Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Carly Fiorina’s Post-Debate Abortion Ad is Intense—and Effective

Carly Fiorina’s Post-Debate Abortion Ad is Intense—and Effective

“Carly won the debate, so here come the false attacks”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2&v=Yhn0DdH8M-0

Carly Fiorina killed it during the last debate. Polling has her in second place behind Donald Trump, marking a whopping 12% increase in support from earlier this month.

Considering she very nearly didn’t make the cut for CNN’s GOP throwdown, I think we can all afford to throw her props. Love her, hate her, or have questions about her, registered voters have spoken—they want to see more. It’s not surprising; many pundits predicted that all Carly needed to raise her profile within the crowded Republican field was a chance to steal the spotlight.

She did it. Her star is rising, and she’s using the opportunity not only to hit back at her most vocal opponents, but to bolster her conservative bona fides before a divided voter pool. It’s a continuation of the strategy she used earlier this summer—when her polling numbers sat below 5%—but it’s still effective. This time around, Fiorina is rebooting the conversation on abortion with a new Carly for America PAC ad that lashes out against Democrats who refused to acknowledge the existence of the Planned Parenthood sting videos after she referenced them in the CNN debate.

It’s an intense ad, and be warned—it contains graphic images from the now-infamous sting videos.

Watch:

More from Fox News:

The former HP CEO made the remarks at the Sept. 16 Republican primary debate last week as she dared President Obama and Hillary Clinton to watch the Planned Parenthood videos. “A fully-formed fetus, on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says ‘we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain,’” Fiorina said, adding that if Congress does not pass legislation defunding Planned Parenthood, “shame on us.”

Some questioned the veracity of the Republican presidential candidate’s remarks after the debate, claiming that the scene exactly as she described was not in any of the videos. However, the Fiorina camp circulated a video of a kicking fetus, which was included in the ad put out by CARLY for America.

The video goes on to show the scene to which Fiorina was referring — a fetus with its legs kicking — before showing another clip of an aborted fetus, and then a former Planned Parenthood technician describing how she was told: “We’re going to procure brain.”

I think this ad is effective; it draws attention to both Carly’s attention to pro-life issues, and her ability to come across as strong on the issues without adopting a Clinton-esque attitude about them. Her focus on “character” is key; she will be able to use this theme in other ad campaigns, which should resonate with voters who crave both a political “outsider” and a candidate who can effectively message on serious policy issues.

Follow Amy on Twitter @ThatAmyMiller

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

YAY! More “strong talk” about abortion. Pffft. SO what? Seems “anti-abortion” types have been TALKING about “banning” abortion for 50 years. SO is Carly, another stalking horse for Jeb!, going to propose a constitutional amendment to “ban” abortion? If not, why not? Does the “smart guy” actually realize anti-abortion only appeals to about 30% of the base and know that no anti-abortion constitutional amendment is EVER GOING TO PASS? But it will keep the jesus freaks happy and conservatives out of power so the GOPe can keep power in coalition with the socialists.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 23, 2015 at 8:10 pm

    You keep reverting to the same old, stupid lies.

    At least get some new material.

      Fiftycaltx in reply to Ragspierre. | September 23, 2015 at 8:15 pm

      Really? And how is that constitutional amendment coming? Havn’t seen anything about it in the papers lately.

        Ragspierre in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 23, 2015 at 8:18 pm

        That’s a restatement of your oldest…and stupidest…of lies.

        As you’ve been schooled repeatedly, there is no need of an amendment.

        But you’ll continue with that lie, I predict. It’s what you’ve got, and who you are on this topic.

          Fiftycaltx in reply to Ragspierre. | September 23, 2015 at 10:50 pm

          Ah, so SCOTUS did NOT rule that abortion was a “right”? Sorry to intrude on your reality. Maybe your next imperial presidency can overturn the rest of the constitution by fiat.

        caseym54 in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 23, 2015 at 11:36 pm

        Why should anyone need an amendment anymore? You guys sure didn’t pass one. IF you’re so worried about what a few more GOP Supreme Court choices might do, YOU go pass an amendment.

        Let me know how that goes.

      “At least get some new material.”

