CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should the president of the United States know U.S. history/geog/math and speak well?
I find this video hilarious but more alarming and sad. Obama has no clue as to how many states are in the U.S. This is just one incident of his obvious lack of education. He supposedly went to Columbia, then graduated from Harvard. So much for his ivy league education............
Here is a video that exposed his lack of education.
He says, "the bomb" that fell on Pearl Harbor. Was there just a single bomb?
He did not even know that our American troops did not liberate Auschwitz. The Soviet Red Army did.
He does not even know the meaning and purpose of Memorial Day. Fallen heros in the audience?
The facts about "bloody Sunday"? The date of the marches.......1965? Does not line up with what he is saying about the birth of his son which means when he was writing this nonsense he didn't add right....Hmmmm Hows could 1965 events result in a 1961 birth?
And Obama blames Bush for eight years of hostility towards Chavez when Clinton was president at the time.
He said he traveled in 57 states....with 1 left to go. Alaska and Hawaii he was not allowed to go to.....which makes 60 total American states.
Then he pronounces one of our states as...."massatoosits..."
EAu Claire he called a state. Wisconsins the state Mr. President, Eau Claire is a city.
What "states in the middle?"
While he was addressing an audience in Sioux Falls South Dakota...he called it Sioux City IA.
And when talking about the tragedy in Kansas he said that 10,000 people died and an entire town destroyed. Actually twelve died.
Does he know how many years a president serves? He said eight to ten...years. The Constitutional limit is eight.
Yes, I don't want a uneducated buffoon in the big house.
The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
I think Mr. Obama's spineless, nebulous foreign policy, his ineptitude in the implementation of his much prized reforms and his empty campaign promises are far more serious matters than his occasional inability to enunciate his sentiments.
While the president of the United States should surround himself with people more knowledgable than himself on things like foreign policy, he better have a good graps of all the expected information one would learn through the normal schooling process...and yes even through college. Now, if we allow a president to gain power, he or she is uneducated, and that person decides to wield the power of the presidency (without checking in with his/her advisors), then yes we have a really big problem on our hands! Oh, and we do have a really big problem on our hands now don't we!
I think education matters especially if you hold one of the highest political positions on earth. I would think the president should know history and geography and that should a teleprompter fail the speech would continue.
I think all the examples in the videos show why today Obama will not release his educational transcripts.
Obama happens to be far more intelligent than many of the presidents that went before him e.g. Reagan who was an actor told what to say by others, George W Bush (nuff said)
Elaborate on your views of Reagan if you will, what exactly was he told to say. Can we be sure he said exactly what they wanted him to or did he ignore them? Provide quotes if applicable.
Its not exactly what he was told to say, his speeches were written for him and his policies were by-in-large thsoe of the elites, he did not formulate policy, his policies were formulated for him, his trickle-down thoery of economics for example, he is attributed with having proposed this but this is simply untrue, he had no conception of the policies of his administration he was merely putting on a front, giving rousing speeches, this was his role.
Now im saying this was a on off, GWB was possibly even worse in terms of how much he actually controlled the presidency, Clinton did know a lot, he was largely informed on policy and sought advice from multiple people on different issues (e.g. Greenspan etc.) but on many issues the buck stopped with him, the same is probably true of GB Senior, this is very easy to see in how reagan was discarded after his presidency, his opinoin was not sought on anything as he wasn't really qualified to give an opinion on anything.People talk about reaganomics as if he was the person who helped formulated these barbaric economic theories but he had nothing to do with them. In short reagan was a puppet as was George W Bush, now in many ways all modern day presidents are puppets but the evidence that these were is pretty substantial, if i was to talk about others it would be fairly baseless
A nice argument, though what are your opinions of him in regards to foreign policy. Was the idea to lessen feelings with Russia at the time also something proposed for him? Also in the way he did not just the fact that he did as it seemed to be the trend of Presidents at the time. From my knowledge of US Presidents at least.
"A nice argument, though what are your opinions of him in regards to foreign policy"
His foreign policy was deplorable, Nicaragua sums it all up for me, hundreds of thousands dead (mainly civilian) and why because one of the south american US satellite states was steeting a bad example by wanted real freedom and democracy.
