| CURRENT EVENTS Tulsi Gabbard~ "I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party ..."
- Thread starter TerryP
- Start date
rocknthefreeworld
Member
No surprise there at all. She is very middle of the road on some things that Dems will not allow that kind of thing (supports regulating abortion in the third trimester and requiring healthcare workers to provide lifesaving care to children who survive abortions) even while she mostly toes the line with them on everything else. No way anyone without an "abortion until the cord is cut" line of thinking will ever get the Dems nomination. And she has been pretty vocal recently against Woke Culture, another Dem no-no. Not to say that she is conservative by any means, but she isn't left enough on the right things for Dems.
Well, she won't all of a sudden become a Republican/Conservative. All she said in her speech was she could no longer remain in the Democratic party. Many will take that to mean she is switching sides. But that's not what it means. She can become an Independent. And that's what I think she'd do WAY before she'd become a Republican/Conservative.
There are a few things on which I agree with her. But there are even more on which she and I highly disagree.
There are a few things on which I agree with her. But there are even more on which she and I highly disagree.
ElephantStomp
Member
No surprise.
ElephantStomp
Member
We just nominated a person that doesn’t follow what you say about us. There are very very few of us that are “abortion until the cord is cut”……
XXL TideFan
Member
RINO is an undercover democrat. Middle of the road generally lack firm convictions. The country needs hard right America first policies and non interference in other nations affairs.
ElephantStomp
Member
Although we completely disagree on this country needing hard right policies, we do agree that middle of the road is cowardice and lacks convictions
XXL TideFan
Member
This is when compromises are hammered out. Ultimately it doesn’t matter which party she is in, she is a member of the WEF and can’t be trusted to work in America’s best interest.
Last edited:
rocknthefreeworld
Member
The party itself refuses to say they aren't. They continually say it is a woman's right to choose when asked about extremely late term abortions.
Nice cutback.
ElephantStomp
Member
I think some of it is because the question itself is ridiculous. If a woman is still carrying in the third trimester she obviously wants to reach birth. People take our pro choice beliefs and run to the far far extreme with their opinion on us
rocknthefreeworld
Member
Not even true. Were it so, then banning abortion by choice in the third trimester would not be controversial at all. BTW, I can fully support Roe v Wade as written. Which would include a total ban in the third trimester.
ElephantStomp
Member
Late term abortions don’t happen hardly at all if ever. Us normal live are fine with a ban on late term abortions, but a dr should determine if it’s needed or not.
I’m fine with a ban after a certain period as long as men have to get vasectomies
XXL TideFan
Member
Are you male or female?
ElephantStomp
Member
Male
TerryP
Staff
A recent addition to our "lexicon" has been the word messaging. What's the message people are getting when it comes to limits?
Just this past weekend Katie Hobbs, while on CBS Sunday, was asked if she supported any kinds of limits she responded with "a decision between a woman and her doctor." (sic) There's an answer that isn't an answer but certainly leads to the assumption she doesn't support any limits. There's the perfect opportunity to clarify what she feels and where she stands.
As you'd expect her non-answer was put in front of people from Schumer's camp as well as reps for Biden, Harris, and Pelosi. They all declined to say whether they stood with Hobbs or they stood with those who believe there should be some restrictions.
I look at the leaders of one party avoiding answering a simple question. A question that's said to not even be a question for most (we support some limits.)
Arizona is an interesting state right now. Not only are we watching Hobbs but in the governors race we have Mark Kelly who also has avoided the questions. He did say he supported late term abortions but when given the opportunity to clarify what he believes? Like the others mentioned earlier ... "mum's the word."
IF I lived in Arizona I know where my vote(s) would go. They wouldn't be based on abortion beliefs.
Just this past weekend Katie Hobbs, while on CBS Sunday, was asked if she supported any kinds of limits she responded with "a decision between a woman and her doctor." (sic) There's an answer that isn't an answer but certainly leads to the assumption she doesn't support any limits. There's the perfect opportunity to clarify what she feels and where she stands.
As you'd expect her non-answer was put in front of people from Schumer's camp as well as reps for Biden, Harris, and Pelosi. They all declined to say whether they stood with Hobbs or they stood with those who believe there should be some restrictions.
I look at the leaders of one party avoiding answering a simple question. A question that's said to not even be a question for most (we support some limits.)
Arizona is an interesting state right now. Not only are we watching Hobbs but in the governors race we have Mark Kelly who also has avoided the questions. He did say he supported late term abortions but when given the opportunity to clarify what he believes? Like the others mentioned earlier ... "mum's the word."
IF I lived in Arizona I know where my vote(s) would go. They wouldn't be based on abortion beliefs.
rocknthefreeworld
Member
If you asked me right now to vote for allowing Roe v Wade to be written into law as it was originally decided I would waste not one moment casting a Yes vote. Right now there are very few candidates in either party who are not answering as if they are all or nothing. Either you can't abort starting the moment of fertilization, or there can't be any limits on when you can abort. If you refuse to answer then you obviously are for the extreme for whatever side was asked. Ask me if I think you can abort at 2 weeks and I refuse or non-answer, I must be for a total ban. Ask me if you think there should be a time when you can't abort and I refuse or non-answer, must be for abortion until labor starts. That is the only way to read it and ensuree you are somewhere around what they will vote for.
XXL TideFan
Member
Abortions are the modern equivalent of child sacrifices to appease various gods and evil entities. People say it isn’t mentioned in the Bible but it was taught in the Didache (Teachings of The Apostles) and was used for a long time before church canon was settled on.
CHAPTER 2
1 And this is the second commandment of the teaching.
2 Thou shalt do no murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not corrupt boys, thou shalt not commit fornication, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not deal in magic, thou shalt do no sorcery, thou shalt not murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's goods, thou shalt not perjure thyself, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt not speak evil, thou shalt not cher- ish a grudge, thou shalt not be double-minded nor double-tongued
CHAPTER 2
1 And this is the second commandment of the teaching.
2 Thou shalt do no murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not corrupt boys, thou shalt not commit fornication, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not deal in magic, thou shalt do no sorcery, thou shalt not murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's goods, thou shalt not perjure thyself, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt not speak evil, thou shalt not cher- ish a grudge, thou shalt not be double-minded nor double-tongued
rocknthefreeworld
Member
Religious texts are not a valid argument for or against laws. You would not like it if another religion became the majority and imposed their religion on you.
