Quote: @Zanary said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Whippoorwills call, evenin' is nigh Hurry to my, blue heaven
Turn to the right, there's a little white light
Will lead you to my, blue heavenYou'll see a smilin' face, fireplace, a cozy room
Little nest that nestle while the roses bloom
Molly and me, and the baby makes three
We're happy in my, in my blue heavenYou're gonna see a smilin' face, fireplace, cozy room
And a little nest nestled where the roses bloom
Just Molly and me, and the baby is three
We're so happy in my, blue heavenWe're happy in my, blue heaven
We're happy in my blue heaven
Oh My Kentucky and Virginia and even in Missouri! Even Pence’s hometown the city council went blue. What a night!!!!
Yippee, maybe they can spread the violence, inequity, homelessness, crime, and filth that their peers have accomplished in Chicago, Baltimore, and most of the cities on the West Coast!
The cities with the most violent crime have generations of dnc corruption...so, by that metric, does craving dnc leadership mean a desire for murdered Americans?
Interesting that you think--or more likely--pretend to think that this is related to the DNC. Shall we talk about how all the red states far outpace blue in terms of crime, poverty, illiteracy, welfare, etc.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ Zanary said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Whippoorwills call, evenin' is nigh Hurry to my, blue heaven
Turn to the right, there's a little white light
Will lead you to my, blue heavenYou'll see a smilin' face, fireplace, a cozy room
Little nest that nestle while the roses bloom
Molly and me, and the baby makes three
We're happy in my, in my blue heavenYou're gonna see a smilin' face, fireplace, cozy room
And a little nest nestled where the roses bloom
Just Molly and me, and the baby is three
We're so happy in my, blue heavenWe're happy in my, blue heaven
We're happy in my blue heaven
Oh My Kentucky and Virginia and even in Missouri! Even Pence’s hometown the city council went blue. What a night!!!!
Yippee, maybe they can spread the violence, inequity, homelessness, crime, and filth that their peers have accomplished in Chicago, Baltimore, and most of the cities on the West Coast!
The cities with the most violent crime have generations of dnc corruption...so, by that metric, does craving dnc leadership mean a desire for murdered Americans?
Interesting that you think--or more likely-- pretend to think that this is related to the DNC. Shall we talk about how all the red states far outpace blue in terms of crime, poverty, illiteracy, welfare, etc.
Pretend?
The numbers on that have been in for a long time, and were an absolute joy to throw around in my very left-leaning sociology classes up here. But hey, you don't have to believe me:
"Bigger discoveries were made. Of the top-ten “most dangerous cities” in America, according to Forbes, all have Democratic mayors. Those cities are Detroit, St. Louis, Oakland, Memphis, Birmingham, Atlanta, Baltimore, Stockton, Cleveland and Buffalo. Race may have little to do with it, although poverty and unemployment are tied to violent crime prevalence. Roughly half the mayors in this top-ten analysis were Caucasian, half African American.
Seven of ten appear in another study of America’s top-25 “most dangerous” cities, which tracks the first adding Kansas City, Little Rock, Milwaukee, Rockford (IL), Albuquerque, Springfield (MO), Indianapolis, San Bernardino, Anchorage, Nashville, Lansing, New Orleans, Minneapolis, Chicago, Houston, Hartford (CT), Chattanooga, and Beaumont (TX), dropping Birmingham, Atlanta and Buffalo.
And of the top 25 “most dangerous,” most are Democrat-led and all but one have poverty rates between 18 to 39 percent. The national average is 12.3 percent.
Of the top 25 “most dangerous” American cities, on top of poverty between 18 and 39 percent, most have unemployment between 4.4 and 9.3 percent. The national average is 3.7 percent.
So, these Democrat mayors – with good intention – are leading cities deep in poverty, weak on tax base, infrastructure, employers, trained citizens, and policies to attract corporate investment. They lead the nation in murder, manslaughter, robbery and aggravated assault."
https://amac.us/americas-25-worst-cities-are-democrat-led-the-answer-new-leaders/
They cite a great deal of real statistics, and it's easy to find them backed up all over pure data sites on the web.
But wait: there's more!
I work in Seattle, and the same morons that insist that they're leading the city with "progressive values" are allowing repeat criminals to walk free, victimizing the actual tax-payers in the area, and turning huge amounts of the city into high-crime, violent areas...including right outside the fuggin' COURTHOUSE!
"According to the Seattle Police Department’s Open Data Portal, officers responded to nearly 550 assault or threat reports in the 500 block of Third Avenue over the past year. They responded to 66 robberies and 78 drug-related calls as well.
