gadgetlady

Cool. I'll lyk when I'm going to be there next (if I'll have time to visit). I'm usually in Irving. Don't bother trying to convert me, though. I've been a hard-core conservative since age 6, when someone told me what taxes were. True story.

Roe and Doe made abortion a FEDERAL issue.

I'm pro-choice on the issue of whether or not people have a right to make a decision about a candidate based on their position on abortion. LOL!

Ha ha! Hey luluc, I travel to Dallas a bit. I'd love to meet you sometime. Whereabouts are you? P.S. I can't stand polls either. They are way too easily skewed. But if they're properly done, they can provide a reasonable snapshot.

When I'm wrong, I freely admit I'm wrong -- and I have done so on this board. It's really fascinating to me that that is not a universal ability.

You know what, in fact, that article you posted really pisses me off because it misrepresents the facts! It says: Randomly selected subjects on three other polls also show Biden winning: CNN/Opinion Research Biden 51 Palin 36 CBS Biden 46 Palin 21 Fox Biden 61 Palin 39 The implication is that it's a randomly selected sample of all voters, and it's not. It really, really annoys me when the media get it wrong (and they often do) -- regardless of which side it helps.

Thank you. I now see where you're getting that information but I'm having a hard time finding that polling on the independent websites. I'm not questioning you; I just don't swallow stuff without researching it. When I go to CNN and Fox I don't see the poll information anywhere. The only place I see it at CBS, with this notation: This CBS News poll was conducted online by Knowledge Networks among a nationwide random sample of 473 uncommitted voters - voters who don’t yet know who they will vote for, or who have chosen a candidate but may still change their minds - who have agreed to watch the debate. Knowledge Networks, a market and public policy research firm based in Menlo Park, CA, conducted the web poll among a sample of adult members of its panel, who are provided web access if they don't already have it. . . . This is a scientifically representative poll of uncommitted voters’ reaction to the presidential debate. The margin of sampling error could be plus or minus 5 percentage points for results based on the entire sample So the CBS poll is a poll of undecideds only (and 473 people is not a terrific sample for national statistical analysis). That doesn't mean squat for national polling. I'll wait for the big boys (Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup) to release their numbers. That being said, the national polls may very well say the Biden won. I don't know if they will or won't. From a statistical analysis point, though, the numbers you posted are inaccurate and premature.

If no one can prove when it does begin, then who's to say we can't go around killing toddlers if they interfere with your life? Do you see the problem? We don't get to decide for other people when their life begins. It begins when it begins. It isn't a personal decision. Thank you. It is a woefully sad issue. I weep not only for the babies, but also for the mothers.

Are those actual polls or self-selecting polls? I haven't seen any "real" polls released. Zogby is releasing on Saturday. Rasmussen hasn't released anything yet, although they did just release a poll saying "59% Agree With Ronald Reagan—Government Is The Problem". Gallup hasn't released. Self-selecting polls are notoriously unreliable.

I absolutely agree. I am libertarian in the truest sense of the word -- do whatever you want with your own body, so long as it doesn't interfere with another's. It cracks me up when I'm informed by pro-abortionists that I'm pro-life because I really want to control women. I don't give a hoot what women do with their own bodies! As far as I'm concerned, prostitution should be legal. It's when another body is involved, and when that body specifically is about to be dismembered, that I stand up for the rights of that second person. Scientifically, life begins at conception. It cannot logically begin at any other time. We can argue about the value of that life throughout the various stages of development (in utero and out), but it's inception is when the sperm and the egg join.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I was railing against the whole term "pro-choice", not against you per se or your use of the term, because Americans have been conditioned to use the term pro-choice to signify pro-abortion. When we talk about any other issue, we specify the issue we're discussing (guns, euthanasia, etc.). No one who believes that people should have the right to bear arms even if they personally don't want to make use of that right is called pro-choice. They're called pro-gun. Same with euthanasia. Yet somehow, and perhaps it's because abortion is such an unspeakable evil, the abortion movement has managed to co-opt the word "choice" because they don't want to be called pro-abortion. As I said, we are all pro-choice. We all believe in personal choice. The distinction we all draw is when our choice impedes on the lives of other people. Pro-abortionists aren't pro-choice when it comes to slavery. They're not pro-choice when it comes to spousal abuse. They're not pro-choice when it comes to female castration. Even though each one of these items also involves a choice, we must always remember that some choices have victims -- which is precisely why I'm pro-life.

Why do you think it's wrong? What's wrong with it? You don't get to tell me what to do -- unless, of course, I'm about to violate another person's rights (in this case, by killing them).