"Was the idea to lessen feelings with Russia at the time also something proposed for him?"
What? Are you serious, do you think Reagans advisors had anything to do with the normalisation of relations with Russia, that was entirely the results of the radical reforms imposed by Gorbachev. The elites of US power would never have normalised relations with Russia witout Gorbachev, especially considering it was the more hawkish elements that wre in power, you need to educate yourself if you think the reagan administration deserves credit for that i.e.
Look i have very little respect for US presidents, i see them as the necessary front for rapacious power(i.e. foer the masses to be provided with the illusion that they have a real say in politics), Reagan typifies this, his domestic and foreign plicy caused massive suffering both at home and abroad ,and despite improvents to the economy at the time he only ensured that in the longterm only the wealthiest of people gained, his economic reforms (or those he is credited with making) are laregly respnsible for the current economic situation in the US.
I believe you took my asking on the idea to lessen feelings with Russia in the wrong way. I merely asked what you felt based on what I have read from people who credit Reagan, I wanted to hear your view on it. I believe that full credit does belong to Gorbachev, that much is obvious. Perhaps I should have worded the question differently.
While I agree with your arguments your comment at the end about my needing to educate myself if I thought the Reagan Administration deserved credit irked me. I will be honest I am also overreacting to the comment though I hate when people jump to conclusions.
"While I agree with your arguments your comment at the end about my needing to educate myself if I thought the Reagan Administration deserved credit irked me"
I am sorry i got the impression from your line of argument and reasoning that you were playing some kind of cat and mouse game, i now see that your inquiries arose out of pure interest and thus i feel i should apologise as that jibe was a manifestation of my annoyance when i felt you were trying to make me slip up.
"I merely asked what you felt based on what I have read from people who credit Reagan"
Again i don't have any respect for Reagan but i can see why the republican party use him as a model and i can see why he was so loved at the time, Reagan (or more accurately those whop were advising him on what to say) did a lot that on the surface appeared to be very good, his economics did propel the US economy into a new age of prosperity but in my view it was a small short term gain for a big long term loss. The fact is Reagans policies to a large extent are in keeping with those of George W Bush, Bush managed to get away with a hell of lot more (i.e. Patriot act, suspension of political freedoms freedoms in other areas, launching two unjust wars for the sake of profit and strategic power, stealing an election etc.) but 9/11 and the public perception of danger coupled with the most complex propaganda machine ever conceived in my opinion allowed Bush a lot more wiggle room than Reagan. But again i feel that at their heart the moves made by Reagan benefitted only the richest in society in the long term. Now on the issue with Russia i don't beleive Reagan deserves any credit (despite what some americans will say), the fact is the USSR was coming down anyway, it had collapsed from the inside like a house of cards, all Reagan had to do was accept the conditions for the dismantling of the worlds only other superpower, which im sure he was ahppy to do, then all he had to do was make a few rabble rousing speeches and taljk about freedom and values and whatever other bullshit hogwash the masses in american want to fantasise about. Again this is largely an off the cuff rant but i feel it sufficiently encapsulates my opinion on the matter.
"Almost nobody in politics writes their own speeches."
Thats not exactly what i meant, while its true that most policitians don't actually write everything they read most would have a certain amount of imput into exactly what they are saying, Reagan however was just reading from a script of policies drawn up by the elites.
It doesn't matter only if the President has to just sit and slide. But, a President, especially of a powerful place like America is important has to know what he is and what he is doing, for whom and why? I don't really know how much the president must know. But, he cannot be catered to all the time. He must know the history most importantly, the basics of mappings and must understand statistics.
A president should definitely know about their country's history, as well as math. A president should also make logical decisions that will result in the greater good of the country. I'm not into politics much, but it seems that based on some people's views on our government, we're not in a good place, and our reputation is in trouble.
Yes absolutely. We unfortunately went through 8 years of a president who gave speeches like they were written in crayon. Sarah Palin recently came to Boston and stated that paul Revere rode through the night warning the British. Bauman also recently went to Concord new hampshire and claimed it was the place where the battle of lexington and concord took place, when it was obviously Massachusetts. How can a candidate have a grasp of the Judicial System, the Constitution or anything else if they do not have a grasp of America's basic history?
