| 
			
				|  Main Menu |  
			
				|  Most Favorited Images |  
			
				|  Recently Uploaded Images |  
			
				|  Most Liked Images |  
			
				|  Top Reviewers |  
		
			
				
| 
  
			
				| cockalatte | 650 |  
				| MoneyManMatt | 490 |  
				| Jon Bon | 408 |  
				| Still Looking | 399 |  
				| samcruz | 399 |  
				| Harley Diablo | 377 |  
				| honest_abe | 362 |  
				| George Spelvin | 325 |  
				| DFW_Ladies_Man | 313 |  
				| Starscream66 | 309 |  
				| Chung Tran | 288 |  
				| lupegarland | 287 |  
				| nicemusic | 285 |  
				| You&Me | 281 |  
				| sharkman29 | 263 |  |  
			
				|  Top Posters |  
		
			
				
| 
  | DallasRain | 71488 |  | biomed1 | 69569 |  | Yssup Rider | 63018 |  | gman44 | 55472 |  | LexusLover | 51038 |  | offshoredrilling | 49923 |  | WTF | 48272 |  | pyramider | 46452 |  | bambino | 45599 |  | The_Waco_Kid | 41068 |  | CryptKicker | 37436 |  | Dr-epg | 36546 |  | Mokoa | 36516 |  | Chung Tran | 36100 |  | Still Looking | 35944 | 
 |  | 
 
	
	
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 03:02 PM | #91 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Jan 3, 2010 Location: South of Chicago 
					Posts: 31,214
				      | 
 
			
			
	No, Doofus, he didn't. Doofus, you have repeatedly, but unsuccessfully, attempted to misrepresent the truth, but you have failed to refute Obama's hypocritical vote against a bill which met every precondition he set. He voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant.  See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=232Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Doove  Did he have the precondition that there not already exist a bill addressing the very issue in the new bill? |  |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 03:16 PM | #92 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: May 20, 2010 Location: Wichita 
					Posts: 28,730
				      | 
 
			
			Republicans don't like people making decisions for themselves any more than Democrats do. They just differ on which decisions.
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 03:17 PM | #93 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Dec 19, 2009 Location: Buffalo NY 
					Posts: 7,271
				      | 
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by I B Hankering  No, Doofus, he didn't. |  
So what you're saying is, the bill had conditions in it that went above and beyond his pre-conditions.  
 
A bill must have A, B, and C before i will vote for it.  But in addition to A, B, and C, you added D, E, and F, and i can't vote for D, E, and F.  So i'm voting no even though it has all my "pre-conditions".   
 
Explain how that's bad.
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 03:23 PM | #94 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: May 20, 2010 Location: Wichita 
					Posts: 28,730
				      | 
 
			
			Kinda depends on what D, E and F are, doesn't it?
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 03:23 PM | #95 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Jan 3, 2010 Location: South of Chicago 
					Posts: 31,214
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Doofus, you lie, obfuscate and deceive.  The Illinois legislation in 2001, 2002 and 2003 that Odumbo opposed would have defined any aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.
This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Doove  So what you're saying is, the bill had conditions in it that went above and beyond his pre-conditions.  
 A bill must have A, B, and C before i will vote for it.  But in addition to A, B, and C, you added D, E, and F, and i can't vote for D, E, and F.  So i'm voting no even though it has all my "pre-conditions".
 
 Explain how that's bad.
 |  
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive. 2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is amended by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. 
 Doofus, you have repeatedly failed to refute Odumbo hypocritically voting against a bill which met every precondition he set.  Bottom line, Doofus, Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant: that's the reality of your "D, E and F".
 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 05:57 PM | #96 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Dec 19, 2009 Location: Buffalo NY 
					Posts: 7,271
				      | 
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy  Kinda depends on what D, E and F are, doesn't it? |  
It does. But it should lay to rest the argument that Obama somehow hypocritically voted against a bill that met every "pre-condition" that he set.  
 
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by I B Hankering  Doofus, you have repeatedly failed to refute Odumbo hypocritically voting against a bill which met every precondition he set. |  
Because of post #93, you need to do better.
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 06:01 PM | #97 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Jan 3, 2010 Location: South of Chicago 
					Posts: 31,214
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Doofus,  you continue to lie, obfuscate and deceive. The Illinois legislation in 2001, 2002  and 2003 that Odumbo opposed would have defined any aborted fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.
This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Doove  It does. But it should lay to rest the argument that Obama somehow hypocritically voted against a bill that met every "pre-condition" that he set.  
 
