Too hot to fail? Tomi Lahren's fall from grace.

[indykid]

My 2 cents is that it shows the hypocrisy of the news media, that they scream first amendment if someone questions a story or how they report it, but if one of their reporters, or what ever Lawrens is, uses their first amendment rights, they get fired if it doesn't agree with the company first amendment?

 

[Expat]

Speaking of eye candy. Greg Guffeld had this young lady on his show this past weekend, Lauren Sivan

 

[indiucky]

will likely be along the lines of an "emanation of a penumbra."

Lord I hope not....Ever since I read H P Lovecraft I have had a fear that we may see an "emanation of a penumbra" in my lifetime....

 

[churchmouse]

Lord I hope not....Ever since I read H P Lovecraft I have had a fear that we may see an "emanation of a penumbra" in my lifetime....

Awe crap Indy.....now I have to Google this.......

 

[Spear Dane]

ya'll are splitting hairs and splicing comma's and ignoring the real issue. Either babies are killed or they are not killed. She thinks they should be killed and so I now have about as much use and respect for her as I do Hillary.

 

[indiucky]

Awe crap Indy.....now I have to Google this.......

Don't...I just made it up...

You know...That whole dumb hillbilly thing I use to trap folks with...

 

[KG1]

Speaking of eye candy. Greg Guffeld had this young lady on his show this past weekend, Lauren Sivan

Tomi who?

 

[indiucky]

ya'll are splitting hairs and splicing comma's and ignoring the real issue. Either babies are killed or they are not killed. She thinks they should be killed and so I now have about as much use and respect for her as I do Hillary.

I found that out debating the topic here on INGO...I am pro life but I count among some of my INGO friends those that are not....I finally came to the realization that the crux is what you said.....We just can't agree on when life begins...I think it begins at the get go and they think it begins at the get out go......

 

[Woobie]

ya'll are splitting hairs and splicing comma's and ignoring the real issue. Either babies are killed or they are not killed. She thinks they should be killed and so I now have about as much use and respect for her as I do Hillary.

 

[indiucky]

Tomi who?

Yep.....She even looks cute in her mug shot...

And she's witty....

And she's a dog lover...We need to hook her up with my young protege Rusty Hornet.....

 

[T.Lex]

Either babies are killed or they are not killed. She thinks they should be killed and so I now have about as much use and respect for her as I do Hillary.

Being pro-choice does not mean that a person thinks babies "should" be killed. That completely mischaracterizes the position in a way that makes it easy to dismiss.

 

[Woobie]

Being pro-choice does not mean that a person thinks babies "should" be killed. That completely mischaracterizes the position in a way that makes it easy to dismiss.

True. It just means they think it's ok to kill babies. That's way better.

 

[T.Lex]

True. It just means they think it's ok to kill babies. That's way better.

It is rational, conservative, and consistent to believe that no babies should be killed, it is not ok to kill babies, and it is not ok for the government to get involved until a specific point in the process.

The only real argument left is the last: at what point can the government get involved.

And yes, I'll stop now and just wait for more pics in this pic thread.

 

[indiucky]

You two above are a perfect example of what I was talking about...I like and admire you both...Woobie believes, like I do, that life begins at conception...But TLex is also correct in saying being pro choice does not mean he thinks it's okay "babies should be killed"......

You are both good men with lot's of smarts and excellent posts......I hate to see a conversation from folks I know I could hang all day with (and I literally do on slow days in the shop) go down in flames...

Now you both probably hate me for butting in with my churchmouse impersonation.....

 

[HoughMade]

My point was simply that whether or not there is a freedom/liberty/conservative principle in the government not regulating in this area, we can't say conservatives want less government and Roe means less government, therefore it's conservative.

How we arrive at the end is at least as important as what the end is when it comes to constitutional theory. If we do not adhere to strict constructionism, then there is no limit to what changing mores may discover to be a constitutional right.

 

[MarkC]

The post-Heller development of 2A interpretation could challenge that assertion. If we want there to be a constitutional right to carry (for example, or for hi cap mags, or zoning that allows for gun ranges), the mechanism will likely be along the lines of an "emanation of a penumbra."


My quarrel was not with the notion that states should be free to decide. Rather, it is some sort of artificial labeling of a policy as "true conservative" or not. The doctrinal underpinnings of Roe can absolutely be defended by conservative principles.

And those are points that I cannot dispute.

 

[2A_Tom]

Like 1911s and adult diapers.

HEY!

Youngin's. Don't understand the dynamics of fads. They mistake 1911 century-old staying power with old fashioned. Let's see where the Glock 19 is in 100 years.

It's a shame, but we never should have. We need to be "good Bereans" (not Kentucky) when it comes to our news.

the news reports the death of Michael Jackson, I say, "Huh. Micheal Jackson died." I'll believe that

Because, NEWS

The post-Heller development of 2A interpretation could challenge that assertion. If we want there to be a constitutional right to carry (for example, or for hi cap mags, or zoning that allows for gun ranges), the mechanism will likely be along the lines of an "emanation of a penumbra."

I will never understand why a gun guy would see ambiguity in the second, or for that matter prosecute another gun guy.

 

[spencer rifle]

How we arrive at the end is at least as important as what the end is when it comes to constitutional theory. If we do not adhere to strict constructionism, then there is no limit to what changing mores may discover to be a constitutional right.

But...what about the "ends always justify the means" approach of our Leftist leaners?

 

[2A_Tom]

On R v W, whereas a right to privacy is certainly a conservative issue, killing your child is certainly not a private matter. There are those that believe that a parent has the right to kill a child until their first birthday.

I personally believe that if I kill someone and there are no witnesses, it should be treated as a private matter and no repercussion incurred.

 

[Woobie]

It is rational, conservative, and consistent to believe that no babies should be killed, it is not ok to kill babies, and it is not ok for the government to get involved until a specific point in the process.

The only real argument left is the last: at what point can the government get involved.

And yes, I'll stop now and just wait for more pics in this pic thread.

The government has always been involved when lives are taken, and as early as possible. Prevention through the intervention of law enforcement officers, or punishment through the justice system. I see no reason to modify this based upon the victim's age.