Why the hate?

I'm still waiting to learn why you jumped all over inRusset, and now apparently me, about religion when he/she never mentioned it and I never brought it up as a defense, merely pointed out you introduced an element that was never part of the discussion..plus your strategy of personally attacking people rather than their arguments won't win you any converts.

You can have the last word.

Your avoiding my point which was you attack the person instead of the argument. Again, Where in InRussetShadows comment is even the word "religion"?

I did not "twist "anything (an ad hominem attack), I quoted you. I made no claim about the Constitution and when life begins. You are putting words in my mouth (another ad hominem attack). Did you say "Whether we call ourselves Tea Party, Constitutionalists, Libertarians, or Republicans, we need to come together." or not? Did you accuse InRusset of being "in the dark ages" for simply questioning your pro-choice stance or not? I did not say anything about pro-life or pro-choice being a disqualifier for the Tea Party movement. You inferred what I did not imply. You attacked inRusset personally rather than what inRusset said.

Supposedly you, me and InRusset are mostly on the same side, yet you come across as "My Way or The Highway". I contend being Pro-Choice is not a de facto requirement of the Tea Party movement. If you want to InRusset, me or ProLifers to see your point of view, convince with the power of your argument, not by bomb throwing.

Wow. You're really foaming at the mouth here. There is no "Freedom Of Choice as proscribed by the Constitution" just like there's no "separation of church and state" in the Constitution as the liberals define it. You're saying someone who favors smaller government, fiscal responsibility, a strong national defense, protected borders, using our own natural resources, etc. "can't" be part of the Tea Party movement simply because they don't favor abortion? Where in InRussetShadows comment is even the word "religion"? How do you know InRussert is a "staunch right to lifer"? He/She doesn't say they are. At least not in this thread. You say "Whether we call ourselves Tea Party, Constitutionalists, Libertarians, or Republicans, we need to come together." You say "We need to have a huge Tea Party umbrella" but then turn right around and reject pro-lifers? How is it that only you are the arbiter of what it means to be in the Tea Party movement?

I've read your profile and several of your comments and it seems you are on the right but your ad hominem attack is a common tactic the Left uses. I also looked at some of InRussets writings and he/she doesn't seem to be a religious fanatic. The Left is the home of intolerance while preaching tolerance. The Left is the home of hate speech while condemning it. If you want to convince InRussert, or me, or any Pro Life person to see your point of view you won't do it this way.

Ronald Reagan said "The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor."

If you've never seen the first Superman movie (1978) rent it. The way Reeve pulled his shoulders in, slumped enough to make himself appear shorter, combed his hair in a nerdy way, spoke with a slightly higher voice (more nasally than from the gut) and acted like a momma's boy while being Clark was a lot more than just Superman out of uniform wearing glasses. It's pretty convincing.

There's hope for a decent Superman movie yet. It's been a long dry spell since the classic Superman: The Movie and Superman II. Hopefully Nolan "gets" the Superman character and doesn't just make him a Batman in red and blue tights. In many ways he's the opposite of Batman.

While I think the first Supes movie is the best so far, I didn't care for the "Otis" character at all and, though I love the fantastic in comic books, I just couldn't "suspend belief" when he "turned back time". Sorry, not even the man of steel could do that. Develop the Clark Kent side of his character, stay away from silly campiness, give him a different villain, keep the kryptonite to a minimum and make him a "real" man with strength and values (not an emo-type metrosexual) who is proud of his adopted home country/planet and I think we'll have a winner.

I love the fact this line "You tell the truth unlike the right" is in the lyrics of her video and yet she somehow doesn't equate "broken promises" with lying. In the Hannity interview she gives Obama a "B Minus". Hannity asks how many broken promises does it take to give him an F?

Obama Girl dumps Obama.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/category/emilys-post... 'Obama Girl': Crush on President Faded Due to 'Broken Promises'

To quote The Simpson's Nelson Muntz... http://nelsonlaugh.com/

I don't know if this helps but from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Your_Eyes_(Peter_...

"Jeffrey Gaines included an acoustic live version of "In Your Eyes" as a bonus track to "Scares Me More", the second single off his 1992 self-titled Chrysalis debut album"

Going to http://www.jeffreygaines.com/, clicking on "Music" and scrolling down I found

"SCARES ME MORE SINGLE - 1992

$1.98

Two Versions of "Scares Me More" and a version of "In Your Eyes"

If you've been wondering about this for six months, spend the 2 bucks to see if this is the version you want. Or, take a stab at your local library, they may have the album it's on.

No predictions here. I stopped watching awards shows years ago. I did hear a couple DJs comment that the Grammy's were better this year because, apparently, they actually focused on music for a change. I'm looking forward to the "Hitler reacts to the Oscars" video that will no doubt pop up on YouTube.

Why won't sharks eat lawyers?
Professional courtesy.