      Fiorina is just about everything you claim Trump to be:

      “to her statement to the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board that Roe v. Wade is “a decided issue”

      “She endorsed the California DREAM Act, which grants in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. …Fiorina also strongly supported Marco Rubio’s amnesty plan that even he claims not to back anymore, endorsed cap & trade and attacked Ted Cruz for being willing to shut down the government to stop Obamacare.”

      More…
      https://www.conservativereview.com/Commentary/2015/09/Carly-Fiorina-Hillary-Donor

    jayjerome66 in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 23, 2015 at 8:23 pm

    You are right on the mark, Fifty.
    Can you imagine the fun the democrats will have with commercials if she gets the Republican nomination?

    Example: They start off with a sad faced ex HP employee, who says – “As the CEO of HP, Carly Fiorina laid off 30,000 workers. I was one of them.”
    Followed by six or seven others who say one at a time : “So was I.”
    Followed by a blurring fast forward of thousands of other laid off HP employees.
    Followed by a quick stop on Carley’s face, saying, I was fired too, for my inept leadership!”
    Followed by whoever is running on the Democratic side, saying: “Vote for Carly, she’ll get you fired too!”

      Steve_in_SoCal in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 10:03 am

      Oh. . .poor face people… what about the 47M on food stamps – up 30% since obama got elected?

      How about poor face Mr. Jones who can’t get a job because Obama is not enforcing the border?

      We could go to Ms. Stiehnkl’s parents – given their daughter was killed by an illegal immigrant. That would be a good poor face.

      You guys got nothing.

      As for Roe v. Wade – try passing post 20 week abortion law and let’s see how long it takes the supreme court to over turn it. Not even Roberts will go your way this time.

      Hey Jake, call the guys. We’re getting the band back together. You folks got a lying candidate who broke the law; a socialist (listen to one of his stump speeches regarding the economy. Now you know why the media won’t print or show any of his campaign speeches when he talks about the economy); a guy who is going to run on the slogan “My son died. Vote for me.”; a guy who’s handpicked governor successor lost in a state that hasn’t voted R governor in 30 years. You can’t even find a fake indian to run. Oh snap. . .wait.

Nice ad but no way I would support any candidate who pushed Amnesty by supporting the Gang of 8 (Rubio Deception Act) and the Dream (Bring your kids to America illegally and we’ll make ’em citizens) Act.

The challenge is to reconcile individual dignity, intrinsic value, and natural imperatives. Today, it is a cultural and institutional practice to denigrate the first, debase the second, and postpone the last.

The premeditated killing of wholly innocent human lives was a prerequisite behavior for a cultural revolution. Its normalization engenders progressive corruption of humanity, society, philosophy (e.g. science), and individuals.

The choice people, especially women, some repeatedly, made was between humanity and luxury. The advocates and activists for a pro-choice/abortion doctrine support it to reduce environmental disruption and personal burdens. It is the wicked solution… The final solution, to a “wicked problem”.

The abortion industry, the Planned Parenthood corporation specifically, and the pro-choice Democrat Party lobby for the creation and maintenance of a human market, and respond to their special (e.g. religious, financial) interests, respectively. It’s unfortunate that not a few Republicans also support the State-establishment of a pro-choice cult (e.g. selective-child, congruence or “=”, class diversity, etc.).

    jayjerome66 in reply to n.n. | September 23, 2015 at 8:28 pm

    Yeah, let’s go back to the good old days, when abortion was illegal, and women had abortions in barber shops or at home using coat hangers.

      Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 23, 2015 at 8:34 pm

      Erm…illiterate, lying Moby Troll…

      He never mentioned what your fantasizing about.

      But, on that same subject, perhaps you can name the people who’ve been fired at the IRS. The VA. The EPA.

      Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 23, 2015 at 8:37 pm

      At the time Roe was decided, abortions were not “illegal” in the U.S., you lying SOS. In some states, they were pretty common.

      And there has never been ONE confirmed instance of a “coat-hanger” abortion.

        jayjerome66 in reply to Ragspierre. | September 23, 2015 at 10:54 pm

        This is a pointed question: do you really have a law degree?