So you bring up other politicians to justify Obamas stupidity? His obvious lack of history and geographical knowledge makes it more acceptable and we should overlook the mistakes he says because others have said similar things?
It is important. Our leaders are expected to be able to meet with other dignitaries and not make the rest of us look like idiots. He is supposed to represent the country as a whole and if he looks like an idiot, we look like idiots.
It matters. But you're a moron. Everyone says "the bomb" referring to pearl harbor. And he never said the rest of that stuff. You got that from Newsmax I'm guessing, or one of their affiliates. Luckily they're going out of business after this phone tapping and paying off officials stuff. Guess pretty soon you'll actually have to make shit up instead of copying shit someone else made up.
Oooh damn, that would take thought. Tough luck mouse. Go back to I Love Jesus sites.
While I understand your points I do not believe a personal attack is required or merited. People can annoy others I know but does it truly merit calling them a moron in your tag and stating that they cannot muster up an original argument?
Perhaps because you are not said person whom is accused of being a moron. What is the saying? "Be the bigger person." Or something along those lines, you could have ignored that and debated the "evidence."
... you are not quite getting the point of my argument.
Okay, evidence um...
Once churchmouse was fooled by a rock I read somewhere.
I read somewhere churchmouse thinks the moon is made of cheese.
Churchmouse can't add 1+1.
The point isn't evidence, it's churchmous's consistent lack of evidence which I addressed in the first reply.
He lists a bunch of made up stuff and accuses someone of being a moron based on it as if it is fact, the only options given in the tags force the respondent to either imply our president is a moron or to say having a moron president doesn't matter.
1. Obama happens to be really smart as anyone with any knowledge of his background beyond Fox News would know.
2. Having a smart president is important, as Bush showed us.
So I made a new tag. And I'm standing by it since the debate was started by churchmouse calling someone a moron.
I get the points of your argument full well, but you are not Obama as far as I can tell. My point is that you could have ignored the argument all together, or simply proved the evidence wrong instead of lashing back. It is going down to Churchmouse's level. However, I do understand your annoyance and agree, but you are still not the President of the United States of America, you are not the one being insulted.
Do a search for arguments that say either "liberals suck" or "democrats suck" or "obama sucks" or anything relating to that... I'm not talking the comments, actual debates created, to a one based on bs like this one or based on nothing but a vague feeling the creator of the debate has about that person or affiliation. Then compare it to the number of similarly worded actual debates but about republicans, conservatives etc. It's so one-sided it's shocking.
I'm tired of arguing with people's indoctrinated mindless hatred for a political ideology they obviously don't understand and don't care to understand using logic they refuse to listen to. I'm also tired of allowing the right side to endlessly spew hatred toward the left while the left must meekly argue logic to the thoughtless and dare not return an insult for fear of them running home and crying to mommy.
If a bully keeps punching you regardless of your arguments, at some point it's time to stop arguing and punch back.
Church doesn't care about logic or argument or debate, he cares about shoving an ideology down other's throats, and he does so with personal attacks and baseless claims. If personal attacks and baseless claims are all he has, I'm better at them than he is. Just because I dont have to rely on them (unlike him), doesn't mean I don't have the right to use them if he starts it.
Regardless of all that, my point still stands that you are not Obama. You were insulting Church for calling Obama a moron if I can recall correctly, not because of the nonsensical argument she provided.
You are tired of arguing with people on mindless hatred, then take the initiative to not argue and save yourself the annoyance.
The fact still remains that you could not even look at the article, you are not forced to read it. If people just ignored the nonsensical idiocy that others spread then said person will eventually disappear.
I completely understand how you feel, but you can avoid it by not paying the person mind.
Bush did go to Yale and RELEASED ALL HIS TRANSCRIPTS. Wonder why Obama has hidden everything........yea why? He won't release a paper or not even one grade. No one even heard of him at Columbia where he claims he went.
"The Obama campaign has refused to release his college transcript, despite an academic career that led him to Harvard Law School and, later, to a lecturing position at the University of Chicago," the Sun reported in September 2008. "The shroud surrounding his experience at Columbia contrasts with that of other major party nominees since 2000, all whom have eventually released information about their college performance or seen it leaked to the public."
