“I started through the slide show on lies and distortions. I was surprised to see that was the description of the slide show. Whoever put that nonsense together could not hold an intelligent conversation with anyone knowledgeable. For example, the current 10 year cost estimate from the CBO is $2.4 trillion because we are past the first 4 years where taxes were collected, but no services rendered.
The idea that ObamaCare is not costing jobs is incorrect on its very face. The number of part time jobs of under 30 errors and reduction in fll time jobs is a direct reaction to ObamaCare.
HuffPo needs to remove the author of this piece from their stable. Maybe he could write for Pravda.”
“I do not understand why he is taken seriously when he is writing in the NYT. He is not writing as an economist, but rather as a liberal. He tells us such by calling his work "Conscience of a Liberal" and not "Conscience of an Economist".”
“The next question is to ask what the police department swore to the judge was the basis for the warrant. The warrant seemed like a belated excuse for intolerable behavior. Hiding the names on their badges is also a sign of bad faith.”
Jan 19, 2012 at 08:49:09
“Your argument has an unacknowledged assumption. You assume that the fetus is neither alive nor sentient. The counter argument is that, at conception, we have the instantiation of a human being. While the instantiation is not complete, given the normal flow of the mammalian birth process, we will have a normal baby at 9 months and a full instantiation at about 18 years. So, given that, you would have to include the fetus in the "choice" process and I would expect the fetus would invariably choose to be born.
That is why abortion proponents have to go to ridiculous lengths to deny the humanity of the fetus. If they don't, their whole argument falls apart.”
DEMatHEART on Jan 19, 2012 at 21:00:29
“By your definition, a frozen embryo would then be subject to "cruel and unusual punishment" by being kept in a frozen state for an indefinite period of time in a fertility clinic. Furthermore, how many of these frozen embryos are thrown away each year? Where do you draw the line?
C'mon, a newly-conceived "entity" is a zygote, not a human being.
Your conclusions makes it even more clear that CHOICE is the only way to go, since there are so many differing beliefs on the subject. And many anti-choice people "assume" that abortion is just another means of birth control.
This is a very heavy, emotional decision for many women - and they do not take it lightly. It is not up to the government to make my reproductive decisions for me.”
goatini on Jan 19, 2012 at 17:37:17
“Over 70% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterine lining. They are sloughed off in the monthly flow.
If you are seriously comparing a single-celled organism that will most likely be flushed down the toilet, with a living, breathing female US citizen, you are going to ridiculous lengths to deny the humanity of the living, breathing WOMAN.
Hence, your whole argument has just fallen apart.”
gloriaswanson43 on Jan 19, 2012 at 17:04:03
“HuffPo mods, I will try to be delicate:
I've had a miscarriage...at home. I saw the "remains." That did not look like a human baby.
enuma on Jan 19, 2012 at 15:20:12
“Even if we assume that a fetus is a person, we have consistently ruled that the right to life is not the right to another person's organs. If I'm dying of liver failure and my gather is the only matching donor candidate, I still need his permission to take a lobe of his liver. Even if it's his fault that I need the transplant in the first place (let's say he accidentally poisoned me) I cannot take his organs without his permission.
We don't even allow people to take organs from cadavers without permission. To ban abortion but allow families to refuse to donate a heart from their recently deceased relative says that women are less deserving of bodily autonomy than corpses.
A woman is not a walking incubator. Sentient or not, a fetus has no right to live in her uterus and take nutrients from her body without her permission.”
William Dodson on Jan 19, 2012 at 10:53:04
“It is not an assumption. It is an observable, scientific fact. Immediately following conception, the brain and spinal cord have not begun to develop yet. Therefore, it is impossible for the zygote to be sentient. In fact, the brain does not become developed enough to perform even basic functions such as movement until 15 to 18 weeks into the gestation. By the way, gestation does not begin until about 2 weeks after intercourse. Sorry to go all biology class, but this is not what is believed, this is known for a fact.
It should also be noted that even those who are 'pro-choice' are not necessarily pro-abortion. But we know that making something illegal does not make it go away. (See alcohol and drug prohibition.) If you really want to eliminate the need for abortions in America, remove the cause. This is done with education, and access to safe, effective, birth control.”
Blissful on Jan 19, 2012 at 10:30:14
“Have you asked a fetus?”
Debbie Shoemaker on Jan 19, 2012 at 10:22:53
“The one thing I can say for sure without hesitation or referring back to some ancient book is that the woman is a fully formed human with a functioning brain. I will not say that a clump of cells equals a fully formed woman. Now the forced birther people have no problem in equating a woman with a clump of cells but I will not reduce women to incubators just because some man dumped his genetic code into her body.”
bklynsparrow on Jan 19, 2012 at 10:13:00
“Your counter argument is a religious and semantic one. It is not based on embryology. You're claim a 15 word description of a book is the whole book. It's not. Fetuses are not people- they are biological entities but a woman is a person. Her body is not first and foremost an incubator.This is why anti-abortionists twist themselves into pretzels to deny the humanity of women.”
iskra on Jan 19, 2012 at 10:09:14
1/2 of all fertilizations are spontaneously lost. Does got not care about them?
A zygote is NOT a baby and even the church knows that. Look up the debates Thomas Aquinas wrote about this topic.
Suggesting a handful of cells with less than 50% chance of progressing could 'choose' is ridiculous.”
“Are you kidding, Jen? You forgot the /sarc tag. The Democrats own the Senate and the White House, but the problems in Washington are due to Fox News. Yeah. Right.
I guess everything would be all right in your mind if there were no opposition, of any kind, in this country.”
