Foreign governments with U.S. writers on their payroll?

This is pretty damn scummy:

“A range of mainstream American publications printed paid propaganda for the government of Malaysia, much of it focused on the campaign against a pro-democracy figure there.

The payments to conservative American opinion writers — whose work appeared in outlets from the Huffington Post and San Francisco Examiner to the Washington Times to National Review and RedState — emerged in a filing this week to the Department of Justice. The filing under the Foreign Agent Registration Act outlines a campaign spanning May 2008 to April 2011 and led by Joshua Trevino, a conservative pundit, who received $389,724.70 under the contract and paid smaller sums to a series of conservative writers….

Trevino’s subcontractors included conservative writer Ben Domenech, who made $36,000 from the arrangement, and Rachel Ehrenfeld, the director of the American Center for Democracy, who made $30,000. Seth Mandel, an editor at Commentary, made $5,500. Brad Jackson, writing at the time for RedState, made $24,700. Overall, 10 writers were part of the arrangement.”

You take secret, undisclosed money from a foreign government to write hit pieces in U.S. media against a man, in this case Anwar Ibrahim, who is struggling to bring democracy to his country and was beaten and imprisoned for years for daring to challenge the dictatorial government? (Russia has apparently run similar pay-to-say operations.)

Much of Trevino’s work under the Malaysian contract has been removed by the outlets that published it. But you can get a taste of its amoral quality from this piece that was published as a rebuttal to a Trevino column.

And here’s a Rachel Ehrenfeld piece, condemning Ibrahim for “careless sexual behavior” among other things.

We already know of course that “you can’t believe everything that’s on the Internet.” But paid agents of foreign governments masquerading as American journalists takes things to a dangerous level and says a lot about the character of those involved.

UPDATE: Among those named as receiving money from Malaysia in Trevino’s belated filing as a foreign agent is Christopher Badeaux. Here’s a small sampling of his Malaysia-related work at RedState.com:

“Najib Razak, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, has been on a more or less singular crusade to convince the Muslim world — and the West — that there is a path for moderate Islam in the world, that Islam does not equal terror, and that the taking of a life is contrary to Islam and civilization. His speech at Oxford was of a piece with that….

The salient point here is not whether we agree with the prime minister’s theological assertions, but rather we can appreciate the extraordinary effort he is making here, and the importance for the United States of his efforts.”

And:

In Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim, the leader of Malaysia’s opposition, has apparently been caught in adultery, with video evidence that Dartmouth scientists say nearly certainly implicates him. The major dailies are calling on him to resign. For three years, after failing to topple the governing party in the 2008 elections, he has crisscrossed the planet telling anyone and everyone who would listen how corrupt and evil the governing party is. And yet despite all of this — despite his stated certainty that his opposition coalition of socialists, Islamists, and yuppie liberals is the only chance his country has to avoid certain doom at the hands of the centrist coalition that has been re-elected time and again in Malaysia, he has refused to resign.”

– Jay Bookman

1,428 comments Add your comment

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:36 pm

In case someone on here missed this earlier:

“You don’t need an AR-15. It’s harder to aim; it’s harder to use.
And in fact, you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun. Buy a shotgun.” — Joe Biden

Funny, especially the gal with the semi-auto…Our Veep is brilliant.

Women Take Biden’s Shotgun Advice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=Ia4csoQLvGY&NR=1

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:37 pm

……….. and this one on the DEBT LIMIT:

You owe it to yourself to watch the SUPRISE ENDING !

http://www.youtube.com/embed/Li0no7O9zmE

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
10:38 pm

Iraqi children are still getting blown up and Iraqis are giving up on their government.

But cons ignore that fact.

There is an opportunity for you pro lifers in gay marriage because they will adopt unwanted born children but you don’t care about born children.

There is no pro life arguments for born children except on the left.

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
10:38 pm

Moonbat,

Hysterics are the domain of the cons especially given their inability to do math or science. What else do they have left.

