There’s talking points?

If adultery was illegal, Newt Gingrich would be serving a life sentence.

And our whole economy is built on coveting your neighbor’s goods.

There should be.

When you go on television or radio, you have a very very very VERY short time to map out your argument and hit your crucial points. Shows like MEET THE PRESS and THE NEWS HOUR, which allow for long discussions and aren’t obsessed with fast-food debates, let people stray from talking points and engage in actual discussions. But if you’re going on FOX, be prepared to make your argument with as few words as possible and get out.

He could just have said, “Judges who impose them on people? Please point out the women who have been forced by judges to have abortions against their wills.”

“Judges who impose them on people? Please point out the women who have been forced by judges to have abortions against their wills.�

Well that too. Hugh says so much crazy shit that it’s easy to overlook things like that.

Is Hugh going to attack Catholics who agree with the death penalty as well?

I wish someone would call these bastards on these gotcha questions. “so, Hugh, you wrote a book about religion. Do you remember your Sunday School teacher’s name? Why did she omit the lesson about Thou shalt not Kill?”

“What’s your bank balance, Hugh? Did you skip church the day the sermon was on the verse about the camel through the needle’s eye?”

Hewitt’s melon would have exploded if McAuliffe would have kindly mentioned the Vatican has always been against the Iraq war. “Immoral, and “Agression” I believe are the precise words. That’s hilarious Hewitt didn’t argue McAuliffe’s assertion that he was a right wing whacko.

Moving on.

you support late term abortions, and judges who impose them on people

Gosh I had no idea that my abortion was imposed on you, Hugh.

How about “my religious views should have no effect on the government’s abililty to mandate pregnancy, nor should anyone else’s. That power would be an unwarranted intrusion into the rights of the individual”

Actually, he did a great job, Nitwit is just too dense to get it:

HH: But I mean, you often cite Catholic doctrine in this book, and yet you support late term abortions, and judges who impose them on people. […] Is that teaching optional, Terry McAuliffe?

TM: Is what teaching optional?

He points out very clearly that there is no biblical doctrine on abortion. The bible, being as how it was written by people over a thousand years ago, doesn’t speak to abortion, electiricity, stem cells, nuclear weapons…These people are just making it up as they go along…

mikey

In the rest stop, with the trucker.

“TM: Hey, listen, I have my views on my religious beliefs, Hugh, you’ve got yours.”

The suggested response essentially says “I agree that abortion is wrong but I don’t think it should be illegal”. Terry McAuliffe’s reply does not say that. I read it as saying, admittedly not in a straightforward way, “I don’t hold that my religious beliefs say that abortion is wrong, any more than you hold that your religious beliefs tell you the death penalty is wrong.”

Now I don’t know the details of his actual religious beliefs and whether or not he actually thinks abortion is bad like adultery is bad. And I generally think that reduction in the number of abortions by sex education and access to contraception is a good idea if for no other reason than that abortion is a fairly unpleasant procedure for the woman involved, from what I understand. I think it’s also politically a decent starting point. But it’s quite another step beyond that line to say that abortion per se is “wrong” even at the level of adultery. I don’t think it is wrong at all. I think encouraging people on our side to say that it’s “wrong but it shouldn’t be illegal” even when they don’t actually believe that is a dumb idea.

The problem isn’t that Terry McAuliffe isn’t snappier with the talking points. The problem is that Terry McAuliffe is a total cobag, and any party or candidate who has people with his values and skills (hint: it’s all about the Benjamins) among its public faces needs to rethink itself in more fundamental ways than mere talking points.

It’s appalling to me that McAuliffe remains an important figure in the Democratic Party. He’s a big macher in the Hillary Clinton campaign. Especially if she wins, we’ll all be reminded that one of the small silver linings of the Bush years has been the relative absence of sleazy, center-right Democratic powerbrokers like TM from our public sphere.

He could just have said, “Judges who impose them on people? Please point out the women who have been forced by judges to have abortions against their wills.�

Hey, I went to traffic court last week to plead nolo contendere to a bunch of parking tickets, and the judge imposed an abortion on me. And I’m a guy! Now that’s judicial activism!

I like the part where T calls H a wacko.

I know you’re a right wing whacko, but don’t make things up.

I’d prefer the reply, “So Hugh, do you criticise moderate Muslims for not supporting the imposition of Sharia Law as well?”

Me mum used to posit the notion that the reason folks like HH were so freaked out by abortion was that, deep down inside, they are sure that if their mothers would have had a choice, they never would have been carried the little Hughs to term.

That sounds harsh, I know, but I do think the root of most of the right nutisphere’s ‘issues’ is severe low self-esteem, and a fear that no one loves them and that they are unworthy of love. If they can look down on others as subhuman, then they get a false boost to their sense of self-worth.

But hey, I guess even my mum could have been in danger of having an activist judge impose an abortion upon her, so maybe I shouldn’t judge.

The ideal response to a Spew Spewitt question is ‘oh, fuck off’. Make Chapstick Tits hit the seven-second delay button.

See, I think Terry’s answer should have been:

“Now, Hugh. It’s only been a few hundred years since we got the traditional-values crowd to end their hundred-thousand-year practice of infanticide. Let’s not rush things here.”

Whatever one may think of Mr. McAuliffe, it is an undeniable pleasure each time he calls the bastard “Hughie.”

And really, is adultery wrong? Or just a fun and exciting way to spend a weekend away from home?

“HH: But I mean, you often cite Catholic doctrine in this book, and yet you support late term abortions, and judges who impose them on people. […] Is that teaching optional, Terry McAuliffe?”

Well, since god hasn’t struck Terry down, I’d say that clearly it is, dickhead.

Fuck do I hate Christianity. Hewitt’s goofy-ass god didn’t see fit to tell America about himself for several millenia I don’t see why he all of a sudden needs the country to listen to him now.

It just pisses me off that our country’s dominant religion says that most of the people who have lived in America, and most of the things that have happened in America, are worthless fucking shit that we can just ignore.

It’s pretty fucking unpatriotic, if you ask me.

He points out very clearly that there is no biblical doctrine on abortion. The bible, being as how it was written by people over a thousand years ago, doesn’t speak to abortion, electiricity, stem cells, nuclear weapons…These people are just making it up as they go along…

Er, yeah, that’s the idea of the Catholic Church. The Pope makes pronouncements about things and people have to agree. The Catholic Church isn’t about Biblical Fundamentalism.

Well, yeah, but only when he’s speaking “ex cathedra.” You see, most of the time when the Pope speaks, he’s just talking out of his ass. But when he speaks “ex cathedra,” he’s talking out of God’s ass.

I would pay good money to see someone — anyone — give TDTL’s answer (So Hugh, do you criticise moderate Muslims for not supporting the imposition of Sharia Law as well?) to the next christublican who asks a cheeky and obnoxious question a la Hughie.

i think that abortion is illgal because it is bad killing a innoest baby.it is a crime.