>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me share with you another personal "spin" :). My brother-in-law is 20 years younger than me. So I have known him since he was in the elementary school. In college he was very liberal (just like most college kids). After college, while at his first job he is still very liberal. My wife and I are laughing amongst ourselves like "give him time he will change." The kid is very hard working and ambitious. He is not happy with what kind of money he is making. So he goes to school for his masters. After masters he gets another job. Still very liberal. Works very hard and still not happy with his financial situation. So he goes to law school at night (borrows money on top of what he already owes for other schools). Make the long story short. He is now a partner in one of the top law firms in Boston. Married to a professional; has two kids. He is now Republican and proudly displays it on his Facebook. So my conclusion is that if a person, by the time they are 35 yo, is still liberal he/she is either socialist or loser <bg>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>...and it's thinking like this that cost the Republican's the election...the idea that they're superior and know what's best for everyone and anyone who disagrees is some horrible horrible person that is going to destroy the moral fabric of the whole country....especially if you're not a white christian male. What's even more pathetic is the Republican's still haven't figured this out (or at least are not willing to do anything about it). for example http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/house-committee-chairs-all-white-men_n_2201136.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>To be fair, House committee chairs are typically chosen based on their seniority on the committee, and most committees don't have Republican women or minorities at senior levels.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>The people's House operates just like every other govenrment agency, thus long serving nitwits are able to remain in powerful leadership positions due solely to their ability to be re-elected in safe gerrymandered districts. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>One could comment on what type of person still notices color and gender rather than most qualified individual but that too would not apply do to seniority crap. ;)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Agreed. Thing is the Republican party has jumped up and down screaming how they're 'diverse' and working to become more diverse. They keep saying all these things (like how they will back off abortion topic) - but when it comes right down to it - no diversity (it's even worse than before) and the votes/stance on woman's rights/abortion issues is the same and there is no backing off it either - if anything its also worse than before. So here you have the leaders of the Republican party SAY they believe a,b, and c - say they will do a,b, and c - and at the end of the day - nothing changes - other than more people and politicians flee the party before it completely implodes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I suppose if one only takes Congress into consideration you'd appear correct. However, since you demagogued the entire Republican party perhaps you could look further than Washington DC. Take governors for instance:
>>>>>>>>http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-governors-considerably-more-diverse-than-their-democratic-counterparts
>>>>>>>>Note: I do not have a quick link for the incoming governors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Valid point. I guess I should of said Republican leaders.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>When exactly has the Republican (or Democrat for that matter) party suggested they will "back off abortion topic"? That's both sides bread and butter in terms of their base.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>There is a whole bunch of clips I can send you of John McCain saying this word for word on Fox News....
>>>>>>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/25/john-mccain-abortion_n_2189064.html
>>>>>>>http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/mccain-wants-leave-abortion-alone-republicans-move-away-grover/59282/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>..and it's not bread-and-butter for the republicans - its 100% complete disaster - hence McCain saying they will back off the topic - which in fact THEY HAVE NOT. (You can find many many other video clips to support this as well)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Besides, the Republican party's official stance is on the winning side according to the trend in the country. Seems to me the >Democrats are the one's who'll need to modify their stance if they are to stay mainstream.
>>>>>>>>http://www.gallup.com/poll/154838/Pro-Choice-Americans-Record-Low.aspx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ok there are other polls to take a look at and saying it's as simple as pro-live vs pro-choice is really not valid. Pro Life under what circumstances? ALL circumstances? So incest, rape, going to kill the mother - none of that matters according to the Republican party guidelines - right? Now what kind of results you think you're going to get from people (especially women) with an attitude like that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>McCain was the standard bearer in 2008 and he has long enjoyed his self titled position as "maverick" in his party. He is a political opportunist who has carved out a niche for himself in DC which is very popular with the political press.
