I am troubled by the guy already.

first interview with an Al-Jazeera knock off. The New Tres Secretary. Loads of pork in the new spending. The Uber-pushing of government paid/sponsored birth control. The gold plating of the environmental movement..regardless of what science says...Which he holds so high..I really hope this guy can pull a rabbit out of his hat.

But no torture chambers in Obama's plan. No war crimes. So sad.

God Bless America.

Actually, he's EPA nominee has promised to make science the focus of the EPA's decisions, instead of the faith-based decisions making process of the Bush administration, which is probably why the GOP is holding up her confirmation in the Senate.

As for government-paid birth control, again, Bush's faith-based, abstinence only programs are proven failures, so why not fund programs that actually work to reduce unwanted pregnancies (and therefore, reducing abortions)?

Let's see. You are troubled by:

1. Our president promoting peace and freedom in the Muslim world? I assume you would this to be done with bombs, since that has worked so well.

2. The nomination of Timothy Geithner. Hmm. Did you object when Bush nominated him to the second most important position at the Federal Reserve?

3. Government spending in a stimulus bill whose whole purpose is to increase government spending in order to prevent the complete collapse of our economy. Hmm. Yes, I can see how that would be troubling.

4. The promotion of birth control? As opposed to what, I might ask?

5. Environmental protection? Yes, that is troubling indeed. Don't scientists uniformly agree that we need more arsenic in our water (which Bush proposed), lead in our gasoline again (which Bush proposed), and lots more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (which Bush did nothing to prevent)? Oh, they don't? Hmmm.

Your side lost the election, friend. Get used to it.

I may be wrong, but isn't the abortion decision aimed at foreign aid? Bush hobbled foreign aid for families by insisting that it would not be delivered to any nation that allowed abortion. It has nothing to do with internal U.S. policy, at this time.

The ref. in this thread is to some dollars in the stimulus package that was apportioned to states to defray their birth control program expense. The Republicans jumped all over the item to ostensibly show that such is not an example that would stimulate the econmy. This is of course a whole different discussion but I concede they have a point. This item has since been withdrawn.

You refer to a reversal of policy for foreign aid which Obama signed...re some foreign assistance is contingent on a no-abortion/contraceptive (I am hazy on the details) practice.

Thanks.

I just heard about your point on the radio.

I voted for him you insufferable retard.

I am for birth control you maggot. I voted for him as well. I am opposed to the government getting involved in the welfare giveaway (which you no doubt receive) under the current economic conditions. This is no time for this kind of thing unless it keeps people like you from breeding..Then I would pay double..Hell I would cut your nuts myself!..Crawl back under your refrigerator box and continue your nightly masturbation as usual.

I am for birth control you maggot.

You know, that kind of approach will always convince more people.

Chips O'Toole:

I am for birth control you maggot. I voted for him as well. I am opposed to the government getting involved in the welfare giveaway (which you no doubt receive) under the current economic conditions. This is no time for this kind of thing unless it keeps people like you from breeding..Then I would pay double..Hell I would cut your nuts myself!..Crawl back under your refrigerator box and continue your nightly masturbation as usual.

Ahhh.... I love the stimulating, intellectual arguments put forth by people like O'Toole. The sad thing is that he probably spent hours patting himself on the back for this scathing post.