He did not excel at Columbia and how he got into Harvard no one knows. Obviously he knew someone because it was not his brain that got him in.
If he had excelled at ANYTHING...SAT, ACT.....we would know. But again these are guarded secrets. he obviously was a very poor student especially at geography. LOL
Every president and candidate released their entire medical history.
McCain released some 1500 pages of history just from the Navy and over 1200 additional pages .....Gore released his.........Bush allowed the media to review over 400 pages of his history. John Kerry didn't want to but released his....but Obama not one page,,,,6 paragraphs.
I hold them ALL TO THE SAME STANDARDS. It's Obama who thinks he should not be held to the same standards as others.
So are you saying that the abortion position means something? Cause hey honey....how about this from Obama. LOL Talk about yoyoing....he can't even give an answer and HE CLAIMS TO BE A CHRISTIAN. There is no moral difficulty in Gods opinion. And Obama is pro-choice.........which is contrary to what his God says. HE DOES NOT GET IT...AND NEVER WILL.
It is above his pay grade. ..............He does not want to reduce it.....he embraces it. His lied during this interview his voting record shows it.
Every president and candidate released their entire medical history.
Including Obama: ref What more information do you need?
So are you saying that the abortion position means something?
I am saying his position (not just stuttering or saying uh a lot) is incoherent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RQqZkPbseo
yep - the quintessential democratic position; abortions should be safe legal and rare (see Clinton 1996)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of61E1FesPU
This video is unrelated to the other and shows no inconsistency - it is the video from the debate description - typo?
hey honey we knew his position when we elected him. This is the way most Americans feel about abortion - that it should be taken seriously, not made illegal, but reduced where possible through preventing the pregnancy in the first place (through abstinence, contraception etc.) Generally about 20% agree with your position that abortion should be illegal in all cases ref
Public policy on abortion is more complex than 'the bible tells me so'. Obama has obviously chosen not to have an abortion twice, but knows that personal morals are not always what should be law. Most women wouldn't drink or smoke during pregnancy - should it be illegal? should it be illegal to eat soft cheese, homemade ice-cream, lox, oysters, salmon?
coffee can cause miscarriage/abortion - should it be illegal? only when a woman knows she's pregnant or for all women who might be pregnant?
can the government mandate taking prenatal vitamins?
I actually hope that you will be very outspoken that you believe Obama is stupid to as many people as possible, because as the campaign moves forward and he debates the other candidates, it will ring untrue with people and they will see that most of the hostility towards him (such as yours) is largely unfounded.
Yea it took him HOW LONG...to produce his birth certificate? Only until Trump pressured him....and sent investigators to Hawaii did he cough one up. LOL Why take the abuse of the media and the entire Republican Party...and not release it earlier? He could have nipped it in the bud for crying out loud. Did it take them that long to manufacture a false one? I will NEVER BELIEVE HE IS A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES. The statements of his own grandmother during the campaign are enough for me.
I believe he went to Harvard...that has been proven. If he was that intelligent why not release your grades....your papers? Columbia......????
How did he get into Harvard that is what I would like to know. It was not because of his grades or anything he did at Columbia that is for sure.
His abortion position is ungodly and he claims to know and believe the scriptures. But he does not know what the Bible states about the life in the womb...nor does he care. He is someone who thinks that you can get to heaven even without Jesus, which is heresy.
Abortions safe legal and rare.......LMAO. Say that again will ya?........LOL
Are abortions today safe.......legal and RARE? How many abortions take place a year in the United States and around the world? LMAO You kill me seriously.
Abortion is one of the most performed surgeries in the world. Abortion is anything but RARE. LOL
I do not believe people knew when they voted for him...what they really were getting. I think he was elected because he was half black and people hated Bush so much that they wanted the opposite of what he represented. But today that opposite is biting him in the arse. People don't want what Obama represents...socialism...a nanny government. People did not like his health care package...and they don't like his position on jobs. He is an idiot.
