Senator versus presidency
Posted By: sm on 2008-10-10
In Reply to: How did he become a Senator then? Did no know look into his background then? - ss
Sure, I can see where a lot of this would be overlooked while running for a senate position versus president of our country. The higher the position, the more you look into someone's history and that is what separates the boys from the men....
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
What would an Obama Presidency Mean?
What Would an Obama Presidency Mean?
by Rev. Clenard H. Childress Jr.
The Democrat Party has for years given lip service to the African-American community. They have talked about prominence without fulfilling the promise. They patronize without empowering. Worst of all, this unholy bond has done more to decimate and deplete our community than slavery and Jim Crow laws ever could have accomplished. This allegiance has destroyed millions of our children; children created but denied access to the American dream, children aborted.
The Democrat Party has been a major contributor to the African American slippery slide down the slope of depravity. It has caused our community to deny the God of our Fathers and ignore the counsel of His Word. This Word brought us up and out of Egypt. This Word broke the chains of a terrible bondage and established us in the path of upward mobility and prosperity.
Our loyalty to this political regime has vexed our leaders and organizations. Institutions that were birthed to advance the causes of Afro-Americans, now in their ignorance, lobby for our decline. NAACP, Congressional Black Caucus, Rainbow Coalition, Urban League, the list goes on and on. All of these were once heralded groups with anoble past and great historic accomplishment. Today, they are stymied by this ungodly tie. Rev. Jessie Jackson, AL Sharpton, Julian Bond, Joseph Lowery are all allied in party and, in the process, have lost their souls. What happened to the God of Dr. Martin Luther King?
Despite this deplorable behavior of our perceived leadership, the winds of change have begun to blow. Pastors and leaders in the Black community have begun to remember their roots and realize they are chained to mediocrity and complacency. There has been a consistent flow of Afro-Americans making their way back to freedom. This has sent shock waves through the present Democrat leadership. While we are yet somewhat in a vacuum of solid Afro-American leadership with true integrity (there are many on the horizon not yet recognized), we are once again being wooed by the oppressor’s ploys to stay on the plantation. Staying where there is little reward and where our lives and votes are taken for granted. Once again it is someone of our own ethnicity, our own race being used. The Democrats have deployed a new pied piper in a desperate attempt topreserve their self serving party.
New face, same tune. The song being played is from the movie “The Culture of Death.” The goal is to fill the seats with Afro-Americans in the theater of apostasy. Why? Because if the current trend continues the Democrat party could soon be performing in their final act.
Enter Sen. Barack Hussein Obama (D-Ill), who is truly turning out to be one of the greatest performers of all times. Obama’s biggest act is that he calls himself a Christian.
Howard Dean, Chair of the Democrat National Committee, scripted most of the scenes in this production starring Obama. Dean outlined an approach that will emphasize outreach to evangelicals. He said, “People of faith are in the Democratic Party including me.”
Listen to this line. Obama stated, “As I travel around this state, I don’t get asked about gay marriage, I don’t get asked about abortion, I get asked ‘How can I find a job that allows me to support my family?’ I get asked, ‘How can I pay those medical bills without going into bankruptcy.’” (Taken from a reply to questions asked during the Ill. Senate campaign)
We are deeply troubled, but not surprised at the Senator’s remarks. One would only have to look at Obama’s consistent support and advocacy for the gay agenda and the abortion industry to understand. As a longtime activist for children in the womb (the most discriminated against segment of our society) and proponent for family values, I am horrified at this man’s voting record. Anytime Planned Parenthood gives you a 100% rating, all Americans should cringe in fear because they are the leading abortion provider in the nation.
Each day, 1452 African Americans are murdered by abortion, 4,000 children over all.
There have been over 15 million African American children dismembered in the womb by the abortion holocaust and as many women victimized.
As an elected official, should anyone have to ask you about abortion to make it your concern?
Marriage, since the 1970s, is down 17% in America and in the African Community it’s down 34%, which is twice the national average.
Should Barack Hussein Obama again have to wait until someone asks him about the fundamental building block of all society? Shouldn’t he protect the sanctity of marriage? The truth is, someone has asked and how he has answered the question wasabysmal.
The question was asked of Obama, should the heinous act of partial birth abortion be outlawed in America? Twice Sen. Obama answered no! When he was asked if a child, who might miraculously survive the sentence of death by abortion, be protected from an abortion doctor after surviving? Sen. Obama said no! (See Born Alive Victims Protection Law.) Has he no conscience? Is he misinformed on the facts of these barbaric practices? His response to these questions is not indicative of the Black community’s beliefs, and certainly shows a low degree of conscience and moral fiber.
