Puppies! Vote for me! Puppies!

Head count!

How many people couldn’t help but smile seeing a puppy?
·
I don’t think being seen with puppies would hurt his race, and positive feelings are only going to help him.

That said, I would hope people could see beyond cute fluffy animals.

Well, it would probably work on me. A breath of fresh air.

Ya gotta admit it’s more appealing than “demon sheep”.

Is this as opposed to Killing Puppies>?
.
http://www.jillstanek.com/2010/09/killing-puppies-vs-killing-babies/
.
Why would the Party who kills innocent babies care if puppies are killed? Is that what Joe Sleazestak is saying? That puppies are cuter than babies, and why he is a pro-Abortion candidate?

Do you approve or disapprove of President
Barack Obama’s job performance?
Approve …………………………………………………. 43%
Disapprove……………………………………………… 51%
Not sure …………………………………………………. 6%
.
The tell-tale of polling. How much has Barack Obama impacted this race.

This may offend your sensibilities, but a fetus is not a self sustaining human being, and as such isn’t a baby.
.
That’s why a pregnant woman says “I’m going to have a baby!” not “I have a baby!”

Hey look, rusty wants to change the subject again!

Is it me, or is Sestak’s puppy loads cuter than Steele’s puppy?

I noticed he used W’s mug in the ad too – is HE a puppy?

No, puppies can eat pretzels.

“After months of trailing Toomey, sometimes by double digits, two recent polls show Sestak regaining the lead”
.
Odd. It seems like only yesterday…Wait it was only yesterday..
.

“Anyone with ANY sense what-so-ever knows Joe SLEAZESTAK is loosing big time. Even the big Dem machine has pulled out of PA with all ads for him now”
.
newfreedomblog
October 19, 2010
at 3:24 pm

Look! Shiny object!

uhh so sestak runs an ad saying “yep, I voted for the bailouts because we had a mess to cleanup”. (Which is about 100x better than any of the political ads from either party I’ve seen from any candidates here in NY.)

And Toomey responds with a bunch of clips of Sestak explaining why his votes were good for the people of PA.

Uhhh.. did Toomey’s campaign get hijacked by Sestak operatives or what? I don’t get it. Maybe this is why Sestak is suddenly pulling even or ahead.

Will the real Joe Sestak please stand up!!
.

I don’t think you or some shadily funded attack add are qualified to tell us who the “real” Sestack is…

8.2, that may be so, but I’m sure he knows what a Real American is.

“Will the real Joe Sestak please stand up!!”
.
“Paid for by Crossroads GPS”
.
“Crossroads GPS was organized in July, 2010 under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. In order to qualify for such tax status, the organization must not be “primarily engaged” in participating or intervening in political campaigns to support or oppose candidates. Crossroads GPS, however, appears to be a classic example of a 501(c)(4) organization that is improperly using its tax status to spend tens of millions of dollars in the 2010 congressional races while hiding the donors funding these expenditures from the American people. ”
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fred-wertheimer/irs-called-on-to-investig_b_750875.html
.
As usual, Rusty couldn’t care less who’s pulling the strings. The GOP winning is far more important to Rusty than the integrity of the electoral system.
.
All’s fair as long the libtards lose, right Rusty?

It is really painful when you make me stand on the same side with rusty against you, but you leave me no choice here.

That’s why a pregnant woman says “I’m going to have a baby!” not “I have a baby!”

Illustration: I have a friend who is going to be driven by her husband to a hospital in the next few weeks for a schedule CS delivery. The baby would be 38 weeks old. The baby is deemed full-term and full term after 36 weeks. Hence, delivery dates are given in a +/- 2 week range. Tell me if this woman aborted her unborn child at 37 weeks would she be killing a baby or just removing a fetus?
.
This is the part of liberalism that piques me the most. I get gay marriage, I do not agree with it, but I get it. But that someone, anyone could actually defend the position that terminating a human life within you is in any way comparable to killing a baby dog is just despicable.
.
What is it, nature, nurture? What makes anyone feel comfortable in thinking this is right? How do we justify this savagery in what is generally an improving humanity.

…and more appealing than O’Donnell ads choking chickens.

Jay, no cute kitten ads?

At the point that the organism can live & breath outside the womb of its own volition, I’d consider it a human being. Now, I’m NOT saying fetuses aren’t important or that destroying one is humane in all cases, but I am saying that until that baby takes its first breath, the human being, the mother takes precedence.
·
Between the point of birth and conception any number of things can happen, including miscarriage. While these things might not out right kill the fetus, it might maim it. Before birth, there are situations that also might warrant abortion: rape, incest, etc. Before conception, you have entities that could come together to start the process to make human lives, but there’s no protections of those either.
·
And, to turn the tables on you, my religion is the source of this particular “first breath” philosophy, and one that I’ve come to agree with. How do you feel about that first amendment when it comes down to Freedom of Religion & abortion.

And, to turn the tables on you, my religion is the source of this particular “first breath” philosophy, and one that I’ve come to agree with. How do you feel about that first amendment when it comes down to Freedom of Religion & abortion.

