Partly cloudy with a stray thunderstorm.
Partly cloudy with a slight chance of thunderstorms overnight. Low near 80F. Winds SSE at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of rain 30%.
Updated: September 19, 2017 @ 7:52 pm
September 19, 2017
So she will fight for my opportunity to marry a rich lawyer to pay my way through Harvard law school then leave him with my children and divorce him once he's done paying for law school??!! So she has fought for Texas children, why didn't she fight for her own instead of leaving them with her sugar daddy that paid for her law school??!! I don't understand how she is fighting for Texas children when she wants to kill them in the womb??!! Will she also fight for my opportunity to enrich my law firm through crony capitalism and pay for play??!! Wow, sounds great. She is something to be proud of.
No one ever heard of "abortion Barbie" until she fought for killing babies. If killing babies is what makes you proud, then "abortion Barbie" is for you. Me, I will stick with the party that has given us a surplus, jobs, a booming economy, and a respect for life. That makes me proud of Texas
I think Rockstrongo has something against blondes.
Right on Rock. The first clues in the first paragraph are "Lawyer" and "Democrst". Does caring for the children of Texas mean killing them before their born? I can't think of a better example of what Texas doesn't need then a Wendy Davis..
No, you mean 'Windy Davis'[wink]
Yet another politician who will be "FIGHTING" for me...I truly cannot bear to hear one more of these swine tell me they are fighting for me, have been fighting for me, will be fight for me, etc., ad nauseum. I have mastered the skill of silencing the TV, just seconds before the words "I will fight for you..." come out of a political ad's audio. The radio however, tends to sneak up on me and I am still working on that reflex.
Hey, you ain't doing any fighting, so stop lying to us. If you are so determined to fight someone, volunteer for the infantry.
She is bought and paid for by the Mostyn PAC. No one ever heard of her until her rant to kill babies after twenty weeks. Now that is something to be proud of.
Does Linda Reid watch the news? This is all proven to be lies. Her second husband raised the children and even got custody of them. He even secured a restraining order against her. She was 21 not 19 when she divorced him, after he cashed in his 401 (k) to pay for her to go to Harvard Law School and when the final payment was made she left.
We have enough liars in office, we don't need one like this to run Texas. And we don't want Texas to be another NY or CA. Go to Greg Abbott for Governor and see a real leader.
Mostyn? Isn't that the same Democrat Houston trial lawyer who did a robo-call supporting Alicia Cox, the Tea Party "Republican" running for JP?
I think I'll stick with honesty, and vote for Toni Randall ...
And what's with all those Democrats running as Republicans, and why is the Galveston County Tea Party backing them. I guess neither could get elected without the other.
Politics over principle.
One recent poll says that even more women are for Greg Abbot then for 'Windy'.
A liberal Democrat from a gerrymandered district in Dallas. Advocate of no limit abortions, supported by Planed Parenthood. Unwed mother at 19, divorced at 21? Has she married the father of any of her children? Before political correctness she'd be called a SLUT.
Don't blame Mrs. Ried for this political add. It was paid for and probably written by the Wendy Davis committee. Sent to every "letters to the editor" in Texas that would accept it.The reception by GCDN readers should indicate how poor a candidate W.D. is for any elected office in Texas. She'll keep campaigning until her financing runs out.
Davis -- Abbott -- I can't get too excited about either one of them. And since I only vote FOR people and not AGAINST people, I guess I'll sit this race out.
Response to IHOG posted at 10:56 am on Tue, Apr 29, 2014:
IHOG, do you have any daughters? God forbid if one of them made a life choice that you happen to not approve of. Would you call your own daughter that "S" word?
You know there are folks who have a low opinion of women who use that word very loosely. In fact, I bet there's people in other parts of the nation who think that every young woman in Texas is a "S".
Do you realize that Wendy Davis, despite her hardships (that she may or may have not put upon herself) she made something of herself and cares about the people of our state? She, or someone like her, could very well be a neighbor of yours who could do more for women (like your daughter) besides calling them sluts.
* * - - WENDY DAVIS for Governor - For a Better TEXAS - - * *
Ok, I'll play. What is her platform for a better Texas? What are her legislative accomplishments that lead one to think she can run the state?
