President Bush spoke last week at the United Nations World Summit about the need to end deep poverty in the world, but for the fourth year in a row, Bush this week blocked U.S. funding to the United Nations Population Fund, which addresses maternal health care and family planning for the world’s most impoverished women.
The reason? Abortion politics — some Bush supporters claim the fund has been used for coercive abortions in China, although the administration’s own 2002 investigation found no evidence to support those claims.
Poverty goes on, as usual, and so does politics. . . .
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- charleskhyter on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Politico on Moore has had enough of House
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
18 Comments
The poor shouldn’t expect any relief from this president! Given his mater’s remarks, the only concern his family has ever had for poor people is that they stay as far away from them as possible! Of course, that means them, personally, not what little money they might have.
Oh boy…where to start?
http://www.planetwire.org/details/2211
To cater to his conservative right base, he is trying to cut all money that may go to, even in the smallest fraction, to abortions. Unfortunately it will also cut money to family planning. There will be more unwanted pregnancies. The increase in births in these 3rd world countries will also increase the incidence of starvation of children and whole communities. There will be an increase in sexually transmitted diseases because of the cessation of condom dispersement to poor communities.These were not contraceptive programs for sexually active teenagers…the contraceptives were usually given to married women.
Bush seems to think that his AIDS/HIV Initiative that he promoted wildly in 2003 in Africa is somehow different from family planning. In fact, that initiative will set up separate clinics that are specifically for AIDS/HIV. People will be too ashamed to visit them. G.W. and his brain gang have decided this program would somehow be better than funding programs already established through regular doctors offices where the women will get all medical problems taken care of including family planning.
Yaaaawwwwn
Docha love it. Puny is the inDUHvidual who lectures us on maturity.
QED “quo erat demonstratum”
Ok Sir G…what does that mean in regular English?
I think it means that George flipped them the bird on his way out of the room.
Quo=what or Quod=that which was to be demonstrated
Used in math proofs. Remember geometry?
Puny’s been typing QED after everything I say as if it “proves” what he’s been saying.
I thought I’d return the favor and go one better, which in his case isn’t difficult to do.
When I was a kid, my father had a solution for us kids when we got to bickering.BOXING GLOVES!
Are you kidding me, Trace? Puny works up a sweat TYPING. He thinks “boxing gloves” are something you wear when you stack boxes. The last time he was in a fight, his sister kicked his ass, and that was his YOUNGER sister.
I don’t think that “Yaaawwn” or its variants is in the same category as some of your comments, Galad. BTW, that’s a really enlightening conversation you’re having with your alter-ego Tracy.
I see you’ve cleaned it up just a tad lately, though. Thanks for that.
I have no respect for you, Puny. You pretend to be black if you think it helps your argument. You pretend to be an academic if you think you can score points.
You’re a lying POS.
And everytime I smell you around, I’m going to throw a chair across your cowardly face.
BTW, I misspoke when I said that I have no respect for you.
What I meant to say was that I have nothing but contempt for you.
Yeah, that’s more accurate by far.
And anytime you insult a poster, you can expect to get it back with interest.
If you haven’t noticed, we pissed off liberals have utterly had it with being called “wimps” by Fat Bastard Rush Limbaugh and his ilk for the last couple of decades.
We’re not “taking it” anymore.
Have a nice day.
I’ll second that Galahad.
Thing is, folks like dooda, and the president they so embrace are ……..well chicken….. .
Galahad (or are you Tracy today?):
You are a fine one to be acting holier-than-thou towards anyone, with your made up names, unfathomable illogic, and petulant tantrums.
I’ll be happy to call you a wimp now that I know it bothers your alleged mind so. I won’t even use scare quotes to pretend that it isn’t true.
Your contempt is well appreciated. I can now be certain of having no regrets for treating you like the mean-spirited, bullying child you are.
I don’t recall ever pretending to be black. Your kneejerk prejudices have you jumping to conclusions. Do not confuse culture with race, kid. It makes you look as callow as you are.
I do note that you seem to be pretending to be a mythical knight of a mythical kingdom. It seems to fit your worldview nicely. Those fantasies are popular with pre-teen and early teen children.
