Title: Another McGaffe: McCain admits we're in Iraq for Oil Source:
YouTube URL Source:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzwboGFXrVg Published:May 2, 2008 Author:McCain Post Date:2008-05-02 23:04:43 by robin Keywords:None Views:1166 Comments:32
McCain is an idiot, but he full well knows it would have been much cheaper to just buy the freaking oil. But we can't let on about who really controls foreign policy, can we?
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
Obama is not "for killing babies in the womb", like Red China, where abortions are forced on women who do not want them.
Rather, Obama believes such decisions are best left up to to the pregnant women. This is supported by many who have bumper stickers like "Keep your hands off my body".
I would like to see laws against abortion, but after voting for pro-life candidates my entire voting life I have not seen any yet.
McCain chooses to bomb babies and pregnant women, perhaps for the next 100 years. This "collateral damage" would be fine with him.
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
So the war on terror is irrelevant as a reason for fighting in the Middle East.
No, not at all, Lebanon could invade Florida any day now.
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
McCain is an idiot, but he full well knows it would have been much cheaper to just buy the freaking oil. But we can't let on about who really controls foreign policy, can we?
You score two more points, very good insight.
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
I agree, but the pro-choice people see it as a woman's choice to do with her body as she chooses, not as murder. I have personally had the oppty to change the minds of two young pregnant women in my life. Another I discovered later, was too ashamed to speak to me about what she was going through (I felt terrible learning this later).
Red China has a murderous policy in regards to abortion, to be differentiated from allowing women to have abortions when they choose to.
I would still make abortion against the law, as it once was in the country.
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
But Obama is in fact in favor of abortion being legal.
McCain and Clinton also support keeping abortion legal, as do 85 to 90 per cent of the American people.
It would take a Constitutional amendment or a ruling of the Supreme court overturning Roe v. Wade, to change it. Roe was issued by a Court that included 6 GOP nominees, 5 of whom were in the majority.
I fear that a McKook presidency would be totally horrific.
I agree. It would be an horrific continuation and extension of the Bush presidency. Such an election result would be hailed as a ratification of what went before and a mandate for more.
McCain and Clinton also support keeping abortion legal, as do 85 to 90 per cent of the American people.
It would take a Constitutional amendment or a ruling of the Supreme court overturning Roe v. Wade, to change it. Roe was issued by a Court that included 6 GOP nominees, 5 of whom were in the majority.
Thanks for the hard truth reminders.
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Not a federal issue, it is state rights or personal protected right.
Thanks for the correction, I should have made that clarification, just as Ron Paul has. Did you notice how Romney and others rushed to add "state rights" to their abortion stance, long after Ron Paul did?
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Did you notice how Romney and others rushed to add "state rights" to their abortion stance,
Huckabee was like a little parrot on his shoulder.He would say there very same things, sometimes only hours after paul. and the MSM would act like it was the greatest words ever spoken. They knew he was
winning a lot of hearts and minds so they all stole from him mercilessly.
No more "bread and circuses" , its "bandaids and puppet theatre ".
I agree, it was so unfair (the standards for reporting reaching new lows). And the way Huckabee says anything is so annoying. So much grandstanding, bleeeahhcch.
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
The following facts are what The Gallup Organization does NOT want you to know about their abortion poll, why they went through a tortured exercise in data manipulation to conceal the following facts about American opinion, why their poll results showing that almost half of Americans view abortion as murder are now missing from their web site, and why they had their lawyers demand that the Fathers' Manifesto Web Site be shut down (which they were successful at doing)
So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it. Numbers 35:33
1.
17% believe that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances. 2.
Another 56% oppose most circumstances of abortion, which means a total of 73% oppose the current practice of abortion-on-demand. 3.
1% have "no opinion". 4.
Only 26% support current abortion policy that it should be "legal under any circumstances". 5.
48% believe abortion is murder. 6.
Only 40% of Americans favored legalized abortion in 1969, prior to the US Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. 7.
Few if any women who have abortions are aware of the increased risk of suicide and breast cancer, nor the risk of dying during the abortion.