Josef

March 2nd, 2013
10:39 pm

Getalife

Okay, the Readers Digest version. We are opposed to abortion as a means of birth control. When we were presented with the case of a woman who shared our belief but was in no position to raise her child, we put our money, time, effort and energy where our mouths were. It was a blessing. A similar thing when our boys were left orphaned.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
10:40 pm

“George Tiller was charged with not murder but misdemeanors, as I recall. I don’t know who else has been charged off the top of my head – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=7#comment-1249433

Then what you are saying is that when the law IS broken there can be a case to be proven. So the law works as it should.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:41 pm

bman.

It’s not tough at all. Do as I do and just laugh at the idiocy on display. For example…

“Conservative” posts: “There is not a progressive on this blog that wants to even consider the term personal responsibility.”

When the “progressives” here all support “choice” which actually requires the pregnant woman to take responsibility for herself and decide whether or not she’s going to give birth and raise the child, give birth and put the child up for adoption, or abort the pregnancy. If that’s not advocating personal responsibility, then I’m not Brosephus. However, once the word “abort” enters the picture, that one word blocks out any and everything else in the conservative mind causing them to actually advocate the opposite of personal choice because THEY want to dictate what the woman does.

I’m in the same boat as you, which is why I simply laugh my ass off at the idea of the “party of personal responsibility” openly and actively advocates trampling on someone’s personal responsibility while they’re claiming that people need to be more responsible. They’re wanting to create moochers for the sake of berating them.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:41 pm

When the V.P. said he had told his wife if she thought something was amiss just to take a double barreled shotgun and go out on the deck and shoot a couple of “blasts” ………… I assume he knows his wife has 24/7 Secret Service protection.

But then maybe he doesn’t know.

Towncrier

March 2nd, 2013
10:41 pm

“How many children did you not murder?”

You mean of the unborn kind? Since I am not a female or a medical doctor, none. I never have had the opportunity to murder an unborn child, so there are none that I elected not to murder.

appleseed

March 2nd, 2013
10:42 pm

If its the choice of the individual,then its the responsibility of the individual,All kinds of BC exist,free or cheap why does it need end in death?

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:42 pm

……………. then you’re not Brosephus.

td

March 2nd, 2013
10:43 pm

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
10:38 pm

Moonbat,

Hysterics are the domain of the cons especially given their inability to do math or science.

Now I laughed so hard I almost peed in my pants over that ridiculous statement when it is the left that does not understand the math of borrowing 40 cents on every dollar we spend is not good for the nation and does not understand the basic biological knowledge as to when life actually begins.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:43 pm

Towncrier:

Exactly. Thank you.

St Simons - he-ne-ha

March 2nd, 2013
10:43 pm

if you are against the right to terminate a pregnancy AND against
free birth control, a) you don’t have 3 daughters, and b) you should
be entitled to 2 yrs of therapy for your sexual repression issues.
(idk the psych term, mrsstsimons is at a snob party right now)

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 2nd, 2013
10:44 pm

Hysterics are the domain of the cons especially given their inability to do math or science. What else do they have left.

Birtherism.
Skewerism.
Skeeterism.
Benghazi-ism.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:44 pm

“THEY want to dictate what the woman does.”

You mean like when “they” (the government) sent thousands of men to their deaths against their will ?

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
10:45 pm

geez,

TaxPayer and getalife need to get a room and have a waaaaa waaaaaa party.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOgv-UuTgac

G Mare

March 2nd, 2013
10:45 pm

td@10:27, re ‘personal responsibility,’ it seems to me that most progressives/liberals believe in responsibility beyond what is merely personal & selfish.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 2nd, 2013
10:46 pm

…when it is the left that does not understand the math…

Election night Karl Rove says, “What?”

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:46 pm

……………. then you’re not Brosephus.

Ok wise one, explain it then. How is YOU enforcing YOUR beliefs and ideas onto a stranger with whom you’ll never meet equate to her taking personal responsibility for herself and her actions?

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:48 pm

You mean like when “they” (the government) sent thousands of men to their deaths against their will ?

Nope. Not hardly. Your attempt to deflect is duly noted though.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
10:48 pm

“You mean like when “they” (the government) sent thousands of men to their deaths against their will ? – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#sthash.W4tNVnQy.dpuf

They had a choice. They could have left the country to avoid being drafted.

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
10:49 pm

Td,

I am sure you were laughing when bush and the cons cut taxes without cutting any spending and thus had to borrow to keep their scam going. And then again when they started two wars without providing the first additional tax dollar to pay for them. Then there was their prescription drug company benefit funded with more borrowed money…

td

March 2nd, 2013
10:49 pm

Brosephus™ – If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:41 pm

What is so hard to understand that taking an innocent human life is not taking responsibility for ones actions but rather is reliving oneself of the responsibility of taking care of what one created. No spin can get you out of that fact. You can call it choice or use legal terms about life but the bottom line is it is a human being and one choice to get rid of their responsibility and kill a human being when one chooses abortion.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:49 pm

You mean like when “they” (the government) sent thousands of men to their deaths against their will ?

Nope. I mean like when “they” (private citizens) stick their noses into the personal and private affairs of private citizens where they have absolutely NO business getting into them in the first place.

Towncrier

March 2nd, 2013
10:49 pm

“Then what you are saying is that when the law IS broken there can be a case to be proven. So the law works as it should.”

I don’t know that I would agree with your understanding of what I said. Tiller was acquitted of the charges. I don’t know how many doctors have NOT been charged with terminating the live of a “viable” fetus. I don’t think any in Canada, since there are now no restrictions on abortions there. If you look at international law, you will find that we allow abortions later than most countries (except Canada, China and Vietnam). Given that, I am not sure how you can be so confident that Roe is necessarily right.

Are you an agnostic or atheist?

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
10:49 pm

“inability to do math or science”

Apparently, if you have children, you did not have an ultrasound early in the pregnancy.

It doesn’t take math or science…

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:51 pm

Headline: “Cleared of Rape, Former Montana QB Wants Back in the Game”

“Former University of Montana star quarterback Jordan Johnson hopes to return to the sport he loves after being acquitted of sexual assault charges, the football player’s family said today.”

“Despite the prosecutions’ attempts to prove Johnson, 20, of Eugue, Ore., had raped a classmate and former acquaintance last February after she invited him over to watch a movie, evidence showed Johnson had consensual sex with the 21-year-old alleged victim.”

But the defense countered her claim with text messages the alleged victim sent to a friend, writing “I don’t think he did anything wrong.”

http://gma.yahoo.com/cleared-rape-former-montana-qb-wants-back-game-190515844–abc-news-topstories.html

Now let’s see if she is charged with perjury, filing a false police report, etc.

I doubt it.

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
10:51 pm

Moonbat tries to deflect. She is getting hysterical.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:52 pm

What is so hard to understand that taking an innocent human life is not taking responsibility for ones actions but rather is reliving oneself of the responsibility of taking care of what one created.

What is so hard about minding YOUR own business and staying out of the business of others? You can couch your stuff in religion or whatever you choose, but you can’t fix your mouth to claim that people need to be responsible for their actions, as you have claimed numerous times about welfare when you’re trying to push your beliefs onto people where you have absolutely NO business getting into their personal affairs.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:53 pm

They had a choice. They could have left the country to avoid being drafted.

And so could the women have left to have their babies killed in another country.

Towncrier

March 2nd, 2013
10:53 pm

“You mean like when “they” (the government) sent thousands of men to their deaths against their will?”

Or perhaps when “they” wanted to disarm the people “they” had displaced off from their own lands:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
10:53 pm

Josef,

That is what I am talking about.

Thank you.

No wonder you saw the light.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
10:54 pm

“What is so hard to understand that taking an innocent human life is not taking responsibility for ones actions but rather is reliving oneself of the responsibility of taking care of what one created – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249459

And it’s not your body, and not your pregnancy, and it’s none of your business. It’s a pity we aren’t like sea horses, where the male carries the young to term. That would give a whole new meaning to “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament”

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
10:54 pm

Yeah TP, I’m deflecting and flying off the handle here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ESHjYat9rk

lol

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
10:55 pm

“Are you an agnostic or atheist?”

Why do you ask?

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:55 pm

Brosephus:

You’re in law enforcement. You know better.

Every law ever passed is based on the WILL of one segment of society (through their elected representatives) to enforce those beliefs/will on others. That’s just the way it is.

The only arguement here is not WILL but whose side is morally right.

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
10:56 pm

Great thing you did, josef.

And for anyone else that has adopted as well.

God bless you.

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
10:56 pm

Moonbat does not understand the limitations of the ultrasound. It does not detect conception or the day after or the day after that, etc. Cons want to eliminate condoms and birth control pills and the morning after pill and the IUD and spermicide,etc.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
10:57 pm

Excuse me:

“argument”

td

March 2nd, 2013
10:59 pm

Brosephus™ – If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
10:52 pm

What is so hard to understand that taking an innocent human life is not taking responsibility for ones actions but rather is reliving oneself of the responsibility of taking care of what one created.

What is so hard about minding YOUR own business and staying out of the business of others? You can couch your stuff in religion or whatever you choose, but you can’t fix your mouth to claim that people need to be responsible for their actions, as you have claimed numerous times about welfare when you’re trying to push your beliefs onto people where you have absolutely NO business getting into their personal affairs.

So if my beliefs say that a my child is not behaving in a manner that I feel is appropriate then the government should not interfere when I punish them in a manner that I think is right?

The bible says that wives must “submit” to their husbands. So if my wife has a headache and says no and I force her anyway then the government should stay our of my affairs?

If you want to use the progressive thought about viability outside the womb then why is it a crime to kill your child before it is 2 or 3 years old because that child can not live on its own without a parent?

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
11:00 pm

TaxPayer,

You ignore my original post in the matter and continues to deflect.

“What others want to do with their life is their problem and they will have to deal with that themselves.

As long as it’s not funded by taxpayer money, it’s on them.”

Period.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:00 pm

td:

Careful there …………. you might make them think.

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
11:01 pm

And it took quite a bit of science to provide that ultrasound, moonbat. More than you apparently are aware of. In fact, science has given us the ability to saves millions of lives that would have otherwise died due to natural causes.

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
11:02 pm

ewww an extra “s” in there somewhere..

big ammo…

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:02 pm

“If you want to use the progressive thought about viability outside the womb then why is it a crime to kill your child before it is 2 or 3 years old because that child can not live on its own without a parent? – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249473

Poor argument. It does not require the birth parents for a delivered child to survive. It only requires that someone take the place of the Mother and raise the child.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:02 pm

You’re in law enforcement. You know better.

Every law ever passed is based on the WILL of one segment of society (through their elected representatives) to enforce those beliefs/will on others. That’s just the way it is.

And you took an oath to defend the Constitution. You know better. Abortion has been ruled Constitutional. The right to privacy has been upheld as Constitution in certain aspects. Why you and others like you want to trample over a woman’s right to privacy just because of YOUR morals is beyond me.

I bet if there were a group trying to instill “moral” laws based on Islam, you’d be having a Grand Mal seizure trying to stop it. That’s why this is a secular country, where people have the freedom to practice their beliefs in whatever they choose, as long as it is legal. That’s how it is in America. If you want religious rule, then go to a theocratic country. America ain’t one and will not be one.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:03 pm

“Analysis: For the first time in half a century, there is the real possibility that a person who did not fight in the Cuban Revolution will lead the country.”

How about Joseph Kennedy ? Or Dennis Rodman ?

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
11:03 pm

Moonbat,

It also takes taxpayer money to deny people the opportunity to get an abortion. You seem to be all for that though.

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:03 pm

“Cons want to eliminate condoms and birth control pills and the morning after pill and the IUD and spermicide.”

Counterproductive to their argument . Inconsistent and weird.

td

March 2nd, 2013
11:04 pm

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
10:54 pm

Why is it considered child abuse if the mother is a drunk or drug addict and delivers a child addicted or the child has fetal alcohol syndrome?

breckenridge

March 2nd, 2013
11:04 pm

“Every law ever passed is based on the WILL of one segment of society (through their elected representatives) to enforce those beliefs/will on others. That’s just the way it is.”

Fair enough. But it is also the Constitutionally defined job of the Federal courts to do away with such laws if they step on individual liberties.. American law is designed to protect the rights of the majority, its purpose is to protect the rights declared in the Constitution of every American.

Their inability to control the courts like they can control some brain-dead worthless loser members of Congress (Inahofe, Bachmann) has always been the bane of the religious right.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:04 pm

Brosephus:

Have you been drinking tonight?

You know better.

Respecting the law/Constitution and trying to change it in legal ways are two different things.

I can respect the 55 mph speed limit and yet work legally to change it to 70 mph.

Geez !

breckenridge

March 2nd, 2013
11:05 pm

Should have read “not designed to protect the rights of the majority.”

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:06 pm

So if my beliefs say that a my child is not behaving in a manner that I feel is appropriate then the government should not interfere when I punish them in a manner that I think is right?

As long as it’s legal, then do what you feel is right.

The bible says that wives must “submit” to their husbands. So if my wife has a headache and says no and I force her anyway then the government should stay our of my affairs?

As long as what you do is legal, that’s between you and your wife.

If you want to use the progressive thought about viability outside the womb then why is it a crime to kill your child before it is 2 or 3 years old because that child can not live on its own without a parent?

Why should I use thought that I don’t think? That’s where you go off the rails. Study the laws. Abortion is legal up to a point. That’s why we have laws. Scout’s worried about you making somebody think, but you should try to think first.

TaxPayer

March 2nd, 2013
11:06 pm

Oh well. y’all have a pleasant evening.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:06 pm

“Why is it considered child abuse if the mother is a drunk or drug addict and delivers a child addicted or the child has fetal alcohol syndrome? – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249483

I have no idea what the point of your question is. What does that have to do with a discussion on abortion?

Josef

March 2nd, 2013
11:07 pm

Getalife

Thanks for the vote, but it boils down to practicing what you preach, and that’s why I said that neither “side” wants to hear what we have to say. For us even to try to bring this into the “dialog” carries with it a note of piety which we detest. That’s why we tend to stay out of it. We didn’t do it out of any piety, but simply because we were presented with a situation where we could do something we were obliged to do. That obligation carried with it the blessing. I wish I could say it was the blessing that was the motivation, but iit wasn’t. It was the obligation. The blessing was the payback for living up to the obligation.

bman.

March 2nd, 2013
11:07 pm

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:07 pm

breckenridge:

I say again the law and morality are two different things. We all know that from Nazi Germany.

The law may be good/moral or it may be bad/immoral and courts (as they did slavery for years) may uphold it.

Upholding it does NOT make it necessarily moral. It just makes it the law.

td

March 2nd, 2013
11:07 pm

Brosephus™ – If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:02 pm
“And you took an oath to defend the Constitution. You know better. Abortion has been ruled Constitutional. The right to privacy has been upheld as Constitution in certain aspects. Why you and others like you want to trample over a woman’s right to privacy just because of YOUR morals is beyond me.”

And slavery was part of the Constitution and declared legal by the SCOTUS in the Dread Scott decision. Did that make it morally right?

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
11:07 pm

“And it took quite a bit of science to provide that ultrasound, moonbat.”

TP,

Yes, I am aware there are one or two technical aspects of ultrasound. lol

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:07 pm

Human beings will have sex.

It is human nature.

You can’t change that.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:08 pm

“American law is designed to protect the rights of the majority – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249494

That is not correct. American law is designed to protect the rights of us ALL, not just the majority

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:08 pm

Well said Bro.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:09 pm

For example, some of you libs. felt that when the SCOTUS upheld the 2nd Amendment that that was an “immoral” ruling.

