tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post2543216345077659864..comments2023-12-30T10:06:37.450+00:00Comments on HousingPANIC - The Housing Bubble Blog with an Attitude Problem, 2005 - 2008: The second quarter is coming to a close. Watch Ron Paul shock the GOP with the amount of $$$ he raised...bloggerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06585266242070350399noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-33821787697513101492007-06-27T19:05:00.000+01:002007-06-27T19:05:00.000+01:00meanwhile, hillary has no shot of winning the pres...meanwhile, hillary has no shot of winning the presidency. she is not a serious candidate for the job<BR/><BR/>and that's my take.<BR/><BR/>June 25, 2007 12:00 PM <BR/><BR/>====================================<BR/><BR/>You're right she's not a serious candidate for the job. That doesn't mean she won't win.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-8632961698989027162007-06-27T07:14:00.000+01:002007-06-27T07:14:00.000+01:00f u keith, sorry i had to say itif you want to di...f u keith, sorry i had to say it<BR/><BR/>if you want to discuss abortion create a thread. then we can discuss all the candidates position on the subject not just ron pauls. What about mitt romney? Lets compare him to Kerry he is a flip flopper. He was initially pro choice now he's pro life? Why ? My guess he wants the republican nomination and he knows he has to be pro life to get it? At least ron paul is pro life on principal and not because of publice opinion polls. The kind Doctor has delivered babies as an air force doctor. Maybe he has a unique perspective on human life that you and I dont? its possible he is right man.... Not matter what you say about RP at least he stands on his principals and you know exactly where you stand with him.<BR/><BR/>McCain? what kind of bs is that immigration bill? are you ready to make a thread about that yet? pls do!<BR/><BR/>Ron Paul RevolutionLagwagon631https://www.blogger.com/profile/05646588630922241554noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-84389308828299240222007-06-26T18:54:00.000+01:002007-06-26T18:54:00.000+01:00I am a woman and have no problem with his pro-life...I am a woman and have no problem with his pro-life stance. He makes a good point that the state has no business deciding who and who is not worthy of protection. <BR/><BR/>Abortion makes it too easy for the 'Wham -Bam thank you ma'am". It also pits generations against each other.<BR/><BR/>No candidate is perfect - He is the only one who believes in the Constitution and he wants to get us out of these wars.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-21754996857032879572007-06-26T16:53:00.000+01:002007-06-26T16:53:00.000+01:00yuccatree3- It's appalling to me when people take ...yuccatree3- <BR/><BR/>It's appalling to me when people take a candidate and decide whether or not to vote for the person based on one single issue like abortion. ESPECIALLY when he recognizes that it's not a federal issue and it should be left to the states. It doesn't matter what he believes because it's not something he should or can decide. What's wrong with that?joonjoonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374051789954296205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-72434503178008775602007-06-26T03:32:00.000+01:002007-06-26T03:32:00.000+01:00I love Ron Paul, but he just isn't mean enough. I...I love Ron Paul, but he just isn't mean enough. I can't believe all this time has passed and he still hasn't called Guillani out on that 9/11 comment in the debate. Because the truth is that if a presidential candidate sincerely doesn't understand that the muslims have damn good reasons to hate us (the creation of Israel and the propping up of brutal dictators all over the middle east) then that guy has no business being president.<BR/><BR/>Why won't Ron Paul get offensive? Because if he doesn't have it in his character to fight, then he really shouldn't be president.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-36918457271814121242007-06-26T00:04:00.000+01:002007-06-26T00:04:00.000+01:00Just donated $175 on ronpaul2008.comJust donated $175 on ronpaul2008.comgregorywhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13900940292043774887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-74157808732574416892007-06-25T22:51:00.000+01:002007-06-25T22:51:00.000+01:00While I like Ron Paul for what appears to be his u...While I like Ron Paul for what appears to be his unfailing honesty and truthfulness, I looked at his site and see he's strongly pro-life: he says he's overthrow Roe V. Wade? Now that seems a bit odd to me: I thought the guy was a libertarian candidate in the past and professed that government shouldn't intrude on the lives of citizens. I'm not sure why women aren't supposed to make decisions pertaining to their bodies?