        If so, how can you be so abysmally ignorant of the history of abortion law in th US? Before Roe Vs Wade (why did you bring that up, I didn’t)  “abortion was PROHIBITED ENTIRELY in 30 states and legal in limited circumstances (such as pregnancies resulting from rape or incest) in 20 other states.”

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States

        How did you get that so wrong?

        And though you undoubtedly know I was using the coat hanger as a general symbol for ‘back alley’ abortions your assertive claim there has never been an instance of it corroborated is as full of feces as you are: 

        From the reminiscences of WALDO L. FIELDING, M.D., retired gynecologist: “My early formal training in my specialty was spent in New York City, from 1948 to 1953, in two of the city’s large municipal hospitals.

        There I saw and treated almost every complication of illegal abortion that one could conjure, done either by the patient herself or by an abortionist — often unknowing, unskilled

        “The familiar symbol of illegal abortion is the infamous “coat hanger” — which may be the symbol, but is in no way a myth. In my years in New York, several women arrived with a hanger still in place. Whoever put it in — perhaps the patient herself — found it trapped in the cervix and could not remove it.”#

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/health/views/03essa.html?_r=0

        That’s two misstatements of fact from you in a single comment. Are you going to man up, and apologize for publishing false information? Or double down and rationalize it with additional lies on lies, like Fiorina did with the contrived PP videos?

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 6:43 am

          Gawd, you’re a lying SOS!

          My first statement…IF you could read…was confirmed by your reference and even your illiterate comment, Moby Troll.

          My second statement is in no way contradicted by your apocryphal bullshit. Lying liars have been lying about anecdotal stuff since time immemorial. ESPECIALLY around Collectivist agendas! “HANDS UP! DON’T SHOOT!”

          Both statements are true and correct, you lying SOS troll.

          jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 11:33 am

          Smuck-A-Long: saying abortions were legal in the US because they were legal in some states is like saying Negros were free in the United States prior to the Civil War because Negros were free in 9 states. By your twisted rationalization we didn’t need no stinkin’ Thirteenth Amendment. Right, ditzo.

          Another confirmation of self-inflicted hanger abortions:
          Whoopi Goldberg has written about, and mentioned numerous times, she performed an illegal abortion on herself with a coat hanger in a park, when she was 14 years old.

          Google it, you buffoon.

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 1:01 pm

          Both statements are true and correct, smuck-holster.

          platypus in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 9:48 pm

          If you knew what a back alley abortion was, maybe you wouldn’t make such stupid statements about the process (coat hangers). But then again, maybe not because you have made nothing but stupid comments on this site.

          Abortions, back in the day, were done ‘back alley’ so that anonymity could be preserved. No woman wanted to be known as one who ‘needed’ an abortion. This was because public morals frowned on sex outside of marriage. So some doctors would do the operation but only if the woman came in the back door of the office (which was in the alley) after hours.

          The alternative to abortion was a home for unwed mothers, which was free of charge on the condition that the woman give up the baby after birth. Again, this existed because of public morals and a woman known to be unmarried who was obviously pregnant would obviously be a sexually immoral woman and therefore a social problem. A woman who found out she was pregnant would go live in one of these homes in order to keep her reputation. In exchange for hiding the pregnancy for the community, the community would protect her reputation afterward by keeping the episode secret. This was primarily to help her in the marriage market (such as it was).

          I think you have a rage issue jj666. Why else would you hang out at a site like this one when you share none of our values and viewpoints?

      stevewhitemd in reply to jayjerome66. | September 23, 2015 at 8:41 pm

      Is that your solution? It’s not ours.

      If your only response is to throw a fifty-year old cliche out there then you’ve lost the argument. It’s nothing but an ad hominem for you.

      Did you watch the videos? I did. Horrific. Awful. Terrible.

      Ms. Fiorina is right. This is a test of character.

      No to abortion, be it legal or illegal. No to Kermit Gosnell and to coat-hangers.

      There is a better way. It involves respecting life, not just that of the fetus but also of the mother. It’s respecting that a woman might find herself in a terrible jam and may need our help. Instead of condemning her as a slut (the old days) or just evacuating her uterus and sending her on her way (today), we need to help. Compassion. A helping hand. Assistance. It might cost a little of our hard-earned tax dollars but I’ll pay the tax to put an effective end to abortion.

