It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Under Fire Over Segregationist Praise Biden Lies Again About Busing

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2019 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Lumenari

No thats what you did when you said.



Kinda like abortion then? ?


I only said a 2ed un-needed pulvic exam is unethical. Why did i say that?
Because the doctors being forced to do it say so. Because my sister ,who's a doctor (and trump loving pro-life republican) told me that it was.


~yawn~

The frequency of a pelvic exam during pregnancy depends entirely on your pregnancy, the doctor, etc.

And you do understand that your sister is not the only Doctor on the planet.

Probably not a good one if she just rolls off with a blanket statement like "more than one pelvic exam for a pregnant woman is unethical".





posted on Jun, 28 2019 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari




I just realized that you have no clue about what a pelvic exam is or how many we get with a normal pregnancy.


Except all those times I took my pregnant girlfriend to have them.

Maybe your the one that doesn't really know what they are.
Because if you did I don't think you'd want your sister, wife, daughter, mother having one when they don't need them.

If the state made a law that you had to have an extra prostate exam each year or you lose your healthcare . Would you be ok with that?
Remember this isn't something you doctors says you need. In fact your doctor specifically says you don't need it but politicians say you do.

Do you really want to argue that politicians should have the right to decide what treatments you have to have?
Might as well give them the power to force vaccinations on us.

This isn't about a pelvic exam it's about giving the power to politicians to force people to have medical things done that they don't need.



posted on Jun, 28 2019 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari




The frequency of a pelvic exam during pregnancy depends entirely on your pregnancy, the doctor, etc.


It doesn't in the clinics that i'm talking about.
It depends on what the politicians want. Not the doctors, not the pregnancy. Politicians.



posted on Jun, 28 2019 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari




more than one pelvic exam for a pregnant woman is unethical


See your trying to spin things. I never said this. I said having an exam that doctors say you don't need.
I never said women only need one.



posted on Jun, 28 2019 @ 11:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen

I am enjoying the leftists turning on each other because they're more "Woker" than the other candidates.

They're wanting reparations, socialism, open borders, . . . . . . what's next?
Drag kids



posted on Jun, 28 2019 @ 11:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: highvein

www.pbs.org...

No, they won't. She's as nutty as the rest of the band of morons up there.


When its a bunch of moron's even a half wit looks good. Logic says they will attack Trump's age among other things, to do this they will likely turn away from the older candidates Biden, Bernie and Warren

Yes but she comes across better and more in control than any other Dem candidate, her age, gender and military are all pluses as well. As I've said before think there is a certain weariness among some of the public of all the divisiveness, feel like some 2016 Trump voters may be looking for a less bombastic and abrasive candidate. Especially some of the older voters Ive had the pleasure of talking with. Like one of them said politics used to be background noise, now its in your face every day, some of that is Trump. Hope I'm wrong doubt these people will vote Democrat but they might not vote at all if they arent inspired to do so.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 12:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Edumakated

The Democrats are playing a chess game that's already been checkmated 😎



You shouldn't underestimate them.
Did you think that before they took the house?

Dont you worry yourself one bit....
The turnover in Congress ALWAYS happens at midterms
Remember Barry's midterm ?

And , most folk are not underestimating the Dems chances
They are severely OVERESTIMATING them
I see one already


I'm thinking this batch of Democratic candidates have actually swung further left than the 1972 elections.

Worked out real well for them last time... the Democratic candidate lost what... 49 states?



ETA... McGovern/Nixon... Nixon carried 49 states and over 60% of the popular vote.

So this one should be fun!

Yep.
I remember.
First hand.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 12:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Gothmog

My prediction is that trump wins potus. Wins electoral vote , loses popular vote. Just like last time.

Dems keep house and tie up or take senate.

The electoral vote IS the popular vote .
You do live in the US , yes ?



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 12:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: Grimpachi
It is just like reading an MSM site. Only the feed is a day behind.


xuen works for the msm. Check his post and thread history.

All rehashed msm stuff.


If he worked for the MSM he would be posting pro-Democrat articles...you know, like the real MSM who works for the Dims.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: highvein


The nominee will be Gabbard.

I will call it now, and I will hope I am wrong.

If she runs the DNC will have a contender.

If she ran against, say, Mitt Romney, she'd get my vote. But she does come with some policy baggage for me, and while not as much as the other Dem-wits I saw the last two nights, Trump is getting things accomplished that I wanted to see happen. I tire of voting for the lesser of two evils... I'll vote for a President whose policies I mostly like once again. TRUMP 2020!

