Another Look at How Members of Congress Exercise School Choice

heritage foundation ^ | 24 may 02 | Jennifer Garrett

[John O]

And just for the record, that is an excellent description of your post. No facts, no logic and ad hominem from the very start. Look in the mirror.

I know that I shouldn't do this as you've already shown yourself to be unteachable (and if you read all my posts this is the very first thing I've said about you)

lets look at my post for facts. 1. The dem platform is pro-abortion and pro-homosexual. do you dispute that. 2. a pro-life dem senator by claiming to be a dem senator gives control of the senate to the anti-life party (the dems).

Lets look at logic. 1. See number two under facts. 2. my entire post is based on logic. If someone supports a party they, by their support of that party, support that parties goals and agenda. This seems perfectly logical to me.

Lets look at ad hominem attacks. You'll have to help me out here. Where did I attack anyone involved in this discussion? I didn't. Therefore no ad hominem attacks.

I don't expect a reasoned response But I had to try one more time.

GSA(P)

[Kay Soze]

Exactly! "... democrats want uneducated kids to become uneducated adults, so that they will vote democrat. 1. Dems are owned by the Unions (NEA) 2. A population not equipped to compete in today’s world will need more governmental assistance and more welfare which feeds to democratic constituency!

[Protagoras]

I know that I shouldn't do this as you've already shown yourself to be unteachable (and if you read all my posts this is the very first thing I've said about you)

You attacked Paul Vallas, you attacked all Democrats and now you have attacked me. You lied about them, you addressed them instead of ideas or events and that is ad-hominem despite your contention that the attack has to be on the poster.

lets look at my post for facts. 1. The dem platform is pro-abortion and pro-homosexual. do you dispute that.

It is irrelevant to your attacks.

2. a pro-life dem senator by claiming to be a dem senator gives control of the senate to the anti-life party (the dems).

Irrelevant and off topic.

Lets look at logic. 1. See number two under facts.

You gave no facts in your earlier posts, only opinions. You now try to add some "facts" which are off topic and hope no one will notice, BZZZT, wrong.

2. my entire post is based on logic.

Illogic. Your opinion, and incorrect in any case.

If someone supports a party they, by their support of that party, support that parties goals and agenda. This seems perfectly logical to me.

It would seem logical to you. It is nonsense.

Lets look at ad hominem attacks. You'll have to help me out here. Where did I attack anyone involved in this discussion? I didn't.

See above examples

Therefore no ad hominem attacks.

Nice try.

I don't expect a reasoned response But I had to try one more time.

Save the bandwidth, you wouldn't know reason if it hit you in the face. And that IS an ad-hominem.

The main truth of the matter is that you said that Paul Vallas supports abortion and homosexuality. Then you made this convoluted attempt to link all Democrats to abortion and homosexuality. Lies, pure and simple. Moronic

I'm just guessing that you are one of those who condemns third parties and advocates changing the Republican party from within. Am I right about that?

[=Intervention=]

Here is the 2000 DNC party platform. While there are attempts to make it inclusive later on, the actual text lays out unconditional support for abortion as a choice. Here's the text.

"The Democratic Party stands behind the right of every woman to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of ability to pay. We believe it is a fundamental constitutional liberty that individual Americans - not government - can best take responsibility for making the most difficult and intensely personal decisions regarding reproduction. This year's Supreme Court rulings show to us all that eliminating a woman's right to choose is only one justice away. That's why the stakes in this election are as high as ever."

Whether all Democrats are pro-abortion or not isn't the case. Casey Jr. (for instance) isn't...but the party platform is, as stated above, is to keep abortion safe, rare, and legal. That is a moral worldview that views infanticide as an acceptible choice.

[Protagoras]

Thanks for posting it but I think most are aware of it. I certainly was. It is however irrelevant to the charges made by another poster.

[=Intervention=]

No, it is quite relevant. These are the goals of the Democratic party. The party works to further its goals. One of the poster's points is that by electing Democrats, you further this agenda EVEN IF the individual candidate is pro-life. Given the way the political system works (slush funds, general contributions, and the like), I find it hard to disagree.

[Protagoras]

Perhaps you missed the original post. He made a vile, despicable comment about a person. It was a generalisation made as a troll. He was trolling for trouble so he could expound on his off topic agenda. He admitted it.

I merely gave him what he wanted, a chance to make himself look like a jerk.

[Protagoras]

How can his heart be in the right place when he supports killing babies and recruiting our kids into sexual deviancy.

This is the troll he made in response to my comment on a Democrat. He claims that a person supports killing babies. He claims that he supports recruiting children into sexual deviancy. It's moronic on the face of it and it was meant to be intentionally inflammatory. I called him on it. You should too.

He is a democRAT after all. DemocRATs are either stupid or evil. usually both

Now this one. I ask you if everyone you ever met who was a Democrat was either stupid or evil. Or both. Your parents maybe or grandparents or neighbors or children. They are not simply wrong or misinformed, they are evil or stupid. Or both. And all this would include anyone in the Democratic party who was trying to change the party from within, maybe in direct opposition to abortion and homosexuality.

Now let me know if you still support the comment and it's poster.

[mafree]

Thanks for the ping.

I'm definitely for school choice and am tired of some of the patronizing elitists who oppose it, as if they know what's best for low-income families.