Surely there are some teeny blogs where you and Ed can go to have some really intense peer-to-peer discussions in perfect harmony.
Go run along now. Find one of those teeny blogs. And watch out for the Mooreons, dear.
“I don’t recall ever pretending to be black. Your kneejerk prejudices have you jumping to conclusions. Do not confuse culture with race, kid. It makes you look as callow as you are.”
Puny, drop the offended tone. You pretended to be a black Muslim as “Ahmed.” You pretended to be “non-white” (whatever that means) as visiting professor Gail.
I am not Tracy. I e-mailed him awhile back and he lives in a town outside of Wichita. I live in Wichita.
Since I started using this name Galahad, I have not posted under any other names. AND unlike your posts, my e-mail is hot and the same one every time.
You remain a lying POS.
Have a nice day.
Thank you, Gary. I will have a nice day. After all, those of us who are on the right side of history and also have well-deserved pride of posession are unfazed by your ill-tempered name-calling.
For a hot e-mail, yours sure goes nowhere useful.
A lie involves misleading or withholding of truth from someone who deserves the truth. For a group that defends Clinton by carefully adjusting the definition of what a lie is (”the grand jury was merely a political witch hunt that didn’t deserve the truth, so no lie was told”), it is hard to fathom why liberals are so eager to bother using the word “lie,” as if it means something to you. But that’s what you do.
Blogs are intended to be as anonymous as the users desire. Names and identities should mean nothing.
Your hyper-concern over who or what I am makes it clear that you judge the quality of a person’s argument by your value judgment of his “bona-fides”, whether relevant or not. Trying to bully me with that old, liberal “bona-fides” argument is indefensible. It is nothing more than cheap, argumentive bullying, but it has become the center of your style.
Anyway, you’d drop a load if you knew who I am. I just laugh.
See, this is exactly what I’m talking about–
“you judge the quality of a person’s argument by your value judgment of his ‘bona-fides’, whether relevant or not.”
But it’s extremely relevant to someone who values the truth. You can’t say you’re a “holocaust survivor” if you’re not, because those people went through unimaginable hell and their experience gives them an authority that you haven’t earned if you haven’t gone through it.
It’s like people who pretend to have been “in combat,” like that POS Bill O’Reilly, when they haven’t even been in the military.
As for dropping a load if I found out who you really were, I doubt it. I’m not concerned with who you are. I just want you to stop pretending to be WHAT YOU’RE NOT.
And by the way, when you lie about your “bona fides,” neither I nor anybody else is going to take your word on anything else.
Liars are never believed, even when they tell the truth.
George W. is learning that one the hard way . . .
The truth of an argument is entirely independent of who makes the argument.
I certainly never made any claims to have been a holocaust survivor; but it seems obvious that being a holocaust survivor does not improve one’s knowledge or understanding of anything other than personal holocaust experiences. Holocaust survivors are not automatic experts on international politics, or even the German politics of the 1930s and 1940s. All they know about those days are how they got dragged into the maelstrom and what they did to survive it.
Similarly, war veterans may have strong opinions about their war experiences, but they often have no clue about the way the military really works or the complicated ways that politics controls the military. I will listen to the veteran’s personal experiences; but his notions about the rightness or wrongness of the war, itself, are just an uninformed opinion. Such determinations are not made in fox holes or swift boats.
Your anger over someone’s possibly using several identities or someone’s claiming a certain “status” shows that you were swayed by that claimed status more than the correctness of the argument itself; and now you feel betrayed.
Well, you’re not alone in making that mistake. Look at all the saps who think Kerry was a hero, and is therefore qualified to speak on the Vietnam War. I won’t argue that he didn’t deserve his medals, but I will argue that you won’t find another person in the history of the US military who got three scratches in 4 months and obtained Purple Hearts and a release from duty because of them.
Of course, it is well documented that he also lied about his sojourn into Cambodia. He also has given testimony that he was a war criminal. Some “bona fides.”
Nevertheless, lots of democrats were happy to consider him a military expert because of those “bona fides.”
Now that’s something to get angry about.