Think her sugar daddys money something for her. She used the guy like she will use the taxpayers.
Response to Don233 -Are you a forgiving Christian? Maybe not, since you wished upon someone that they were aborted.
Here's a question that involves a higher level of thinking than just calling a politician a worthless piece of trash: Is an abortion supporter who happens to be a woman more of the propensity to be one who "likes to murder babies" than a male politician who supports abortion?
To 'fight for children' don't they have to manage to get born, first?Or, did this candidate, a study in mendacity and self-contradictions 'fight for' burning babies to death with saline, or chopping them to pieces in the womb, then tossing whatever was left into a dumpster or flush down the toilet?Your 'choice' makes my choice of vote easy.
ONE of them is going to win, Gary.Unless you dislike both equally, not voting just helps the one you find most objectionable.I WOULD like to vote FOR somebody sometime again.Until then, the lesser of two evils sounds better to me.imho
The folks posting on this thread proves the adage that "Republicans don't like women" and that the "GOP war on women" is still in full force.
How do your wives feel about your disdain for Davis and all women?
There you go again sverige. Disagreeing with Wendy Davis' politics is not the same as a "war on women". Why do you ProgLibs equate disagreement with "Hate"? The Conservative women I know are for Greg Abbott and his policies. They are definitely not anti-women. PPP poll Greg Abbott's at 51% to 37% for Wendy Davis 4/15/2014Texas Tech Poll Abbott 54% Davis 25 % 4/19/2014
In a war, people get killed.The Party mostly advocating actual killing of females (and males) , and supporting such for the past 40 years with a singleness of purpose that gives said killing top, or near it, priority over other issues, is the Democrat Party.Maybe it's just me, but killing some 25 million plus females (and a like number of males, +/-...) in that time sounds like more of a 'war on women' than expecting them to pony up 10 bucks for their own recreational sex birth control each month...But, then, I'm not a 'progressive'...Nor, obviously, was I ever a leftist 'choice'...
Well, geocroix -
Making the decision to be pro-choice doesn't mean you advocate the "killing of babies".
The human race (especially in the modern venue) must make hard life decisions every day. Not only regarding a young Melanie's possibility of having an abortion, but also elderly Uncle Sidney's ultimate need to be placed in an assisted living or hospice. Every day, the unfortunate "choice" is to pull the plug on someone who (through illness or accident) cannot breathe on his/her own. Making the choice to end a life isn't taken lightly neither by democrats nor republicans.
Think about the thousands of republican parents who have had to be part of their daughters' decision to abort a child. It can happen to anyone, despite emotional leanings toward "killing babies".
sverige, you can disguise it anyway you want but the dictionary definition of "Pro - Choice" is "Favoring or supporting the right of women and girls to choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy to term." or "An ideological position which defends a woman's right to have an abortion on the grounds of her inviolable autonomy over matters concerning her own body."If the female chooses to terminate the pregnancy then those who are "Pro-life" believe that a life has been terminated. That life has a separate DNA structure than that of it's mother. "Pro-lifers" believe that life is or was a "baby". It is not like having an appendix removed since the appendix has an identical DNA to the body. The aborted fetus, only half of its DNA is from the mother. Is it a human? "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart..." Jerimiah 1: 5 If God recognizes this entity, why can't we?
The thing that I fail to see with any frequency in this debate is anything about the other half of the DNA contribution--the contributor that gets to go on with life as though nothing ever happened. Public consciousness is more than ecstatic to try and convict the woman of all kinds of violations of legal and ethical rules, but the man involved, well, I guess, he was just doing what boys do. "Love" 'em and leave 'em. She gets to deal with the physical and emotional aspects of the pregnancy, abortion or delivery, adoption or single motherhood. Regardless of her decision, one or more parts of society finds fault with it, and those that don't are generally much quieter than those that do.
Would we be willing to shut down the reproduction ability of our boys until they are married and committed to becoming parents? Or, perhaps quit giving societal approval to boys "becoming men" through sexual prowess? Or perhaps pulling those impregnators of the women they abandon out of the woodwork, and, if she doesn't want to have the baby, make him responsible for carrying it to term, delivering, and putting it up for adoption?
I'm not a fan of making one person responsible for the joint actions of two people. Yet, that's where the abortion debate seems to be focused.
