YEARBOOK: Ralph Northam In Blackface & KKK Photo


#21

Are false accusations enough to disqualify a person from office?

Define “credible”.

I think it’s interesting that when a Democrat is accused you believe it, but when a Republican is accused the excuses greatest hits album is all you listen too.

Interesting.

Above reproach? Does this apply to the President as well, or just state AG’s?


#22

Their jobs are not the same, CSB–or did you not notice that? The AG is the chief law enforcement official of any State and should NOT be a racist, a liar or a thief. The President is none of those things–despite the left-wing media’s continual accusations to the contrary–but his job and function is NOT law enforcement as much as it’s directing the ship of state.

This woman’s accusations are much more credible for a variety of reasons. (1) She’s of the same political party (and presumably the same political philosophy) as the man she’s accusing. (2) She reported this over a year ago and nothing happened. This happened at the Democrat convention in 2015…not 38 years ago. She has specific details about what happened, when, what day and under what conditions. If you recall, Ms Ford did NOT report what she says happened to her for 38 YEARS, had no recollection of exactly when, where, or in what conditions this supposedly occurred and the two other people she claims knew about it or were present, have NO recollection of any such thing ever occurring. Plus, she is a left-wing, activist virulently opposed to President Trump and would likely have done this to ANY of his nominees that happened to hail from Virginia. She raked in over $800K for her efforts. Fairfax’s accuser is NOT being financed by anyone–certainly not conservative sympathizers.


#23

No, CS, the brownface by Herring should not - in and of itself - disqualify him from assuming the governorship.

However, I think the fact two days ago Herring was stating flatly that Northam should resign for the exact same thing he himself is now admitting to, no doubt preemptively before his public unmasking takes place, reveals that Mr. Herring is not exactly the most virtuous individual in the state of Virginia. I sure as hell would not want him as the governor of a state I live in.

Simply stated, if Herring thinks Northam should resign, perhaps he might wish to apply the same standard to himself.

The level of hypocrisy here is stunning. As if any further example is necessary, with regard to the Lt Governor and the now detailed account of the alleged sexual assault by his accuser, I have to ask, where are Sen Hirono or Sen Corey “Spartacus Moment” Booker and the rest of the Senate Judiciary Dems who with essentially one voice declared that Cavanaugh should not be seated on the Sup Ct - the woman - his accuser - should be believed in these matters - even in the absence of evidence? Guilty until proven innocent.

This mess in Virginia should get even more interesting - As I understand it, the 4th in line is a Republican. I assume there are yearbook pictures of him having his way with sheep!! LMAO


#24

An example of the left’s utter hypocrisy, let’s just examine one statement that the President made Tuesday night that the media is calling a “lie” or a “bald-face lie”. He said that 1 in 3 women in the latest caravan is sexually assaulted at some point on the trek. The media (including the morons at “Factcheck” and “Snopes” claim it’s a lie because the “true” figure is 31% are assaulted. I’m not a math wizard but “one in three” amounts to 33 1/3%, so these morons are accusing the President of “lying” because he was off by 2 1/3%??? Their reaction would have been identical if the President had said “almost one in three” and you know it.


#25

I’ve noticed that since the sexual allegations against the Lt Gov, now many democrats are saying we need due process…

HO HO HO!!


#26

Not for the photo; that’s making a social justice mountain out of a goofing-around molehill.

Magna-Yeah-That

His words made it clear that he supported post birth abortion (as did Obama).


#27

Can you link something for me that shows that?


#28

Have you NOT been watching ANYTHING but MSNBC and CNN, CSB? There’s a video in which Northam ADMITS that when a baby is born alive, he says “We make it comfortable while the mother and relatives decide what to do with it.” What ELSE does that mean but allowing them to decide whether or not to kill it or simply allow the baby to die? He was talking about a baby that had SURVIVED an attempt to abort it.


#29

link?


#30

#31

Rachel Dolezal Is a ‘Master Artist’: She’s Always Been ‘Very Good at Doing Her Makeup,’ Says Her Mother


#32

Thank you for the link!

So, if I’m understanding correctly, the bill under consideration would allow for an abortion in the third trimester for specific instances.

The law currently states, “Virginia law currently prohibits third-trimester abortions, excepted in the extreme circumstances in which a woman’s life or health is at risk and that risk is certified by three physicians,”

Sounds to me like the bill would reduce the number of physicians to one, which the Governor said he’d like to see at least two, but not much else would change, would it?

more than one physician, by the way — and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s non-viable."