      You throw out the false rejoinder as a way to avoid being honest about the problem. It’s time to be honest.

        jayjerome66 in reply to stevewhitemd. | September 24, 2015 at 1:14 pm

        *

        I respect your right to your opinion; but you don’t respect my right to mine.

        You say it’s time to be honest. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. You need to be honest too.

        My ad hominem attacks are in response to the same kind of attacks on me, or are you blind to the names and insults always hurled at me by your brother-in-opinion Ragspierre. Have I ad hominem-ed you? You, on the other hand, seem to headed that way toward me when you say ‘Is that your solution. It’s not ours…’

        Are you suggesting my opinion on abortion is the marginalized one, and the opinion of ‘you and yours’ is the accepted, majority view here in the US?

        Not by any established polling measurement. Per recent Gallup polls, 50% of Americans consider themselves pro-choice; only 44% consider themselves pro-life. To the question ‘do you think the Supreme Court should overturn Roe Verses Wade,’ a minority 29% said ‘yes.’ 53% said ‘no.’

        Your views on abortion are minority views. And if when you say “No to abortion, be it legal or illegal,” are you one of those ‘non-exception’ right-to-lifers who would ban abortions in cases of rape, incest or to protect the mother’s health? If so, 75% to 85% of Americans (depending on the polling) disagree with you. Which statistically would put you in the same percentage of Americans who believe in spells or witchcraft. In an even smaller percentage than those who believe in ghosts and UFOs.

        I applaud your compassion for woman who find themselves in a ‘terrible jam’ and may need a helping hand. Are you offering that helping hand now, to pregnant girls to stop them from aborting, with cash for living space or hospital costs and financial assistance for her and her baby after birth? If not, why not?

        Now in the US there are about 1,000,000 legal abortions yearly. About 60% of abortion patients are minority women. Overall 69% of all the women who have abortions are economically disadvantaged, close to or below the poverty line. If abortion is outlawed, you and other compassionate Conservatives like you are going to have a busy time ahead in coming decades, to test your character and conviction in helping to provide for them and their infants in their time of need.

          What do the poll numbers say when people are asked if they support abortion in the first, second and third trimesters? It is not a binary question.

          By the way, I applaud you on your decision to stop trying to say that Carly’s a liar on the video issue.

      So, you don’t believe in personal responsibility?

      You do believe that it’s a simple choice to exchange one life for another, for money, pleasure, convenience?

      Do you recognize individual dignity?

      The pro-choice/abortion doctrine is a denial of human biological evolution. Elective abortion is the indiscriminate killing of a human life in a captive environment. Rejecting the intrinsic value of human life casts doubts on the motives of people to arbitrarily sustain human life. For what? Profit, leverage, parts?

      Ironically, pro-choice/abortion has reduced women to commodities, barefoot, and perpetually pregnant. The male feminists must love the subordination of women for their pleasure. The female feminists must love controlling and profiting from the exploitation of men and women for political leverage. The pro-choice/abortionists must love debasing human life, in lieu of moral development.

      The selective-child policy of liberal societies is objectively worse than the one-child policy of the Chinese communists. Selective-child policy is built on a pro-choice religious doctrine that, like other pro-choice policies (e.g. congruence/”=”) is selective or variable.

      When did indiscriminate killing become a polite activity?

      Not even the military enjoys the right to premeditated termination of millions of viable human lives as has been granted to the abortion industry. Men certainly do not have a right to kill another human life for causes other than self-defense. Is killing to preserve money, status, and opportunity now an acceptable defense?

      Perhaps if we reclassify human life as a “clump of cells”, an assembly of parts for sale, or babies as enemy combatants, that would relieve the cognitive dissonance caused by the pro-choice/abortion religious doctrine that debases human life and represents an unprecedented violation of human rights.

      Or men and women could take responsibility for the predictable (not prophetic) outcome of their sexual congress. But, that would be too hard in a liberal… libertine society, which promotes a pursuit of money, pleasure, and convenience.