I already bought a flag.


TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 01:08 AM
link   
The problem isn't that Biden is a racist or voted for busing or anything like that... the problem is that Biden is in the lead. Anything and everything will be pulled out to stop him so the other candidates can race to the finish.

We saw the same thing in 2016 with the MSM and the Republican primary. Jeb started out as the leader, and was attacked mercilessly by the MSM until his poll numbers hit rock bottom. Then in turn every leader was done the same way, until the MSM came up against Trump and couldn't manage to trip him up for falling flat on their collective faces.

That's how the establishment works. You won't be nearly as likely to vote for a candidate as you would be to vote against them. It's human nature and the establishment knows this. So they attack the candidate they don't want and praise the candidate they do want. In the primary, everyone will attack the candidate who is ahead in hopes that those who decide to vote against them will vote for the attacker. Then in the general, they will attack the other party. If Harris gets the nod, though, Trump will destroy her in the debates.

The MSM has lost much of its power. This is uncharted political territory, and it comes complete with monsters. We saw 10 last night and 10 more the night before that.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Is "bussing" still occurring, or was that a 1970's experiment?



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 01:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xuenchen

Is "bussing" still occurring, or was that a 1970's experiment?


Not sure.

Not much info available !!

Hmmmm 😬



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 01:55 AM
link   
πŸ’₯πŸ˜„πŸ€£πŸ’₯

1975: Biden Supported Constitutional Amendment to Stop Busing

πŸ’₯

Former Vice President Joe Biden supported a constitutional amendment to prevent busing to achieve school desegregation.
Biden, who is under fire for praising segregationists, was asked about the divisive issue and if he would support a constitutional amendment to resolve it during an interview with National Public Radio in 1975.

β€œThat would clearly do it,” he said. β€œWe are trying to figure out whether or not we can come up with an innovative piece of legislation which would limit the remedy and I don’t honestly don’t know whether we can come up with something constitutional.”
πŸ’₯




posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

If memory serves, it sorta died out after it was declared a failure and gas was in short supply after the Iranian Hostage crisis.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 03:44 AM
link   
a reply to: highvein

The issue I have is the points I disagree with Donald Trump over do not reduce the money I take home from my work earnings, they don't create a system wherein I m footing the bill for something I find morally or logically wrong, and they don't target my clearly enumerated Constitutional Rights... I can't look at Gabbard's platform and say any of those things about her... she's trash, some as the rest of that dais.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

I know and respect the electoral vote. I talk to you people enough you should know this by now....



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 03:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Fox and many other right wing media is also part of the msm. You can not convince me otherwise.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 03:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Metallicus

Fox and many other right wing media is also part of the msm. You can not convince me otherwise.


Well whoop tee frick'n doo !!!

Congratu frick'n lations !!!!


πŸ’₯🀣πŸ’₯


edit on Jun-29-2019 by xuenchen because: πŸŒπŸŒπŸ”πŸŒπŸŒ



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:01 AM
link   
a reply to: putnam6

The SJWs won't vote for Gabbard unless she becomes exactly what the voters you're referencing are most alarmed by. There is still a decent percentage of vapid liberals in this country who blame Hillary Clinton for alienating the supporters Sanders was supposed to hand over to her by not inserting her head far enough up her own ass like the ranting loony magical millionaire Sanders did.

It's quite amusing... for 3 election cycles after Bush we heard the left say nonsense like "the GOP is so fractured between the far right extremists and independents that nobody who can win the general is radical enough to win the primaries." Low and behold, that seems to be yet another in a long, long list of Democrat projections into the Right, because right now the Dems are literally held hostage by their own extremists, race baiters, perverts, fools, ecoterrorists, communist sympathizers, lazy entitled, misogynists, and liberal fascists that there is no way in Hell someone electable in the general emerges from the primaries... proof of that is easy to find. Does the Left really think independents will vote for free healthcare for illegals? Baby killing on the day of the infant's birth? Sky high taxation just to buy out the educators who remarkably have been in the left's pocket for decades? LOL!!!! I can honestly say the POTUS side of this election doesn't worry me in the least, barring some sort of deepfake shenanigans, Trump wins this without even having to campaign. It's almost looking like a Dem forfeit similar to how the RNC forfeited in 2012 by running Romney.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join