“In this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he continued. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

I think, and I could be wrong, but I think the second paragraph is referring to the first. I believe what he was saying is that if the child would not be expected to live after birth or would be severely deformed etc, that a late-term, 3t, abortion should be allowed. He was describing a case where a baby was stillborn or under duress and that the parents should have the opinion to decide whether to let the child die or take some action to save the child.

Not that he thinks that healthy babies should be able to be killed after they are born.

Now the question to the delegate was “would your bill allow for abortions while a woman was in labor?”

Now, no one has said it, but it sounds like you all think that they are advocating for abortions of healthy babies moments before the baby is born. Currently, that’s not in the law, and unless someone can prove otherwise, this new bill wouldn’t allow for that either, though it would allow a single doctor to make that choice, something I disagree with.

Furthermore, while I agree the bill leaves a lot to be desired, in what possible scenario would a woman about to give birth have her life saved if she aborted her baby at that moment?

It just sounds to me like they want to let doctors decide based on the situation, not the government.

The reality, in my opinion, is that if you let doctors decide, there are going to be rare cases where healthy babies are aborted, if you let the government decide, there will be rare cases where healthy mothers die because they couldn’t get an abortion.

If you keep the law the way it is, the chances of getting three doctors to make a choice like that would be pretty rare if ever.


#33

/Facepalm…


#34

Apparently, others found it. I heard the clip on the radio.


#35

CS - you missed one VITAL point in Northam’s commentary: “The infant would be delivered”. It would then be kept “comfortable” - paraphrasing. You do understand, he is unequivocally referring to a live birth, don’t you? You wouldn’t bother taking steps to keep a still born comfortable - right? You do understand that once the child has been delivered, any preconceived danger of carrying the baby to term or complications of the physical act of delivery, by definition, no longer exist - right?

It is this kind of indefensible BS/the willful ignoring of facts by many folks on the Left, in this case, you, that is precisely why it is often impossible to engage in meaningful discussion/debate. And not just on this issue, but damn near any other - illegal immigration jumps immediately to mind.


#36

Can you give us an example of a baby being “stillborn” being “made comfortable” while the doctor and mother “decide” what to do? And have you NEVER heard of a Dr. Gosnell?


#37

The issue is whether you try to revive the baby. Now of course if the baby is perfectly healthy (but isn’t breathing) this is why you should do, but I think, and frankly I freely admit I’m no expert here, but if the baby were stillborn and suffering oblivious debilitating mental or physical deformity there might be a question of what to do revive the baby or let it pass.

No judgement here because I don’t think I could make a determination here in every case.

I mean, there are rare instances where babies with Anencephaly or Encephalocele where the babies brain is mostly missing or in the latter case, the baby is born with their brain outside their skull.

There are lots of other rare horrible genetic mutations that can cause a lifetime of pain and medical bills that most families cannot afford.

But again, I see the moral conundrum and frankly I’m not decided, I’m just saying that I don’t think the governors comments were meant as you all seem to have taken them. I mean, god, I hope I’m right. If you’re right, and he’s ok with killing perfectly healthy babies, then I agree with you guys.


#38

There are thousands of “doctors” throughout the country perfectly willing to abort (kill) a perfectly healthy, viable baby for a fee. If there weren’t, we wouldn’t have 60 MILLION dead babies since 1973. No one can EVER convince me that ALL of those 60 million babies were “deformed” in some manner or even most of 'em. Meanwhile, there are tens of thousands of infertile couples BEGGING to adopt a baby…ANY baby, regardless of race, sex or deformity. When we adopted our daughter in 1978–5 YEARS after Roe–there were more than 5,000 couples on the waiting list at that one, rather small adoption agency in conservative Texas.


#39

Ok, you’ve kinda shifted the topic here. We were talking about 3rd-trimester abortions.


#40

Not at all, we’re talking about abortions at ALL STAGES of a pregnancy–including those up until the baby is partially out of the birth canal, and even some which have EXITED the birth canal alive! The FACT is, that a baby BECOMES a baby at the moment of conception. Left alone, it will either be flushed out of the uterus naturally or it’ll grow into what we recognize as a human baby. It won’t become a platypus or a liver fluke or a mako shark. It will emerge from the womb as a HUMAN BEING–which is what it ALWAYS was. I abhor the idea of ANY abortion, but I’m particularly distressed by the left’s attitude that they should be “allowed” to kill a baby even after a woman begins her labor contractions or even when the baby is 4/5ths delivered and ESPECIALLY when the baby has survived all attempts to kill it but emerges alive anyway, which is precisely what the Virginia bill would have allowed and very likely how the New York law will be exercised.