      Elective abortion is a wicked and opportunistic solution to a “wicked problem”.

    Fiftycaltx in reply to n.n. | September 23, 2015 at 10:54 pm

    NO. The “challenge” is to recognize the RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL, in this case the woman and not the collection of cells growing in her (the parasite). You want to force people to follow your religious superstitions, move to Iran.

      Bruce Hayden in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 24, 2015 at 2:58 am

      Except that many of the babies here were no longer in the women’s bodies, but rather were alive outside the womb. They were kept alive for a bit in order to more successfully harvest their organs.

      The primary issue of the videos was “born alive”, but that is a subset of the problem of abortions of viable fetuses, and esp when in the third trimester. At that point they are a minute or two away via emergency C-section from full legal citizenship. A distinct majority in this country agree with the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade that as a woman’s pregnancy progressives, her right to the autonomy of her body wanes. First trimester or so, she has almost complete discretion. Third trimester and the baby’s welfare ultimately gains importance over her discretion. Which is to say that if she snoozes, she loses. If she wants to abort, do it early, first trimester, before the fetus is viable, and not third trimester when it is a minute or two from being legally considered “alive” and a fully legal citizen.

        jayjerome66 in reply to Bruce Hayden. | September 24, 2015 at 4:26 pm

        “Except that many of the babies here were no longer in the women’s bodies, but rather were alive outside the womb. They were kept alive for a bit in order to more successfully harvest their organs.”

        Bruce, you do know don’t you that the photos and film shown of fetuses in the videos were stock footages, from various OTHER anti abortion sources.

        NONE of the fetuses shown in the videos were connected to Plannd Parenthood.

        There’s no proof any the fetuses shown were harvested for tissue or body parts.

        IN FACT one of the primary fetuses shown was still borne, not aborted.

        Further, in the US, something less then 1% of abortions are 3rd term or what are called ‘partial birth’ abortions. About 90% of US abortions are 1st Term. And under law, and particularly in California where the supposed Planned Parenthood expose videos were made, if a 3rd Term fetus is born and shows any signs of viability (beating heart, breathing, etc – i.e. It’s not clinically dead) iby law it is required to receive the same emergency medical attention any other premature baby would receive.

        What I’m telling you is that the videos are distorted propaganda. Late term abortions are rare. And if a fetus is born alive, under law it has to be given medical care to keep it alive.

      Observer in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 24, 2015 at 6:52 am

      That “parasite” is an innocent human baby, brought into existence by the affirmative choice of the female to engage in sex. If the female did not want to be burdened with the responsibility for the baby she created, there are many cheap, easy, and effective ways to prevent pregnancy. But once the female has created the baby, she does not have the right to pretend it is not a baby, but merely a “clump of cells” that she can dispose of in any manner she chooses, including having the baby murdered once the baby is out, or partially out, of her uterus.

      You can try to rationalize the murders of these babies in whatever way you please, but that will never change the fact of the obvious evil that is happening here, or your complicity in it.

      Ragspierre in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 24, 2015 at 7:15 am

      .22tx, as we’ve been around this barn before, you should certainly know that venting your religious bigotry and calling human beings “parasites” is not making friends or influencing people (in a good way).

      It’s unscientific boobery, in fact, and science and rationality are how I approach this question, as you’ve been told. I’m hardly alone.

      But periodically, you seem hell-bent to vomit out this same hate-filled bullshit, and one has to wonder why? It really seems kind of sick.

      “The “challenge” is to recognize the RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL, in this case the woman and not the collection of cells growing in her (the parasite).”
      ~~~
      What you call a “parasite” IS scientifically and empirically a human individual with its own distinct genetic coding. The infant is maturing within another human being, just like all humans (and most mammals) have evolved over millions of years. But you, you liken abortion to the popular “Alien” movie.

      Like all social Darwinists, your debasing of a human fetus into a “parasite” to justify utilitarian ends (“rights”) is dehumanizing and eugenic. You and Planned Parenthood are the “Aliens” we must defend our children against. YOU and the @PPFA are the parasites that feed off of a child’s body parts.

      The natural “rights” of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” that you acquired without effort on your part (and are blatantly misapplied by you) are being sucked out of the individual infant with the abortion vacuum.

