User

Yes, of course. He wanted him to fail at implementing his left-wing policies. Context matters. Why would we want our political opponents to succeed? Also, the left-wing howled about that for a long time; not sure what you mean by barely being called out for it. Here you are over a decade later, bringing it up.

There is A LOT of space between acknowledging climate change, how bad it is, what is causing it, and what we can even do about it... and then getting to the doomsday nonsense you are pushing.

Um. No. There is literally no objective evidence to seriously support the catastrophic climate change position. This is just pure unmitigated doom porn.

What do you mean by this?

Or, hear me out, we can stop spending so much, reform entitlement programs. If we are going to brag about how great Europe is doing, lets cut our military spending and they can up theirs to protect themselves more and meet their NATO obligations.

Again, they have various areas like B and C, and whatnot; it is only one of those areas, I believe, more closely around Jereusluem, that has more blanket prohibition... it is not the entirety of the West Bank. Systemic to what? The point is that where there are close living conditions between Israelis and Palestinians, there is some violence that happens. Its like any other statistic... In America something like 10,000 people die a year falling down stairs. Is that "systemic?" To the larger point here, the fact that there is some small amount of violence that occurs for some small % of the population, that is hardly evidence of ethnic cleansing. Its simply a matter of the human condition that when people who have generations of hate and angst and religious animosity towards one another are in close proximity that incidents will happen. https://www.timesofisrael.com/police-demolish-illegal-settler-structures-prompting-outrage-from-coalition-members/

I guess, thanks for making my response easy. No, this discussion here was about the meaning of Pro-Life terminology. You completely ignored anything I said and what we were discussing and now want to argue about abortion legislation in general. Care to respond to the point this time? Once again, you completely ignored what we were discussing. The discussion here was about your absurd notion that one second before the baby is out of the birth canal is somehow not a person and then one second later, just like magic, it is! We were not discussing the impact on anyone here, and I was not doing or saying anything about this. Care to respond to the point this time instead of feigning this fake outrage over things I have neither said or done here? I can't help you if you are going to continue to refuse to engage honestly here about what the basic premise of the Pro-Life position is. You don't have to agree to understand. I didn't fail to understand anything. If you had something extra to share like this, go for it. Doing so after the fact is not a failure on my part. You were trying to make a point about how many identify as Pro-Life by claiming a statistic of people polled saying "illegal in all circumstances" was = Pro-Life. The Pro-Life position is not defined by having to believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. In fact, a vast majority of folks in the Pro-Life movement believe there is at a minimum an exception for the life of the mother, because two rights to life are conflicting, only one can succeed. So, once again, you did not even bother to stay on the subject. Says the guy who wants to teach everyone's kids how to have anal sex and give good blow jobs... My "morals" regarding abortion being wrong are no different than thinking it is wrong to push Grandma off the cliff being wrong. Do you think it should be legal to push Grandma off the cliff now? The point of my comment was to explain to you that the position for not supporting killing unborn children is no more based on religious dogma than the position to not support pushing Grandma off the cliff. It is your premise that the unborn child should have no considerations, not mine or those in the Pro-Life movement. Once again, this is simply a failure on your part to have the capacity to understand how others think so you can get another little bigoted jab in. Lets just set the record straight, I get it, you don't like religion. You don't have to keep trying to prove it to me.

Odd, I can see a whole lot more typing out than "nuh uh" going on from me here. Nice strawman. I never said anything about every single house being destroyed and every single person expelled. It is you who seems to think that any amount of people harmed = ethnic cleansing, which is absurd. Not exactly. The issue is limited to a particular area of the West Bank where Israel doesn't allow for any new land to be built on in that particular area without permission. I am not aware of any blanket prohibition in all of the West Bank... that is absurd on its face. If that were the case, there would literally be nothing new built anywhere for the last almost 50 years. The settlements destroyed are those built illegally in this particular area without permission. Guess what? Israel also demolishes Israeli structures that are built illegally in this area as well, and a whole lot of Palestinian structures are not torn down that were built illegally. I think there are some 3 million Palestinians in the West Bank and the settler violence we are talking about around 1,000 various incidents of violence a year, stuff like an Isreali settler killed a cow included in that number. So no, there is no systemic large scale violence against all of the Palestinian people in the West Bank. We are talking about the isolated incidents between where Isrealis and Palestinians live near each other and that violence is not all one sided either. Yes, just as the numbers of Palestinians increase as well. That is usually what happens when people have families and populations naturally grow... That is not ethnic cleansing.

Amazing you typed this out, and you don't see the irony. The Nazis were literally rounding them up to try to kill them all or as many as they could. Every Jew was systematically hunted down and shipped off somewhere to die or be killed outright. Israel has not killed millions of Palestinians nor are they trying to. Israel is not rounding up Palesitnians for death. Which is why I continually point out the absurdity of your claim here, since the Palestinian population is increasing, they were given Gaza to do as they please with, they have some authority over themselves in the West Bank and ability to expand and grow there as well. No one is systematically taking their land and cleansing them from it. This is and has been my point, that you would sit here comparing it to what happened with Jews under Hitler shows how outrageously absurd your position is. More insults doesn't make your argument any better. Of course the violence is isolated... otherwise it would be impacting vastly more people. You are taking settler disputes between Israelis and Palestinians and blowing them up to more than it is. Nothing you have provided shows that Palestinians would be "ethnically cleansed" in the next 10,000 years at whatever pace Israel expands Settlements.

