We've all laughed about the absurdity of that statement, but clearly, the Republicans believe it and want to make sure they're always the ones doing the raping.

You certainly have a right to be a bigoted A-hole, but understand that it's a personal choice, not a commandment from God. Given that God didn't think homosexuality was a big enough deal to include it on his top ten list of sins, given that nowhere in the bible does it state that God thinks homosexuality is a worse sin than any other, and given that Christ said "love thy neighbor", not "love thy neighbor - unless he's a fag," the scriptural and theological ground upon which you stand is a lot less firm than you (or whatever bigoted pastor fed you this crap) would like to believe. In fact, you're probably more in danger of violating the "judge not lest ye be judged" clause and ending up in the Lake O' Fire as a result than the average homosexual is. Remember, according to the beliefs YOU claim to subscribe to, all sin is forgiven by those who ask forgiveness. So if a gay man on his deathbed asks sincerely for Christ's forgiveness, he'll receive it and go to heaven, regardless of how many times he's taken, or given, it up the ass. Meanwhile, you'll be guilty of having judged - and punished - someone who God has forgiven. And usurping God's position as the arbiter of who is worthy of salvation - well, that's gotta be WAY up there on the list of things that will send you rocketing to hell. Hope you like things warm.

Few people are so dimwitted that they'd say, "oh well, that's ok" and shrug their shoulders about being ripped off for 10 grand or more, but I guess that's the price of loyalty to today's GOP.

Sorry if that doesn't fit your "it's the fault of black and poor people!!!!" narrative, but stupid, nasty, and bigoted is no way to go through life.

What any of this has to do with an idea of how to recover from the Wall Street pals of your favorite party stealing billions of dollars from us that we gave them to bail their asses out of the mess they created is anyone's guess; I think I'll go with "garden-variety bigotry and partisanship" as to the reason why you would feel the need clutter up this thread with your horseshit.

All it would take would be a statement to the effect that "Contraception is a part of health care. People who can't afford contraception can't afford children either, and we can better afford to help them avoid having children they don't want in these tough economic times than we can afford to support those children. The Republicans' plan to withhold family planning aid to those who can't afford it is guaranteed to increase public assisstance rolls at a time when the government is already facing huge economic challenges. A vote against family planning aid is a vote for more families on welfare."

Seems to me that ought to do it for even most of the crazy base, who hate welfare even more than they love forcing people to have unwanted children. Not to mention that keeping the outrage alive a bit longer just gives that many more people the opportunity to hear about it and think, "these nuts now want to stop people from using birth control, too?"

I've heard others say that the Dems will take another run at this in an omnibus spending bill and if that's the case, I'm fine with dropping it from this particular bill - just so long as they don't miss the opportunity to really hammer them with their own lunacy when it comes up again.

I don't think I said "we're there"; I think what I said is, it's a pretty major thing when the majority of people in the country demonstrate of their own free will that they can look beyond race. That's actually a HUGE thing that would not, could not, have happened 20 years ago.

Does it mean that now Care Bears will ride Unicorns on Rainbows in fantasyland and everything is perfect? No. But it doesn't make it less of a big deal in terms of steps in the right direction.

If that seems too simplistic, think about it for a minute: who's going to have a harder time imagining a black man as president, someone who shared classrooms and friendships with black kids in school, or someone who spent their entire early life separated from the "other"?

Even if we look to the 80s, this explanation holds true - the generation then in charge were all old enough to have been sentient before the civil rights era. Reagan and other Republicans drew often from that well.

It has to do with people's life experiences. Those who lived under and longed for a return to the pre-civil rights era are dying out, and the people behind them can't understand what the big deal was about all of it in the first place, because it was never part of their lives.

What marks Obama's election as a turning point, in my mind, is that it's the first time we as a nation chose to look beyond race, rather than being forced to do it through legislation or court orders. Desegregation and civil rights weren't things the south voted for itself. School busing was not to the best of my knowledge voluntarily adopted by any school system anywhere. Affirmative action came about because too many employers seemed to lack the ability to look beyond race. And there are other examples.

That's what's different. This time, we as a country stepped up and said, we don't care that the guy is black, we think he's the best person for the job - without anyone forcing us to do it, and in spite of attempts, both veiled and blatant, to get us to instead focus on tribe.

I don't see how that can be viewed as anything other than a sea-change in racical attitudes. "Thaw" greatly understates the magnitude of the change.