These six things the lord hates, yea seven are an abomination unto him, a proud look, a lying tongue and hands that shed innocent blood. (Proverbs 6:17)
There is no candidate running for the office of the presidency with a worse record than Sen. Barack Hussein Obama. His hands have aided and abetted the abortion industry’s slaughter of the innocent and no other community is affected by it more than the African American community. It’s an industry that targets Afro-Americans for profit at the expense of our children’s lives and the pain of Black women.
This charade has been quite a production. It is now playing and coming to a theater near you!
Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in his letter from a Birmingham jail, “The early church put an end to such evils as infanticide (infant killing).”
From a jail in Birmingham, AL, without any other source of reference but his heart and the Bible, Martin wrote to some Bishops and Pastors who were not in favor of the demonstrations he was leading. They felt that it was counter productive and not in the best interest of the Negro people. Martin Luther King, Jr. felt quite differently, he chided church leaders for their reluctance to join him in the struggle for freedom. King’s reference to infanticide pointed to the legality of infant killing under Roman law in the first century. Martin Luther King, Jr. pointed to the practice of Christians to rescue babies left on the side of the road to die, because their parents did not like their complexion, eye color, hair color or viewed the child as an inconvenience (sound familiar?) First century Christians rescued those babies and raised them as their own children.
The early Church defied unjust laws even when the consequences could have meant their own death for doing so. Oh, if that kind of love and courage could be demonstrated today by our leadership, it would begin to heal our land.
Sen. Obama has written, “I am not willing to have the state deny American citizens a civil union that confers equivalent rights on such basic matters ashospital visitation or health insurance coverage simply because the people they love are of the same sex – nor am I willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the sermon on the mount.”
Sen. Obama, did you say obscure? That would tend to lead unlearned listeners to believe that the Bible is vague or obscure on the subject of homosexuality.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Nearly half of the 32 verses in the first chapter of the New Testament book of Romans were dedicated to warning the early church about sexual perversion. The Apostle Paul warned that perverse thinking and the habits they create were due to the fact that “they did not want to retain God in their knowledge.” That verse truly reflects much of the cast in the Democrat Party.
I would like to ask Sen. Obama the question, “How obscure is this verse?”
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with woman kind: it is an abomination.
That sounds pretty definitive to me.
It would appear to me that Sen. Obama as well as many others shun and ignore the obvious and cloak the true causes of our problems.
African Americans make up 12% of the population, but account for over 50% of all new cases of HIV. African American women account for a staggering 68% of all newly diagnosed HIV positive women in the United States. These women primarily contracted HIV from heterosexual sex. Now, with that said, 60% of all new AIDs cases in America will be the result of the violation of Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:27 (men having sex with men).
Martin Luther King, Jr., who never marched one step for “Gay Rights,” said, “The contemporary church is often a weak ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is often the arch-supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power of the average community is consoled by the churches silent and often vocal sanctions of things as they are.”
You have heard my review of this masterful political production concerning Sen. Obama and a few of his cast. There is undoubtedly more to come.
Suffice it to say, the prospect of Sen. Barack Hussein Obama becoming President of the United States poses a real threat to African Americans.
Cathy Cohen, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago, conducted a survey tracking the attitudes of nearly 1,600 young people of all races nationwide. The professor did one of the most comprehensive studies with the focus on African Americans 15-25 ever performed.
The survey shows that young African-Americans are more conservative than their white counterparts when it is comes to same-sex marriage and abortion. There has been consistent data that shows African-Americans are pro-life and oppose same-sex marriage. An Obama presidency would certainly not reflect Afro-American youth or the nation he’d be leading. In fact, his position on these issues would be ensuring their present destructive trend.
Black Enterprise magazinedid a survey in which 58% of its participants viewed the NAACP’s pro-choice stance as wrong. As a role model, Barack Hussein Obama would be stirring the cauldron of confusion and mixed emotion. Many people would be happy for his success, because he is black, but vexed by his immoral position on the critical issues.
Obama’s use of the presidential bully pulpit would be a boost for the culture of death and the homosexual agenda.
As President, there would also always be the threat of a veto of any significant pro-life or pro-family legislation. Additionally, Obama would undoubtedly nominate pro-abortion justices to the US Supreme Court, which could etch Roe v. Wade into stone for generations.
Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Any success achieved at the expense of our children is no success.” I and many other African-Americans long to see the day of an African-American President, but not at the expense of our children and our values.
Remember, all significant social change which empowered and eradicated injustice has come from the Church not congress, from Pastors not the president. Politicians often join in the cause later, but social reform always starts in the Church. To keep this better in mind I will close with another quote from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s letter from a Birmingham Jail:
There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period when the early Christians rejoiced as they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society.
God help us to be a thermostat.
Rev. Clenard H. Childress Jr. is the Senior Pastor of New Calvary Baptist Church in Montclair, NJ. He hosts “The Urban Prophet” which takes the pro-life, pro-family message into the urban areas.
Rev. Childress is the author of “No Shepherd’s Cry.” Pastor Childress and his book were recently featured on the 700 Club hosted by CBN’s Pat Robertson.
Pastor Childress is joyously married to Regina Childress and has four children: Clenard, Thomas, Tonya and Tia.
One heartbeat away from the presidency.,,,,,,,,
Very scary indeed for a candidate with a 4-year degree in journalism
Democrat hasn't won the presidency yet.
Mostly because I can't wait to see what you all have to say when the country is still in shambles with a Democrat behind the wheel. I can't believe you all actually think a Dem in office will help. Entire Congress is Dem right now. What has it done lately?
Looking Ahead to the Obama Presidency.....sm
Looking Ahead to the Obama Presidency
Written by John F. McManus
Wednesday, 26 November 2008 00:40
Barack Obama's and Joe Biden's own records and agendas show the direction they have in mind for the nation.
Without doubt, the election of Barack Obama is historic because he is the first Black American selected by voters for the highest office in the land. Indeed, the election of an African-American to the presidency by a nation with a majority white population may be unprecedented, and the fact that this is possible should be a source of pride for all of us, regardless of whether Obama himself was a good or bad choice.
An articulate and confident young man, Obama's presence in the White House will be welcomed by many. Along with his oratorical skills and appealing vitality, his family will remind older Americans of the John F. Kennedy era when a telegenic and appealing wife and two charming youngsters accompanied the newly elected president into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
What will the Obama presidency be like? Throughout a campaign stretching back for almost two years, the Illinois senator regularly employed the word "change," and the word even morphed into "change we can believe in." The posters, oratory, television ads, and pronouncements of several Obama staffers repeatedly issued unspecified pledges that this new and different candidate would alter the course America was following.
"Blueprint for Change"
But how would America's course be altered? Even though the American people could have read online what an Obama-Biden administration promised, most failed to do so. Much of the agenda, albeit without a lot of detail, is contained in Blueprint for Change, the 83-page document subtitled "Plan for America" issued by the Obama-Biden team. As we shall see, the "change" envisioned by the Blueprint includes more government at home and a continuation of our interventionist foreign policy abroad.
Of course, America has been moving in the direction of more and bigger government for decades, regardless of whether a Republican or Democrat has been in the White House. Obama hopes to move us even further in the big-government direction. What kind of change is that?
Even many Americans who recognize that Obama will push for more government at home believe that he will end our interventionist foreign policy because of the opposition he has expressed to the Iraq War. But this conclusion flies in the face of his proposal to transfer troops to Afghanistan (in essence transferring the Iraq War to a different theater) and his support for international arrangements, including expansion of NATO.
Please consider the following positions as they appear in the pages of the revealing "blueprint" document and judge for yourself how much change there will be and whether the recommended "change" would be a good thing. (Comments following each quoted item are ours.)
• "Emergency Economic Plan to Inject Immediate Relief into the Economy." Both Obama and Biden voted for the $700 billion bailout (along with John McCain). More bailouts will likely follow.
• "Provide a $1,000 Emergency Energy Rebate to American Families." Government giving money to everyone, as was done with the 2008 rebate, doesn't solve any problems. These funds either have to be printed (the root cause of inflation) or borrowed, likely from China, which puts our nation's neck in a noose. The interest that is compounding on our already enormous debt is a toxic time bomb. The government will eventually resort to massive inflation to pay the debt or collateralize the debt with American assets; in which case, those now holding our bonds will end up owning America.
• "Invest in the Manufacturing Sector." America's manufacturers need relief from the stifling array of taxes and regulations, and from the steady erosion of the dollar brought on by debilitating inflation, not government handouts that are always followed by government control. A 2006 study by the Competitive Enterprise Institute entitled "Ten Thousand Commandments" found that the federal regulatory burden on U.S. businesses amounted to $1.13 trillion. This burden is killing American businesses, productivity, innovation, and jobs.