The following graph is an ACCURATE representation of Gallup's abortion poll data:
Note how consistent this presentation of their data is with a flat out honest internet poll which didn't confuse gullible women with all kinds of emotionally fused questions prior to asking the key question about whether or not they thought abortion ought to be legal.
abortionpollinternet.gif (24012 bytes)
Only 23% on the unbiased internet poll support abortion on demand compared to 26% on the biased Gallup Poll. 64% on the unbiased internet poll oppose abortion on demand compared to a total of 73% on the biased Gallup Poll who believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances and illegal in the vast majority of circumstances (more than 99% of abortions do NOT involve rape and incest, and abortion is more dangerous to a mother's life than childbirth itself).
The larger percentage (12.4%) of respondents who answered "undecided" on the unbiased internet poll is a far more credible scenario than the 1% who answered "don't know" on the biased Gallup Poll. Far too many Americans are undecided about abortion than Gallup indicates, proving that Gallup selectively weeded out certain types of respondents, targeted their poll to an audience with an agenda, or perhaps didn't ask men this question. It's believable that only 1% a pack of feminazis would say "don't know" to such a question, but there are a heck of a lot of American men who're on the fence about this issue. Since the internet poll was most likely a mix of men and women, it's credible that 12.4% of the respondents, and thus of the general American public, would be undecided.
FIFTY SIX PERCENT OPPOSE 99.9% OF ALL ABORTIONS!
The most egregious aspect of Gallup's presentation of its own poll results is how they fail to point out that even of their own audience, 56% oppose 99.9% of all abortions. There's no abortion which is safer than child birth itself, so this simply is not a factor and should never be asked in an abortion poll. There are 90,000 rapes and incest in the US each year, half of which, or 45,000, involve penetration. As a woman can get pregnant one day out of 30 days, only 1,500 of them could actually get pregnant, and only half of them, or 750, would actually get pregnant.
Of the 1.6 million abortions each year, less than 0.05% involve rape or incest, and more than 99.95% do NOT. For Gallup to include in the category more than half of Americans who OPPOSE 99.95% of all abortions as "support Roe vs. Wade" is UNCONSCIONABLE.
MORE AMERICANS VIEW ABORTION AS MURDER THAN THOSE WHO DO NOT
In July 1999, The Gallup Organization had a poll on its website that contained the following results of their abortion polls which showed that almost half of all Americans, 48% of them, view abortion as murder, and only 45% do not.
abortiongallup3.gif (32673 bytes)
Yet 57% in a Los Angeles times poll reported FIFTY SEVEN PERCENT viewed abortion as murder:
Even more striking, while 57% of respondents say they consider abortion to be murder, more than half of that group agree that a woman should have the right to choose an abortion.
LESS THAN A MAJORITY AGREED WITH ROE V. WADE PRIOR TO THIS SUPREME COURT DECISION
It's also quite a different view of American opinion of abortion than the following from the Statistical Handbook on the American Family, Oryx Press, 1992, Table E4-7 which notes that only 40% of the US population favored the legalization of abortion only a few years before the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision which made abortion "legal" in the US, but certainly not in God's Mind:
abortion1969.jpg (49375 bytes)
The omission of these vital facts from that web site raises serious questions about the objectivity of this organization. The fact that almost half of their fellow citizens view the 40 million abortions which have been performed in this country as the direct result of an unpopular, immoral and unconstitutional act by their own government, as murder, is an important thing for Americans to know. This is not a trivial point, yet the Gallup Organization took it upon itself to trivialize it by removing any and all references to these facts from their web site:
Why did they do that? What political or moral or other motivation would an otherwise respectable polling organization have for concealing this information? Who put the pressure on them to remove this incriminating evidence of the dissatisfaction of the American people for their government? Why did they succumb to this pressure?
A partial explanation is the way Gallup presented this data on that date, and continues almost two years later to present it.