it took him HOW LONG...to produce his birth certificate
for all normal people it took 0 time at all. "the Obama campaign made a copy of his Certification of Live Birth from the State of Hawaii available on the Internet in June 2008" http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
He could prove his citizenship better than you can even before going through the extra step of obtaining the long-form birth certificate
- embossed and signed official Certificate of Live Birth that anyone in Hawaii would get if they requested their official copy
- Driver's license
- passport
- credentialed by the Illinois and U.S. Senate
- political enemies in position to know (the Republican Governor and the Republican Director of Department of Health in Hawaii who both supported McCain) said Obama's long form is on file (now made public)
- the candidates he ran against with many investigators both agree he was born in Hawaii and the Hillary camp even found 2 newspaper articles published in Hawaii announcing his birth within 10 days of its occurrence
And the evidence for the other side -
- they said the birth certificate wasn't public when it was
- said it was forged til it was authenticated
- produced a Kenyan birth certificate that was easily shown to be forged
- said he had a fake SSN - nope
- deliberately cut off the youtube video of a phone call to Obama's step grandmother to make it seem like she didn't say he was born in Hawaii when she did
and once all those don't pan out, they just keep trying (e.g "Did it take them that long to manufacture a false one")
Only until Trump pressured him....and sent investigators to Hawaii did he cough one up.
Trump apparently still doesn't believe. Sometimes the facts cannot compete with a person's belief.
I will NEVER BELIEVE HE IS A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES.
apparently my last statement applies to you too; this is the point where you officially jump the shark...
The statements of his own grandmother during the campaign are enough for me.
so, if his grandmother actually said in that phone call that he was born in Hawaii, you would believe her then right?
here is the full clip. Relevant part starts at about 4:35; "He was born in Hawaii" at 6:27
How did he get into Harvard
In the fall of 1970, he applied for admission to the University of Texas law school but was rejected. Then, he took his C average transcripts and applied to Harvard and was accepted - oh wait, that was George W.
why not release your grades
He graduated magna cum laude (the top 10% of his class) from Harvard Law School which utilizes a blind grading system. I'm pretty sure your opinion of him isn't going to change whether he was a 4.0 student or a C student like GWB.
His abortion position is ungodly
I've explained the difference between morality and legislation a couple of times already you can agree or disagree (or not address it at all and just repeat yourself...)
How many abortions take place a year in the United States
about 1 million refref (P.S. - about 25% of abortions are induced through medication ref (i.e. RU-486) not "surgery")
Legal
"Legalization of abortion and access to abortion services do not lead to increased reliance on abortion for fertility control in the long term; in developed countries with these conditions, the predominant trend in abortion rates has been downward." ref
Safe
Illegal abortions account for 13% of all maternal mortality. Death from abortion is almost unknown in the United States or in other countries where abortion is legally available. ref
Abortion is anything but RARE
I said he supports making them rare - not that they are rare.
"the rates of abortion, whether legal or illegal - and abortion-related deaths - tend to decrease when the use of birth control increases." ref
"In 2006, [family planning] services helped women avoid 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, which would likely have resulted in about 860,000 unintended births and 810,000 abortions." ref
"Al Gore and Bill Clinton got between 90 percent and 92 percent of the black vote." ref
Obama got 95% ref hardly an unbelievable jump in enthusiasm for the first African/American (father=African, mother=American) President.
people hated Bush so much that they wanted the opposite of what he represented.
and because McCain had vacillated on many of his positions lessening enthusiasm among his voter base.
People don't want what Obama represents...socialism
most "socialist" programs are actually pretty popular, like: the military, police, fire, emergency services, judicial system, prisons, food and drug inspection, public ownership of the airwaves, national infrastructure, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, the VA, parks, libraries, student loans, public universities, universal mail delivery, etc. (Note: many of these things don't meet the technical definition of socialism, but rather the type of socialism that is attributed to Obama out of ignorance) - it is only the word socialism that has a moderately negative connotation (though that is lessening as well ref)
if, as you say, you have no intention of comporting your beliefs with reality - then what you are looking for is not a debate site. Perhaps you should try to minister somewhere instead (oops, sorry Christian women aren't allowed to do that) - maybe a blog...
His birth will always be debated. His grandmother must have been on drugs during the interview when she said he was not born in Hawaii.
You said, "In the fall of 1970, he applied for admission to the University of Texas law school but was rejected. Then, he took his C average transcripts and applied to Harvard and was accepted - oh wait, that was George W."
