TH3

Where do you have this information?

Couldn't be more wrong bro - abortion rates - while higher among minority women - they are pretty much the same against all other demographics: "According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, "Almost three-quarters of women obtaining abortions in 2008 reported a religious affiliation. The largest proportion were Protestant (37 percent), and most of the rest said that they were Catholic (28 percent) or that they had no religious affiliation (27 percent). One in five abortion patients identified themselves as born-again, evangelical, charismatic or fundamentalist; 75 percent of these were Protestant.” That's from a CHRISTIAN website http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/40519-why-do-so-many-churchgoers-have-abortions So - all you men can spout your "ideals" - when it comes down to it - and a young girl gets pregnant - they seem to have a different decision making algorithm.

I do read Gawker once in a while - only because its linked with my favorite site - Jalopnik. I don't need/use websites to affirm my positions. If you are so "up" on me you should know - I don't want HRC in office - voted DEM once in 30 years and would prefer a GOP candidate to win. Sorry of I am old enough at this point to not buy anything anybody says - including GOP promises of "lower taxes" and MR's low level foreign policy statements. AFA me being conservative - I would say I have conservative fiscal ideas - not dreamy political fiscal concepts - there is nothing worse than fooling yourself. I would say my social views are "conservative" too - in that people should do whatever they want as long as it doesn't bother anyone - and religion should be out of all politics.

You must be a high income person - good for you - as that is who a flat tax will benefit in terms of paying less - the middle class will pay more in a flat tax system. Remove all deductions, loop holes, credits - all for it - the tax code is the biggest source of corruption we have.

Easy slick...I have listened to Rubio and I mentioned why I find him questionable and backed up my position by comparing to what i consider an exemplary politician. You have not responded to either of these posts directly - but simply threw some labels and names around. Your age is showing.

For whatever reason labels are important to you guys. So be it. Not sure how old you are but do yourself a favor and do a little research on James Baker - a true "conservative". Look at the breadth of his accomplishments in tax reform, middle eastern and russian diplomacy. Look at the depth and width of how he did things and compare that to the puny thoughts of these GOP candidates - Rubio, Cruz, Huckabee.....these are small small men. We need better.

Rubio: Was for immigration - now is against it. Against immigrants getting preferential treatment - unless its his parents Doesn't want to level with Cuba because it is communist and will go back on BO naturalizing relations - OK do the same with China (Nixon) and Russia (Reagan/Bush) if you are so principled. Plus - just plain stupid. Will shut down communication with ME countries - sounds like a winning strategy - of course no clear strategy other than 'Merica! OK - blow the liberal whistle on me - this guy has nothing - all of the above show his inch deep comprehension of complicated issues - and the typical GOTP simplistic answers. Where have the James Bakers of the GOP gone?

Bill Clinton was adopted and dirt poor Prolly not - maybe because he has sliced his platform down so narrowly he will never win a general election....

I don't usually run for president but when I do..... I pander to the most jingoistic narrow minded easily lead demographic in the hopes of leading the most diverse nation in human history

Joining war on marriage, war on Christmas, war on religion....

I did not grow up in a “religious” household – but I have read the New Testament. I am not sure anyone seems qualified to speak for Jesus to be honest with you. Look at the last two Popes – completely different approach and view of what the Catholic Church should be. I cannot fathom – though – how the teachings of Jesus have been leveraged/construed for the advantages of the few – or utilized for the advancement of organized religions. To me – there seems to be a complete disconnect. If Jesus – the son of God – was on this earth – I can’t believe that he would discriminate. I think people views on SSM written into the Bible are 2000 years old – or 1500 – are like many things written in both the old and new testament are not “the word of god” but man’s view of things at the time. If you think the bible is the word of god – then you can’t pick and choose – it’s all or nothing. Look around the world today. The Middle East/Indiana/Africa/9/11 most of the worlds troubles seem to be religiously based – or at least highly leveraged by religion. Did you see 60 minutes last night – Ireland divided by Catholics and Protestants – both Christians – ready to kill each other for in the name of religion? I don’t get it. I do think the Indiana legislation is simply a bone thrown to the religious right to saw off same sex marriage. I think if you want to operate in our society which has decided not to discriminate – play by those rules – start adding religion to government and it’s a mess.

Jesus. - no doubt - would have done the same....