PERSONAL HEALTH RISK NOT WORTH HAVING AN ABORTION
About a quarter of Americans have believed since 1975 that abortions should be "Legal under any circumstances", ranging from a low of 21% in 1971 to a high of 33% in 1995, and currently 26% do. This is a very low percentage of the voters to base the legalization of such a risky medical procedure on, particularly since it violates the religious convictions of two billion Christians around the world, is viewed as immoral by a majority of Christians worldwide, is considered murder by a significant majority of Americans, greatly increases the risk of breast cancer and suicide, and is the kind of operation from which you would expect there to be 10,000 deaths per year in light of the 1.6 million abortions being performed each year. These last two points give us a clue about what motivated Gallup to remove this information.
Very few women who get abortions are aware of:
1.
The high risk of abortion-related fatalities. 2.
The higher risk of breast cancer. 3.
The increased risk of suicide.
These three points are extremely important to a decision to get an abortion. If American women were aware of the total risk here, it's doubtful that any of them would have abortions. It might be easy for many women to kill "just a fetus", but if she knew how much she was putting her own life at risk, this would be the tie breaker in the decision: she simply wouldn't do it.
10,000 ABORTION RELATED DEATHS PRIOR TO ROE V. WADE
So why is there such a blackout on both public opinion and medical facts? Why did the National Center for Health Statistics report that 10,000 women died from abortions each year before abortions were legalized when:
1.
There were far fewer abortions each year? 2.
They were performed almost exclusively in the same types of clinics in which they are now being performed?
Rather than shout about the risks from the rooftops like they should, they now conceal this information by not associating an abortion-related death with the abortion itself. Instead, more than 10,000 deaths annually are listed in other pregnancy-related fatalities where the risks of abortion cannot be fully understood.
To conceal this uncomfortable reality about the unpopularity and danger of legalized abortion, The Gallup Organization engaged in an egregious act of statistical manipulation. It used another category called "Legal only under certain circumstances" which it claims is supported by 56% of those polled. The Gallup Organization is a professional enough organization that it knows how to frame a question to get the desired response, and how to present the data to confuse the issue. And confuse the issue they did. Ever since this poll has been conducted, Gallup has used a "sub category" of the above response called "IF CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES: Do you believe abortions should be legal under most circumstances or only in a few circumstances?" and 42% of those in this category reported that abortion should be "Legal only in a few circumstances".
The way such a sub-category should work is that the 42% who responded "Legal only in a few circumstances" should be multiplied by the 55% who responded "Legal only under certain circumstances" to get a total of 23% who believe that abortion should be "Legal only under certain circumstances". This is the way anyone who takes a detailed look at the poll would interpret it--unless they also take the time to note that in this sub-category were also 27% who supposedly repeated that it should be "Legal under any circumstances" and 16% who supposedly repeated that it should be "Illegal in all circumstances".
abortion.gif (10283 bytes)
Certainly nobody who stated in the first question that "abortions should be legal under most circumstances or only in a few circumstances" would change their minds on the second question and report either "Legal under any circumstances" or "Illegal in all circumstances". So now you have to go back and question whether or not this was actually a sub-category of "IF CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES", whereupon you discover that Gallup made a "mistake" and that this is actually a more detailed breakdown of all of the respondents--both "Legal under any circumstances" and "Illegal in all circumstances" are identical in both categories.
ok? So now we know where Gallup is headed. They want you to believe that "Legal only under certain circumstances" is a small sub-category which is what most people will do if they don't reexamine these poll results a few times. The next sleight of hand gets even more egregious. What do people mean when they say "legal only in a few circumstances"? Well, we don't know, because this view, which is held by up to 56% of those polled, are lumped in with "legal under most circumstances or only in a few circumstances". So by the time they ask the question about whether abortion should be legal "When the woman or family cannot afford to raise the child", it's not so easy to determine, when less than 32% responded "Should be legal", which this is a sub-category of. Certainly they didn't ask this question of the 27% who flat out believe that abortion should be "Legal under any circumstances" or the 16% who believe "Illegal in all circumstances"! Or did they? If they repeated the above "error", then we just don't know.