What does Bush have to do with this? LOL
That is what you liberals do, try to take the focus off the subject. The subject is Obama not Bush. But Bush at least released all his grades and transcripts and test scores. Obama never did so obviously he was less than a C student and embarrassed about his academic record.
He obviously did not take a geography class at Harvard or Columbia however as he does not even know how many states there are.
Top 10% in his class......does not say much for Harvard if thats the kind of students they are graduating.
You don't get the Christianity thing with abortion so I won't go into this. It will be above your pay grade I'm sure.
But his words and actions do not show he is a Christian in the truest sense, not if he separates his faith publically and personally, which he does. He says Jesus is not the only way to heaven. Christ says that He is. I really doubt Obama has ever read the scriptures to know.
Just to enlighten you a bit. Abortions are surgical procedures. The Pill that causes an abortion is not. The abortionist has a job to perform and that procedure is a surgical one. Most problems or complications or deaths have to do with anesthesia. In many clinics they have no one on staff who is really qualified to administer it. They do not have the proper equipment and those who are trained to use it. Most abortions clinics standards and facilities don’t even meet the same standards of vet clinics. They are worse. In fact most clinics do not even send the body parts to a pathology lab.
Abortion advocates try to claim that abortion is safer than other common forms of surgery. They ignore the fact however that patients are different, making the comparison irrelevant. In other surgical procedures, the patient may be old and/or deathly ill or injured, while abortion patients are relatively young and normally in good health.
As I said most deaths or injuries are not reported. So your stats.....not accurate. Gaining full access to accurate data would require the cooperation of the abortion industry as well as the state and local government agencies responsible for compiling data. Political agendas get in the way as does the doctors reputations on the line and the privacy of the woman and family. They have little interest in reporting industry disasters and most injured women don't want it made public what they did. Sooooo research in this field becomes totally independent on whether abortion injured women seek justice through the legal system....most do not.
The majority of cases are settled before they even go to trial. The majority of abortionists demand a confidentiality agreement as part of their willingness to settle a case....makes sense because they want to practice again. Legal research services track only cases that actually go to trial. So, except in those rare instances in which a settled case is sensational enough to be covered by the media, there is little chance that one could even find out it exists. There is a huge coverup in this industry. Not all doctors report abortions. Not all women will admit to having one. The statistics are not accurate and never will be. If you want to read a book that documents thousands of abortion deaths case by case with numbers...read Crutchers LIME 5. If you want to see reports of clinics all over the country on safety read the book. It is not the pretty little picture you make it out to be.
His grandmother must have been on drugs during the interview when she said he was not born in Hawaii.
Actually the way the guy phrased the question was the likely issue. Even in English it could be taken two different ways:
- Were you there (pause) when he was born in Kenya = Obama was born in Kenya and his step-grandmother was there to watch it
- Were you there (pause) when he was born (pause) in Kenya = His grandmother was in Kenya at the time Obama was born and does not specify where Obama was born.
Now complicate that by having it translated into Swahili.
From what I can make out of the discussion after the Hawaii remarks it sounds like the latter was exactly what the translator believed and relayed as well.
Since his grandmother's word was definitive when it said what you wanted to believe, is it now definitive when it doesn't? Or should I ask it differently - what evidence do you have to the contrary?
What is your excuse for this one?
"I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it."
I alluded to it in one of my earlier posts, but I'll spell it out further: clearly he meant 47 - 1 left to go + Alaska and Hawaii = 50
obviously he was less than a C student and embarrassed about his academic record.
No one at Harvard graduates magna cum laude as a C student.
Top 10% in his class......does not say much for Harvard if thats the kind of students they are graduating.
he does not even know how many states there are.
Which is more likely
A) he and the entire 90+% of Harvard that graduated below him that year are so stupid as to not know how many states there are
B) after flying across the country to nearly every state (better than any geography course you ever took) giving several speeches a day - someone might begin to say I've gone to nearly all fifty states and change their mind midway through to give the exact number of 47 instead and have it come out as 57 (or something similar) - clearly you don't do enough public speaking to know that not every syllable comes out the way you intend - especially after flying around non-stop for days.