West Precinct Commander Capt. Tom Mahaffey told the county council Tuesday that he and his officers hear people’s frustrations, but their hands are tied by city policies regarding people who are homeless, drug addicted and/or mentally ill."
https://komonews.com/news/local/security...in-seattle
So, simply...to vote for dnc "leadership" seems to support a desire to have Americans robbed, beaten, raped, and/or killed. Again, the examples are wildly rampant...with decades of data to back the results.
Why would anyone celebrate victories by the party trying to get Americans robbed/raped/killed?
Classes? Oh my God, please tell me you don't teach this nonsense.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Classes? Oh my God, please tell me you don't teach this nonsense.
Please do respond with statistics. Find some hilbilly town in WV that has a higher drug rate or something.
If you want to run an experiment on how great Blue has done just look up municipal bond rates. Higher interest rate = more risky = investors think their chance of getting paid back are lower.
I can save you the time if you want. Zanary already made you a list.
Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Classes? Oh my God, please tell me you don't teach this nonsense.
Please do respond with statistics. Find some hilbilly town in WV that has a higher drug rate or something.
If you want to run an experiment on how great Blue has done just look up municipal bond rates. Higher interest rate = more risky = investors think their chance of getting paid back are lower.
I can save you the time if you want. Zanary already made you a list.
You can't be this stupid. This reminds me of those maps that went around during election season that showed a "shocking" visual connection between where Democrats voted and the crime rate. It was quite a revelation....to folks who can't identify where CITIES are on a map.
Sure it's probably true that most of the major cities have crime problems. It's also true that most major cities have Democrats for mayors. Of course they do. But this is obviously more about population density than it is about politics. People in populous areas vote Democratic. Even in deep red states. Look it up, Dallas county, Harris county (where Houston is) just to name two, voted for Gore, Kerry, Obama, Clinton by wide margins.
Now, if you actually do a FAIR analysis and compare the crime rates of large cities run by both Dems and Republicans (there are a few), you'll find there is no significant difference between the two.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ pumpf said:
Where? Where was the debate about late-term abortions? I'll be happy to debate that issue with you... but I never brought it up. I talked about children being killed after they were born- and Democrats doing nothing to prevent it. You (apparently) couldn't be bothered to read what I actually wrote... and then argued an issue that I never brought up (in this thread). And, to top it all off, you personally attacked me by comparing me to an evil, false prophet... and then attacked my work as a pastor. How can you not see that any of that was wrong? I wouldn't think of attacking you as a father or husband, just because we disagree on a myriad of topics. Yet you (and others) always make it your goal to- somehow- go after my faith or my calling as a pastor.
Is that what you call civil discourse?
As for killing healthy babies after they're born... my first question is: when did the health of the child matter in the debate as to whether or not to kill her? Is that really the qualifier you wanted to use? Does the fact that the baby have health issues matter in any other situations? Are you really suggesting that a child- who is already born- does not deserve the same rights / medical access as anyone else? This is not about abortion; this is about another human life that is alive outside of the womb. Wasn't THAT supposed to be the "red line" that determined what was a human life with a right to life... and a "clump of cells"?
And what about if the mother changes her mind? What if she saw her son born ALIVE... after a failed abortion... and wanted to keep him? Should she be allowed to do so? Well, it happened... and the abortion clinic refused to call 9-1-1... and they refused to give her any other kind of help. The boy died in the crying mother's arms. What's your opinion on that situation?
One other question, although I doubt you'll actually answer any of the questions I've posed: does Kermit Gosnell belong in prison or not?
I'm talking about the national debate about late-term abortion. That's the debate. Intentionally killing babies after they are born is already illegal.
OK... but I wasn't. And you used this opportunity to personally attack me, even though I wasn't at all talking about the "national debate". And, yes, it's already illegal... but that isn't stopping dozens of children from being killed anyway.
Now, do you want to answer any of my questions (or maybe apologize for your personal attacks)? Or should we just start talking about third-trimester abortions?
I read something once about turning the other cheek.
Is it just me, but you seem to routinely behave in tune with your political values but rarely with your Christian ones.
Quote: @"BarrNone55" said:
@ pumpf said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ pumpf said:
Where? Where was the debate about late-term abortions? I'll be happy to debate that issue with you... but I never brought it up. I talked about children being killed after they were born- and Democrats doing nothing to prevent it. You (apparently) couldn't be bothered to read what I actually wrote... and then argued an issue that I never brought up (in this thread). And, to top it all off, you personally attacked me by comparing me to an evil, false prophet... and then attacked my work as a pastor. How can you not see that any of that was wrong? I wouldn't think of attacking you as a father or husband, just because we disagree on a myriad of topics. Yet you (and others) always make it your goal to- somehow- go after my faith or my calling as a pastor.
Is that what you call civil discourse?