<BR/>_________________________________<BR/><BR/>+++++I'm a woman and this is the "deal-killer" for me. Women have enough problems getting through life without having control of their bodies taken away from them and being forced to bear children they don't won't and can't afford to raise. And don't give me this crap about "it's their fault." What about rape? What about incest? What about failed birth control because no method of birth control is 100% effective? THERE IS NO WAY IN HADES I'M VOTING FOR A PRO-LIFE, ANTI-ABORTION CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-3275796334497933892007-06-25T22:37:00.000+01:002007-06-25T22:37:00.000+01:00I won't support Ron Paul because of his stance on ...I won't support Ron Paul because of his stance on gay issues. It doesn't matter whether the collapse hits or Ron Paul gets elected and avoids the collapse -- either way, he and his supporters are willing to hand me a big fat tax bill for it while telling me that I must be excluded from the "benefits."<BR/><BR/>At least if things collapse, I won't have to worry about paying for all the "family values" of people who had kids and homes they couldn't afford, insisting they're more "moral" than I am because they got their spouses knocked up 5x too many.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-70643603762375827742007-06-25T22:05:00.000+01:002007-06-25T22:05:00.000+01:00I guess my point was twofold:A) Is abortion really...I guess my point was twofold:<BR/><BR/>A) Is abortion really an issue? It has been discussed as one of the primary election issues since Roe V Wade. This is Supreme Court stuff and therefore the connection to the president is once removed and, depending on seats available in the court, mostly irrelevant. <BR/><BR/>Now, if the life of fetus was currently sustainable at no cost to the mother and could be safely removed, who would object? Abortion would be irrelevant.<BR/><BR/>B) The far right has nowhere to speak on this issue. Just like immigration, if you want to stop young people from having unwanted babies, you have to stop them at conception (or the employer/ border). This is their primary biological imperative.<BR/><BR/>Also, as far as states rights causing many problems, couldn't this be true of almost any states rights issues? This is another thread in and of itself. My assumption is that after states rights were more or less defined, and after subsequent generations, people would have voted with their feet and left these states altogether.<BR/><BR/>Back on thread - GO RON PAUL !!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-51413257267035070492007-06-25T20:15:00.000+01:002007-06-25T20:15:00.000+01:00"[B]ut I think it shows that this issue will alway..."[B]ut I think it shows that this issue will always be a litmus for many<BR/><BR/>For me it is not. I support RP but am against his abortion position"<BR/><BR/>-----------------------------<BR/><BR/>Amen. I disagree with RP that we can stroll right out of Iraq without leaving behind a catastrophe, but I still support him. I hope people will not throw the fetus out with the bathwater.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-50702217680030473582007-06-25T19:57:00.000+01:002007-06-25T19:57:00.000+01:00I also think anyone needs to think long and hard a...I also think anyone needs to think long and hard about 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' when thinking about what to do with the abortion issue<BR/><BR/>life - whose life?<BR/>liberty - whose liberty?<BR/>pursuit of happiness - whose pursuit?<BR/><BR/>You have two people - the baby and the mother - with very different need states, thus the inherent conflict that will never be resolved<BR/><BR/>never. <BR/><BR/>Add in the fact that fathers have no choice as to whether they get ass raped for child support but the woman has an option, well you get the idea. Let's make it fair all around, not just for women. If men can't decide, then maybe women shouldn't be allowed to decide either.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-3336140522479130292007-06-25T19:48:00.000+01:002007-06-25T19:48:00.000+01:00While that is also an important document [The Decl...While that is also an important document [The Declaration of Independence], it has no legal standing.