That is what you liberals do, try to take the focus off the subject.
This is what you do: try to focus on stupid subjects like birth certificates, transcripts and "haughty eyes" without realizing how cretinous they make you seem - not Obama.
Just to enlighten you a bit. Abortions are surgical procedures.
Just to enlighten you a bit - No they are not, look it up.
Shouldn't part of being this ardent in your opinion require at least a modicum of knowledge regarding the basic underlying facts?
The abortionist has a job to perform and that procedure is a surgical one.
Or prescribing Mifepristone, etc. - some surgeries are abortions (D&C;, etc.), not all abortions are surgeries.
You don't get the Christianity thing with abortion so I won't go into this.
I get it perfectly - you believe (without any verses in the bible regarding an actual abortion and conflicting verses related to the value of children in the womb) that the invisible man in the sky wants you to deride politicians who do not make coffee illegal (caffeine can be an abortifacient)
what you still don't seem to get is that morals and statutes aren't the same thing.
It will be above your pay grade I'm sure.
It's morality may be above Obama's pay grade (and since you don't even seem to know what it is - I would suggest it is way above your pay-grade) - but since I don't give credence to the invisible man in the sky and am only dealing with whether it should be legal and am sufficiently familiar with the facts - it's actually not above my pay grade at all.
The fact is that the mother/fetus relationship is a unique situation where the life/liberty of one can conflict with the life/liberty of the other and raises complex legal issues surrounding weighting of the related interests. And people who are always calling for small government can't see that this is a perfect place to heed their own advice and keep the government at the periphery in most cases.
You seem to have completely ignored the questions of whether government should:
¤ prohibit harmful substances (soft-cheese, etc.)? only on known pregnant women, or even potentially pregnant women?
¤ if a doctor recommends a caesarean section and a woman opts for natural childbirth and the child dies - is it murder? (based on real but more complicated story)
¤ if a woman is four months pregnant and finds out she needs chemo-therapy which would likely kill the fetus, is she allowed to get it?
(In some states it is against the law to knowingly permit a child to be exposed to a controlled substance which is not for the benefit of the child - Code of Alabama Title 26 Section 26-15-3.2)
Abortion advocates try to claim that abortion is safer than other common forms of surgery.
Actually, I was claiming that illegal abortions are less safe than legal ones - you disagree?
They ignore the fact however that patients are different, making the comparison irrelevant....
I'll avoid finely "tuning" your information on maternal mortality related to legal abortions and just reiterate that my argument was that legal abortions are safer that illegal ones.
As for the black vote......just how many people knew what Obama was all about...how many voted for skin color?
My argument is not that every elector is a well-informed one (especially since I consider you to be a likely voter unless you are a Jehovah's Witness or one of the Christians that don't believe women should vote...) it is only that there was not a vast difference in the amount of ignorant voting in 2008 which is attributable to Obama's skin color compared to prior elections. I imagine some people voted for and against him who were ignorant of his positions.
It is odd however that he did not release ANY COLLEGE TRANSCRIPT BEFORE HARVARD. Who knows how he got through. Won't release grades, national test scores...nothing. Odd isn't it?
Oh yes he likes to travel...he not only flew across the country many times...but also the world. Sometimes he didn't even know where he was because he would in opening remarks say a different city.
He can't even pronounce words right.......Is these just Harvard pronunciation?
You know nothing about abortion. It is a surgical procedure. You look it up. I gave you websites that said it was. You are so ignorant on this. Is a D&C;a surgical procedure?
I mean there is not a site I ever have come across that did not classify abortion as surgical procedure.
Are you jsut ignorant or punking all of us? Abortion is a surgical procedure.
ARe you just stupid or in denial?
If a woman uses the PILL.......a doctor is not touching her....using instruments. She administers the Pill herself. This is not surgical. Nevertheless the Pill causes abortions as does many birth control methods.
Morals and statutes.........
I know the difference especially when it applies to being a Christian and standing on the Word. You obviously do not know the Word to make that judgement. I will leave it at that.
In any case it is sad that even you believe that a child in the ninth month can be aborted and should be if the mother wants to kill it. I understand this much from your comment here.