As for killing healthy babies after they're born... my first question is: when did the health of the child matter in the debate as to whether or not to kill her? Is that really the qualifier you wanted to use? Does the fact that the baby have health issues matter in any other situations? Are you really suggesting that a child- who is already born- does not deserve the same rights / medical access as anyone else? This is not about abortion; this is about another human life that is alive outside of the womb. Wasn't THAT supposed to be the "red line" that determined what was a human life with a right to life... and a "clump of cells"?
And what about if the mother changes her mind? What if she saw her son born ALIVE... after a failed abortion... and wanted to keep him? Should she be allowed to do so? Well, it happened... and the abortion clinic refused to call 9-1-1... and they refused to give her any other kind of help. The boy died in the crying mother's arms. What's your opinion on that situation?
One other question, although I doubt you'll actually answer any of the questions I've posed: does Kermit Gosnell belong in prison or not?
I'm talking about the national debate about late-term abortion. That's the debate. Intentionally killing babies after they are born is already illegal.
OK... but I wasn't. And you used this opportunity to personally attack me, even though I wasn't at all talking about the "national debate". And, yes, it's already illegal... but that isn't stopping dozens of children from being killed anyway.
Now, do you want to answer any of my questions (or maybe apologize for your personal attacks)? Or should we just start talking about third-trimester abortions?
I read something once about turning the other cheek.
Is it just me, but you seem to routinely behave in tune with your political values but rarely with your Christian ones.
Examples?
Quote: @pumpf said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@ pumpf said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ pumpf said:
Where? Where was the debate about late-term abortions? I'll be happy to debate that issue with you... but I never brought it up. I talked about children being killed after they were born- and Democrats doing nothing to prevent it. You (apparently) couldn't be bothered to read what I actually wrote... and then argued an issue that I never brought up (in this thread). And, to top it all off, you personally attacked me by comparing me to an evil, false prophet... and then attacked my work as a pastor. How can you not see that any of that was wrong? I wouldn't think of attacking you as a father or husband, just because we disagree on a myriad of topics. Yet you (and others) always make it your goal to- somehow- go after my faith or my calling as a pastor.
Is that what you call civil discourse?
As for killing healthy babies after they're born... my first question is: when did the health of the child matter in the debate as to whether or not to kill her? Is that really the qualifier you wanted to use? Does the fact that the baby have health issues matter in any other situations? Are you really suggesting that a child- who is already born- does not deserve the same rights / medical access as anyone else? This is not about abortion; this is about another human life that is alive outside of the womb. Wasn't THAT supposed to be the "red line" that determined what was a human life with a right to life... and a "clump of cells"?
And what about if the mother changes her mind? What if she saw her son born ALIVE... after a failed abortion... and wanted to keep him? Should she be allowed to do so? Well, it happened... and the abortion clinic refused to call 9-1-1... and they refused to give her any other kind of help. The boy died in the crying mother's arms. What's your opinion on that situation?
One other question, although I doubt you'll actually answer any of the questions I've posed: does Kermit Gosnell belong in prison or not?
I'm talking about the national debate about late-term abortion. That's the debate. Intentionally killing babies after they are born is already illegal.
OK... but I wasn't. And you used this opportunity to personally attack me, even though I wasn't at all talking about the "national debate". And, yes, it's already illegal... but that isn't stopping dozens of children from being killed anyway.
Now, do you want to answer any of my questions (or maybe apologize for your personal attacks)? Or should we just start talking about third-trimester abortions?
I read something once about turning the other cheek.
Is it just me, but you seem to routinely behave in tune with your political values but rarely with your Christian ones.
Examples?
You have been nothing but a gentleman ... and your faith has been used against you.
It isn’t fair imo. If you were a different faith it wouldn’t be allowed.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@ pumpf said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ pumpf said:
Where? Where was the debate about late-term abortions? I'll be happy to debate that issue with you... but I never brought it up. I talked about children being killed after they were born- and Democrats doing nothing to prevent it. You (apparently) couldn't be bothered to read what I actually wrote... and then argued an issue that I never brought up (in this thread). And, to top it all off, you personally attacked me by comparing me to an evil, false prophet... and then attacked my work as a pastor. How can you not see that any of that was wrong? I wouldn't think of attacking you as a father or husband, just because we disagree on a myriad of topics. Yet you (and others) always make it your goal to- somehow- go after my faith or my calling as a pastor.
Is that what you call civil discourse?
As for killing healthy babies after they're born... my first question is: when did the health of the child matter in the debate as to whether or not to kill her? Is that really the qualifier you wanted to use? Does the fact that the baby have health issues matter in any other situations? Are you really suggesting that a child- who is already born- does not deserve the same rights / medical access as anyone else? This is not about abortion; this is about another human life that is alive outside of the womb. Wasn't THAT supposed to be the "red line" that determined what was a human life with a right to life... and a "clump of cells"?