God created man. From man he created woman. After that the gave that ability to create other human beings to the female of the species with man's help. The decision to have sex should not be made without realizing the ramifications of that act. The only contraceptive that is 100% effective is abstinence. Every boy and girl should be taught this and preferably by their parents. Parents you don't want your your children learning about sex on the street and the schools already have enough to do teaching the required subjects. Parents, it is YOUR responsibility.
Who's responsibility is it when the message isn't given? Who's responsibility is it when society gives one of the two parties a free pass to go on with life, but expects the other one to keep buying new wardrobes every few weeks, deal with swolen joints, weight gain, changing social perceptions, etc. while we impose on her the full weight of a poor choice by two people? You want to call her a killer if she has an abortion, but what's the answer for her co-conspirator? Are we merely willing to let God take care of his judgement, but we want society to have the first crack at her?
If you want to ban abortion, fine. But, who has the guts to ban knocking someone up and ditching responsibility for it?
More lies made up by democrats. Women are paid less by Democrats. And the only thing they do for women is fight for them to have abortions.Their even paid less in the WH. And the sisters that fight back are usually paid for by George Soros, Moveon.org, or the Unions to destroy everything and make noise. There is no war on women from the Republican's it's just trash for political gain by the Democrats.
Well, trinaevenhouse -I wonder if folks like you truly believe that an individual like Davis is completely void of morals and values that they would be on a campaign to wantonly kill babies. The pro-choice folks are not the evil, godless, hell-firing sorcerers that folks want to make them up to be.
I can imagine several thousand families in this country grasping with the reality that their daughter probably will get an abortion. None of these people are cheering in the stands that abortion is a wonderful thing. Gads, if it happened in my family (to either my daughter, niece, cousin) I would not go and blame the pro-choicers. In reality, I would hope to not lay blame on anyone, as it would do no good. The better choice is to move forward.
Having Davis nor Abbott as governor will affect us regular folks and our little 'ol lives.
Hi! I just stopped off in this discussion to see if there were any true, practicing Christians in here. It doesn't seem as if there are many. Spewing hate and vitriol over political preferences is simply sad. So much finger-pointing when no one's (party's)hands are clean.
Some here seem to have no issue with inadvertently (and quite poignantly) announcing that they are intent upon remaining part of the problem. Congratulations.
Well,... Since we are all part of the problem, could you please grace us with your solution?
Ok, sure, but first, I didn't write that "all are part of the problem". I am simply trying to point out an observation that some (not all) seem to want to immediately engage in some form of venomous attack on people &/or their preferred political party or candidate, rather than selling their preferred candidate based upon the merits of what they can do for all of us.
And while I will not take a side in this debate, I find it amusing that some of the very folks that might well claim to be people of God, forget that they should act as if they are. Until & unless we all conduct ourselves in such a manner that doesn't teach others (including our children) to be respectful and think critically about the things that matter, our country will continue its unfortunate social and financial decline.
Now, excuse me, I'm going to stand in the garage and believe that I am a car. [wink]
Why do people always attack Christians? There is nothing here about Christians. They can't debate on the issues. Everything in that article was a lie. The truth is out there. And you are simply sad. And there are many.
I attacked no one and no, you can't play the "I'm a victim" card here, though it appears you are trying to now. Rather than attacking anyone, I just made what I felt was candid observation about how rancid some become when debating & defending their political preferences. Hypocrisy rears its ugly head when some who profess to be fine, upstanding, dare-I-say 'holier than thou' Bible folk, forget that they are supposed to act like it too.
I am not simply sad, rather I am quite happy & pleasant because I do not descend to the depths that others here do. At its very core, most elections are nothing more than a popularity contest, which is precisely why things are as they are & both parties share that blame. If you don't like a candidate's platform, vote for someone else or no one at all. Feeling obligated to attack and denigrate others because of your differences is very telling.
Accentuate the positives of your preferred candidate, rather than going on and on about what you believe are the shortcomings of their opponents.
Sverigel, you need to read what I have posted. I did not judge her nor anyone else. You do though. She admitted the lies.