I would say that the above has either no effect (kxl) or unmeasureable effect on middle income wages compared to global compettion, global sourcing and technolgical labor replacement.

I dont want Hillary. You just confirmed my thoughts that the GOP really doesn't have any good ideas. I even read the GOP platform today and it had no ideas. I think you are fooling yourself if you think POTUS has a big effect on middle class income. The effects of global competition, internet, computers, worker effeciency gains all far outweigh what either the GOP or BO could do to change these dynamics. Todays economic structure does not b ode well for the middle class.

The level of macro and micro economics in this thread is enlightening Since BO is not going to make things better what are the GOP' plans to restore middle class income growth? Seriously. Lets forecast that Jeb or Scott wins and the GOP wins 60 seats in the Senate.....what could we expect that would help middle class income growth and deeper employment?

What exactly are these laws supposed to do?

Meanwhile the GOP worries about legislation to help pizza huts and cake shops....

What did i say that differs from the law? Again - you are so weak - or I guess adept - at not really debating. You only reply on your terms and in vague ways. If you are adept at this law - What in particular is this law supposed to do and why? If it is not different that the federal RFRA - why did they pass it? Of course its different - waiting for your non answer.

Because I dont agreevwith you? Tell me DC. What people will this law help and how?

I did.....A$$....Again - Tell me where someone has been harmed that this law helps....sorry - the "market" has read right through this law and is reacting accordingly.... Keep playing that winning hand though! It got you 8 years of BHO and by doubling down on it you might just get 8 years of HRC So it just might target gays for discrimination though huh?

What problem? When where is it burdensome for expression of religon? What this law does is unburdens the ability to be discriminatory. Keep at it GOTP.....please the few and alienate the many....is this really worth it? The Market Speaks.....Arkansas backs off

Talk about the market deciding out of ignorance - I would say the supporters of this kind of legislation are the start of ignorant mob rule - Where is the problem that this legislation is addressing? And as usual - when the market starts deciding and the TP/Libertarians don't like that outcome - all of a sudden is something different than market rule. This law is nothing but a pander to the religious right and it is structurally different than others - It is crap and as long as the GOP focuses on this crap - they don't have a shot at the WH. Hey - keep it on the books - let it ride out - and see how the market decides. I am of the thought that we should just give the keys to the whole GOP/TP platform - let them write, pass and enact ALL the things they want and see what kind of country we have. Get it out of our system.

I don't agree with Sandy Beach too much - but I agree with him this morning. This is just another example of the GOP/Con latching on to a no win issue. This issue does nothing to get them closer to the white house - all it does in alienate MOST of the voters in the USA. This may delight the base but independent voters, women, etc that make the difference in the general election - people like me - this is simply ugliness. How do these laws make any difference in anyone's lives? These also highlight the hypocrisy of the TP/Libertarians: You say - let entities act as they wish and let the market decide. Well Indiana and now Arkansas are acting as they wish - and the MARKET is deciding that maybe they don;t want to deal in this environment by walking, Market forces at work.

And here is the text of Indiana's RFRA: Indiana's RFRA makes it explicit that the law applies to persons engaged in business as well as citizens in private lawsuits, but until quite recently it had always been understood that federal RFRA covered businesses and private lawsuits. (See this post by law professor Josh Blackman for more on these matters.) Late last night just outside the Senate chamber, I asked Senator Chuck Schumer of New York (who sponsored federal RFRA in 1993) to comment on the story. "Not right now," he replied. Schumer still hasn't found time to respond to this question on Twitter: So why are so many people saying that Indiana's law is an unprecedented attack on gay people? Bad journalism is to blame here. See this CNN headline that says the law "allows biz to reject gay customers," or this New York Times story that makes the same claim while ignoring the fact that many other states and the federal government have the same law on the books. Indiana's RFRA does not grant a license to discriminate. First of all, the state of Indiana, like 28 other states, has never prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation at public accommodations. Even without such laws in most states, discrimination doesn't commonly occur because the United States is a nation that is tolerant of gay people and intolerant of bigots. Mean-spirited actions by a business owner anywhere in the country would almost certainly be met with a major backlash. Much more (for those who can process it) at the link: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/indianas-religious-freedom-restoration-act-explained_900641.html?page=2 I would suggest you expand your bookmarks list for a better understanding of the law and how it is unique in many ways.

Don t understand your numbers. How was was the govt fully funded last year and where did 15 come from?