      At a legal minimum, denying “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” to one individual so that another, by the death of the first party, receives “leveraged’ “rights” is criminal and easily an act of discrimination.

      The undignified and populist posturing of a liberal biased SCOTUS does not make abortion right or just. Their decisions are often against human flourishing. SCOTUS, by its decsions,only makes popular (and parasitism) easier.

      Adult parasites are ones who feed off the “flesh” of others with pernicious and ravenous delight.

        *
        Jennifer,

        A ‘parasite’ — according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary — is “an animal or plant that lives in or on another animal or plant and gets food or protection.”
        So, technically, a fetus is a parasite. So is the embryo it evolved from. And that embryo also has its ‘own distinct genetic coding.’ Do you consider Ernestine Embryo an infant too? Here she is, cute and cuddly. Don’t ya just want to give her a hug!

        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Tubal_Pregnancy_with_embryo.jpg

        And here’s some of her younger cousins, their DNA markers also uniquely distinct.

        https://www.ehd.org/drem/dsihe/14-3.jpg

        Doesn’t her cousin Eddie Embryo (D) already look like his daddy – the one missing in action after impregnating his Moms, who already has applied for the requisite public medical birth and post-birth aid? Moms was offered ‘morning after’ like medications to flush Eddie out of her uterus, but she refused: not wanting to live with the duel stigmas of Social Darwinism and Utilitarianism tattooed indelibly on her character.

        Do you have a problem flushing Eddie out of his mother’s uterus with ‘morning after’ like birth control medications? Or legalizing the sale of morning after birth control pill without prescription?

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 2:36 pm

          A ‘parasite’ — according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary — is “an animal or plant that lives in or on another animal or plant and gets food or protection.”
          ===============================================

          Proving…yet AGAIN…that you’ll LIE about anything.

          A “parasite” is NOT the progeny of a species. That is called their “young”. A “parasite” is, per force, ANOTHER species.

          You are a scientific boob, as well as every OTHER kind of boob.

          jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 4:44 pm

          Thanks for the definition clarification. Don’t forget to notify all the major dictionaries that their biological definition of parasite is wrong. And don’t forget to let them know that up is really down, and water isn’t technically wet.

          Wait! Coincidently I just look up the word ‘boob’ in my online unabridged dictionary, and it shows a photo of a goofy bald guy, with your name under it! You’re famous!

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 4:50 pm

          https://www.bing.com/search?q=parasitism+biology&pc=MOZI&form=MOZSBR

          Now you’ve been exposed lying about your lies.

          One of us has a science background. You just have a history of lying.

          jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 5:03 pm

          Hey you, with the pointed dunce cap down to your ears, you know you only linked to a GOOGLE SEARCH LISTING, and not a particular page, right dodo?

          So which one of the thousand of search results are you using to back up your claim?

          (If this guy was any more clueless he’d need an auto steering wheel turn signal indicator to figure out left from right)

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 5:36 pm

          Yes, you lying moron. I was giving honest people the opportunity to investigate SEVERAL definitions, so they’d see the FACT that parasitism can only occur between TWO species in medical or biological parlance.

          You lying SOS.

          jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 24, 2015 at 11:06 pm

          Oh grow up will you. A fetus is not a technically a full fledged parasite.by strict definition, but it is parasitic. Parasites survive by exploiting hosts for resources necessary for their survival (like food, water, heat, habitat – like a fetus in the womb). In parasitism the parasite contributes little or nothing to the survival of the host., like a fetus in the womb.

          If I use the word parasite to describe a fetus in the womb it’s a descriptive, not a lie you jackass. 

          It would be the same if I called you an a-hole. Though technically you’re not the opening to an anal canal, you share enough of its traits to qualify for the descriptive. Therefore when describing you as an a-hole, I’m not lying, I’m providing a symbolic description to convey a deeper descriptive truth. It’s like when you used the word parasite here on LI some time back to describe government officials or welfare receipients ( I don’t remember exactly what) as parasites. You certainly weren’t using the word In a purely biological context. Were you lying then? Probably, but not In the word usage.