That’s your right to believe that ……………. and we have our beliefs on the morality of other rulings.

And all sides will work to have their way.

That’s the way it has always been.

Now ……….. dismount from your “high horse”.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:09 pm

Have you been drinking tonight?

Ask yourself that. You’re not trying to change the law. YOu’re butting your nose into the affairs of others. I don’t understand why y’all can’t get it through your head that it’s legal. It’s been taken to the Supreme Court.

You can try to increase the speed limit. If there are people who don’t want to do so, then you can’t “moral” them into trying get what YOU want. All these little petty attempts at insults don’t change the fact that you’re being nosy as hell in the private affairs of people where you have no right to interfering with their affairs.

Josef

March 2nd, 2013
11:10 pm

Moonbat

Believe me, H- has. Far more than we deserve.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:10 pm

And slavery was part of the Constitution and declared legal by the SCOTUS in the Dread Scott decision. Did that make it morally right?

At that time, I think Christians used the Holy Bible to justify slavery. Doesn’t that make it morally right at that time?

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:11 pm

td @ 11:07

Thank you !!!!!

td

March 2nd, 2013
11:11 pm

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:06 pm

“Why is it considered child abuse if the mother is a drunk or drug addict and delivers a child addicted or the child has fetal alcohol syndrome? – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249483”

I have no idea what the point of your question is. What does that have to do with a discussion on abortion?
- See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249498

The point is that you made the claim (paraphrase) that it is the woman’s body and the government should stay out of the decisions she makes with regards to said body.

Not a true sentiment.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:12 pm

For example, some of you libs. felt that when the SCOTUS upheld the 2nd Amendment that that was an “immoral” ruling.

Why do y’all insist on this generic “you libs” thing all the time when you want to paint your thoughts onto others? Why don’t you be a man and ASK the person their beliefs? Are you too intimidated and not man enough to ask a simple question?

They call me MISTER JamVet.

March 2nd, 2013
11:12 pm

Cons are fools for carrying on with their faux piety on this subject.

Obviously their War on Women Full Scale Legislative Assault on Women’s and Children’s Rights is working wonders for them.

Just ask Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock among others about it.

It’s not just Democrats or liberals or women who outright reject the Republican Party’s goal of a constitutional ban on all abortions; such an amendment doesn’t even find support among Republicans (20 percent), conservatives (25 percent), or tea partiers (28 percent).

And yet it is in the party platform.

The leaders of this party have become too extreme even for their own base. For all the threats and hyperbole and dozens of failed bills in the House and hundreds of bills introduced around the country, this is not what Americans want. It’s not even what Republicans want.

You fanatics are fighting a lost battle…

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:13 pm

“At that time, I think Christians used the Holy Bible to justify slavery. Doesn’t that make it morally right at that time?”

No ………. because they misinterpreted or ignored the clear teachings of the scriptures. Paul actually condemned the slave trade. Look it up.

And ……….. you make our point.

The law is the law ……….. but that does not mean it is moral or that it shouldn’t be changed when immoral.

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:14 pm

They should use that probe to check the prostrate for the pols that passed it.

Just sick.

Towncrier

March 2nd, 2013
11:14 pm

“Nope. I mean like when “they” (private citizens) stick their noses into the personal and private affairs of private citizens where they have absolutely NO business getting into them in the first place.”

What a bunch of malarkey. So, if a father is “privately” molesting his children in his own house and you suspect as much, it is none of your business? Here’s what liberals like yourself don’t really get: what was illegal in the past may be legal now and vice versa. Legality is NOT the measure of whether something is right or wrong – that depends instead upon a external moral standard. Abortion is right or wrong not because of what the SC says, but because of what an objective moral code says. Segregation, in the eyes of the SC, was once “constitutional” but now is not. Who really knows how things will develop in the future? No one in Germany in 1920 ever thought they would be divided as a country after a horrendous war brought on by someone who rose to power in a period of less than 10 years. The Wright brothers never imagined in 1906 that the very vehicle they were proving flight worthy would be used to drop nuclear devices on two cities not four decades later. It is a fool who doesn’t understand from history that very unexpected things can happen in a very short amount of time, who thinks that such-and-such could never happen here to to us.

td

March 2nd, 2013
11:14 pm

Brosephus™ – If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:10 pm

And slavery was part of the Constitution and declared legal by the SCOTUS in the Dread Scott decision. Did that make it morally right?

