tkhayes

trivial? You took that notion and then linked it to bombing.... i do advocate HC for all, but not under the current system which would require us to pay some $10000/month in insurance costs to achieve what could be had for 40% of that amount in income tax for everyone. Medicare for all! Nice try (again) but the thread is actually about Assange and his Nobel nomination. If you care to discuss HC, there are dozens of threads about it already where i have clearly stated my position and the reasoning behind it. Assange is my hero - I think i'll donate another $50 to his defense...!

where did I say that? i actually asked the question, did not 'give the answer' Once again you attempt to 'win your argument' by changing my words into something convenient to you.

So you believe that Obama went to church for 20 years just cause he said so, but you don't believe him when he says he has a US birth certificate. pretty convenient. I do not actually believe he went to church at all. I think he only said that to try and appease weak people who believe that you have to be a Christian to be President. And I do not care if he went to church or not or what his pastor said. It is no reflection on him whatsoever. i am in a discussion with you, and you are obviously deranged, but that actually has no reflection on my character at all. But if you want to take it to the extreme, you are currently associating with a left-wing democratic socialist Commie Canadian who thinks that HC for all is a good idea....touche

At what point does the cluster of cells become a fetus, since you seem to want define when life begins. And at what point does the fetus become human? And at what point does the human become 'salvageable' and capable of thinking for itself? It is a cluster of cells. human cells or otherwise, it is nothing more than a cluster of cells. And I could give a fuck about it at that point. 14 year olds.....; um, most states require parental consent of almost anything involving a 14 year old. But since you brought it up......the decisions is between the patient and the doctor. so the question is NOT abortion, the question is whether or not a 14 year year can legally discuss medical issues with their doctor and them make informed decisions. In some cases, yes they can, in some cases, i am sure they cannot. Now your point is again.....? Cause I missed it somewhere in the rant about cells in a dish being being fetus's and so on

that is about the lamest, self-serving definition of faith I have ever read......'guarantees of water boiling' come from faith? wow - try the dictionary instead how 'bout? it don't mention science anywhere in there I am afraid.....

what tax dollars am i spending on your issues? I am advocating spending NOTHING to go after assange or the President's BC for that matter - The BC is not a secret is it? It has been produced.....over and over and over again. yet the nay-sayers continue to demand something else.....spending my tax dollars answering to them..... 'associations with anti-american people' - wow that took tremendous insight and courage to say. You must be blind......look at the relationships every president for the past 50 years has had with terrorists and genocidal maniacs around the world.

that may be, but you are a minority. Largely the anti-abortion debate is being pushed by the Catholic church (research Roe v Wade) and other right-wing religious fundamentalists. Actually "I" never made any comment about what "I" do or do not want to save. My comments were about the hypocracy of much of society as a whole. I am pro choice. I think aborting a 8.5 month old fetus would be wrong, it could easily survive, but I still would not call it 'murder'. I have no problem with a 3 month fetus being aborted, many women do not find out they are pregnant until at least that time. I do not believe that conception means 'soul' because I do not believe in souls. I do not believe that conception means 'life' for that matter, no more than I think that a bacterial culture in a petri dish makes some 'exclusive form of life' particulalry worth preserving. I also believe that trying to define when life begins is a side-show meant to distract from the real issue. I DO BELIEVE, that these decisions are best made between doctors and their patients. I also believe that doctors and patients sometimes will make bad decisions, and that is none of my fucking business. I also believe that it is not a decision for government. I believe that pro-lifers have every right to put up billboards, offer free counselling to gain their ground and do whateever else to convince women to have babies - that is their right. But I believe that probably NO LAWS should exist about abortion, one way or the other. Just like NO LAWS exist regarding the viability/decisions of knee-replacements or tonsillitis.

I bet he stays where he is at for a long time yet. Just because a judge ruled that an extradition can happen, does not mean that it happens tomorrow, - there are appeals at many levels. We cannot even get a freakin' Mexican illegal out of our own country without an extended due process.

IMO, human life is not worth THAT much, even though we preach that it is. we murder thousands of people in wars, people die from disease, we let people die for lack of nutrition, health care and so on. Why do we spend so much time worrying about people not born yet when we seemingly could give a fuck about all those people that are already here? The debate is driven by religious beliefs and that alone. Since I disagree with religion fundamentally, I also disagree with an anti-abortion argument that is based upon religion. ergo, it does not matter when 'human life' actually begins.

don't get bent on that dude, people DISAGREE with you, and rather strongly. So if you want to argue, then you better be ready to argue.