>>>>>
>>>>>Marerick? I thought that was Palin :)
>>>>>
>>>>>>That 100% disaster you describe is simply not accurate. The american populace is about 50-50 on abortion. Yes, you can nuance the specifics and get different results but if you just ask a simple identification question, pro-life or pro-choice, like this gallup poll does, it breaks down the middle. The trend is moving towards pro-life and if you can show me a study or poll that shows different I will gladly have a look.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://jezebel.com/5961192/thanks-to-team-rape-most-americans-consider-themselves-pro+choice-again
>>>>>http://prolifeaction.org/hotline/2012/additup/
>>>>>http://www.christianpost.com/news/americans-more-pro-choice-but-morally-against-abortion-50424/
>>>>
>>>>>I thought about this more over the weekend. I have to agree with you that the country is split on the issue - no question about that.
>>>>>But - all these stupid comments made by the Republicans - as far as their pro-life agenda goes - they did screw it up 100%. I think that is a result of their poorly worded party platform - they end up trying to defend a position that's indefensible - and as a result they end up looking like a bunch of bafoons with a 3rd grade biology education.
>>>>
>>>>Akin & Mourdock's idiocy torpedoed their chances 100% and certainly damaged the broader Republican message. Their positions are extreme and I consider them to be as unqualified as the other extreme to represent our country but their views do not come from the party platform.
>>>
>>>Riiiight but their party platform is no abortion no matter what. So now people ask about rape and they have to answer and attempt to explain what is ..as I pointed out.. an indefensible position. And if you think this happened to just these two knuckleheads you're wrong as I've seen video clips of at least 7 republicans caught saying stupid crap just like this.
>>>
>>>>Pro-life language has been in every Republican platform since 1976. You'll be hard pressed to convince me that it's been a 100% disaster.
>>>
>>>You're right- but until now no one really got them to try to defend the position in clear terms either. (or rather until now they've been smart enough to avoid talking about it much). ...hence the reason for "backing off" the subject being their current solution plan.
>>
>>I suggest you read Reagan's essay ''Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation" published in 1983 over a year before he would win 49 of the 50 states and suggest that he did not "defend his position in clear terms".
>>
>>>>I am curious, what do you find poorly worded?
>>>>http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
>>>
>>>Well for starters:
>>>
>>>"Through Obamacare, the current Administration has promoted the notion of abortion as healthcare. We, however, affirm the dignity of women by protecting the sanctity of human life. Numerous studies have shown that abortion endangers the health and well-being of women, and we stand firmly against it."
>>
>>>"We call on the government to permanently ban all federal funding and subsidies for abortion and healthcare plans that include abortion coverage."
>>>
>>>"We oppose school-based clinics that provide referrals, counseling, and related services for abortion and contraception."
>>>
>>>...which brings me to another point - contraception....also a blunder.
>>
>>What am I missing. I see nothing "poor" about the wording of those abortion points. They convey the party's line clearly.
>>- We stand firmly against abortion
>>- End government subsidies of abortion
>>- End school-based (ie. government) clinics role in abortion
>
>Yes it does:
>1. We stand firmly against abortion - AND don't give a rats ass about the mother.
>2. End government subsidies of abortion - AND contraception.
>3. End school-based (ie. government) clinics role in abortion - AND contraception AND counseling.

1. The first quote doesn't say that, that's your interpretation through your prism. In point of fact it says the opposite.
2. The 2nd quote doesn't say anything about contraception that's your interpretation through your prism
3. Your interpretation is correct

Looks like I misunderstood your point. If I'm now following you correctly your calling the platform wording "poor" is based upon how you view it from your position on the issue rather than the clarity of the document.

>>It should be noted that the draft of the party platform was released for approval on Aug 21, 2012. It was adopted at the convention on Aug. 28, 2012. Akin made his comments on Aug 19th. The platform does not explain his idiocy.
>
>No - but it explains his (and the republican) position.

His stupidity requires no platform, and your point remains baseless unless, of course, you can point out where the official Republican platform says anything about "legitimate rape". ;)

>>I agree with you on contraception, in that it should not have been a part of the party platform. The moronic fake debate never should've left the sound stage where Pelosi createded it out of thin air. That Republicans engaged is further evidence that they are the stupid party.