And what about if the mother changes her mind? What if she saw her son born ALIVE... after a failed abortion... and wanted to keep him? Should she be allowed to do so? Well, it happened... and the abortion clinic refused to call 9-1-1... and they refused to give her any other kind of help. The boy died in the crying mother's arms. What's your opinion on that situation?
One other question, although I doubt you'll actually answer any of the questions I've posed: does Kermit Gosnell belong in prison or not?
I'm talking about the national debate about late-term abortion. That's the debate. Intentionally killing babies after they are born is already illegal.
OK... but I wasn't. And you used this opportunity to personally attack me, even though I wasn't at all talking about the "national debate". And, yes, it's already illegal... but that isn't stopping dozens of children from being killed anyway.
Now, do you want to answer any of my questions (or maybe apologize for your personal attacks)? Or should we just start talking about third-trimester abortions?
I read something once about turning the other cheek.
Is it just me, but you seem to routinely behave in tune with your political values but rarely with your Christian ones.
Examples?
Wait... so you accuse me of acting contrary to my faith (which, I confess, I do all the time... but I've tried hard not to do it as much here)... and then when I ask for an example, you mark it as "funny"... but don't actually respond. Now THAT is funny. But not surprising. Maroon refused to answer any of the questions I posed to him... and now you're doing the same.
It's almost like you guys don't have the ability to have a conversation with someone with whom you disagree. Fascinating.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ pumpf said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@ pumpf said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ pumpf said:
Where? Where was the debate about late-term abortions? I'll be happy to debate that issue with you... but I never brought it up. I talked about children being killed after they were born- and Democrats doing nothing to prevent it. You (apparently) couldn't be bothered to read what I actually wrote... and then argued an issue that I never brought up (in this thread). And, to top it all off, you personally attacked me by comparing me to an evil, false prophet... and then attacked my work as a pastor. How can you not see that any of that was wrong? I wouldn't think of attacking you as a father or husband, just because we disagree on a myriad of topics. Yet you (and others) always make it your goal to- somehow- go after my faith or my calling as a pastor.
Is that what you call civil discourse?
As for killing healthy babies after they're born... my first question is: when did the health of the child matter in the debate as to whether or not to kill her? Is that really the qualifier you wanted to use? Does the fact that the baby have health issues matter in any other situations? Are you really suggesting that a child- who is already born- does not deserve the same rights / medical access as anyone else? This is not about abortion; this is about another human life that is alive outside of the womb. Wasn't THAT supposed to be the "red line" that determined what was a human life with a right to life... and a "clump of cells"?
And what about if the mother changes her mind? What if she saw her son born ALIVE... after a failed abortion... and wanted to keep him? Should she be allowed to do so? Well, it happened... and the abortion clinic refused to call 9-1-1... and they refused to give her any other kind of help. The boy died in the crying mother's arms. What's your opinion on that situation?
One other question, although I doubt you'll actually answer any of the questions I've posed: does Kermit Gosnell belong in prison or not?
I'm talking about the national debate about late-term abortion. That's the debate. Intentionally killing babies after they are born is already illegal.
OK... but I wasn't. And you used this opportunity to personally attack me, even though I wasn't at all talking about the "national debate". And, yes, it's already illegal... but that isn't stopping dozens of children from being killed anyway.
Now, do you want to answer any of my questions (or maybe apologize for your personal attacks)? Or should we just start talking about third-trimester abortions?
I read something once about turning the other cheek.
Is it just me, but you seem to routinely behave in tune with your political values but rarely with your Christian ones.
Examples?
Wait... so you accuse me of acting contrary to my faith (which, I confess, I do all the time... but I've tried hard not to do it as much here)... and then when I ask for an example, you mark it as "funny"... but don't actually respond. Now THAT is funny. But not surprising. Maroon refused to answer any of the questions I posed to him... and now you're doing the same.
It's almost like you guys don't have the ability to have a conversation with someone with whom you disagree. Fascinating.
I love debating with folks I disagree with. Especially if they make valid points. But when it gets silly and stupid I typically bail because it drives me crazy and I don't have time for it.
Case in point: infanticide. Stupid. It's already illegal. There isn't anyone who would argue that it shouldn't be. But I'll debate late-term abortion with you. That's why I did that. I wanted to reach down, pull you out of the crazy pit and give you an opportunity to make your case on something that IS a legit debate. And you're all "answer my question, answer my question."
What questions are you talking about? Kermit Gosnell? Yes, he was a demented serial killer. And I'm pretty certain he's in jail. So what is there to answer? What shall we debate next, Jeffery Dahmer? Aborting gay babies? C'mon.
|
