Amy Barrett for Supreme Court?

[Nebe]

it would be nice if the pro lifers didn't stop caring about the life after it is born

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

it would be nice if the pro lifers didn't stop caring about the life after it is born

You keep saying that. It’s a great bumper sticker. Zero truth to it, so you should be happy. Conservatives are generous and charitable, think of the role religion plays on each side, you’ll understand why.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Nebe

it would be nice if the pro lifers didn't stop caring about the life after it is born

Exactly right. Look at the policies of this (and many) Repub. admin. They hurt the poor. Lower taxes, where the majority of the reduction goes to the rich and then cut the safety net. Again and again we see the same playbook.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Exactly right. Look at the policies of this (and many) Repub. admin. They hurt the poor. Lower taxes, where the majority of the reduction goes to the rich and then cut the safety net. Again and again we see the same playbook.

"Look at the policies of this (and many) Repub. admin. They hurt the poor"

Bill Clinton cut taxes and kicked millions of deadbeats off of welfare. He helped fuel the tech boom of the 1990s, which made God only knows how many people, very wealthy. How come he's a liberal hero? How come you'd never accuse him of hurting the poor?

Unemployment is way down, black unemployment has never been lower. Many more poor people now pay zero federal income tax (they doubled the standard deduction).

When the economy grows, that will always help the wealthy more than it helps the poor, because the wealthy have more disposable income to invest, which allows them to capitalize on the growth. That is not a Republican creation, it is elementary school arithmetic.

Now, we can debate whether or not the tax cuts should have done less for the wealthy, less for corporations, and more for the poor. We can debate that, and you would be able to make some very valid points that I might agree with. It didn't "hurt the" poor, maybe it didn't help them as much as it could have.

If liberalism is better for the poor, that would explain the liberal utopias of Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven, etc. These are cities that have been controlled by liberals for a generation, in a fabulously wealthy state controlled by liberals for a generation, and the people in those cities are far worse off than they were 30 years ago. Any of that not true?

Why do so many poor people risk their lives to come here, even when conservatives are running the show?

In any event, way off topic. Watch what happens during the confirmation hearings, of whomever Hitler picks to be the next justice. Especially if it's a woman. Yet supposedly it's my side that has declared 'war on women'.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

In any event, way off topic. Watch what happens during the confirmation hearings, of whomever Hitler picks to be the next justice. Especially if it's a woman. Yet supposedly it's my side that has declared 'war on women'.

Is that a Freudian slip or calling a spade a spade?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Is that a Freudian slip or calling a spade a spade?

Neither. It was consciously making fun of the left.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Neither. It was consciously making fun of the left.

It was a devastating take down Jim. The liberal ecosystem has been rendered devoid of air, just dishonest lifeless zombies struggling for their last breath. It must have felt good to drink that much blood. Winning!

I honor your effort for the cause with a picture of Elizabeth Warren and her new puppy.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

It was a devastating take down Jim. The liberal ecosystem has been rendered devoid of air, just dishonest lifeless zombies struggling for their last breath. It must have felt good to drink that much blood. Winning!

I honor your effort for the cause with a picture of Elizabeth Warren and her new puppy.

Fortunately for me, I'm not concerned with the opinions of someone who implies that Trumps admittedly awful rhetoric, is responsible for the actions of a lunatic who made good on threats made many years ago. When I say something that indefensible, than you can lecture me on civics, but it will never, ever happen.

Very, very cute puppy. Is she claiming it's a native American pup for some kind of economic gain?

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"

If liberalism is better for the poor, that would explain the liberal utopias of Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven, etc. These are cities that have been controlled by liberals for a generation, in a fabulously wealthy state controlled by liberals for a generation, and the people in those cities are far worse off than they were 30 years ago. Any of that not true?

You are constantly making specious arguments. How does your brain deal with the fact that 14 out of the 15 states with the highest poverty rates are all strongly red; all take in way more in federal tax than they pay in (unlike the trend in blue states); have worse health care, education etc. Any specious explanations for that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by zimmy

You are constantly making specious arguments. How does your brain deal with the fact that 14 out of the 15 states with the highest poverty rates are all strongly red; all take in way more in federal tax than they pay in (unlike the trend in blue states); have worse health care, education etc. Any specious explanations for that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But, but, but the taxes are lower.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device