• "Create 5 Million New Green Jobs." This will be done, says the Blueprint, by investing "$150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial scale renewable energy," etc. In other words, politicians and bureaucrats would create government jobs and subsidize private-sector jobs that should be financed by the private sector (and would be if they were economically viable). Government should get out of the way and let free Americans create jobs.
• "Create a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank." This promise includes an infusion of $60 billion more in federal spending.
• "Give the Federal Reserve Greater Supervisory Authority." The Federal Reserve, which already wields enormous, unconstitutional powers, is a destructive engine of inflation and should hardly be given greater authority. As Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman has recommended, it should be abolished, not enhanced.
• "Pressure the World Trade Organization to Enforce Trade Agreements." Granting the UN's WTO even more authority is another step toward global governance. The WTO is already exercising judicial jurisdiction over sovereign nations, overruling national laws and legislatures, including the laws and the Congress of the United States. Congress and President Bush have weakly protested these usurpations — and then meekly accepted them.
• "Guarantee Affordable, Accessible Health Care for Every American." Healthcare costs have risen dramatically because of already existing government intervention. A national healthcare system would swell the cost while making healthcare hard to obtain, as such plans have done everywhere they have been instituted.
• "Barack Obama has fought for comprehensive immigration reform." Ultimately, what this means is amnesty for as many as 20 million illegal aliens in our nation.
• "High Quality Zero-to-Five Education." The Obama plan actually calls for "early care and education for infants in a Zero to 5 Plan," more government for K-12, federal support for afterschool programs, and more grants for those who move on to college.
• "Double our annual investment in foreign assistance ... to $50 billion.... Invest at least $50 billion [annually] by 2013 for the global fight against HIV/AIDS." With record deficits and a soaring National Debt, America is, in effect, giving away borrowed money.
The above constitute only a sampling of the pledges for more programs, more spending, and more government powers contained in the 83 pages of the Blueprint for Change. And the official Obama-Biden Internet website provides several hundred more pages of details, all pointing toward plans for a vast expansion of the federal government. Less than a week after the election, Georgia Congressman Paul Broun (R) told an audience in his district the president-elect shows "signs of being a Marxist." Perhaps Broun had read the Obama-Biden Blueprint, a rather obvious call for socialism in the United States. And perhaps Broun knows that, in addition to Marx's well-publicized association with communism, Karl Marx is also the godfather of socialism.
Although he didn't mention his own party, we should point out that Rep. Broun's criticism of Obama's apparent Marxist bent applies also to many Republicans. In fact, in October, President Bush and many Republican members of Congress rolled out the Socialist Express to push through the bailout package. Take it from Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, a self-proclaimed socialist, who congratulated Bush for joining the socialist club, and then chided him and his allies for applying a double standard. "How many times have they criticized me for nationalizing the phone company?" he asked. "They say, 'The state shouldn't get involved in that.' But now they don't criticize Bush for having nationalize[d] ... the biggest banks in the world. Comrade Bush, how are you?"
Expanding the UN
The United Nations Association of the United States is the most determined promoter of the UN within our nation. Early in 2008, its leaders sent a questionnaire to all presidential candidates. Barack Obama displayed his strong commitment to the world body and to its various sovereignty-compromising programs in his responses, some of which follow:
• "No country has a greater stake in a strong United Nations than the United States."
• "I have pledged to create a [UN-promoted] cap on carbon emissions in the United States."
• "I fully support the [UN] Millennium Development Goals."
In the year 2000, the 189 member nations of the UN adopted the Millennium Development Goals, a program of eight goals to aid developing countries. Our share of funding these goals could total hundreds of billions of dollars in just a few years. Senator Barack Obama introduced S. 2433 in 2007. Labeled the "Global Poverty Act," this proposal seeks to require our nation to "achieve the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of the people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than one dollar per day." Five months later, Senator Biden offered minor amendments to the bill as he co-signed it. Obviously, these two senators — and the handful of others they have enlisted to back their proposal — believe the American people should pony up enormous sums of money sought by the UN in another program that would empower the world body and further enrich corrupt foreign dictators while doing little to improve the plight of the world's poor.
Based on their stated positions and track records, it is reasonable to expect that Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and the team they will select to staff the new administration won't even consider less government and a mind-your-own-business foreign policy to be options. Their agenda, if implemented, would speed the growth of the federal government, accelerate the surrender of America's independence, and hasten our nation down the path toward submergence in what internationalists euphemistically refer to as "global governance" by various supranational institutions, of which the UN, the WTO, and the IMF are among the most noteworthy. For more information about the power brokers who have helped formulate Obama's agenda and who will be running the Obama-Biden administration, see "Behind the Obama Agenda."