At that time, I think Christians used the Holy Bible to justify slavery. Doesn’t that make it morally right at that time?

And your point? If it was not for religious institutions then slavery may not have even been an issue.

G Mare

March 2nd, 2013
11:14 pm

bman@10:00, thank you for the commas post! I am a big fan of commas. My daughter gave me a mug that says, “Lets eat Grandma/Let’s eat, Grandma/Punctuation saves lives!”

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:15 pm

Brosephus:

You misquoted me ……… get off your high horse.

I said “some of you libs.”

“you libs.” does not equal “some of you libs.”

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:15 pm

Your party passed the violence against women.

The war is over.

Stop attacking them.

Move on.

moonbat betty

March 2nd, 2013
11:17 pm

After the teacher’s union meeting of ‘76 in Vegas, getalife has a child in every state.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4GZFbCqx18

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:18 pm

Our courts are replete with rulings that were later deemed illegal and/or immoral and thankfully they were changed.

That will continue.

Until a law is changed (i.e., illegal immigration law) it should be respected and enforced ………. correct Brosephus ??

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:18 pm

moonbat,

They said they were on the pill.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:21 pm

“So, if a father is “privately” molesting his children in his own house and you suspect as much, it is none of your business? – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249501

Another poor example. The Father is molesting a CITIZEN of this country and breaking the law, of course it’s “our” business.

Towncrier

March 2nd, 2013
11:21 pm

“Why you and others like you want to trample over a woman’s right to privacy just because of YOUR morals is beyond me.”

Code for a license to kill: “a woman’s right to privacy”. Let’s turn that around: why you and others want to permit the taking of life just because of YOUR morals is beyond me.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:23 pm

No ………. because they misinterpreted or ignored the clear teachings of the scriptures. Paul actually condemned the slave trade. Look it up.

And you’re applying today’s morals to yesterday’s problems. The fact that you can’t see that says more about your ability to think than you’ll ever know.

You misquoted me ……… get off your high horse.

I said “some of you libs.”

“you libs.” does not equal “some of you libs.”

“You libs” is still a part of “some of you libs” is it not? I didn’t misquote you. You simply show that you lack the testicular fortitude to be a man and ask a person what they actually think. You’d rather debate what YOU think for them instead.

————–

Towncrier

So, if a father is “privately” molesting his children in his own house and you suspect as much, it is none of your business?

Isn’t molestation ILLEGAL? Isn’t abortion LEGAL? You’re the one spewing malarkey. You need to learn what’s legal and illegal before you try to make a point. As it stands now, you’re shooting yourself in the foot.

Here’s what liberals like yourself don’t really get: what was illegal in the past may be legal now and vice versa. Legality is NOT the measure of whether something is right or wrong – that depends instead upon a external moral standard.

While not a liberal, if making me one means I’m opposite you, I’ll take that as a badge of honor. What Conservatives like you don’t understand is that this country is not a theocratic country. Legality is what it’s all about. Why should YOUR morals dictate everyone’s lifestyles when we don’t all share the same religious beliefs, religions, or even ideologies?

All that other crap ain’t even worth noting or responding to. That stuff reads like nothing but bandwidth killer.

————–

td: And your point?

You asked a question, and I answered. That’s my point.

breckenridge

March 2nd, 2013
11:23 pm

Earlier this week an Al Qaeda publication blasted Obama over his support for same sex marriage. The full article is on Mother Jones.

Al Qaeda…..Tony Perkins…….whatever.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:23 pm

O.K. It’s suddenly gotten a little quiet on here. I think “SOME” (repeat SOME) libs. painted themselves in a corner tonight and have decided to excuse themselves.

