Politics Obama - Actually doing a good job?

What is the party more extreme on? Taxes - the government is consuming more of American income than ever. Abortion - abortion is still legal. Immigration - oh, the extreme of wanting to control illegal immigration. Education - wanting better schools is extreme? States rights - Federal government is more involved than ever. What? Controlling out of control federal spending??? Your talking points are tired.
--- merged: Mar 5, 2013 at 6:50 PM ---

Can you clarify your point of view. I think DC superficially characterizes conservatives without understanding the data he uses. He has repeatedly made over-reaching generalizations about bigotry, racism, and sexism as it relates to conservatives. Do you buy into his views? Do you ever have reservation? Or, do you really think "moderates" in the Republican Party are small in number? Do you really think conservatives are bigots or stupid?

 

Federal taxes as percent of GDP are at the lowest in 50+ years

More state restrictions on abortion have been introduced and/or enacted in the last two years than all other years combined since Roe v Wade

The increasing number of states that are allowing religion and "biblical science" into the public school curriculum does not make for better education.

I could go on.

I provided polls and talking point of many prominent republicans on the party's demographic issues and you keep attributing those remarks and polls to me?

Get over it, Ace.

 

When they say record, I assume it mean a record.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/05/tax-receipts-on-pace-to-hit-record-27t-this-year-congressional-report-says/#ixzz2MiHcZTkx

 

Federal taxes are at their lowest level in more than 60 years. The CBO report estimated that federal taxes would consume just 14.8 percent of G.D.P. this year. The last year in which revenues were lower was 1950.

 

No worries.

Obama is the first gay president.

 

In just the first three months of this year, Republican controlled state legislatures have introduced 694 provisions related to reproductive health and rights and 93 have been approved by at least one legislative body.

Not extreme?

 

As we have learned more about the fetus, it is not extreme to want to protect a living being. There are two issues in question, for me it is the viability of the fetus. I think it is inhuman and immoral to perform in abortion in this circumstance. Some have another agenda, you conflate the two. I am not sure what the statistics are on the "morning after pill" but with the recent ruling on its availability I begin to see less need for abortion and I would not support any efforts to restrict the "morning after pill". I was surprised regarding the administration's position on the court ruling. Can you explain it?

 

Viability does not begin at conception.

 

Some hold the religious view that a fetus at conception is a human being, some don't. This illustrates how you conflate the issues. Viability and the religious view of when God installs a soul (for lack of a better way to put it) are not the same issue. Consistent with the way I perceive your views of conservatives on other issues, if one holds a bigoted view, we all must be bigots. You have yet, to show my perception is incorrect.

 

Fetal heartbeat or fetal personhood bills are extreme by any measure as are bills that effectively prohibit any abortion practices.

It is not bigoted to suggest they are extreme or that they are being introduced and enected at the highest levels since Roe v Wade. And those states will spend $millions of taxpayer dollars defending unconstitutional laws.

 

Is there any abortion you would be against? Are there any limitations on abortion you would support?

 

I've totally lost respect for Obama. He's just a bit too laid back and needs to get tough. I realize it's not just him and the Dems but I had hoped for more when I cast my vote.

 

I would support stronger sex education programs before I would support abortion limitations. I'm okay with advocating abstinence and the benefits, but I think that that not teaching teenagers about all the options and consequences is not beneficial.

(I bring that up because that is part of the personhood bill recently passed by the KS senate.)

When it comes to abortion, my personal beliefs for abortion do not match up with my personal beliefs for choice. I don't understand the women who get to the 3rd trimester and "suddenly" realize they're pregnant. For that matter, I don't really understand why they didn't think about what they would do if they became pregnant when they started having sex with their partner.

I really don't see a need for doing them past about 20 weeks, but that's a personal belief, and I don't believe that what I think about it outweighs their right to choose the outcome of their own life. That being said, I wouldn't have a problem with getting rid of late term abortions with the exception of mother's survival, or quality of life in the child. (Then of course you have ethical issues resulting from the definition of quality of life.)

 

I don't support restrictions on education or information distribution. However, when children are involved in abortion or prescribed contraception I believe parent/guardian notification is required. If there are issues with a child's parent/guardian I would like to see judicial involvement and approval. I also think we should enforce statutory rape laws and if a child seeks an abortion the law should seek the person who impregnated the child and if that person violated the law we should do something about it.

Again, for me at some point we are talking about a real living human being. And if an alternative to abortion is to induce labor or take the baby through C section I would rather see that. I realize the inherent conflict in either forcing a women to deliver an unwanted baby and potentially killing a baby unnecessarily. At some point I prefer to side with protecting the baby. I think the law should be clear and consistent across all 50 states - I do not see this as a state issue - it is a national issue. We should have one set of laws for abortions.

 

I think under 14 parent/guardian should be notified. After that I really don't think so. Looking back 14 years old was really young, but I went on the pill at about 14 or 15. I didn't lose my virginity until I was 17, but I didn't want to take any chances. My Mom would have said No. Her answer to sex ed, was to say No, you aren't going to have it. That doesn't really work on someone as stubborn as me. No, I probably didn't need to be on it, but if someone had prevented me from getting them I might have had sex earlier as part of my "I don't give a damn" mentality.
I also am the naturally curious - I need to know everything about something before I make a decision. Not all high school kids are like that, even though the information is highly accessible to them. I think that more of an effort needs to be made in accurate education since otherwise it's hard to tell where their information may be coming from.

You're talking about viability there. If the fetus is viable, I do think that is the preferable option, with the exception of the cases I stated above. Adoption is then an option. I also do not understand why so many people go out of the country for their adoptions when the US has so many orphans. The personhood bills seem to be more concentrated towards defining when the fetus becomes a person. In the case of Kansas, they want to say fertilization which could then take steps toward outlawing certin kinds of birth control which prevent the egg from implanting.