Jump to content

49er Fan

Community Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    366

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by 49er Fan

    What The Republican Party Needs To Do

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    What absolutley needs to happen is for somone with a lot of money to start buying the major media outlets. Conservatives will be forever demonized until there is some sort of balance in the MSM. What happened in this election cycle was absolutely disgraceful.

     

    Fox News is consistently the #1 cable news network in the country (owned by Rupert Murdoch).

     

    The Wall Street Journal is the #1 home-delivered newspaper in the country (also owned by Rupert Murdoch).

     

    What more do you want?

    What The Republican Party Needs To Do

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted · Edited by 49er Fan

    Explain to me the rationale behind Roe, what its implications are, and what overturning it means. And THEN explain why overturning it would be "extreme".

     

    I can admit that my pro-choice views on abortion are extreme - probably because I don't presume to know what direction every woman who has an unwanted pregnancy should take.

     

    NY Times Editorial, Oct. 15, 2012:

     

    If Roe v. Wade Goes

     

    It is no secret that Mitt Romney and his running-mate, Representative Paul Ryan, are opponents of abortion rights. When Mr. Ryan was asked at last week’s debate whether voters who support abortion rights should be worried if the Romney-Ryan ticket were elected, he essentially said yes.

    They would depart slightly from the extremist Republican Party platform by allowing narrow exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the woman. Beyond that, they would move to take away a fundamental right that American women have had for nearly 40 years.

     

    Mr. Romney has called for overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make her own childbearing decisions and to legalized abortion nationwide. He has said that the issue should be thrown back to state legislatures. The actual impact of that radical rights rollback is worth considering.

     

    It would not take much to overturn the Roe decision. With four of the nine members of the Supreme Court over 70 years old, the next occupant of the White House could have the opportunity to appoint one or more new justices. If say, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the oldest member, retired and Mr. Romney named a replacement hostile to abortion rights, the basic right to abortion might well not survive.

     

    The result would turn back the clock to the days before Roe v. Wade when abortion was legal only in some states, but not in others. There is every indication that about half the states would make abortion illegal within a year of Roe being struck down, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The Center for Reproductive Rights, which challenges abortion restrictions around the country, puts the number at 30 states. For one thing, abortion bans already on the books in some states would suddenly kick in. And some Republican-controlled state legislatures would outlaw abortion immediately.

     

    Even with Roe and subsequent decisions upholding abortion rights, more than half the states have enacted barriers like mandatory waiting periods, “counseling” sessions lacking a real medical justification; parental consent or notification laws; and onerous clinic “safety” rules intended to drive clinics out of business.

     

    Mr. Romney is a vocal supporter of this continuing drive in the states and in Congress to limit the constitutional right, even without overturning Roe. To a large degree, the anti-abortion forces have succeeded. In 1982, there were about 2,900 providers nationwide; as of 2008, there were less than 1,800. In 97 percent of the counties that are outside of metropolitan areas, there are no abortion providers at all.

     

    We do not need to guess about the brutal consequences of overturning Roe. We know from our own country’s pre-Roe history and from the experience around the world. Women desperate to end a pregnancy would find a way to do so. Well-to-do women living in places where abortion is illegal would travel to other states where it is legal to obtain the procedure. Women lacking the resources would either be forced by the government and politicians to go through with an unwanted or risky pregnancy, attempt to self-abort or turn to an illegal — and potentially unsafe — provider for help. Women’s health, privacy and equality would suffer. Some women would die.

     

    Mr. Romney knows this, or at least he used to. Running for the United States Senate in Massachusetts in 1994 against Edward Kennedy, Mr. Romney spoke of a young woman, a close relative, who died years before as result of complications from an illegal abortion to underscore his now-extinct support for Roe v. Wade. In a report in Salon last year, Justin Elliott, a reporter for ProPublica, found that when the young woman passed away, her parents requested that donations be made in her honor to Planned Parenthood. That’s the same invaluable family-planning group that Mr. Romney has pledged to defund once in the White House.

    What The Republican Party Needs To Do

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted · Edited by 49er Fan

    Overturning Roe vs. Wade? That's absolutely - * F*CKING * - extremist as far as I am concerned. There are FOUR Supreme Court Justices in their 70s. The fact that Romney is pro-life at any level or even believes a whiff of this stuff makes him utterly un-electable to me. And to most women. And to most Dems. Had Romney won and plausibly won re-election in 2016 he could have swung the Court from 4-4-1 (split plus swing-voter Kennedy) to 7-2 (Rep. majority) within 8 years or less. You had better believe that Dems. are aware of this.

     

    Show me a pro-choice Rep. candidate and I'll show you someone that might actually swing Dem. votes.

     

    With current Rep. stances on everything - gay marriage, religion in government, prayer in schools, gun control, capital punishment, climate change, creationism vs. evolution, immigration, legalization of marijuana, genetic engineering, censorship - these stances are all extremist in their own right(s) as Dems. see them. And it had better change - or the Rep. party is dead.

    What The Republican Party Needs To Do

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted · Edited by 49er Fan

    Plus, In trying to appeal to elements of the base Romney got himself in trouble, particularly with Hispanics, but also with women. In VA they ran a very dishonest (probably THE most dishonest campaign I've ever seen) painting him as a pro-life extremist. That hurt him with simple-minded women who vote with their vaginas, and he never effectively countered it. He needed to address it, flip it, and say "he's trying to distract you...". Instead we got rehashed talking points.

