PP - Thread Split Off Topic - derailment

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Funny, she's beating nearly every GOP contender in the Iowa polls which isn't exactly liberal territory.

I guess those Iowans must be pretty deaf, dumb and blind.

Can you cite that poll you are referring to? This poll has her trailing Bush, Walker, and Rubio in Iowa, Colorado, and VA. Obama won all 3 of those states twice. So I don't think they are deep red territory, are they?

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...wa-120450.html

[Nebe]

Totally agreed
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

That is true as well.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Sounds on point to me. I certainly would want a feeble minded yet sexually active person to have access to free birth control. Wouldn't you scott ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

maybe a little more...these folks Eben, found any physical or mental "handicap" and various traits to be a "defect", being in poverty is mentioned... they were interested in breeding out of society and eliminating what they considered lesser qualities as they determined them to be ..."dysgenic" breeding versus selective....very high-minded academic elitist stuff


"As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.

Birth Control is not advanced as a panacea by which past and present evils of dysgenic breeding can be magically eliminated. Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupidly cruel sentimentalism.

But to prevent the repetition, to effect the salvation of the generations of the future–nay of the generations of today–our greatest need is first of all the ability to face the situation without flinching, and to cooperate in the formation of a code of sexual ethics based upon a thorough biological and psychological understanding of human nature; and then to answer the questions and the needs of the people with all the intelligence and honesty at our command. If we can summon the bravery to do this, we shall best be serving the true interests of Eugenics, because our work will then have a practical and pragmatic value."

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Sounds on point to me. I certainly would want a feeble minded yet sexually active person to have access to free birth control. Wouldn't you scott ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm fascinated by the fact that I read that and find it incredibly offensive and you find it on point...

a little more Sanger

“While I personally believe in the sterilization of the feeble-minded, the insane and syphilitic, I have not been able to discover that these measures are more than superficial deterrents when applied to the constantly growing stream of the unfit. They are excellent means of meeting a certain phase of the situation, but I believe in regard to these, as in regard to other eugenic means, that they do not go to the bottom of the matter.” (“Birth Control and Racial Betterment,” Feb. 1919, The Birth Control Review).

“Eugenics without birth control seems to us a house builded upon the sands. It is at the mercy of the rising stream of the unfit” (“Birth Control and Racial Betterment,” Feb. 1919, The Birth Control Review).

“Stop our national habit of human waste.” (“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 6).

“By all means, there should be no children when either mother or father suffers from such diseases as tuberculosis, gonorrhea, syphilis, cancer, epilepsy, insanity, drunkenness and mental disorders. In the case of the mother, heart disease, kidney trouble and pelvic deformities are also a serious bar to childbearing No more children should be born when the parents, though healthy themselves, find that their children are physically or mentally defective.” (“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 7).

“The main objects of the Population Congress would be to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring[;] to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.” (“A Plan for Peace,” 1932).

[detbuch]

If Hillary so admires Sanger, it is logical that she would be against the immigration of all those "inferior" folks entering across our southern border. And since anti-social, criminal behavior is a kind of mental disorder, She would, at least, be against giving citizenship to those who illegally cross that border, and even against letting them stay in any case. Unless, of course, they chose to be sterilized, or to be segregated, and have no right to vote or influence society in any way.

At least she has the contraception thing down. Except she wants to provide it for all women, even the "fit" ones. She's not a hypocrite there. She did her part. She only had one child. But that is not a model for even maintaining current population, much less for expanding it and the economy as well. Well, that fits in well with the notion that humans are a sort of cancer on the environment. Even the "fit" ones . . . I guess.

So, what's Bernie's view on the illegal immigrants here . . . or those to come?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

So, what's Bernie's view on the illegal immigrants here . . . or those to come?

it's always hard to tell isn't it? and when they do tell, it's often hard to judge what is true or not....seems the modern progressives learned a lesson from the early progressives who, as shown were pretty blunt with their views, modern progressives have learned the important skills of deception and phony compassion which attempt to disguise pretty cold and callous views and ulterior motives....we get to see a peak occasionally and it's not pretty... we know that Bernie, while an "independent socialist" did co-found the congressional progressive caucus which lists as one of it's "non-profit organization most closely associated" as The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) "It advocates in favor of progressive immigration reform policies"

Sanders is getting criticism for some "straddling" but I did read this clarification of his stance after comments to Ezra Klein

"Sanders is strongly in favor of legalization and citizenship for the current unauthorized immigrant population, which will raise wages and lift labor standards for all workers, and he’s against expanding U.S. temporary foreign worker programs, which allow employers to exploit and underpay so-called guestworkers. Limiting guestworker programs will reduce wage suppression and improve labor standards for U.S. and migrant workers alike.


