How about some liberal tutelage?

Bachmann? how about your lil feller harry reid

Harry Reid’s prostitution lecture bombs


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/50020.html Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

and nevada never gave it a thought!

I have another couple of things for you to consider about the legalization of prostitution; it has been legal before, the most zealous opponents have been progressives, and who thought that drugs would be that close to being legalized. The only constant in the universe is change. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Progressives the most zealous opponents?
More than conservative Christians?

Bullshit.

I have another couple of things for you to consider about the legalization of prostitution; it has been legal before, the most zealous opponents have been progressives, and who thought that drugs would be that close to being legalized. The only constant in the universe is change. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Another BRILLIANT statement by JD! Yes, J.D., the Religious "RIGHT" must have been mis-labeled!

Since when were Christine O'Donnell and Michele Bachmann and all those "Family Values" politicians "progressives"?.

You've been tuning in to too much of Tom Delay's and Jimmy Dobson's "fuck us on the family" crap.

ROTFLMAO

You misquote and misunderstand me. Religious people have been opposed to prostitution for some time but most of the time failed to write laws opposing prostitution. Progressives on the other hand are very good at writing laws and passing them. They come at it from a different angle than morality. They like to think that prostitutes have been beaten down by society or men. They think that by getting them off the street that they will be forced to find more fulfilling lives in marriage or work. This is not me saying this originally. You would have to argue with the author of some works on the topic. Her name is Ruth Rosen. She lays out the legislative attack on prostitutes and the moral attack. My claim is that progressives have launched more legal attacks than conservatives. Laws have more power than disappointment.

Puleeeeeeeeze. Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. What are the Dems doing? Launching a stealth attack while every Family Values candidate is screeching about this stuff at every campaign stop?

I know you're not a retard. I thank you in advance for not making other arguments like one.

I know you're not a retard. Originally Posted by Little Stevie

bigoted and insensitive and mean and cruel and not inclusive

We are all aware that some of us are right thinking conservatives and other are all feeling liberals but I really am curious about this. That is a lie... Can the liberals here speak directly to the point without insult, blaming Bush, or trying to change the subject about our concerns. You will never know how hard it is to addrees a person that is ignorant on a subject matter but thinks he is versed on it and not insult him. He is closed minded going in. He thinks we did not land on the moon. How do you not insult people like you? Can you make a convincing argument about some of the following topics;

Should Obama's uncle be deported? He is an illegal and was nailed with a DWI. He should be treated like all others.

On the payroll tax cut the GOP wanted to extend the cut for 12 months and the democrats only wanted 2 months. How can the democrats say that the GOP was trying to take money from the taxpayers? Well first they did not want to extend them and then they did with a bunch of other provisions. If you were to read the whole history of the happenings , you would already know this and not have to ask such ignorant questions.

The payroll tax is our Social Security payment matched by our employer up to $100,000 in income. The talk is about cutting 2% of the 6.2% that we pay which leaves us paying 4.2% for the next two months. Won't this personally bite us in the ass 20-30-40 years from now? As a nation, where do we get the extra $100 billion that this cut is costing the trust fund? Obama wanted to tax people making over a million bucks to make up the difference but the GOP would not go along. Again , had you read the history of the proceedings, you would not have to ask such ignorant questions.

Three questions, can we get some serious answers? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Seriously, if you would actually know the subject matter or at least if you do not, come to the table with an open mind when asking such ignorant questions, then they really would not be ignorant questions. Or they would be ignorant questions that a person that was ignorant on the subject matter wanted to be better versed in.

You though come with a point of view that excludes the truth if it does not fit into your narrow political view. Soo yes you can get some serious answers but you will not believe them because Sean Hannity told you not to. You are a Hannity sheep, waiting on you shepard.

You can get wtf ever you seek. Quit seeking one single POV and open up your mind to other world views and you may then start understanding the world better.