     

    He's not?

     

    Straight from Romney's website (http://www.mittromne...m/issues/values)

     

     

    Mitt Romney is pro-life. He believes it speaks well of the country that almost all Americans recognize that abortion is a problem. And in the quiet of conscience, people of both political parties know that more than a million abortions a year cannot be squared with the good heart of America.

    Mitt believes that life begins at conception and wishes that the laws of our nation reflected that view. But while the nation remains so divided, he believes that the right next step is for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade – a case of blatant judicial activism that took a decision that should be left to the people and placed it in the hands of unelected judges. With Roe overturned, states will be empowered through the democratic process to determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate.

    Mitt supports the Hyde Amendment, which broadly bars the use of federal funds for abortions. As president, he will end federal funding for abortion advocates like Planned Parenthood. He will protect the right of health care workers to follow their conscience in their work. And he will nominate judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the law.

    Because the good heart of America knows no boundaries, a commitment to protecting life should not stop at the water’s edge. Taking innocent life is always wrong and always tragic, wherever it happens. The compassionate instincts of this country should not be silent in the face of injustices like China’s One-Child policy. No one will ever hear a President Romney or his vice president tell the Chinese government that "I fully understand" and won’t “second guess” compulsory sterilization and forced abortion.

    Americans have a moral duty to uphold the sanctity of life and protect the weakest, most vulnerable and most innocent among us. As president, Mitt will ensure that American laws reflect America’s values of preserving life at home and abroad.

    Speculation: Tim Tebow could be traded, Bills mentioned

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    With Tebow at QB, Denver consistently won the TOP, turnover battle, and rushing yards. It is nearly impossible to lose when you lead these categories. Control. The. Ball.

     

    Yet even with those glowing indicators Denver only won one game with Tebow starting by more than 7 points (@ OAK 38-24), and easily could and/or should have lost several others (@ MIA 18-15, @ KC 17-10, vs. NYJ 17-13, @SD 17-13, @ MIN 35-32, vs. CHI 13-10).

     

    Those scores clearly show that Denver's defense kept them in games and was the major factor they won any games at all.

     

    Noteworthy: Completely blown out vs. losses vs. DET (45-10), NWE (41-23), BUF (40-14).

     

    Also: Lost to KC 7-3 in Week 17 (3rd straight loss) and backed into the playoffs by winning one of the most pathetic division races in recent memory (three teams 8-8, one team 7-9).

     

    Tebow was picked off 5 times in his last 4 games and lost fumbles in each of his last 5 games.

     

    Denver won in spite of Tebow starting, not because of him.

    What If - 1990 Bills play 2012 Patriots. Who wins?

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    What an odd fascination you have with Deion Branch. He was a nobody in Seattle. You're definitely in the minority in thinking he had a better career than Troy Brown. Neither of them is close to a HoF'er though was the point. You also didn't mention how their defense got destroyed by Steve Smith in the Super Bowl.

     

    Steve Smith caught 4 balls for 80 yards and a TD in that Super Bowl. You are thinking of the Muhsin Muhammed 85-yard TD.

     

    Branch had a better career than Troy Brown simply on the merits of his Super Bowl MVP alone.

     

    Brown had three ultra-productive years with Brady from 2000-2002 when he was the focal point of the offense, much like Welker has been. But Brown was pretty meaningless in the other 11 years that he played before and after - averaging just 25 catches per season. Hell, Branch caught 51 balls and 5 touchdowns last year at New England in the twilight of his career.

    What If - 1990 Bills play 2012 Patriots. Who wins?

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted · Edited by 49er Fan

    Best receiver he ever threw to was Troy Brown.

     

    Deion Branch.

     

    And these were not dominant defenses either.

     

    Not dominant like 2000 Baltimore but they were among the best in the league -

     

    In Super Bowls the Pats' defenses have played quite well; Brady I would not say elite except maybe once vs. Panthers.

     

    N.E. picked off Kurt Warner twice in 2001 (one for TD) and held Marshall Faulk to 78 yards. Vinatieri kicks the 48-yard game-winner. The Rams had one of the best offenses to ever play.

     

    2003 - again Vinatieri was the hero although Brady did play well (got picked off once). Turnovers even. Branch caught 10 balls for 143 and a TD.

     

    2004 - Branch is MVP with unstoppable performance (like Jerry Rice before him); McNabb is picked off 3 times and PHI loses a fumble (as does Brady).

     

    2008 & 2011 - N.E. defenses both not as good as in past years, Brady is humiliated against a good pass rush in 2008 (5 sacks, 1 fumble) and outplayed by Eli Manning in 2012.

     

    Not sure what you mean by 3 Brady Super Bowls being more impressive than Montana's 4. Brady has played in 5 and has less wins. The NFC playoffs were very tough to get through in the 80s when you consider NY Giants, Washington, Chicago, and then Dallas' resurgence in the early 90s. SF had two seasons of 14-2 (1990, 1992) and 13-2 (1987) and didn't make it.

    Let's face it, it will be 13 years of missing the playoffs

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    Tough loss vs. Titans and the next two games are difficult but the Bills' schedule isn't bad at all from Weeks 11-17. After New England in Week 10 the most experienced QB they will face will be Mark Sanchez in Week 17 (and ... could be Tebow instead). @ Indy Nov. 25 looks to be the toughest game to win in that stretch but you have to like those 3 home games in a row of Jacksonville, St. Louis and Seattle.

×
×
  • Create New...