P
pete_29
Guest
Two peoples separated by a common language.No kidding. You’d think being from England…he’d know how to write in English.
- Status
C
CaptFun
Guest
With malice toward none, with charity for all…
Abraham Lincoln
All right. Point taken. A Lincoln quote is easier to get than a Shakespeare sililoquy. But on this thread you’ve quoted a Republican (albeit an American).
Quoting the meanest woman in the History of Literature (with the possible exception of Medea) as she ponders gearing up for murder seemed somewhat more in keeping with the theme. :bigyikes:
Lincoln, Lincoln what were you thinkin’ ?
O
oldcelt
Guest
For my mind misgives…some consequences yet hanging in the stars.
BTW, Lincoln wouldn’t recognize his party
John
BTW, Lincoln wouldn’t recognize his party
John
C
CaptFun
Guest
In an acting class at college we had to try to. It was really cool once decoded.
To decode that sililoquy (speech) of “about to become a murderess” Lady Mac Beth:
1 She learns that the King of Scotland, Duncan will be staying under her roof that night.
2 She reasons if Duncan dies, her husband Mac Beth will be the King
3 So she decides to kill the King in his sleep that night and frame some innocents for the crime.
- To ramp up to the murder she calls on “spirits,” to take possession of her (sell her soul)
and **get rid of any residue of feminine mercy and nurturing in her - and fill her with the
direst cruelty. ** - Her requests of the spirits get darker and darker - she wants to kill this King without
a quiver of conscience and relishes the thought of the coming murder. - The thick night and smoke refer to getting away with the crime and becoming Queen
and she plans to do it so secretly that heaven itself won’t know about it in time to stop
her knife with appeals to her better nature. HOLD! HOLD! means STOP! STOP!
youtube.com/watch?v=beeYSCLx8r8&feature=related
It’s good water cooler conversation for tomorrow. “I’m gettin’ into Shakespeare now.”
The pro-abortion speeches to come at the convention will probably be a lot more subtle
and less direct. But both deal with planning the deaths of others in the near future.
And quoting Shakespeare implies you know stuff, feeds my ego.
I
ishii
Guest
Either way, what does that tell you about the modern Democrat party? JFK, Scoop, Truman, Humphrey - where are you? Wasn’t Eisenhower courted by both parties? And he probably could’ve been at home in either, although he chose the GOP. Too bad the Democrat party was taken over by social liberalism - abortion lobby, gay lobby - etc. A once great party is now just a mish mash of interest groups that it keeps together by government handouts or support for identity politics. From the perspective of an old school Democrat, I can understand not being gung ho for the GOP, but what else is out there?Better to say, “if they were pro-life, they wouldn’t be invited to speak.” Even at the convention, numerous delegates, but not enough, would be anti-abortion.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
I don’t think you recognize how hard it is to reform the law without an overturning of Roe V Wade. Without that there can only be pro-life measures passed in congress or by the president which have only a marginal effect. Those who criticize the GOP for not stopping all or the majority of abortions because they had 8 years under Bush or had a majority in congress are unrealistic. Its about overturning Roe V Wade. To do that we must get a pro-life majority on the bench. Re-electing Obama won’t do that. Electing Romney and Ryan could very well do that - there might be some key vacancies that come up. In any case - not voting or wasting your vote on a 3rd party candidate would be counterproductive when so much is at stake.
Ishii
O
oldcelt
Guest
I’m with you…No man born of woman shall harm Macbeth…sorry
Put out your candles Laura…oops…Tennessee Williams.
John
C
CaptFun
Guest
“Who you think you are … a couple a queens? Y’know what I say? I say HA! Ha ha ha!”
- Tennesee Williams (or Marlon Brando’s version of his words in) Streetcar Named Desire.
M
markomalley
Guest
And then there’s this from Big Government:
President Infanticide: Dem Abortion Platform Does Not Exclude Partial-Birth Abortion
President Clinton believed abortion should be “safe, rare; and legal.” But Clinton also believed in a work requirement in his welfare reform bill.