"The fact is that the mother/fetus relationship is a unique situation where the life/liberty of one can conflict with the life/liberty of the other and raises complex legal issues surrounding weighting of the related interests. And people who are always calling for small government can't see that this is a perfect place to heed their own advice and keep the government at the periphery in most cases."
If a woman has the right to dispose of what is living off her body in this case her child and the government should protect this right and but out...then this should also apply to whatever month she is in. There should be no law prohibiting her from killing it. It is her right, her opinion, her body. You agree right? LOL Don't even bring viability up...that should not matter to people like you. Because to enslave her during the first three months....is the same in the last three.......and in your own opinion...that is not right.
You are such a liar. I am not a JWitness.
The thing is you have tunnel vision. You obviously think Obama is perfect, Messiah-like because you defend his every action. I can see and admit Bush's mistakes, he was not a perfect President. But which ones have been perfect?
This is a battle not between individual people really in this country...it is a battle between right and wrong, morality and immorality. It's about light and dark, goodness and evil. This is a battle all about morals and values....two sides so opposed that there can be no middle ground anymore. It's about winning and power and that is all that matters.
I read a book can't remember the title but I did remember this. "It's not that we no longer have the strength of our convictions but that we no longer have convictions. Today everything is relative...the prevailing new attitude... the government owes me....This attitude is has gotten us where we are today and has had a devestating effect on society.
I see the values Obama is thrusting upon us and see a red flag. I for one will not sit by while his camp tries to remove everthing that those that came before us have built. I won't stand by while liberal judges unsurp power and try to destroy our freedoms one by one. Over my dead body will radicals like the LEFT picketing in cities around this country who are trying desperately to tear down society praying and plotting for a revolution....affect me. I will fight back. They want more than wall street to do down......they want socialism, redistribution of the wealth. Our real danger right now in America is not from outside terrorists....its the LEFT who do not want to reward productivity. They want to reward the lazy the ones they can brainwash.
And they want change alright.........destroy the basic tenents of America. This is the change Obama wants.
You obviously think Obama is perfect, Messiah-like because you defend his every action. I can see and admit Bush's mistakes
So, if Bush saying "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family." doesn't mean he has no idea how eating works - how is it that mispronouncing Massachusetts once means someone doesn't know geography?
You know nothing about abortion. It is a surgical procedure. You look it up. I gave you websites that said it was. You are so ignorant on this. Is a D&C;a surgical procedure?
What part of my comment that "some surgeries are abortions (D&C;, etc.), not all abortions are surgeries" do you not understand or agree with exactly?
What do your own sources say about the existence of non-surgical abortions?
This is an Australian web-site and speaks of abortion generally as being surgical procedures because when the article was published in 2001 the RU-486 pill was prohibited in Australia.
Even still, the site has pages about non-surgical abortions
"Contemporary medicine utilizes medications and surgical procedures to induce abortion." (note that there are separate sections for medical and surgical abortions and wikipedia also has a whole separate main article for medical abortions)
¤ make it illegal for a woman to opt for natural childbirth if a doctor recommends a cesarean section?
¤ make it illegal for a woman who is four months pregnant and finds out she needs chemo-therapy to get it?
Would you say a candidate is not a Christian who does not want to do all of the above?
If a woman is shown to have an ectopic pregnancy where there is a high likelihood of maternal injury or death and a very small likelihood of a successfully delivery, should she be allowed to make that the decision or should the government make her attempt the pregnancy no matter what?
Don't even bring viability up...that should not matter to people like you. Because to enslave her during the first three months....is the same in the last three
viability means the child can live outside the mother and would no longer "enslave" her...
You are such a liar. I am not a JWitness.
I think I have discovered the root of the issue - your problem is not with me and it's not with Obama either, it is with reading comprehension. Re-read this until it makes sense:"I consider you to be a likely voter unless you are a Jehovah's Witness or one of the Christians that don't believe women should vote..."
This is a battle not between individual people really in this country...it is a battle between right and wrong, morality and immorality. It's about light and dark, goodness and evil. This is a battle all about morals and values....two sides so opposed that there can be no middle ground anymore. It's about winning and power and that is all that matters.
No - this is about what the government should put people in jail for.
destroy the basic tenents[sic] of America. This is the change Obama wants.