Maybe if there are Pro-Hamas terrorist supporters chanting genocidal death slogans about Israel on one side.... its a bad thing too.

To be fair here, I don't have much faith in your honesty here either, as you continually insist that Israel is engaged in ethnic cleansing as you are... so, instead of just calling you a troll or dumb, I keep picking apart your responses. What goalposts did I move? You are the one claiming this is ethnic cleansing, but keep pointing to such issues as settlement disputes, temporary displacements during wartime, and other such longstanding isolated violence that goes on between both Palestinians and Israelis. Pointing out that these incidents are not ethnic cleansing is not me moving the goalpost; it is me pointing out you are nowhere near the goalpost you set. Not wanting a Palestinian state is still just political squabbling, as most of the Palestinians don't want an Israel or the Jews there to exist at all... hence why they are where they are today, all their failed wars and violence.

Oh man... both sides you say? LOL Almost like that is what Trump was trying to say when the left went bonkers over his comments about "both sides"

LOL, you are not insulting me, you are just calling me a troll or stupid! Oh... and then in the same response you literally insult me again: Israel destroyed literally every home in the West Bank and is trying to?! OMG! No, they did not. Your accusation is "ethnic cleansing" not that Israel is big meanie that destroyed some homes.

All the more reason to vote for Trump it seems!

I can't help you anymore. I gave you the facts. I gave you some advice.

Insulting me is not an argument. The point here, again, is that there is not any Israel-directed policy to wipe out Palestinians from the West Bank. You point to an example of temporary displacement of a handful of communities during a war. Guess what? Israel has had to temporarily displace many thousands of its people along the border with Gaza and Lebanon because of their hostile actions too. So, I guess Gaza and Lebanon are also engaged in ethnic cleansing of their own...

No, you mocked the charges sticking, but we have video evidence of this stuff actually happening. Stop playing games. You are defending these thugs because its for a cause you support.

Do you even bother to read this first? This is talking about illegal Palestinian settlements that were built without permits that self evacuated due to violence and the IDF has ordered temporary exclusions on them to avoid further violence. This is not ethnic cleansing.

So, you are basically proving the earlier point here. That folks like you on the left cheer on the lawlessness when it suits you.

Oh, I always have the receipts for my positions: " Roughly equal proportions of women in both surveys indicated that a baby would dramatically change their lives, that they could not afford a baby now, that they did not want to be a single mother or had problems with their relationship, and that they were not ready for a child or another child. While some of these proportions showed statistically significant differences, in our assessment they were not substantial, because the percentage changes were small." https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh/2005/reasons-us-women-have-abortions-quantitative-and-qualitative-perspectives

Be more specific.

Maybe you really have no clue what it means... but after your repeated posts ignoring what I shared with you about the Pro-Life flag, I have my doubts that you are being anything other than purposefully less than honest in your dealings here. The foundation of the Pro-Life movement is on the premise that the unborn child is a human life with a right to life and it is wrong to kill it. Hence... Pro-LIFE, as in the LIFE of that unborn child. I mean really, you don't have to agree to be honest enough to acknowledge what it is others believe or to discuss what it is they believe. Back to that whole courtesy thing you demand of others but not yourself... Another strawman. I did not hand wave away the birth process. The point here is that nothing magical or even physical happens during that birth process that changes what a baby is other than its location as it moves through and out. Of course there are many differences, but not for what the unborn child is. That is what we are discussing here. There are a lot of differences between a person in outerspace and a person in the desert too, that we could list out forever... but they are still both people. You make obfuscation an art form. LOL, well, just brilliant! Wait, have I not already been in a discussion with you on something else where you were playing this same dumb game? 95% of abortions are for the mere convenience of it. No, that is a very specific position on abortion being wrong in all circumstances, that is not what makes on Pro-Life or identify as Pro-Life. Even going by your source, it would be that 21% would be Pro-Life as they find it morally wrong... Ah yes, you got to get your little bigoted comments in there every chance you can! The Pro-Life movement is no more fueled by "religious dogma" than thinking it is also wrong to push Grandma over the cliff because you are tired of her.

So, back to the point, you are not really Pro-Choice. That is just one thing. We could spend all day outlining how you are not really Pro-Choice. Which to my larger point... it is silly the game you are playing by acting like Pro-Life is some absolutist term when both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice are merely descriptions commonly held to describe the general positions in the abortion issue. Clearly you do. There is no difference between a baby just born and one in the birth canal other than location. You want to pretend human life is just a matter of legal semantics here for babies. Nothing you have provided shows the unborn child is a "non-person", you have gone from quoting an Amendment talking about defining citizenship in America... so the stupidity of your reasoning here means that anyone not a citizen of America is a non-person? Stop trying to justify killing unborn babies for the mere convenience of it. 3/4 of Americans believe in God, Half claim to be religious. And in Gallup polling, 1/3 of those who claim seldom or never attend religious service identify as Pro-Life.

So... there is no ethnic cleansing then, since Israeli settlements are not part of any policy designed to remove by violence or terror a civilian population. Palestinians are still living in the West Bank, living life, and growing.

Trespassing, refusing lawful orders from police officers, obstruction, assault, battery, destruction of property, vandalism... appears there are some conspiracy-related charges as well. You know this, though. So why are you acting like you don't?