This is an extremely "unprofessional" [read: intentionally misleading] manner in which to present such an important poll. It would be bad enough if they didn't compound the "error" by asking a whole bunch of obviously irrelevant and emotionally charged questions about favoring an abortion if "woman's life endangered", "woman's physical health endangered", "woman's mental health endangered", "baby may be physically impaired", "rape", or "incest", all of which are less than 1% of all abortions, and none of which Everett Koop ever experienced in his 30 years of medical practice.
horizontal rule
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, N.Y., the legalization of abortion in 1973 with Roe v. Wade led directly to more than 1,528,930 abortions annually, and to more than 36,295,570 total abortions in the last 23 years. This legalization of abortions was against the will of the people, against the advice of every religious leader in the world, and against the religions of 86% of North Americans--Christianity and Judaism--as evidenced by a recent poll by Aaron Klein at aklein@masterssec.com :
Table 3 Abortion Poll
Question 1: Is abortion positive or negative?
POSITIVE 26.1% NEGATIVE 56.2% UNDECIDED 15.7%
Question 2: Should we allow abortion on demand for the sake of convenience?
YES 23.6% NO 64.0% UNDECIDED 12.4%
Question 3: Should we allow abortion on demand for gender selection?
YES 3.4% NO 84.3% UNDECIDED 12.4%
Question 4: Should we allow partial birth late term abortions?
YES 9.0% NO 80.9% UNDECIDED 10.1%
Question 5: Should we allow abortion if the life of the mother is at stake?
YES 70.8% NO 14.6% UNDECIDED 14.6%
Question 7: Should taxpayers pay for any abortions?
If opposition to legalized abortion were a significant majority, a constitutional amendment would not continue to be a non-starter.
No successful national candidate in memory has vowed to end legal abortion. All have supported legal abortion.
Politically, the position of outlawing all abortions is a loser. When it becomes a winner, politicians will adopt it. Politicians will support almost anything that will get them elected.
So by your logic. lol....the war in Iraq will be ending tomorrow or most people favor it. And most people favor illegals coming across our border too. Yes? lol
[nc] McCain and Clinton also support keeping abortion legal, as do 85 to 90 per cent of the American people.
[Old Friend] That is a lie.
That is a factually challenged lame excuse for a rebuttal.
Numerous polls find Americans support keeping abortion legal, as stated. While many favor keeping abortion legal with limitations, that is keeping abortion legal.
Hillary Clinton is unabashedly pro-choice.
Adopting McCain's "exception" position would keep abortion legal. Adopting his position of returning jurisdiction to the states would clearly result in abortion on demand within the United States, while some states would prohibit it. Any woman could get an abortion on demand but might have to go to another state to get it.
Overturn Roe v. Wade, but keep incest & rape exceptions McCain said he thought Roe v. Wade should be overturned and said he would support exceptions to a ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, and when the mother’s life is in danger. Source: Boston Globe, p. A11 Jan 22, 2000
McCain is firmly established, on the record, for keeping abortion legal.
John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench. Constitutional balance would be restored by the reversal of Roe v. Wade, returning the abortion question to the individual states. The difficult issue of abortion should not be decided by judicial fiat.
McCain's position is to return jurisdiction to the individual states. That would make abortion legal in all the states until individual states declared it illegal. The practical effect would be to make abortion legal in the United States, and to be regulated only by state law. Any state adopting McCain's position on "exceptions" would keep abortion legal.
There can be no doubt that our more liberal states would have abortion on demand.
I disagree with the characterization of Roe being reversed. What he describes is Roe being overturned and nullified for want of jurisdiction.
I agree with the position that abortion is not in the Constitution, authority to regulate abortion was not ceded to the Federal government, and jurisdiction therefore properly lies with the states.
I would overturn Roe but not replace it with a different activist decision.
[Old Friend #24] The following facts are what The Gallup Organization does NOT want you to know about their abortion poll, why they went through a tortured exercise in data manipulation to conceal the following facts about American opinion, why their poll results showing that almost half of Americans view abortion as murder are now missing from their web site,
[Old Friend #26] So by your logic. lol....the war in Iraq will be ending tomorrow or most people favor it. And most people favor illegals coming across our border too. Yes? lol
You can respond to something I actually said, or desperately resort to straw man lunacy.