Why not? The GOP has been the party of 'NO' for a very long time. Hey- the republicans do pretty much anything they need to do to get their own way. Now the democrats are doing whatever they need to do to get their own way. name-calling does not change the facts.....if it works and it is in the best interests of the people they represent, then unless someone changes the rules, then they can do that. don't like it? Then get elected and change the rules. I had to put up with that fucking asshole Bush for 8 years, now you have to put up with this wah wah wah

WOOHOO! - broke 500 posts!! And Assange is STILL my hero.....!

1. um, he is standing....quite tall I might add. 2. and the President's birth certificate HAS been produced, yet people still argue about it and we spend countless numbers of hours and tax dollars worrying about it. This is a waste of government time when we could be spending it on 'important things' and it is a waste of my tax dollars. Oh yes, regardless of how ridiculous it might be YOU have the right to waste my tax dollars - i forgot..... 3. Yes, she has a right to run - but it is a sad commentary on the US populace that she receives any credence

Bush signed his 'signing papers' saying the tortue was Ok and redefined his rights within the law, and overrode courts and legislators at the same time thanks for making my case with your own words. Seems the conduct is neiterh liberal nor conservative I am afraid......

what he claimed was "Very little" came from it. And I agree, 1 trillion dollars spent on a war to prevent 9/11 from ever happening again and we have obtained achieved VERY LITTLE. I was in Reno the other day, the alert level was still 'orange' after 10 years. diminishing returns. very little achieved. Information leaked out that makes no difference one way or the other. The country is broke, we are cutting everything except the military, which would actually save us money. We want Assange 'hung' and we want to see the President's birth certificate, and a dumb-ass reality-show soccer mom is running for president - what a fucked up place for priorities......

Libya will fall too, just like egypt, except that a lot more people will die first.

so then how much transparency is OK with you? And taking then that percentage or whatever your scale is - how is it that Assange somehow violated YOUR rules of transparency? 100% of anything might be ascenine, but it is not a reason to not strive for it. We think we are winning a war in Afghanistan, and in Iraq, and a war on drugs etc. WINNING, not striving for 60% or whatever, we are planning to WIN (that is 100%) we keep trying and trying and trying even though we are failing and failing and failing. talk about ascenine. If Assange does some 'damage' and that brings all this to an end - then HE'S MY FUCKING HERO!!

Um , banks do not get robbed due to a lack of security or due to someone having the combos. They get robbed because people walk in the front door with a gun And I did answer your question and countered your point What was your point again? I cannot remember....

In my world, there would be no launch codes. But for the sake of your silly argument, the launch codes could be sold on fucking Ebay as long as someone in charge had the keys to the silos...... If Wikileaks published the launch codes, I expect at the push of a button or two, they would be changed. I expect they are changed regularly for that very reason - perhaps the guys in charge of the silos already thought of that. I expect there are FAR MORE STEPS to launching a nuke that just having access to the launch codes. etc etc or do I need to go on? What a ridiculous example - you should really try harder. That's like telling me the combination lock for the safe at my bank - it means absolutely nothing, since there are MANY other security barriers in place to prevent me from getting access to it or doing any harm. wow - talk about simple.....!

I did answer the question - There is NO line. Not only that, it is not relevant to the thread - it is just some lame argument that you have that has no purpose nor effect on the outcome Read my post

Where did I say that? I said TRANSPARENCY. you say SECRETS. I say TRANSPARENCY. you're the one that does not get it. Assange is my hero. Dr MLK is my hero. Abe Lincoln is my hero. These are people who stood up for what is right despite the best efforts of people like you who "stand up for whatever works for you at this time" I wrote my representatives and told them to back off the pursuit of Assange. When was the last time you wrote your representatives to ask them to 'better define' what should or should not be a secret? - the question that you appear to be so concerned about....?

You consistently ask this question of everyone, including me, as if this is some sort of defense of your argument. Surely you can do better than that. What we think should or should not be classified neither makes nor breaks the argument of open or transparent government. So regardless of the answer to that question for any specific person - your question is simply an attempt (a poor one) to divert the attention of the actual point of this thread to something that you have conjured up that is only apparent and relevent to you.

so you still support murder then..... nice

I called you asshole. Get the fuck out of my bedroom and get the fuck out of my doctor's office. And how fucking dare you even begin to determine the rights of some 'thing' which is not born and place those rights above the woman carrying that fetus. Go back to the cave sir.....your extremist views came right from there...... sorry but whatever you think, the supreme court disagrees with you. The SUPREME LAW of the country. or did you forget that along with all the other rights and freedoms you appear to be ignoring as well.

They can fuck whenever they want - not only is it their right, it's also perfectly natural. Personal FREEDOM - you should try it. Get the fuck out of my bedroom. And get the fuck out of my doctor's office - asshole.