Everyone who stays be nice …………….. :o

TAPS !

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:24 pm

“why you and others want to permit the taking of life just because of YOUR morals is beyond me – See more at: http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2013/03/02/foreign-governments-with-u-s-writers-on-their-payroll/?cp=8#comment-1249521

If you don’t like the fact that God gave women sole control over their pregnancies, take it up with him. I’ve said it before: when you can prove to me that no spontaneous abortions EVER happen, I’ll join you on the barricades to end voluntary abortion.

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:25 pm

Bro won so leave the women alone now.

The gun bills will be your new memo.

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:26 pm

Until a law is changed (i.e., illegal immigration law) it should be respected and enforced ………. correct Brosephus ??

Ummm, just what do you think I do at work, Scout? Geez. Record deportations and you still think laws are not being enforced? The ideology is strong with you. You should learn how to think on your own.

————–

Towncrier: Code for a license to kill: “a woman’s right to privacy”. Let’s turn that around: why you and others want to permit the taking of life just because of YOUR morals is beyond me.

Let’s try this little exercise here. Answer a simple question for me. What is MY personal belief about abortion? Not what you THINK, but what I think? Answer that, and then we can get on to your “code” crap.

Cherokee

March 2nd, 2013
11:26 pm

“No ………. because they misinterpreted or ignored the clear teachings of the scriptures”

So the founders of the Southern Baptist Church misinterpreted Scripture,. but today’s Christians never do?

td

March 2nd, 2013
11:27 pm

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 2nd, 2013
11:23 pm

O.K. It’s suddenly gotten a little quiet on here. I think “SOME” (repeat SOME) libs. painted themselves in a corner tonight and have decided to excuse themselves.

Everyone who stays be nice …………….. :o

TAPS !

Some of these libs can not handle the debate when there is more then a couple conservatives on here blowing holes in their philosophy so they go away.

G Mare

March 2nd, 2013
11:27 pm

And as for you anti-choicers, My body, My choice. If you have a penis, you do not have the proverbial dog in this fight, so please shut up, go away, & take that government mandated vaginal probe with you!

Cherokee

March 2nd, 2013
11:29 pm

Or, td, perhaps, just perhaps, we have lives to lead, away from the AJC blogs….

getalife

March 2nd, 2013
11:30 pm

aq took your position on gay marriage.

Are you aiding the enemy?

Towncrier

March 2nd, 2013
11:30 pm

“Another poor example. The Father is molesting a CITIZEN of this country and breaking the law, of course it’s “our” business.”

The point went altogether over your head. A parent molesting his children is not wrong because it is illegal. Pedophilia has, IN FACT, been legal in human history. It was wrong then, even though it was legal. And it is wrong now and not because it is illegal. Abortion is not right because it is legal. It is permitted because it is legal. Likewise, computer generated child pornography is not right because it is legal. It is wrong because it violates the moral code and order established by God himself. If there is no God, then I am not sure that anything is really “wrong” in an absolute sense.

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:30 pm

“TAPS !”

Declare victory and leave. We are SO used to that!

Brosephus™ - If do right, no can defense

March 2nd, 2013
11:30 pm

Some of these libs can not handle the debate when there is more then a couple conservatives on here blowing holes in their philosophy so they go away.

Yep, that’s why Scout called it quits instead of manning up and asking me my personal beliefs on whatever he chooses to debate instead of couching his answers as “some of you libs think”.

:lol:

td

March 2nd, 2013
11:32 pm

DoggoneGA

March 2nd, 2013
11:24 pm

“If you don’t like the fact that God gave women sole control over their pregnancies, take it up with him. I’ve said it before: when you can prove to me that no spontaneous abortions EVER happen, I’ll join you on the barricades to end voluntary abortion.”

What in the h3ll does spontaneous abortion (nature or God terminating a pregnancy) have to do with intentional abortion (human taking a life)? Are you saying women should be looked at in the same light as God?