President Obama apparently disagrees on both counts.
(snip)
In 2008, the Democrat Party platform on abortion read this way:
That is the Democratic Party of 2012. Any Catholic needs to keep this in mind.
President Infanticide: Dem Abortion Platform Does Not Exclude Partial-Birth Abortion
President Clinton believed abortion should be “safe, rare; and legal.” But Clinton also believed in a work requirement in his welfare reform bill.
President Obama apparently disagrees on both counts.
(snip)
In 2008, the Democrat Party platform on abortion read this way:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
… while running for the U.S. Senate in 2003, Obama defended late-term abortion:
Worse still, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama opposed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act and in his defense said something that should put a chill up every mother’s spine:
*There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was "movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead."
No, Senator. They wouldn’t go along with the program. They wouldn’t just come out limp and dead.
They were coming out alive. Born alive. Babies. Vulnerable human beings Obama, in his detached pomposity, might otherwise include among “the least of my brothers.” But of course, an abortion extremist can’t very well be invoking Saint Matthew, can he? So, for Obama, the shunning of these least of our brothers and sisters - millions of them - is somehow not among America’s greatest moral failings.
But not Barack Obama. As an Illinois state senator, he voted to permit infanticide. And now, running for president, he banks on media adulation to insulate him from his past.
The record, however, doesn’t lie.
Infanticide is a bracing word. But in this context, it’s the only word that fits. Obama heard the testimony of a nurse, Jill Stanek. She recounted how she’d spent 45 minutes holding a living baby left to die.*
Via The Weekly Standard, here’s the chilling audio of Obama speaking those words: (video at the link. Obama’s comments start at 3:05 …“limp and dead” is stated at 3:58)
The same media currently killing themselves to tie an idiotic statement made by a Missouri Senate candidate to Mitt Romney did everything in its corrupt power to protect Obama from his own statement and voting record in 2008 and is engaging in the same coverup now.
Here’s something else the corrupt media is covering up about Obama’s abortion extremism – Obama’s actions as recently as 2008:
Obama’s 2008 endorsement of late-term abortion bans also appeared to be in conflict with his support for the Freedom of Choice Act. In 2007, Obama cosponsored the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would strike down restrictions on abortion at the state and federal level. The bill stated that all abortions must be legal before “viability” for any reason and that abortions must be legal until birth if a woman’s health is at risk. FOCA does not contain a definition of “health,” therefore “anything an abortionist says is related to ‘health’ is sufficient,” according to Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. “A state would not be able to adopt any limiting definition (for example, defining ‘health’ to exclude emotional distress), because that would be to narrow and infringe on the federally guaranteed right which FOCA would establish. The entire purpose of FOCA is to prohibit any narrowing of the federally guaranteed right – for example, by requiring parental notification, or by refusing to fund abortions.”
(remainder snipped)
… while running for the U.S. Senate in 2003, Obama defended late-term abortion:
Worse still, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama opposed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act and in his defense said something that should put a chill up every mother’s spine:
*There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was "movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead."
No, Senator. They wouldn’t go along with the program. They wouldn’t just come out limp and dead.
They were coming out alive. Born alive. Babies. Vulnerable human beings Obama, in his detached pomposity, might otherwise include among “the least of my brothers.” But of course, an abortion extremist can’t very well be invoking Saint Matthew, can he? So, for Obama, the shunning of these least of our brothers and sisters - millions of them - is somehow not among America’s greatest moral failings.
But not Barack Obama. As an Illinois state senator, he voted to permit infanticide. And now, running for president, he banks on media adulation to insulate him from his past.
The record, however, doesn’t lie.
