Life is a continuum. Proof: try producing life from dead cells. Life can only derive from pre-existing life. It's pure logic.

Ergo: any little "bunch of cells" in the womb IS life and living no matter at what stage.

Duhh.

In taking the Murderer-in-Chief's argument to its logical conclusion:

"I hope your daughters don't get punished with a baby, ever. Your gene line does not deserve perpetuating to begin with."

So there, was that insensitive, racist and politically incorrect?!

Yeah, Birth Control Policy meets everyone's needs -- except the murdered child's needs - that of unconditional protection by its mother.

Birth Control Policy = Murder One -- no different from any other premeditated homicide. I'd rather tweak the policy to exclude innocent children and include known terrorists.

So let me ask the Murderer-in-Chief:

"How does it feel to kill an innocent child, you worthless bunch of adult cells?"

Don't be "sorry to disagree" -- disagreement unraveled in reasonable, logical discussion is the root to all improvement.

In fact, I don't disagree on your points regarding Newt's and his "Realpolitik Wilsonian" statement. I know what that means. But I also know that Romney not only attacked the Constitution through the Second Amendment, but also stated "that Romneycare mandates are conservative principles" and identified himself clearly as a Progressive -- same as McCain.

While you are right that Romney may have somewhat better morals privately (except for obvious public lying) Newt would strike me as minimally less intent on striking down the Constitution than Romney.

They both give me the willies. Regardless of who is elected, the watchful eye of the People can never leave them, not for a minute.

Character in both is just about equal. Any perceived inferiority in Newt's character is equally matched by an inferiority in Romney's character. There's enough evidence that Romney will resort to lying whenever necessary. Like for instance saying that the NRA endorsed him in 2002, when the NRA did not endorse. Or saying that he roughed on mission in Europe, when he was living very comfortably. While one who cheats on his wife, will also cheat on his partner, the one who lies to the People in the campaign will also lie to the People while holding office. His flip-flopping is very reminiscent of the typical McCain flip-flopping.

While Romney actively limited the Second Amendment in Massachusetts with the 2004 Permanent Assault Weapons Ban in Massachusetts (regardless of which direction federal law would ever go) Newt paid merely lip-service to the Second Amendment, but did not actively seek to limit it (I've been digging).

Both are unsavory, both have questionable characters, both are sickeningly progressive and we have to vote for the one whom the Conservatives can assume the most control over.

It's a mess. One that was foreseen. The Founders were right. Once the People become inattentive to Constitutional Matters and corrupt in their ways, they cannot expect the Constitution to survive or see men of good character in office.

Note to self:

TWO Supreme Justices to be appointed by the next President.

The current votes by the Justices are always a narrow margin of 5 - 4 for the survival of the Constitution.

Consider what could happen when there's one MORE Justice just like Ginsburg -- kiss Freedom of Speech goodby, Second Amendment goodby, Habeas Corpus goodby ...

And the Christian God cries.
And the Jewish God cries.
And the Hindu God cries.
And the Pagan Goddess cries.
And Buddha cries.

All the Pantheon cries.

Hey, give it to dasnider, he's right --

a liberal female has to have something to think with in the absence of a brain. He's willing to admit that a rear will do. I can live with that.

You mean these two heaps of meaningless cells?

Which one of them?