That doesn't make any sense at all. The difference is that mothers don't plan on having a miscarraige - it is a tragic accident. The idea is that murder involves some willful intent. Per Wikipedia, "Murder is generally distinguished from other forms of homicide by the elements of malice aforethought and the lack of lawful justification."

Yet again, I strongly refute this point:

In Nevada, state officials say the fraudulent registrations included forms for the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys football team, including quarterback Tony Romo.

"Romo is not registered to vote in the state of Nevada," Secretary of State Ross Miller said, "and anybody trying to pose as Terrell Owens won't be able to cast a ballot on Nov. 4."

While those names will be flagged on Election Day, felonious voters may have better luck using other cutouts. Nevada, along with several other key battleground states, requires no ID to vote.

NO ID TO VOTE!

Please tell me again that these fake registrations will absolutely no effect upon voting whatsoever! Who knows how large the impact could be in these key states.

Oh, and the FBI just raided ACORN headquarters in Nevada as a result of an investigation that revealed thousands of bogus registrations. But I suppose this is all just a big right-wing conspiracy...

I see, ACORN was just minding it's own business, being a good, law-abiding agency and following the law here. Hmmm. Your assertion that 'none of these fake registrations have any effect on voting' is a pretty dubious claim at best. Yeah, I get the difference between voter registration and voting by the way, but thanks for the clarification. BTW, do you know how easy it is to get a fake id (computer + Photoshop + scanner). Are you implying that no matter how aggressively ACORN campaigns to register the same people multiple times, that the 'system' will magically catch all of these errors that are being forced into it? Do you really believe that all of the thousands upon thousands of fake voter registrations by ACORN will have none, zip, zilch, ZERO effect on voting?!?!? The fact is that it is unethical at best and illegal at worst for thugs of ACORN to be signing up the same people multiple times (and bribing them with dollars and cigarettes in many cases).

This is exactly the type of non-sensical rhetoric endemic of Democrats in this election. Who is inciting violence and hatred toward a candidate? I can cite plenty of example of crazy left-wingers acting like esconced madmen toward McCain and Palin this year. And egocentric?? Obama definitely fits that bill. McCain's campaign motto has been 'Country First' as evidenced by his heroic service in the military. Obama's only service is in the community organizing ranks with the extremely corrupt ACORN. The really scary thing is that there are more people out there on the left that hold this viewpoint...

Senator Obama has a lifetime of commitment in helping people to vote early and often, as evidenced by his participation in Project Vote Smart and his association with ACORN. I wonder how many of those 150,000 to 400,000 unregistered African-American voters were duplicates? Bet it wasn't anything like the guy on the front page of the NY Post who was registered by ACORN 72 times though. Now that's experience you can hang your hat on.

The problem is that Obama has drawn that line at the time of delivery. He is one of the most left-wing, pro-abortion candidates ever to run for office.

The Born Alive Infant Protection Act was first introduced in the Illinois legislature in 2001 after nurse Jill Stanek revealed that babies born alive in Christ Hospital in botched abortion procedures were left to die, unattended by medical personnel.

That same year Stanek testified before the Judiciary Committee, where Obama asked whether the bill would subvert a woman's right to abortion. Obama voted against the bill in committee but "present" on the Senate floor.

When the bill was reintroduced in 2002, Obama again voted against it in committee and was the only state senator to speak against it on the Senate floor. Again the bill was defeated with Obama voting "no" and leading the opposition.

2002 was the year the U. S. Congress passed and President Bush signed the federal version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Unlike Obama in Illinois, Sen. Hillary Clinton voted to support the bill. In fact, the bill passed the Senate 98 to 0 with pro-abortion senators like Boxer (D-CA) and Reid (D-NV) supporting it.

In 2003, the bill was introduced in the Illinois legislature for the third time and directed to a committee chaired by Obama, Health and Human Services. They refused to bring the bill to a vote.

Only when Obama left for Washington in 2005 did the Born Alive Infant Protection Act pass the Illinois legislature.

'Could' and 'probably' are unsubstantiated claims. Where is your proof?

So if parents decide that they don't want children they should have a right to end their lives? What about parents whose children are already born? Sounds like the ends justify the means here. That the extinguishing of a life might lead to fewer "unwanted children" hardly justifies the intrinsic evil and relative gravity of this action.

I agree. There is just sheer hatred out there for Palin! Such nonsensical, bitter hatred and from celebs and politicians alike. People who might otherwise have an errant intelligent thought run through their heads from time to time (am being FAR too generous here). There is nothing like this coming from the Right toward Obama. People are passionately opposed to Obama, but nobody is out there spewing out profanity-laced rants/tirades against him! Ahem - P Diddy and Sandra Bernhard. But politicians and tv personalities too. Passing of daily hit pieces on Palin as objective journalism. It's downright ridiculous. What happened to a little civility in our culture?! Fair fighting? At least being respectful and agreeing to disagree. These Dems are a complete and utter disgrace and deserve to lose BIG TIME in November!!! Get ready to love Palin for the next four years!

And one more article related to this subject:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/a_look_at_celebrity_economics.html