          And back to you insisting there is only inter-species biological parasitism, and parasites NEVER latch on to their own species, you want to make a wager on that?

          How about this: if I provide scientific proof you’re wrong in the next 24 hours will you agree to stop commenting here at LI for a month?

          And if I fail to provide an example in 24 hours I’ll stop commenting here for a month.

          Do we have a bet? 

          Tick tock. Tick tock…

          You’re a sick fuck JuniorJackass. But I will agree there has been one known parasite growing in momma’s womb. She called it “JJ”.

          Also, under “dumbass” in the dictionary it just states “JJ”.

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 25, 2015 at 7:21 am

          You are a laugh RIOT, you poor, moronic POS!

          You’re just WRONG. The progeny of a species of higher animal is NEVER a “parasite”. You’ve been busted, bested, and basted!

          Now, YOU find a medical or biological authority that uses the term “parasite” to describe a developing human being.

          Oh, and stick your “bet”.

          Two other quick points before I stop punking you…

          You weren’t using the term “parasite” symbolically, you lying SOS. Which is why you used the word TECHNICALLY. You just told ANOTHER lie!

          But my use of the term to describe the social leeches who feed off of us is perfectly sound. Look up “social parasite”, used as a metaphor.

          A embryo does not “evolve”, you moron! Human beings DEVELOP.

          Here endeth the punking…

          jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 25, 2015 at 4:05 pm

          Barry, baby — you’re such a cute kid (pinches his rosy cheek). But you’re getting out of hand, and leave me no choice, so —

          …I’m gonna put a spell on you
          …gonna mix you a devils brew
          …I’m gonna get you back is true
          …yeah gonna, gonna, gonna put a Hex on you.

          With thanks to Elias Hoth (and the killer guitar solo):
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93Dnv23nrzc

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 25, 2015 at 6:14 pm

          That’s at least consistent with your knowledge of science.

          jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 25, 2015 at 10:53 pm

          And this consistent with my knowledge of Hexes:

          Let the Talmudic Incantation Shrink
          The Demon Ragspierre
          As His Name Decreases
          Letter By Letter
          He Disappears Into The Void

          Ragspierre
          pierre
          ierre
          erre
          rre
          re
          e
          .

          The Demon and all his Subterfuge
          Is Cast into the
          Void of Time!
          One type of incant

      Steve_in_SoCal in reply to Fiftycaltx. | September 24, 2015 at 10:07 am

      If true, then any “disease” is a parasite. Why not let that parasite live?

Great ad. I still will not vote for Fiorina, but great ad.

Does anyone know where it is running, if anywhere?

After the debate when people were arguing over who won it, I started saying the winner would not be determined by polls or the pronouncements of the commentariat. It would be determined by who was taking the most shrill, hysterical attacks from the drive-by media.

C’mon ladies. I’m 50+. I lived through a LYING Clinton presidency. Hillary was HATED then by smart women.

Carly:
– was FOR Hillary before she was against her (I’ve NEVER EVER IN MY LIFE been ‘pro’ Hillary. HAVE YOU?!)

– PRAISES Islam as great and peaceful (Wtf?)

– Slams Ben Carson – for speaking truth about Islam (Wtf?)

– Fired from her big corporate job 10 years ago. Was not hired again since? (huh?)

#NoThanksCarly

    PhillyGuy in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 24, 2015 at 12:49 am

    Exactly. Plus she believes in man-made global warming and is a supporter of Common Core. The more people dig into Snarly Fiorina’s statements in total, the less they will like her. There was a time when people were rating her the worst technology CEO of her era. Jeff Sonnenfeld was completely right about her.

    Mercyneal in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 24, 2015 at 4:52 am

    You’re equating Hillary with Fiorina? Unlike Hillary who got jobs by riding on the coattails of a powerful husband( how retro of her!) Ms Fiorina did it the hard way, making it on her own.

    Go, Carly!

Wow between Kimberly and Amy the estrogen bonding with Fiorina is really getting deep. 6 polls ago Fiorina was second in CNN’s poll, but susequent polls have Trump at 26% to 33% and Fiorina in 4th or 5th place at 7% to 8% up only 3% in latest Fox Poll.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend