Now, where do I begin?  Your basic premise is interesting but I've never seen any data on relative birth rates of liberals and conservatives, let alone whether or not it was based on abortions.  But  mainly, the entire political dynamic of the past 25 years refutes your premise.  The political reality is that 40 percent of voters are conservative and 40 percent are liberal.  The 20 percent in the middle swing elections.  And they swing back and forth depending on a lot of factors, such as the quality of the candidates, the state of the economy, etc..  So I find nothing to support your amusing premise, but good luck with it.
PS:  I fully expect the liberals on the board to say I'm not a real liberal anyway.

possibly not that off either.

Let's face it, if the conservatives do in fact have all the money like the liberals claim, the mere economics might back your arguments.

With all the money, why would they need a government funded program? They wouls simply handle it with their own private doctors.

More proof where none is needed.

Eventhough you never mention Democrats, most people here will read that into it. There is really only two true believer Liberals left. Jerry Brown and Ralph Nadar. Neither is exactly a baby machine.

-- Modified on 3/8/2011 6:16:35 AM

You didn't expect me to pass this one up, did you?

"However, George seemed to overlook a few contradictory phrases that did not appeal to the Liberal taste for lexicon.  Take "Reproductive Rights" for example.  Don't they mean Non-Reproductive Rights?"

Actually, George did cover this topic, and he did it rather well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM

"Also, consider "Planned Parenthood."  Don't they mean Planned Abortion."

From wikipedia's page on Planned Parenthood:

"Services provided at locations include contraceptives (birth control); emergency contraception; screening for breast, cervical and testicular cancers; pregnancy testing and pregnancy options counseling; testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases; comprehensive sexuality education, menopause treatments; vasectomies, tubal ligations, and abortion."

Abortion services is about 2% of what they do.

"Supposing there was an pet abortion clinic.  Of course, they wouldn't call it an animal abortion clinic.  It would be called something like Puppy and Kitten Neighborhood Relaxation Center.  But lets just say there was such a thing.  What do you think animal rights people would do?  By that, I mean Liberals in Volvo station wagons.  I think they would have a fit that animals were being aborted.  Peta would be all over that."

Actually, there's a lot of people who care about the well being of animals that regularly provide abortions services for them. It's actually rather commonplace when spaying feral cats.

"The big payoff of this thread comes next.  If you believe that the people most likely to get an abortion are those that approve of the right to have an abortion, logically that would mean more liberals terminate pregnancies than other people."

Your logic is faulty. The reason being is that liberals are more likely to use birth control. A bigger indication of who will have an abortion than political affiliation is whether the woman in question is married. 80% of all woman who have abortions are not married. Why would that matter all much in this day and age? Because men are still the primary bread winners, and they're far less likely to marry a single mom.

"Over the past 40 years the Liberal population has been self-diminishing."

Actually, when you look at the numbers, the rural states, which are historically more conservative, have seen their numbers shrinking.

"Of course not all of their children would have grown up to be Liberals, but the fact that fewer and fewer children over time were robbed of any influenced by Liberal parents seems likely to me.  Ever since Row v Wade, Liberals seem to have dwindled in population and influence, and those that remain are hesitant to even call themselves Liberals.  A sharp contrast to the 60s, when Liberalism was a badge of honor."

That has more to do with right wing propaganda demonizing the word liberal.

"I have a theory that even though there have been times when we have had a pro-life President and a pro-life Congress — even though they could have changed the course of "reproductive rights" in this country — they never did, tried or will.  Not as long as there is a long term payoff for conservatives."

I think it's more about dangling the fruit for the fundies so they'll vote for them, without going through with it and making it illegal, which would incite a sharp reaction from the other side.

Man---frothing from the mouth over "union busting", then "planned parenthood funding abortions", taking away a woman's right to choose, etc. You KNOW the far right is going down when they start going off the deep end like this putz. Jesus---what an angry & bitter little man. You are SO far out of the mainstream, even among conservatives,that anyone trying to engage you in rational debate will find that an exercise in futility.

F_U, a perfect way to cheer up your day : cash your SSI check & go have that miniature golf game with Snow------



-- Modified on 3/8/2011 6:47:01 AM

I measured it!

If I were you, I would skip this thread.  Too many words here.  There's probably a post with a Photoshopped picture of George Bush in a donkey's anus, so check that out instead.  Which George Bush?  Does it even matter?  There might even be a link somewhere to order your picket line Dunkin Donuts online.  There no statistics here, or proven scientific fact, so I would ignore this topic.

OK, now that all the Liberals have left, I have a topic just for us non-Liberals.  To segue into this topic, I would like to conjure up the great Liberal icon George Carlin.  He perfected a method for entertaining Liberals by appealing to their political ADD,  George could reduced jokes down to 2 words, most famously Military Intelligence.  And who could forget Pussy Fart.  He had a pure genius command of language, I admit.  

However, George seemed to overlook a few contradictory phrases that did not appeal to the Liberal taste for lexicon.  Take "Reproductive Rights" for example.  Don't they mean Non-Reproductive Rights?  Is anyone really stopping someone from reproducing in this country?  Also, consider "Planned Parenthood."  Don't they mean Planned Abortion.  Or maybe you can get a unscheduled drop-in abortion these days with a coupon, but I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with parenthood.  

If you are still with me, lets take this one step farther.  Supposing there was an pet abortion clinic.  Of course, they wouldn't call it an animal abortion clinic.  It would be called something like Puppy and Kitten Neighborhood Relaxation Center.  But lets just say there was such a thing.  What do you think animal rights people would do?  By that, I mean Liberals in Volvo station wagons.  I think they would have a fit that animals were being aborted.  Peta would be all over that.  Even if it could be shown that the Mother animal chooses the abortion, I think they would not miss the chance to fling some red paint around.

The big payoff of this thread comes next.  If you believe that the people most likely to get an abortion are those that approve of the right to have an abortion, logically that would mean more liberals terminate pregnancies than other people.  Or in the very least, the percentage is disproportionately larger for Liberals.  Sure all kinds of people get abortions and it isn't limited to one political group.  But the fact that abortion is so political, perhaps the most politically divisive issue of all politic issues, is it really any surprise that one side is more likely to exercise those "rights" than the other?  Logically it seems true to me.  They don't gather that kind of statistical data while they have the woman in stirrups and there's a reason why, I think.

Over the past 40 years the Liberal population has been self-diminishing.  Of course not all of their children would have grown up to be Liberals, but the fact that fewer and fewer children over time were robbed of any influenced by Liberal parents seems likely to me.  Ever since Row v Wade, Liberals seem to have dwindled in population and influence, and those that remain are hesitant to even call themselves Liberals.  A sharp contrast to the 60s, when Liberalism was a badge of honor.

I have a theory that even though there have been times when we have had a pro-life President and a pro-life Congress — even though they could have changed the course of "reproductive rights" in this country — they never did, tried or will.  Not as long as there is a long term payoff for conservatives.  I mean mostly conservatives in the Republican Party, who are not really pro-life.  They are pro-self-administered-Liberal-holocaust.  Getting the Liberal to be both the Jew and the Nazi, while they pretend to care and rally those people who do actually care to act as their proxy on the front lines of a war they plan to never win.  But that all probably would not sound very good above a clinic store front for either side of the issue.  

So the next time a Liberal talks about Planned Parenthood and Reproductive Rights, just smile and nod.  You have a front row seat to the greatest Darwin Award of all time.  And whether you want it or not, you are the recipient too.  Congratulations.  Hug a Liberal today.  If you can find one.

Yep! You're correct! I have not read it all, but not because...

I'm a liberal, but because I judged from your first and last paragraph, you were not open to any real discussion. I don't waste my time reading garbage demeaning one group of people or persons.

You're much like Newt Gingrich, who others have remarked about as believing he's the smartest guy in the room, and often is. But, his smugness and condescension soon oozes out, and he starts patting himself on the back with both hands, because no one else will, soon enough for his tastes. Of course what he wants most, to be president of the United States, will always be beyond his grasp because of his impatience with others he deems inferior to himself. He doesn't seem to get is that the loathing he harbors for others, originates from loathing he has for some aspect in himself. So sad he can't be liberated from that, and live to his full potential.

So what your saying is because of abortion lees people are "BROUGHT UP" as democrates...or...that you you are a democrat by virtue of your geneology.....or both.

I'll have to think about that...but not for too long..