When it comes to the number one priority for immigration reform—legalizing the unauthorized immigrant population in the United States—Sanders has said time and time again that they should be legalized immediately and put on a path to citizenship, and he’s highlighted their contributions to the American economy. Sanders could not be any clearer about this. He voted for the 2013 comprehensive reform bill that would have legalized most of the unauthorized population, despite his misgivings about the large expansion of high- and low-skilled guestworker programs in the bill, which shows the importance he ascribes to legalization. Sanders understands that having eight million people working in the U.S. labor market without labor and employment rights puts downward pressure on the wages and working conditions of all workers. He has not failed to point this out. There’s no question that Sanders’ desire for legalization of the unauthorized population is consistent with his broader agenda to see wages rise for workers in the United States.


I'm actually ok with this as long as we get to send 1 progressive off to the socialist paradise of their choice for every two undocumented Americans that we make whole and legal

[Jim in CT]

As fr Margaret Sanger, a large group of black ministers submitted a petition to have her likeness removed from the Smithsonian, due to her disgusting views. Spence immediately comes to her defense.

Some conservatives have exaggerated some of her quotes for political capital. But when you boil it down to her comments that cannot be separated from her, it's vile.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

As fr Margaret Sanger, a large group of black ministers submitted a petition to have her likeness removed from the Smithsonian, due to her disgusting views. Spence immediately comes to her defense.

Some conservatives have exaggerated some of her quotes for political capital. But when you boil it down to her comments that cannot be separated from her, it's vile.

her words don't really need any exaggerating

“I admire Margaret Sanger enormously,” Secretary Clinton had said in March, “her courage, her tenacity, her vision . . . And when I think about what she did all those years ago in Brooklyn, taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions, I am really in awe of her.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

not crazy about most of the GOP but they sure look great next to the dem's line up of losers

Have you given Ben Carson a look? I don't think he has a prayer, but my God, the guy is impressive. He went to Harlem yesterday, and told people in Harlem (talk about going into the belly of the beast) and told them that it's not white republicans who are to blame for their problems, but rather the liberal policy "of not showing us respect, not treating us like equals, but patting us on the head and treating us like pets. That's what happens when they don't respect you, but take care of you, so that in turn, you will take care of them". Heroically, he likened liberal policies to Lyndon Johnson's famous statement "if we give these n's free stuff, they'll vote for us for 200 years". He also said that the only solution is to embrace the only values that matter, family and faith.

Brave, and very intellectually honest.

[justplugit]

I always liked him. A bright guy who seems very honest and trustworthy.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by justplugit

I always liked him. A bright guy who seems very honest and trustworthy.

He gave a great answer on his abortion position very recently. He said that he worked most of hi scareer as a pediatric neurosurgeon, an dthat he couldn't count ho wmany times he and his team fought all night long, giving everything they had, to save critical babies, sometimes who were still in the womb. So he said that no one should be shocked that he's not in favor of killing babies for convenience.

I thought it was a fair, honest answer.

He just comes across as a decent, honest, thoughtful man.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by justplugit

I always liked him. A bright guy who seems very honest and trustworthy.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

He gave a great answer on his abortion position very recently. He said that he worked most of hi scareer as a pediatric neurosurgeon, an dthat he couldn't count ho wmany times he and his team fought all night long, giving everything they had, to save critical babies, sometimes who were still in the womb. So he said that no one should be shocked that he's not in favor of killing babies for convenience.

I thought it was a fair, honest answer.

He just comes across as a decent, honest, thoughtful man.

So neither of you have any problems with his research on tissue from aborted fetus'?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So neither of you have any problems with his research on tissue from aborted fetus'?

A tough but fair question.

I don't think most people have a problem with performing medical research on corpses, even babies. I have no quarel with that. But I would assume that those folks died of natural causes or an accident. I also assume, as the law requires, that fetal corpses used for research, were not manipulated while still alive, for the specific reason of maximizing harvestable tissue. Finally, what sickened a lot of folks about PP, was the absolute callousness with which they discussed such things, but in my opinion, you need to have something deeply wrong with you to do that for a living, so maybe it's not that surprising.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So neither of you have any problems with his research on tissue from aborted fetus'?

If it matters, Carson is denying that he ever performed research on fetal tissue. His surgeries. done in the effort to save lives, were sometimes used as a source for scientific research. He has no ethical issue with that research, but claims he has never been involved.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So neither of you have any problems with his research on tissue from aborted fetus'?

Today was the first I heard of that.
He is being interviewed tonight so I will wait to see what he has to say
before I pass judgment.