I made no reference to the Gallup Poll and, in any case, you did nothing to refute their polls. You rely on unsourced claims which you admit the publisher was forced to remove from public view on the internet.
Even your unsourced purported polling data only claims that 17% favor a total ban on abortion.
17% believe that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances.
That leaves 83% favoring legalized abortion.
To believe the unsourced inanity that 48% believe abortion is murder, one MUST believe that 31% believe it is murder and should be legal.
The history of polls I relied upon is The Polling Report.
The link contains numerous abortion poll results going back over a decade. Those favoring making abortion unlawful are consistently in a small minority.
There is still only two ways to change the current state of the law which you seem incapable aof addressing:
Constitutional amendment
Getting the Supreme Court to strike down Roe.
If you favor Constitututional amendment, why has a proposed amendment not achieved progress in at least one state?
If you favor a Supreme Court ruling declaring abortion illegal, where do you find that the states or the people ceded authority to the Federal government to regulate abortion?
Polls listed chronologically. Data are from nationwide surveys of Americans 18 & older.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Jan. 9-12, 2008.
Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. Oct. 23-25, 2007.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Oct. 23-24, 2007.
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International.
The Harris Poll. Oct. 16-23, 2007.
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll. Oct. 19-22, 2007.
CBS News Poll. Oct. 12-16, 2007. N=1,143 registered voters nationwide.
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Oct. 12-14, 2007. N=1,212 adults nationwide.
CBS News/New York Times Poll. Sept. 4-9, 2007.
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life survey conducted by Schulman, Ronca & Bucuvalas. Aug. 1-18, 2007.
Quinnipiac University Poll. Aug. 7-13, 2007. N=1,545 registered voters nationwide.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. July 18-21, 2007.
Gallup Poll. May 10-13, 2007.
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. May 4-6, 2007.
Quinnipiac University Poll. April 25-May 1, 2007.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Neil Newhouse (R). April 20-23, 2007.
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Jan. 19-21, 2007.
Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Oct. 26-27, 2006.
CNN Poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation. Aug. 30-Sept. 2, 2006. N=1,004 adults nationwide.
I don't care what the majority of people believe. It is totally irrelevant. The taking of innocent life is murder.
Anyone and everyone in favor of abortion has a moral flaw.
In elections, successful candidates tend to care what the majority believes. We do not have a nation based on the imposition of anyone's religious beliefs on any one else.
Your position that the taking of innocent life is murder is political suicide if a national party tries to impose it by force. The result of a rape is just as innocent as any other potential life. Your position is that you can go rape some woman, get her pregnant, and have the government force her to give birth to your child. Good luck in the election. You should do especially well with the women voters.
Anyone who calls someone else a LIAR just because he or she points out the TRUTH has a severe moral flaw.
We are discussing the election process for president of the U.S. Nobody with your enlightened position is getting elected.
[Old Friend #31] I'm just stating facts and the truth.
Unfortunately, you admitted that the ridiculous garbage you puked up all over the board straight from THE FATHERS MANIFESTO, by THE CHRISTIAN PARTY, was challenged in court and had to be removed from The Christian Party site. When your uncited, unlinked purported poll results were demonstrated to be internet poll garbage, you stated, [Old Friend #29] "I don't care what the majority of people believe. It is totally irrelevant."
[Old Friend #31] Your position boils down to this. Punish the child for the crimes of the father. That is immoral.
Your position is that you have the right to rape a woman, get her pregnant, and then use the power of the government to force her to give birth to your child.
Or, you can rape your daughter, get her pregnant with a child possessed of numerous maladies, and then use the power of the government to force her to give birth to your child.
You are entitled to your enlightened position. You are not entitled to force it upon everyone else against the will of the people. You can always work to gain the support of the people for your enlightened position. Until you do, we will have no major candidate who espouses your enlightened position.