Infanticide is a bracing word. But in this context, it’s the only word that fits. Obama heard the testimony of a nurse, Jill Stanek. She recounted how she’d spent 45 minutes holding a living baby left to die.*
Via The Weekly Standard, here’s the chilling audio of Obama speaking those words: (video at the link. Obama’s comments start at 3:05 …“limp and dead” is stated at 3:58)
The same media currently killing themselves to tie an idiotic statement made by a Missouri Senate candidate to Mitt Romney did everything in its corrupt power to protect Obama from his own statement and voting record in 2008 and is engaging in the same coverup now.
Here’s something else the corrupt media is covering up about Obama’s abortion extremism – Obama’s actions as recently as 2008:
Obama’s 2008 endorsement of late-term abortion bans also appeared to be in conflict with his support for the Freedom of Choice Act. In 2007, Obama cosponsored the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would strike down restrictions on abortion at the state and federal level. The bill stated that all abortions must be legal before “viability” for any reason and that abortions must be legal until birth if a woman’s health is at risk. FOCA does not contain a definition of “health,” therefore “anything an abortionist says is related to ‘health’ is sufficient,” according to Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. “A state would not be able to adopt any limiting definition (for example, defining ‘health’ to exclude emotional distress), because that would be to narrow and infringe on the federally guaranteed right which FOCA would establish. The entire purpose of FOCA is to prohibit any narrowing of the federally guaranteed right – for example, by requiring parental notification, or by refusing to fund abortions.”
(remainder snipped)
That is the Democratic Party of 2012. Any Catholic needs to keep this in mind.
R
Roselle
Guest
The same number of females are speaking at the RNC convention, but the DNC wants it to be known, loud and clear, that women will be giving talks at their gathering. It does seem they want to revive the war on women theme. The first go around seemed odd. Don’t expect much different from the second try.
“DNC Really Wants You to Know Women Will Speak at its Convention”
commentarymagazine.com/2012/08/22/dnc-really-wants-you-to-know-women-will-speak-at-its-convention/
snippet from Alana Goodman’s article:
“DNC Really Wants You to Know Women Will Speak at its Convention”
commentarymagazine.com/2012/08/22/dnc-really-wants-you-to-know-women-will-speak-at-its-convention/
snippet from Alana Goodman’s article:
G
gilliam
Guest
Keep in mind that the two conventions have two different goals. Here is how the AP describes it:
"Barack Obama needs to remind voters why they loved him in 2008. Mitt Romney needs for voters to get to know and like him better. "
realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/08/24/two_different_conventions_much_different_goals_115190.html
Also the subplots are different:
The Democrats need to tell voters why voting for the “unknown” Romney could be dangerous for them.
The Republicans need to ask voters, “are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?”
"Barack Obama needs to remind voters why they loved him in 2008. Mitt Romney needs for voters to get to know and like him better. "
realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/08/24/two_different_conventions_much_different_goals_115190.html
Also the subplots are different:
The Democrats need to tell voters why voting for the “unknown” Romney could be dangerous for them.
The Republicans need to ask voters, “are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?”
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Obama Rejects Catholic Leader for Democratic Convention Prayer
lifenews.com/2012/08/24/obama-rejects-catholic-leader-for-democratic-convention-prayer
lifenews.com/2012/08/24/obama-rejects-catholic-leader-for-democratic-convention-prayer
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Wow…I’m shocked. :yawn:
R
Riverton_Grammy
Guest
Or, are your children and grandchildren better off now that they have to pay the $5 trillion back?
Jon
D
DoGodsBidding
Guest
Here is the New York Post’s article on this. I particularly like Bill Donohue’s comment in the article.
DGB
nypost.com/p/news/local/cardinal_sin_bam_blew_off_blessing_aLYqq7VnyqG8maCqZaui2K#ixzz24Tx4EQVT
C
CaptFun
Guest
COMING SOON!
:sad_bye: - to the future !