 
 Because of post #93, you need to do better.
 |  
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.  2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented  in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. 
 Doofus,  you have repeatedly failed to refute Odumbo hypocritically voting  against a bill which met every precondition he set.  Bottom line,  Doofus, Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant: that's the reality of your "D, E and F".
See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=2  32
 |  
	|   | Quote   | 2 users liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 06:09 PM | #98 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Dec 19, 2009 Location: Buffalo NY 
					Posts: 7,271
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by I B Hankering  Doofus,  you continue to lie, obfuscate and deceive. The Illinois legislation in 2001, 2002  and 2003 that Odumbo opposed would have defined any aborted fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.
This is Illinois Bill SB 1082: 
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.  2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented  in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. 
 Doofus,  you have repeatedly failed to refute Odumbo hypocritically voting  against a bill which met every precondition he set.  Bottom line,  Doofus, Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant: that's the reality of your "D, E and F".
See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=2  32
 |  
Because of post #93, you need to do better.
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 07:12 PM | #99 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Jan 3, 2010 Location: South of Chicago 
					Posts: 31,214
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Because of your last two posts, Doofus, you need to re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082 that would have defined any aborted  fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to  legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Doove  Because of post #93, you need to do better. |  
 This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:
 
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.   2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented   in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is  amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. Now that you have re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082, Doofus,   you need to get it through your pointed little head that Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant even though the bill met every precondition Odumbo set.
 
 See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=2  32
 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 07:14 PM | #100 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Dec 19, 2009 Location: Buffalo NY 
					Posts: 7,271
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by I B Hankering  Because of your last two posts, Doofus, you need to re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082 that would have defined any aborted  fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to  legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.
 This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:
 
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.   2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented   in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is  amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. Now that you have re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082, Doofus,   you need to get it through your pointed little head that Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant even though the bill met every precondition Odumbo set.
 
 See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=2  32
 |  
Because of post #93, you need to do better.
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 07:31 PM | #101 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Jan 3, 2010 Location: South of Chicago 
					Posts: 31,214
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Because of your last three posts, Doofus, you need to re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082 that would have defined any aborted  fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to  legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Doove  Because of post #93, you need to do better. |  
 This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:
 
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.    2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented    in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is   amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. Now that you have re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082, Doofus,   you need to get it through your pointed little head that Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant even though the bill met every precondition Odumbo set.
 
 See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=2  32
 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-24-2012, 07:42 PM | #102 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Dec 19, 2009 Location: Buffalo NY 
					Posts: 7,271
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by I B Hankering  Because of your last three posts, Doofus, you need to re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082 that would have defined any aborted  fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to  legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.
 This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:
 
LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.    2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented    in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is   amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.  8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any  9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various  10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person",  11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant  12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any  13 stage of development.  14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with  15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the  16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that  17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion  18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of  19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary  20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been  21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction  22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean  23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law. 27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law. Now that you have re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082, Doofus,   you need to get it through your pointed little head that Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant even though the bill met every precondition Odumbo set.
 
 See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @:  http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=2  32
 |  
When you've got something new to offer, let me know.
		 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
	
	
		|  08-30-2012, 04:22 PM | #103 |  
	| Valued Poster 
				 
                
				Join Date: Jan 3, 2010 Location: South of Chicago 
					Posts: 31,214
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	The only thing that is required, Doofus, is for you to quit lying.  See where Doofus was earlier caught in a lie on this very matter @: http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=2215258&postcou  nt=232Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Doove  When you've got something new to offer, let me know. |  
 Because of your last four posts, Doofus, you need to re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082 that would have defined any aborted  fetus that  showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to  legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.
 
 This is Illinois Bill SB 1082:
 
 LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b 1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.     2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3  represented    in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Statute on  Statutes is   amended  by adding 5 Section 1.36 as follows: 6 (5 ILCS  70/1.36 new) 7 Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant. 8 (a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any 9 rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various 10 administrative agencies of this State, the words "person", 11 "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant 12 member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any 13 stage of development. 14 (b) As used in this Section, the term "born alive", with 15 respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the 16 complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that 17 member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion 18 or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of 19 the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary 20 muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been 21 cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction 22 occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean 23 section, or induced abortion. 24 (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall 25 be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate 26 protection under the law.27 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon 28 becoming law.
 
 Now that you have re-read Illinois Bill SB 1082, Doofus,   you need to get it through your pointed little head that Odumbo voted against protecting the life of a 'living' infant even though the bill met every precondition Odumbo set.
 
 
 |  
	|   | Quote   | 1 user liked this post |  
 
 
 
	
	
		
	
	
 | 
			
				|  AMPReviews.net |  
			
				|  Find Ladies |  
			
				|  Hot Women |  |