in our supposedly "Christian nation" is becoming unquestionably despicable. We've so thoroughly demonized them to the point that they are increasingly stigmatized as being unworthy of any compassion and basic respect for their gignity as human beings.

The psychological trauma these children experience when they someday find out that they were conceived via rape and that their "fathers" were loathsome sexual offenders of the worst sort has to be devastating (and some people might think the worst thing you would ever have to tell a child is that they are adopted). Is Ricky also in favor of these "Daddy Rapists" visiting and/or having legal rights to these children when they (eventually) get out of jail (if they are even prosecuted in the first place)? After all, he and his ilk believe in the innate supremacy of "intact" two parent heterosexual families, right? Has he ever met any of these children? Has he ever met any women whom say that they are "proud" of the fact that they decided to have their rapist's baby?

How could having an abortion after being raped be any more emotionally traumatizing/scarring for a woman than knowing you're carrying your rapist's baby and, more importantly, that that same person that raped you is now "linked" with you vis a vis the child for the rest of your life? Santorum obviously doesn't understand the wider implications of what he is saying. There's more involved with having children than just gestating them in a woman's body and delivering them but I'm sure that people like Santorum are either unwilling and/or unable to understand it.

for companies to come back here. I don't know how far I would go to penalize companies though IMHO we just shouldnt subsidize companies as much as we seem to be doing right now either and there should be penalties when companies get subsidies for setting up shop in a particular area and failing to deliver a certain number of jobs and/or suddenly decide to pack up and head across the border. If they do stuff like that, they should have to repay some or all of those subsidies that they got for showing up and then perhaps that money could be used to help the newly unemployed workers transition to new jobs. Just some thoughts.

People choose behavior (to do or not to do something), NOT orientation (who somebody is attracted to). However, that being said, whether or not being GLBTQ is a "choice" or not should not really even be a consideration. Our constitution is supposed to protect all kinds of personal choices and private behaviors assuming they do not impinge on the freedom/well-being of other people. After all, practicing a certain kind of religion is a "choice" that is fully protected by law. Why should private consensual sexual behavior be subject to different consideration- even if it is "chosen"?

to try to bring those jobs back here either. I will eat my underwear if they ever allow any incentives (or penalties) to be approved for companies to keep their work here in the US.

Companies *MAY* voluntarily decide to bring work back here but ONLY once we've hit "third nation" status in terms of working conditions and lack of regulations and watchdogs.

It sucks to see the state you live in to not only NOT move forward but actually move backwards.

He just has to "survive" it. He has the organization and campaign infrastructure to "survive" the primary but if he becomes the nominee (which IMHO is still more likely than not), it won't be because Republicans love him. If they did, he'd almost certainly have the nomination locked down by now. He and the Republican establishment seemed rather eager to "coronate" him after a presumed SC primary win but things.didn't.go.to.plan and now, unless they can quickly neutralize Gingrich, they're going to be in for a long, drawn-out, and, frankly, bloody primary. All the while, Obama will be pushing his positive agenda and blueprint for a second term and staying above the fray of the GOP primary and get ready for battle when the GE starts in earnest.

If the shoe fits.......................

Like with "Obamacare", it shows that he cares about helping people less fortunate. I'd be proud to say that I care about what happens to other people and want to make sure that they get the help they need and the Republicans don't- unless you're part of the 1%. Plus, as soon as he embraces it, it loses its potency as an attack line by Gingrich (or anybody else).

Imagine a debate between Obama and Gingrich:

Gingrich: "You're a food stamp President!"
Obama: "Yeah, so?"
Gringrich: