor and legislature are controlled by republicans, so it would be very difficult to say that the investigations were not objective. Yet we still have people ignoring that and claiming that the videos are true. Show me a state where an unbiased, objective investigation is done and wrongdoing is proven and maybe I will reconsider my statement.

By the way, if your goal is to ensure that a Republican is elected president and the republican majority holds in the senate, a much more effective tactic would be to fund the government, keep the powder dry and wait for an investigation that indicates there is a smoking gun. Going all shutdown happy may play well in Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas, but it won't help republicans achieve their long-term goals. Not everyone in US feels the same as the Midwest and southern states. Let's face it, you're sending your party on a fool's errand that will accomplish little, but endangers long-term goals to prove a point.

[shocka khan]

Oh, and in the vein of the republicans picking a new speaker and the issue of slavery (with the prejudice that comes with it), this guy is absolutely damaging the republican party by running for speaker:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/steve-scalise-republicans-113985

Too bad Trey Gowdy didn't consider running for speaker, but perhaps he can try to get one of the vacant positions. Gowdy appears to be someone who wants to try to do the right thing and not resort to demagoguery.

[MoValley John]

Depends on whether you're talking about John Brown and William Quantrill (more like today's politicians) or the house and senate of the 1850's, who actually tried to get along and make compromises. i.e. the Missouri compromise of 1820, the Great Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas Nebraska act of 1854.

No, today's politicians on both sides (but on this issue mostly the republicans) are acting more like John Brown, who believed that he had the right to murder any one who disagreed with him on the issue of slavery and William Quantrill, who burned Lawrence down.

In the time leading up to the civil war, politicians tried to work together and forge compromises on the slavery issue, which actually postponed the Civil War. Today's house republicans don't want to compromise. They want to use poorly edited videos that were cherry picked to get their way and don't mind taking government hostage.

Let's recap......we've had about 6 states investigate the whole PP thing with a grand total of zero of them finding PP guilty of any wrongdoing. Some of those investigations are in states where the governor and legislature are controlled by republicans, so it would be very difficult to say that the investigations were not objective. Yet we still have people ignoring that and claiming that the videos are true. Show me a state where an unbiased, objective investigation is done and wrongdoing is proven and maybe I will reconsider my statement.

By the way, if your goal is to ensure that a Republican is elected president and the republican majority holds in the senate, a much more effective tactic would be to fund the government, keep the powder dry and wait for an investigation that indicates there is a smoking gun. Going all shutdown happy may play well in Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas, but it won't help republicans achieve their long-term goals. Not everyone in US feels the same as the Midwest and southern states. Let's face it, you're sending your party on a fool's errand that will accomplish little, but endangers long-term goals to prove a point.

So, you're saying the Democrats are willing to compromise? On anything? You're saying Obama's "Back of the bus" comment during the Affordable Care Act debate was in the spirit of compromise, too? This whole lack of compromise attitude falls squarely on the backs of Republicans? Do I have that right?

Or are you saying right or wrong, the Republicans are being blamed for not compromising, allowing the Democrats to frame issues as they like? Are you saying that because of the activism now present in the media, any tactical misstep will have grave consequences, therefore, as to not further hurt the party, Republicans shouldn't fight for a CENTRAL PRINCIPAL, they should get along, and once again, kick the can down the road?

[Dave Stalwart]

Some issues are the kind that can't be compromised. Murder of the unborn is one of those. How exactly do you compromise when one person acknowledges that it is murder and the other person says they are morally happy with it?

When you have an issue like this, you can't really ever come to an agreement. Calling one party off-base for not being willing to compromise on an issue isn't really going to work when compromise really just means allowing the injustice to continue. What they are really calling for is for pro-life people to just give up and be willing to accept the killing. Compromise is just a buzz word that gets used, but this isn't an issue that can "compromise."

Maybe I'm missing something, but what would be a way to legitimately compromise this issue? Right now, the closest thing we have to that is the whole "allow women to decide what's best for their own bodies." I get that. It sort of works. Although, I could still compare it to saying "the best way to decide the issue of slavery is to allow the people who own slaves to decide what to do with their slaves." It doesn't quite work when the issue is a human injustice.

[MoValley John]

And no, the videos weren't highly edited. They were long, drawn out, clear to understand explanations of how Planned Parenthood packages and sells dead baby parts. The only editing was the long lead ups to getting the people from Planned Parenthood to speak. Who wants to listen to 45 minutes of small talk. The whole, "The videos were highly edited" defense doesn't wash when you have reps from Planned Parenthood speaking, unedited, for minutes at a time, on exactly how they abort babies to extract the most money.

[shocka khan]

So, you're saying the Democrats are willing to compromise? On anything? You're saying Obama's "Back of the bus" comment during the Affordable Care Act debate was in the spirit of compromise, too? This whole lack of compromise attitude falls squarely on the backs of Republicans? Do I have that right?

Or are you saying right or wrong, the Republicans are being blamed for not compromising, allowing the Democrats to frame issues as they like? Are you saying that because of the activism now present in the media, any tactical misstep will have grave consequences, therefore, as to not further hurt the party, Republicans shouldn't fight for a CENTRAL PRINCIPAL, they should get along, and once again, kick the can down the road?

I guess you didn't read my first sentence. Both parties are guilty of not compromising.

The abortion issue is somewhat like what Social Security used to be called 'the third rail of American politics.' I get the fact that you are passionate about this issue and I also appreciate the fact that you are calling out the evils of war, which shows to me that you not only feel strongly about it, your feelings are clear and unambiguous.