Doesn't change the fact that it's a different person. Personhood isn't determined by a journey through the birth canal.

Yup. I agree. The problem is the baby is not the mother's body; he or she is a different person.

Oh, I know. My husband calls Austin a little annex of Berkeley in the middle of Texas, the Birkenstock capital of the Lone Star State, and the nice thing about Austin is it's 5 minutes from Texas. We tried to open a business in Austin once. It was a business that would have all part-time employees (by the very nature of the job, we wouldn't need anyone for more than 10-15 hours per week; we generally hire students needing a little extra money on the side). We had to scratch the whole plan because the City (note: capital "C") of Austin was requiring us to pay a "living wage" and provide health insurance for the employees. That they were part time didn't matter. How the heck do you provide a "living wage" to part-timers? (BTW, we pay between $10 and $15 per hour + generous tips, which is certainly nothing to sneeze at -- especially for college students looking for side money!). There was no way for us to succeed with the business with those requirements. So we left.

Ha! Places I regularly visit: New York, Seattle, Las Vegas, Dallas. Place I feel most welcome politically: Dallas.

:tongue: I'm not quite sure what you mean here. :tongue:

LOL! Yup, if it weren't for the weather I wouldn't live here. It's depressing to not have my vote matter one whit. {sigh}

Hmmm. Looking at the timeline, I made ONE. And it was about editing, and how Obama can be shown to be a poor interviewee as well, with editing. It wasn't "spin" at all. I agree -- you have not been backpeddling. Thank you for that. :tongue:

(My husband thinks we should test weapons and drugs on them) I don't think it's being cheap to be upset at what we pay to house a criminal.

Dems and libs were frothing at the mouth, waiting for Palin to fumble tonight. She didn't. Now they're backpeddling. In fact, I've never seen pedals move backwards so fast! When someone resorts to calling names, it demonstrates that they've lost our argument.

Yes, I am. A decade ago, however, I wasn't. The pro-life movement, which I have been involved in for close to 30 years, converted me.

I do have to disagree on a few things, though. Better life than what? Than death? Surely, yes, being alive is better than being dead. With death there is no hope. That just plain sucks. It's not a fair thing to convey to your kids in any way, shape, or form. But there is something worse than being an unwanted child: suffering a violent death.

You have a right to be grumpy, Gloucester. You should have had help and you shouldn't have been turned away. Progress has been made and pro-lifers are much more aware of the needs of mothers before and after the life decision. I'd venture a guess you wouldn't get the same answers today that you did years ago. And again, you didn't deserve what you went through -- asking, in good faith, for help, and getting turned away. :tongue: The question of whether help is or is not there, however, doesn't justify the killing of innocent human beings. We don't solve social problems by killing people.

It's all in the editing. If you watched Palin tonight, she nailed it -- it wasn't edited. A good friend of mine edited Obama's interview with Kroft -- not adding any words, not reordering, just taking stuff away. BIG difference in how he looks: KROFT: Why do you think you’d be a good president? OBAMA: Well, I think that when you think about the challenges we face, these are challenges that require us to look forward and not backwards. When it comes to the economy I think we have to recognize that we are now in a global economy. KROFT: Why you? I mean, why do you think you would be a good president? OBAMA: Well, I was gonna get to that. KROFT: Oh, okay.Okay. Go ahead. OBAMA: When it comes to the economy, I think I understand the knowledge economy. I think I understand what it’s gonna take in order for us to reinvest in our manufacturing base, and what it’s gonna take to ensure that we are freeing ourselves from dependence on foreign oil. How we can fix our health care system. And that’s on just on the economy. Now, there’s a parallel when it comes to foreign policy. Fighting al Qaeda is going to be different than my grandfather, who fought in Patton’s army in Europe. There’s a different set of threats. Some of them, like terrorism, that we have to focus militarily, but also diplomatically, and use all elements of power. Some like climate change, that we’re gonna have to strengthen our alliances and form partnerships. And it’s gonna be much more of a task of persuasion. We can’t, you know, use our military to make sure the planet doesn’t get warmer. KROFT: But what is there specifically about you? You mentioned disposition. You mentioned disposition. What skills and traits do you have that would make you a good president? OBAMA: Yeah. You know I am very good at analyzing complicated problems. Hearing all voices. Getting all perspectives. And then taking some decisive action in terms of moving us in a direction that’s gonna solve the problem. See what you can do when you edit? Make Obama ramble and show that he's unable to answer the question. For those of you truly interested in her interviews, I suggest reading the complete transcript.