Solari on Oct 16, 2013 at 09:06:33
“Technically, everything would be all right if there were no opposition of any kind. Everyone would agree with everything being done and we'd all be happy. Impossible, of course, but technically a utopia.”
“That is one of my big ones. Men have no say in whether the child is born or not, but are expected to pay if the women wants the child.
In essence, feminism has backfired. The women want the benefits of feminism, but also the benefits from the courts from a time before feminism. The net is men are opting out of this very one sided affair. The result is the feminist cannot "have it all".”
NKNK on Jun 20, 2013 at 11:06:25
“Women are still much better off in today's world, where they are not treated as children, and where the levels of discrimination, prejudice, and stereotyping they are facing have gone significantly down. We'll totally take the men's unwillingness to marry. Many women are unwilling to marry too. Marriage is not something basic and fundamental - love is, but marriage is not. Being treated like an equal human being (although we're not quite there yet) is, on the other hand, quite fundamental and crucial.”
“You are still comparing apples and oranges. Australia had the equivalent of a $600 billion stimulus in the US (we ended up spending about $850 billion), but Australia started with a budget in surplus and a trade surplus (mostly in commodities and trade with China). The US and Australian situations are not comparable.
Norway used oil revenues to create a stimulus, not debt. Here you have another invalid comparison. Sweden used permanent tax cuts (supply side economics).
Your examples are not the examples you think they are.”
“You are wrong. The stimulus was passed in early 2009. At the time, Pelosi controlled the House and Reid had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Reid did not need Snowe or Collins except maybe to claim it was "bipartisan". But, Reid has never been concerned with
kj011 on Mar 11, 2013 at 13:56:18
“Nope. He needed help from moderate Republicans to pass it in the Senate. If you look back, you will be able to find a news article from February of 2009 when Mitch McConnell threatened filibuster. And Al Franken still hadn't been seated yet.”
“We go to great lengths not to blame the victim. But, if it is a fat person dying from a heart attack, a drug addict dying from an overdose, or a smoker, current or former, dying from lung cancer, there is this under current of them having "deserved" it. No, no one deserves it.”
“I loved reading the comments of the lefties around here going crazy. The hate spewing from the left and from Eileen Reid is almost as amusing as Caroline Glick's idea in the first place. BTW, she was in the video.
“This is a direct result of conflict of interest from Congress. Anyone who has ever said crony capitalism is an attribute of one party or the other is a fool. Crony capitalism is a direct result of our system of elections and of a flawed regulatory system where the regulators are either pretty much ignorant of the industry or are on a revolving door between the industry and the regulators.
Chris Dodd is not running for reelection because his corruption was finally exposed. He knew he could not win. It is hard to believe under these circumstances the idiots in the Senate allowed him in the same room with the financial reform bill. It is clear this bill is merely a stepping stone to a high level, well paid job with either the lobbying industry or the financial industry. The bill is payoff for the soon to be offered job. Watch for it.”
hardwroc on Jun 7, 2010 at 14:50:41
“And what is your take on FOX "NEWS" hiring their entire staff from the GOP? I'm curious how you feel about one party having an entire industry OWNED by them and working 24/7 as their mouthpiece?”
“I don't particularly approve of this approach, but I understand why they are doing it. It is a filtering method. The company knows they will get far more applications than they can evaluate.
A good friend of mine went into management and became a second line manager. One of his jobs was to hire some people directly out of college for starting positions. As he was evaluating this huge stack of resumes, he decided to immediately reject anyone who did not have a 3.8 GPA. As he was doing this at home one night, his wife said "You know, Tom, you would not have hired you". But, he needed some way to make the pile manageable.”
WashingtonDCsucks on Jun 6, 2010 at 11:52:34
“Why is it that stupid people are always allowed to take the easy way out???”
“Palin is correct. It has been obvious for years that environmentalists have pushed drilling into areas that are orders of magnitude more difficult to drill and recover the oil. Not only is the drilling far more difficult, it is both more risky and more difficult to recover from an error.
If this is not obvious to you, just ask yourself if this well would have been plugged already if it were in a 150 ft of water as opposed to 5000 feet of water. Think divers versus submersible robots and significantly increased water pressures.
It is ironic that all those fears of harming the coastal waters that forced the drilling so far out are coming true, anyway. BTW, Bloomberg is quoting Jindal as saying the drilling moratorium will cost La. 20,000 jobs. Oh, goodie, just what we need in this economy. Plus the deepwater rigs will now get moved to Brazil providing years of jobs for that economy, but being unavailable for the US. Does anybody wonder how many jobs will be lost in Alaska and Texas? Oh, and the estimates are the US will import an addition $10 billion in oil to replace what we lose from the gulf. Let;s hope nothing happens to those tankers coming through the gulf.”
Apr 20, 2006 at 06:45:57
“There seems to be lot of conspiracy theory at work here, but the conspiracy theories are a chimera.
What we have here is a publicly owned business that is failing. This may be a "buggy whip" problem in that print cannot keep up with alternate channels or it may be a content problem or something else entirely. Is the content so skewed that readers are abondoning the product? Has the company forgotten what its real product is? Howell Raines and the Martha Burke "flood the zone" situation come to mind.
All the shareholders are saying to management is that the business is failing. Management needs to do something, and quickly, to rebuild their product.
This process happens in all industries and is not specific to the NYT. Look at IBM before Gerstner became the CEO.
This is not a political issue or "truth to power" issue. This is a business issue and the NYT is on the verge of failing. Management needs to do something different or it will fail. Unfortunatly, in most situations like this management needs to be poked and prodded to address the issue. That is all that is happening here.