<BR/><BR/>Thinker, I have to disagree with you on that. It is actually a much more important document because it sets forth that the power of government emanates from those to be governed, who possess the inalienable right to form and/or dismantle a government, if necessary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-78596015551514334132007-06-25T18:54:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:54:00.000+01:00Yes, I hijacked my own thread on RP to move to abo...Yes, I hijacked my own thread on RP to move to abortion, but I think it shows that this issue will always be a litmus for many<BR/><BR/>For me it is not. I support RP but am against his abortion position<BR/><BR/>But I understand his abortion position. He wants the federal government to take a back seat, and a severely limited government. I'm down with that in almost all cases.bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06585266242070350399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-63135006467122646262007-06-25T18:52:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:52:00.000+01:00Shouldn't states be able to decide, especially as ...<I>Shouldn't states be able to decide, especially as the feds have no constitutional power to make a decision on the matter?</I><BR/><BR/>I agree that in principle, yes. If it were regulated as "abortions not legal in states X,Y,Z" and "legal in A,B,C" then that's the end of it. But it wouldn't be the end of it.<BR/><BR/><BR/>In practice, the extreme anti-abortion states will do things like <BR/><BR/>* make an abortion illegal as first-degree murder. <BR/><BR/>* make it a felony to cross its state lines if you have an abortion, equivalent to accessory to murder.<BR/><BR/>* make certain forms of birthcontrol as equivalent to abortion (IUD, pill), and therefore imprison dispensers thereof as accessories to murder.<BR/><BR/>* make any woman applying for state colleges have to sign upon penalty of perjury and imprisonment that she had never had an abortion.<BR/><BR/>* same for state employees (e.g. all teachers) <BR/><BR/>* ban all websites which provide any information about how to get to states or abortion providers outside the state.<BR/><BR/>* make it a felony to help to pay for abortion services rendered in any state, with punishment equivalent to solicitation to murderAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-40064452311794468862007-06-25T18:47:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:47:00.000+01:00...just sent in $100. my 1st political donation. t......just sent in $100. my 1st political donation. <BR/><BR/>this guy is the real deal!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-65085705901856999742007-06-25T18:44:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:44:00.000+01:00Here is the text of the 9th Amendment: "The enumer...Here is the text of the 9th Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."<BR/><BR/>Their is a fair amount of debate among Constitutional scholars as to the meaning of this Amendment, however, it is difficult to imagine how this Amendment confers any new substantive rights such as a right to privacy.<BR/><BR/>The Supreme Court is tasked with interpreting the Constitution, however, the Supreme Court is not entitled to enact new law under the guise of Constitutional interpretation. By reading a right of privacy into the Constitution, the Supreme Court was actually (in my opinion) trampling on the Constitution's mandate that laws be passed only after ratification by both houses of Congress (bicameralism).The Thinkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02975817251694544996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-82914242624112902292007-06-25T18:39:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:39:00.000+01:00For only the second time in my 18 years as a voter...For only the second time in my 18 years as a voter I have sent money to a campaign -- $200 to Ron Paul, and I consider myself a Democrat. <BR/><BR/>He seems to be the only candidate on either side that is willing to point out what the real problems are (and we don't agree on everything, but I'm not going to be a single-issue voter). <BR/><BR/>Even if he doesn't win, he's talking and raising awareness. That's worth the money to me. <BR/><BR/>And if he wins...<BR/><BR/>-MStudent Archaeologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00504547928310411935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-88489383613946851962007-06-25T18:32:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:32:00.000+01:00This was a discussion of RP not abortion. Just li...This was a discussion of RP not abortion. Just like the media you have turned the whole debate about his candidacy into Pro Life Pro Choice debate.<BR/><BR/>What about the issues that really matter? Like ending the illegal war in Iraq, monetary policy, and a defunct federal social security system...<BR/><BR/>Lets talk about these issues and how RP was and still is rightAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-82194142980476719292007-06-25T18:22:00.000+01:002007-06-25T18:22:00.000+01:00Old family saying:Just follow the moneyhttp://www....Old family saying:<BR/><BR/>Just follow the money<BR/><BR/>http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200706/CUL20070615a.