I came across this link http://www.republicanviews.org/repub...s-on-abortion/ and thought it was interesting. Here's a quote that pretty much sums up how dangerous this can be.....
"While many republicans will argue that public opinion is on their side on the issue of abortion, many republicans have lost elections where women’s rights became prominent issues, seemingly because of their stance on abortion. Many felt that strong anti-abortion stances are what cost Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia and Todd Akin in Missouri what should have been winnable races. Part of this is because abortion is an ever-changing issue in the public’s mind. There are too many dependent factors for most people to have a set-in-stone opinion on the issue."

[shocka khan]

And no, the videos weren't highly edited. They were long, drawn out, clear to understand explanations of how Planned Parenthood packages and sells dead baby parts. The only editing was the long lead ups to getting the people from Planned Parenthood to speak. Who wants to listen to 45 minutes of small talk. The whole, "The videos were highly edited" defense doesn't wash when you have reps from Planned Parenthood speaking, unedited, for minutes at a time, on exactly how they abort babies to extract the most money.

Forensic experts have said they were. We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

http://www.newspaperpost.com/2015/08/27/forensic-experts-agree-planned-parenthood-videos-were-heavily-edited/

"Fusion GPS’ research was a full analуsis of the first four, of six, videos that have been released bу the anti-abortion group. Due to the heavу editing and manipulation, the videos “have no evidentiarу value in a legal context and cannot be relied upon for anу official inquiries.”"

Maybe you have a point, maybe the people making the videos have a point, but their methods in elaborating and proving up their point caused the whole venture to be tainted.

[atlwsu]

Absolutely and that is a great comparison. If there was ever a time to shut down literally everything no matter what the cost it would be over the needless murder of millions of babies because of our desperate need of convenience that we have allowed to permeate our society.

Isn't it convenience that drove the necessity of slavery too? I mean here you have owners who don't have to work yet they get to make tons of money by not paying their "staff." Regardless of how wrong it obviously is, people continue to do it because it makes their life so much more convenient and better and wealthy.

Speaking of convenience, it's awfully convenient to label an entire group of people as not human so that you can do really bad things to them without their consent…. I'm pretty sure we labeled slaves not human didn't we? I guess that's the first step.

Amen

[MoValley John]

Forensic experts have said they were. We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

http://www.newspaperpost.com/2015/08/27/forensic-experts-agree-planned-parenthood-videos-were-heavily-edited/

"Fusion GPS’ research was a full analуsis of the first four, of six, videos that have been released bу the anti-abortion group. Due to the heavу editing and manipulation, the videos “have no evidentiarу value in a legal context and cannot be relied upon for anу official inquiries.”"

Maybe you have a point, maybe the people making the videos have a point, but their methods in elaborating and proving up their point caused the whole venture to be tainted.

The discussion isn't whether or not the videos can be used in a courtroom, the question is, from the videos, can you see what Planned Parenthood is doing? No, they aren't admirable in court, but yes, any knucklehead can understand exactly what PP is doing. Unless that knucklehead simply chooses not to understand.

[MoValley John]

Yes, they were selling, and profitting on selling body parts. Anyone with a ledger can approriate zero $ for the sale of a human kidney and then charge $50 for the cardboard box. Same as the legal college kegger that gave away the beer, yet charged five bucks for the mandatory plastic cup. No liquor license needed!

[shocka khan]

The discussion isn't whether or not the videos can be used in a courtroom, the question is, from the videos, can you see what Planned Parenthood is doing? No, they aren't admirable in court, but yes, any knucklehead can understand exactly what PP is doing. Unless that knucklehead simply chooses not to understand.

If our congress, with all the lawyers who serve there, can't or isn't willing to conduct or rely a fair and impartial investigation into this matter and not jump to conclusions based on tainted evidence, we have lost our way. As with many of the 'gotcha moments' I've witnessed in the last 25 or so years, this is yet another low point for our country. When our thought leaders resort to tactics with a lynch mob mentality, it will be no surprise to see the opposition (democrats) use such tactics back against republicans. Maybe even on an issue you feel strongly about.

Tit-for-tat is what today's 'grassroots activism' politics are all about. Again, on both sides.

[WuDrWu]

I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing something....but didn't Pelosi call for an investigation of the people that made and "altered" the videos? She didn't call for PP to be investigated did she?

[WuDrWu]

And of course politicians are going to leap before they look.

President Obama tweeted "cool clock" to a kid that clearly didn't build a clock, and probably duped everyone as to his intentions from the get go.

I saw a report on CNN about a woman who "paid it forward" to 2 women whom she claimed were "fat shaming" her, among other things. Except 2 days before they ran this "heartfelt" beautiful story, the woman's facebook page had been discovered, she routinely made fun of the mentally handicapped (and others) and literally NO ONE could corroborate her story which now appears very much in doubt, if not a 100% fabrication.


People, politicians and the MSM often leap to early conclusions (and are wrong more than they should be) before any research is done.

[shocka khan]

I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing something....but didn't Pelosi call for an investigation of the people that made and "altered" the videos? She didn't call for PP to be investigated did she?

I try to ignore Pelosi ;). But you're 100% correct. My opinion is that both sides need to cool the rhetoric and an independent, unbiased investigation of the entire situation should be performed. One that would be accompanied by a report that states what all parties did that was unethical or improper so that someone has actionable information that will result in consequences for any and all parties.

[MoValley John]

If our congress, with all the lawyers who serve there, can't or isn't willing to conduct or rely a fair and impartial investigation into this matter and not jump to conclusions based on tainted evidence, we have lost our way.

We lost our way a long time ago. We lost our way when the desires of one person weighed more than another person's right to live. We lost our way when taxation became a form of social engineering, not a method in which to fund government. We lost our way when government employees were allowed to unionize. We lost our way when Corporations, not Congress, began drafting laws. We lost our way when it became necessary to practice defensive medicine. And we lost our way when people can no longer watch a video, admissable in court or not, and determine the gist of what someone is clearly saying.