My judgement of Wendy Davis is she's a pathological liar.This is based on her own words and deeds, not my Sunday School attendance.If my position discomfits anybody....that's OK by me...the Constitution gives us all the right to be offended.If a person wants to pretend to be making nice, while actually doing the same thing they are oh-my-goodnessing over, that's OK, too. The 'pursuit of happiness' is also one of our nation's founding tenets.Ain't America great!!
Response to Roacharito posted at 7:39 pm on Tue, Apr 29, 2014:
Bravo, Rocharito. I admire your positive and healthy-minded attitude. It's comforting to know that there are folks like you who see the reality of it all. If you were one of my neighbors on my block, I'd be proud to have you as one. As for the folks here who label every pro-choice female candidate as a "baby killer", I hope your negativity is only in your words on forums like these, contrasted with your real life to be inspired with forgiveness, peace, tolerance and love.
Keep on writing sverige1, the stupid just keeps on pooring out.
Wow, I still believe these phony politicians are not "fighting for us" but, there is no need for politicians to fight anyway.
We are more than able to fight each other; seemingly, to the death.
Response to kevjlang posted at 7:31 am on Wed, Apr 30, 2014:
Well, exactly in another post I wrote was the fact that we as voters don't demonize male "pro-choice" candidates - never. It always seems that if we happen to have a female candidate, especially one like Davis who had hardships as a young, single mother - that we make her pro-choice abortion right stance as a co-efficient with being a "bad" person.
Even still, the good thing about being able to comment on these kinds of issues is to raise the awareness that our society gives a double standard on the issue. You are correct: the males need to have an equal responsibility in the abortion issue. In a sense, if a father of a young teen girl is in the mix as far as the decision to keep or terminate the baby...at least there is a male figure who is involved, even if it isn't the young "baby daddy" who really should be the responsible one. I still say that we fail to realize that Republicans/conservatives have daughters who terminate pregnancies too. The issue shouldn't be a polarized/political one.
So, republicans who don't like Davis - what's YOUR solution? I haven't heard one yet. BTW - Acehi: sure, I'll continue to write. If anything, to bring out, expose, and magnify the stupidity that the fringe right displays. Maybe in doing so, our society will have some hope.
"So, republicans who don't like Davis - what's YOUR solution?"If you are asking about having an unwed female in your family who becomes pregnant I say where there is life there is hope. First, do not terminate the pregnancy. Carry the baby until birth. The family then has an additional member. If the family is unwilling or unable to to have an additional member there are thousands of childless couples who are willing to adopt the baby. I have had some pregnant girls in class where the cost of pre-natal care and delivery was absorbed by the adopting couple. These couples are carefully scrutinized so the girl knows that the child is going to a good home. The Catholic Church and other churches also provide homes for unwed pregnant women if their families do not accept their pregnancy.One example in the Houston area http://lifehousehouston.org/Other examples in other areas:http://littlerose1999.blogspot.com/2007/03/homes-for-unwed-mothers.htmlBy the way sverige, I have provided you these links before so don't say "what's YOUR solution? I haven't heard one yet. "
Well, ponce - I want to hear YOUR solutions, not a link. A link is for reference of interest reading. We've heard these from other folks.
What I like on these forums is the words from us common folk.
So far, the only thing I have read is that "every woman should bear the child". That "abortion is not the choice". Well, there's millions of young women who made that decision. So, why have they not listened to all of these bright forum writers and be enlightened.
I know you do not like links. The links are for other readers of this forum in case they or someone they know has need of somewhere to turn. The word is spreading, LOVE is spreading. Where there is LIFE there is HOPE. And Where is HOPE there is JOY. And where you find GOD there is HOPE, LOVE and JOY.
Pro-choice candidates that run as Democrats will get run through the wringer by their Republican opponents. A pro-choice candidate that runs as a Republican will get attacked, regardless of the candidate's gender.
Wendy Davis isn't getting villified because she's a pro-choice female Democrat. She's getting villified because she's not only that, but she also has other things that Republicans are piling onto. I would assume that she expected to have all of those things brought up in the campaign. Perhaps she also expected to see some of the comments turn out so ugly.
Terminating an innocent life is no option sverige. The option for most pregnancies was available before hand. [sad]
Whether we like it or not, the law says that abortion is legal. Our personal ethics may be different. It's not illegal to have higher ethical standards than the law requires.