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-15897389157176527252007-06-25T17:29:00.000+01:002007-06-25T17:29:00.000+01:00That's just it - the abortion debate from a legal ...That's just it - the abortion debate from a legal or government perspective should NOT have religion intermixed. Anytime someone's personal religion gets mixed up with politics or social policy or government, it's a mess.<BR/><BR/>Plus, of course, there's this small little matter:<BR/><BR/>Amendment I<BR/>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06585266242070350399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-88410698512735766122007-06-25T17:26:00.000+01:002007-06-25T17:26:00.000+01:00The interesting thing about the abortion debate is...The interesting thing about the abortion debate is that when God is taken out of the equation, then yes, legally, there isn't a right or wrong answer. Of course, not everyone is Christian, and that's fine. But for those of us who are Christian, there is that Command "Thou shalt not kill."anonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16564963379174399291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-88199242236951516972007-06-25T17:21:00.000+01:002007-06-25T17:21:00.000+01:00>> The next American president should be a Democra...>> The next American president should be a Democrat. I'm voting for Hillary.<BR/><BR/>Funny how she's on the cover of Fortune magazine - "Business Loves Hillary." Even funnier how she's never run her own business, sweated making a payroll, etc.<BR/><BR/>Yeah, she's YOUR perfect candidate: the clueless leading the ignorant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-83498063246610281902007-06-25T16:06:00.000+01:002007-06-25T16:06:00.000+01:00You are correct folks - dec of independence of cou...You are correct folks - dec of independence of course. My bad<BR/><BR/>But I believe we are a country based on the fundamentals of that document, and that phrase. The US is life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. No better words have ever been written.<BR/><BR/>Legally, I do believe the 9th amendment of the constitution, fundamentaly the right to privacy, does protect the woman's right to an abortion. But the right of the fetus to life, assuming it is sustainable life, with rights, is also thus covered by the 9th amendment. And the 14th - due process. <BR/><BR/>Messy issue, no good answer, and RP's idea of leaving this one up to the states is not the right one.bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06585266242070350399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-21239697986093906022007-06-25T15:18:00.000+01:002007-06-25T15:18:00.000+01:00Keith, methinks you've been in the U.K. too long. ...Keith, methinks you've been in the U.K. too long. "Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" comes form the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution; these words are therefore of no legal effect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18675105.post-29369869006726576492007-06-25T15:13:00.000+01:002007-06-25T15:13:00.000+01:00m reynolds, the populace of Italy is about as Cath...m reynolds, the populace of Italy is about as Catholic as an ACLU convention; the country just happens to embrace Vatican City, and produce a lot of cardinals. Italians don't go to Mass; they don't get married, and don't have kids.<BR/><BR/>Ron Paul is right on abortion. Having federal courts decide the issue uniformally for every single American actually takes away our right of political choice. Maybe people in Utah want no abortions, and maybe Massachusetts wants to legalize any abortion on demand, and maybe Virginia wants some middle ground. <BR/><BR/>Shouldn't states be able to decide, especially as the feds have no constitutional power to make a decision on the matter?<BR/><BR/>You've got to remember, if federal courts decide that they have jurisdiction over a particular issue, they control the outcome -- not you.<BR/><BR/>Republicans and Democrats are just the same on this point. As long as the federal government happens to be advancing their agenda, they are happy to endow it with whatever powers may be expedient to that end. They are in favor of surrenduring to the feds the rights they don't care about: right wingers endowed the federal government with unconstitutional powers to conduct military police actions, and to conduct a war on drugs; leftists have endowed the federal government with the unconstitutional powers to engage in social engineering, and to create abortion laws. <BR/><BR/>Remember, if the federal government has the power to regulate abortion, it has the power to legalize it OR to ban it.<BR/><BR/>No matter where you fall on the issue substantively, everyone should agree that the feds have no place in the abortion debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com