Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Auf Weidersehen Herr und Frau Bucher

What a pathetic performance from Paul Bucher. I saw his concession speech and came away with the feeling that he doesn't get it. The voters said no to his vile message of division. The author of the despicable "Catch and Release Kate" website had the audacity to say shame to those he stated had said mean things. He should look at himself and his wife, Jessica McBride. The two took shameless and mean-spirited self promotion to new heights.

Thankfully, the voters get it. It wasn't his opponent's money that did Bucher in, it was his poorly run campaign and it was the man ... a little man ... that did the trick.

Good riddance.

15 Swings of the bat:

Troy Fullerton said...

Nah, it was the money.

Other Side said...

Big or small bills?

Dad29 said...

I voted for JB principally because JB is REALLY a good handgunner.

Also because he has the charisma to get along with 72 DA's, 100+ Leggies, and 100+ members of the AG office staff.

Other Side said...

I have no problem with JB being a "REALLY good handgunner," though that is opposite to my beliefs. And I agree with you, dad, that he will likely get along with everyone better than the inept, foot-in-mouth prone Bucher.

Believe it or not, I have voted Republican in the past (Gov. Dreyfus comes to mind and there were others I thought deserving). However, it is JB's uncompromising stance against choice, and his going along with the idea that it doesn't matter whether the woman was raped or might face death if the pregnancy is carried to term that will cause me to vote (gasp) for Falk.

Too bad. I think he would be a decent attorney general.

But, since my vote determines the election ... snicker.

Dad29 said...'ve been drinking the Xoff KoolAde if you REALLY believe that VanH's stance on abortion includes sacrificing mothers for the babies.

His position is that of Pro-Life Wisconsin (to which I contribute.) THEIR position is more nuanced than Xoff would have you believe.

But for openers, let's simply concede that "danger of death" cases are rare, indeed.

As to the rape question--you propose to kill an innocent. Frankly, if killing innocents doesn't bother you, why does rape?

Just sayin'

Other Side said...

Why do you have so little sympathy for women who have been raped, dad? Or, maybe it's because you believe they asked for it?

And, the day you are raped and forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term is the day I will listen.

Just sayin'.

Dad29 said...

One of my daughters was raped. I don't think you have standing in that debate, OS.

Dad29 said...

Still waiting for your direct response to the FACT that your position would kill an innnocent.

Other Side said...

Uh, in fact I do ... but I will keep that private, dad.

And, of course an innocent will be killed. That's the additional sadness to this. But your forcing this on the woman is like her being raped a second time. If she does not wish to keep the result of the rape, IT IS HER CHOICE.

Dad29 said...

So you maintain that one has the right to choose to kill?

Are you running for Mullah-in-Chief for AlQuaeda?

Other Side said...

Are you maintaining that women have no rights? So what if you get raped ... hell, lets propogate the species with raping ... why worry about families at all. Yeah, let's make raping legal.

Green and Van Hollen disgust me. And, who do you think you are ... Himmler? Your actions are no different than the forced impregnation of Aryan-looking woman during WWII. Except they had no choice.

Dad29 said...

Ahhh...again, you avoid the answer.

You maintain that a woman HAS A RIGHT to kill an innocent.

I say that your assertion places you on a par with the Mullahs.

You then argue that I say "women have no rights," and compare me to Himmler.

The better comparo, my man, is to compare you with Eichmann, or Mengele.

The question, again: How DO you justify the killing of innocents?

Other Side said...

How do you justify rape?

Dad29 said...

I don't. Never did.

Back to the topic: killing innocents.

Other Side said...

This is getting us nowhere. The innocence you talk about was robbed when the woman was raped.

If a pregnancy occurs, it is and should always be the woman's right to choose how to continue. If the woman chooses to terminate the pregnancy, then of course there is sadness. I cannot imagine there would not be.

But you seem to think it such an easy task for a woman to retain the pregnancy after being raped. Just suck it up and move on. And, to be forced to do so would make it even worse.

You see this in terms of black and white. I do not. We will have to disagree.