You do know that many babies have to be “encouraged” to take the “first breath” after they come out either by natural birth or CS. Their nostrils have to be cleared, and they sometimes have to be jiggled or even spanked to make them take a sharp first breath. Without this help, they have no “first breath”, are they fair game then? If killed when out but without a first breath, is it an abortion or murder? Remember, you can not kill what was never alive, and by your “religion” they are not alive before that “first breath”
.
Is it just the very “first breath” that is considered such or every breath after a cessation of breath is also a first breath. Thus, if a man is rescued after drowning and is no longer breathing, is the first breath he gets after first aid also considered kosher. Or, was he fair game when he couldn’t breath, such that if I hacked of his neck then I wouldn’t be guilty of murder.
.
The first amendment argument is interesting. I only have one thot/question on that, why does law enforcement try to charge a person who kills a pregnant woman for 2 murders? Remember Scott Peterson?
.
My experience in Cape town South Africa a few years ago illustrates my general frustration with the liberal view on issues like these. An oil tanker was grounded on the cost, causing a lot of pollution in the waters with a particularly big effect on the penguins. The effort to clean and save these penguins was massive and effective. So, some really smart chap rounded up some destitute children (lots of them in Cape town), and poured crude oil on them while cameras were rolling. He was hoping to get some attention, the message was clear. You guys have such a mind bungling orientation/priority when it comes to the sanctity of human life. Surely, that can not be a sign of improvement in our common humanity.

You do know that many babies have to be “encouraged” to take the “first breath” after they come out either by natural birth or CS. Their nostrils have to be cleared, and they sometimes have to be jiggled or even spanked to make them take a sharp first breath. Without this help, they have no “first breath”, are they fair game then? If killed when out but without a first breath, is it an abortion or murder? Remember, you can not kill what was never alive, and by your “religion” they are not alive before that “first breath”

·
Inaction is not killing or murder. Not realizing you need to spank a new born or clear its nostrils to get it to breath is simply ignorance. Also, I’m Jewish. This isn’t some “religion” as your quotes would imply that I’m making up. Anyway, your example isn’t abortion, murder, or killing. If the thing never breathes of its own accord it dies of its own accord. The moment it breathes it is alive. There isn’t anything difficult about that concept. In the future there might be a treatment for cancer. Doctors not knowing or not performing that treatment haven’t killed the patient.
·
Is it just the very “first breath” that is considered such or every breath after a cessation of breath is also a first breath. Thus, if a man is rescued after drowning and is no longer breathing, is the first breath he gets after first aid also considered kosher. Or, was he fair game when he couldn’t breath, such that if I hacked of his neck then I wouldn’t be guilty of murder.
.

The first amendment argument is interesting. I only have one thot/question on that, why does law enforcement try to charge a person who kills a pregnant woman for 2 murders? Remember Scott Peterson?

·
Don’t know. It doesn’t particularly reflect on my religion though. I suppose you could make an argument that you don’t believe the fetus is a human being, but you’d still be left with murder. And, as I was saying, acts against fetuses aren’t entirely forgiven by Judaism, but there is a clause in Judaism about the mother coming before the fetus. It originates with a thought that essentially has to do with it being a good dead to relieve pain & a rabbinic proclamation about when life begins, ie first breath.
·

An oil tanker was grounded on the cost, causing a lot of pollution in the waters with a particularly big effect on the penguins. The effort to clean and save these penguins was massive and [in?]effective. So, some really smart chap rounded up some destitute children (lots of them in Cape town), and poured crude oil on them while cameras were rolling.

Nice straw man argument. You’ll note, however, most liberals don’t go around pouring crude oil on children… :/

I missed this paragraph and accidentally left it unquoted above.

“Is it just the very “first breath” that is considered such or every breath after a cessation of breath is also a first breath. Thus, if a man is rescued after drowning and is no longer breathing, is the first breath he gets after first aid also considered kosher. Or, was he fair game when he couldn’t breath, such that if I hacked of his neck then I wouldn’t be guilty of murder.”

And it is the very first breath as far as I’m aware. Here’s some info on declaration of death in Judasism: Brain Death & Jewish Law

If you’d go by the information in that article, the lack of breath at birth would be enough, but that doesn’t mean that if you intervene the thing is not a living human.

Democrats and Republicans love puppies, but Democrats will allow the unborn to be killed and the Republicans will internationally forbidden wars of aggression to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis so that Bush could get re-elected.
.
On a related note, many biologists are frustrated with the facts that cute mammalian vertebrates like bunnies have no problem gaining protection while very unattractive reptiles and insects are, in many cases, far more important for the ecosystem – and we are not talking about house flies, ants or roaches in your home but ones which do not interact with people – can not gain protection.
.
So, I say save the babies, save the Iraqis and, for ones who’s extinction will impact the ecosystem, save the ugly bugs and lizards.

My oldest dog (Ziggy, named after Ziggy Stardust) had successful surgery yesterday and is now home resting comfortably. He showed up on our doorstep over 11 years ago and has been a member of the family since the day he ran into the house and refused to leave.

My daughter works in a preemie ward. Funny how those “not babies” fight to live and grow to be just like “real” babies.
.
If you climbed to an eagle’s nest and broke the eggs, you just committed a crime. Why? According to the pro-choice argument they aren’t anything that is alive. I really can’t go along with the fetus is not a baby argument. It’s really morally bankrupt.

liberalmeltdown, you’re confusing (same as above) intervention with the lack there of. The fact of the matter is that without the intervention of early delivery, there’s a good chance the organism would not grow on its own, but I have nothing against keeping preemies alive. How many of those “not babies” cut themselves out of the womb? Anyways, as soon as they take a breath we are obligated to take care of it. We can choose to take care of it regardless of our obligation.
·
As far as the eagles nest, that’s because eagles are endangered. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the arguments I’ve made. And in fact, most of the arguments I’ve made aren’t even liberal arguments, but it would be impossible for any of you to see that and you have to tie it to other people’s ideas in an attempt to undercut my arguments which you can’t or won’t deal with directly.
·
Feel free to avoid the issues I’ve presented. Its pretty typical behavior around here.