M
markomalley
Guest
From The Street:Obama’s Labor Problem: Charlotte Union Chief Shuns Democratic Convention
Bill Wise is an influential labor leader in the Carolinas, president of a Charlotte local that represents 2,000 US Airways (LCC) workers, and a committed Barack Obama voter in the coming presidential election.
Yet Wise wants nothing at all to do with the Democratic National Convention that begins Sept. 3 in Charlotte.
In fact, Wise is so committed to avoiding the convention that he has not returned recent calls from two Democratic National Committee members. “I don’t have anything to do with that,” he says. “I have a prior commitment and I’m not going to go through a sales pitch in the eleventh hour.”
(snip)
Without reading too much into Wise’s position – he is outspoken and strongly independent – it is hard to avoid the conclusion, after speaking with him, that Obama has a labor problem. At the very least, Obama has a problem with the 700,000-member International Association of Machinists, a visible, activist union that dominates the aerospace and airline sectors. IAM President Tom Buffenbarger says that he too will stay away from the convention, where the union’s participation will be at an historic low.
That is a traditional Democrat base that seems to be cracking right around now.
Don’t forget about the UMW withholding endorsement (from a couple of weeks ago):
The nation’s largest coal miners union has yet to make an endorsement for the upcoming presidential election after giving President Obama its full and early support four years ago — hinting it may sit out the race.
But despite the United Mine Workers of America’s indecision, organized labor is throwing its support to Mr. Obama much as it did in 2008 when the then-Democratic senator from Illinois won the presidency.
The UMWA says it will make an endorsement — or not — based on recommendations of its state councils, most of which will hold meetings in the next few weeks. The process likely will conclude by mid-September, said UMWA Communications Director Phil Smith.
The UMWA has a history of backing Democratic presidential candidates, but “it’s certainly an option that there could be no endorsement” this year, the spokesman said.
Bill Wise is an influential labor leader in the Carolinas, president of a Charlotte local that represents 2,000 US Airways (LCC) workers, and a committed Barack Obama voter in the coming presidential election.
Yet Wise wants nothing at all to do with the Democratic National Convention that begins Sept. 3 in Charlotte.
In fact, Wise is so committed to avoiding the convention that he has not returned recent calls from two Democratic National Committee members. “I don’t have anything to do with that,” he says. “I have a prior commitment and I’m not going to go through a sales pitch in the eleventh hour.”
(snip)
Without reading too much into Wise’s position – he is outspoken and strongly independent – it is hard to avoid the conclusion, after speaking with him, that Obama has a labor problem. At the very least, Obama has a problem with the 700,000-member International Association of Machinists, a visible, activist union that dominates the aerospace and airline sectors. IAM President Tom Buffenbarger says that he too will stay away from the convention, where the union’s participation will be at an historic low.
That is a traditional Democrat base that seems to be cracking right around now.
Don’t forget about the UMW withholding endorsement (from a couple of weeks ago):
The nation’s largest coal miners union has yet to make an endorsement for the upcoming presidential election after giving President Obama its full and early support four years ago — hinting it may sit out the race.
But despite the United Mine Workers of America’s indecision, organized labor is throwing its support to Mr. Obama much as it did in 2008 when the then-Democratic senator from Illinois won the presidency.
The UMWA says it will make an endorsement — or not — based on recommendations of its state councils, most of which will hold meetings in the next few weeks. The process likely will conclude by mid-September, said UMWA Communications Director Phil Smith.
The UMWA has a history of backing Democratic presidential candidates, but “it’s certainly an option that there could be no endorsement” this year, the spokesman said.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
this does not surprise me at all. remember when Obama paid a visit to the Pope in Rome not too long after taking office i wonder why he was motivated to meet the spiritual leader of over 1 billion Catholics and since being in office he has done whatever he can to
belittle Catholics and the Church herself?
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Democrats’ Big Get for the DNC: Charlie Crist
pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/08/27/democrats-big-get-for-the-dnc-charlie-crist
- Status