Open Chat... All Day, Every Day! Express Your Views, Debate, and Challenge the Views of Others!

In order to keep up with the nature of free, spirited debate, I wanted to place the chat feature at the top of the homepage. This ensures people can come here and share their views on anything they wish and not have it be related to any specific discussion. Here, people can share ideas, links, and views "unmoderated" and an their own pace. To me, this makes The Elephant in the Room blog truly a place for debate.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

August 21, 2012 - Morning Headlines

- US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey's C-17 plane was struck with fragments from rocket fire launched into Bagram Airfield by Afghan militants overnight. Dempsey was not hurt, but his plane was damaged and he had to leave Afghanistan on a different C-17 (ABC News):

- Pressure mounts on GOP representative and senate candidate Todd Akin to resign his bid for the senate. The GOP is cutting off support, but Akin does not appear as if he wants to drop out of the race (USA Today):

- Iran claims it has upgraded its short range ballistic missiles. The move will most likely add additional tension to the current political climate bubbling in the Middle East (Fox News):

- After stunning growth over the last 12 years, Apple is now the most valuable company in world history (CNN Money):


  1. I have to wonder what is going on with some parts of the GOP:

    Every moment that the American people are distracted by these social issues and not thinking about the economy, it hurts Romney/Ryan. Knowing that, of all times to choose to push a platform based on divisive social issues, why would you do it as the election closes in?

    1. Hi Rken Wow!

      We agree on something! In my youth, I was pro-choice. Back then, abortion was allowed ONLY before the end of the FIRST trimester.

      As the laws changed to include 'late term' and/or 'partial birth' abortions, so did my opinion. The matter has degenerated to the point where today, there are 'scholars' in their ivory towers attempting to decide whether AFTER birth abortions would be acceptable, and at what age the newly born of our society become 'persons'.

      The majority of Americans are pro-life:


      If you interpret our Constitution literally to actually MEAN Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness - for ALL Americans - then, by that standard,(IMO) abortion would clearly fall into the category of UnConstitutional. NO WHERE in the Constitution does it state (or imply) that ONE person's RIGHT to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness should/could/would cancel/negate that SAME right for ANOTHER.

      ALL that said, the issue does NOT belong the Presidential platform of any candidate. If they keep it up, they COULD win the popular opinion BATTLE on that ONE issue, and end up losing the over-all election WAR.

    2. Dara - Should a woman have the right to decide when to give birth?

    3. Seems we can agree Dara! At least on the main points. :)

      I'm pro-choice though, but at the same time I certainly can agree with you that post-birth/late-term abortions are pushing the limits in the whole 'pro-choice' debate. Barring certain exceptions (health of the mother, etc).

    4. As I said, I initially was pro-choice, back when the 'choice' was to be made within the FIRST trimester.

      Number one on MY list of reasons is mother's safety. A first trimester abortion is an office/clinic procedure and relatively free from physical complication... beyond that time - for numerous reasons, the woman SHOULD be at a hospital. For whatever reason(s), many abortion docs these days, DO NOT enjoy hospital privileges.

      As with any 'liberal/progressive' program - 'they' pushed the abortion issue. In many states a woman can NOW 'choose' to abort up to and including the END of gestation - long past the time the CHILD COULD and probably WOULD live outside the mother's womb, if not for the 'intervention' of some 'kindly' doctor who SAVES - not the child ('FIRST, do NO harm'?) but the mother, from the BURDEN (read: responsibility) of caring for the fruit of her OWN activity.

      The living infant is either 'dispatched' or put aside to die, isolated, on its own, from hypothermia, dehydration, suffocation or some combination...

      I'm not sure whether I buy into the 'moment of conception' argument or not... BUT killing/allowing to die - a human LIVING being - is DEAD wrong. OUTSIDE of the abortion 'argument' - these inhumane 'procedures' would be labeled murder/manslaughter.

      So, in answer to your question. Since Rowe v. Wade IS the law of the land,(as a woman)I believe that three months is PLENTY of time for a woman to 'decide' whether or not she 'chooses' to become a mother.

    5. @RKen - Yes. When the health of the mother is in jeopardy, I agree.