At some point, we have to decide at what point we want government to be enforcing our ethical standards and at what point we want to work among ourselves to set the bars and hold ourselves accountable.
Sure, we can pass a law making it illegal to have an abortion. However, will it have any more of an effect on those killings as the laws against murdering school children, young adults, senior citizens, etc.? How about if we just teach our "couples" to not get pregnant, teach them what the ethical decisions are should "it" happen, and whatever else we can come up with to eliminate unwanted pregnancies?
Personally, I'd prefer if boys and girls or men and women didn't get into the situation to begin with. I can't think of any reason someone not pregnant would even think about getting an abortion.
Response to carlosrponce posted at 8:13 am on Wed, Apr 30, 2014:
If it only were that so easy, then, yes - the ideal is to teach children that sex is to be saved until wedding night. The ideal is to have each middle and high school student (male and female) to be abstinant. That would avoid the complication and consequences of unwanted pregnancy. Another ideal is for girls and boys to hopefully turn out to be "straight" so that an individual won't have to navigate through being "different" and the discriminations and rejection that follows "coming out".
People simply don't result in these simple "outputs" that you and I wish they would have. Some girls get pregnant. Heck, some young women get pregnant and they make heart-wrenching decisions to terminate the pregnancy. Yes, the boy/man who impregnated her should be involved and help face the decisions and consequence. Ponce - let's face it. We're never going to have a human race that perfectly pigeonholes each soul to be a God-fearing, Christian individual who takes the sanctity of love and marriage in the traditional sense. It's a big world out there. People are different.
Yes, sverige, the answer is that simple. They do respond to absolutes. They will respond to rules. That is why gangs are so popular among the inner city youth. It is the permissive and absent family where there are problems.
Response to rukidden posted at 10:45 am on Wed, Apr 30, 2014:
Apparently, the termination of a baby IS and has been an option for many young women.
How are you and your pro-life folks going to turn the tide around so that people choose your way of thinking? So far, your strategies haven't worked. Don't get me wrong: I'd like for abortion to be a thing of the past too.
"How are you and your pro-life folks going to turn the tide around so that people choose your way of thinking?" Through education. A lot of women have had abortions who are now the best advocates against abortion. Abortion providers provide little or no post procedure counseling. Very few come out unscathed. I have witnessed this in teenaged girls returning to school following an abortion. In the movie "Heaven is Real" the young boy describes a sister he never knew he had. His mother had a miscarriage. Many who have had near death experiences describe Heaven as a place not only where the deceased go but also a place for the aborted. Given the prospect of having an encounter one day with a child that could have been hers and having to answer the question "Why didn't you want me?" might be enough to stop the senseless termination of viable human life. Only a small percentage (3%) of abortions are due to possible fetal health problems.Less than 0.5% (1/2 of one percent) is due to rape or incest).Source:http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
That movie sounds moving and I personally would hope that keeping a child would be any young woman's choice. But, I still think you're speaking "pie in the sky".
We must look at the plausible psychological components involved with many young women who get pregnant. A substantial number of these women truly feel that they can't possibly take care of a baby in their point of time in life. I'd venture to say that others would think that they, as potential young/inexperienced/ill-equipped mothers would do harm to the child.
As I mentioned before, life decisions are often based on the end result in the long run. Elderly: decision made to join an assisted living, nursing home, or hospice. Mentally retarded: decision made to shelter them in a full-care facility or try to mainstream them in schools with life skill classes. Brain-dead patient: to keep expensive life support (knowing that loved one is probably in a lot of pain, but can't communicate it). Or, keep them plugged in. I don't think the decision-makers regarding abortion take what they have to decide on any less lightly.
No "pie in the sky". Just doing my best to do as the Lord commands! May God Bless You and Yours!
Back to you sverige1, then to the Pro Choice crowd, killing un-born children is just a strategy? [sad]
OK, rukidden:Killing un-born children is a terrible choice. But, for many young women and their parents/guardians, it's a choice they very likely made in heart-wrenching fashion.
Then again, maybe there's daytime talk shows on "career abortioners" - women who have aborted multiple times. I don't think you or I think of that as a good "strategy". We'd agree on that.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.