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/543-looking-ahead-to-the-obama-presidency
Celebrate Obama's presidency!
In "celebration" of this stimulus and a month of his presidency, let's see if Obama has lived up to his promises. I will let you score your president.
Here are the 7 promises.
1. Make government open and transparent.
2. Make it "impossible" for Congressmen to slip in pork barrel projects.
3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. (Even Congressional Republicans shut out.)
4. No more secrecy.
5. Public will have 5 days to look at a bill.
6. You’ll know what’s in it.
7. We will put every pork barrel project online.
Obama is rich in his own right - not just the presidency -
he can spend money any way he pleases. Believe me, if I had that kind of money, I would be going to broadway too!
Bush's "Active/Negative" Presidency
Bush's Active/Negative Presidency
Recent events provide an especially good illustration of Bush's fateful - perhaps fatal - approach. Six generals who have served under Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld have called for his resignation - making a strong substantive case as to why he should resign. And they are not alone: Editorialists have also persuasively attacked Rumsfeld on the merits.
Yet Bush's defense of Rumsfeld was entirely substance-free. Bush simply told reporters in the Rose Garden that Rumsfeld would stay because I'm the decider and I decide what's best. He sounded much like a parent telling children how things would be: I'm the Daddy, that's why.
This, indeed, is how Bush sees the presidency, and it is a point of view that will cause him trouble.
Bush has never understood what presidential scholar Richard Neustadt discovered many years ago: In a democracy, the only real power the presidency commands is the power to persuade. Presidents have their bully pulpit, and the full attention of the news media, 24/7. In addition, they are given the benefit of the doubt when they go to the American people to ask for their support. But as effective as this power can be, it can be equally devastating when it languishes unused - or when a president pretends not to need to use it, as Bush has done.
Apparently, Bush does not realize that to lead he must continually renew his approval with the public. He is not, as he thinks, the decider. The public is the decider.
Bush is following the classic mistaken pattern of active/negative presidents: As Barber explained, they issue order after order, without public support, until they eventually dissipate the real powers they have -- until nothing [is] left but the shell of the office. Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon all followed this pattern.
Active/negative presidents are risk-takers. (Consider the colossal risk Bush took with the Iraq invasion). And once they have taken a position, they lock on to failed courses of action and insist on rigidly holding steady, even when new facts indicate that flexibility is required.
The source of their rigidity is that they've become emotionally attached to their own positions; to change them, in their minds, would be to change their personal identity, their very essence. That, they are not willing to do at any cost.
Wilson rode his unpopular League of Nations proposal to his ruin; Hoover refused to let the federal government intervene to prevent or lessen a fiscal depression; Johnson escalated U.S. involvement in Vietnam while misleading Americans (thereby making himself unelectable); and Nixon went down with his bogus defense of Watergate.
George Bush has misled America into a preemptive war in Iraq; he is using terrorism to claim that as Commander-in-Chief, he is above the law; and he refuses to acknowledge that American law prohibits torturing our enemies and warrantlessly wiretapping Americans.
Americans, increasingly, are not buying his justifications for any of these positions. Yet Bush has made no effort to persuade them that his actions are sound, prudent or productive; rather, he takes offense when anyone questions his unilateral powers. He responds as if personally insulted.
And this may be his only option: With Bush's limited rhetorical skills, it would be all but impossible for him to persuade any others than his most loyal supporters of his positions. His single salient virtue - as a campaigner - was the ability to stay on-message. He effectively (though inaccurately) portrayed both Al Gore and John Kerry as wafflers, whereas he found consistency in (over)simplifying the issues. But now, he cannot absorb the fact that his message is not one Americans want to hear - that he is being questioned, severely, and that staying on-message will be his downfall.
Other Presidents - other leaders, generally - have been able to listen to critics relatively impassively, believing that there is nothing personal about a debate about how best to achieve shared goals. Some have even turned detractors into supporters - something it's virtually impossible to imagine Bush doing. But not active/negative presidents. And not likely Bush.
The Danger of the Active/Negative President Facing A Congressional Rout
Active/negative presidents -- Barber tells us, and history shows -- are driven, persistent, and emphatic. Barber says their pervasive feeling is I must.
Barber's collective portrait of Wilson, Hoover, Johnson and Nixon now fits George W. Bush too: He sees himself as having begun with a high purpose, but as being continually forced to compromise in order to achieve the end state he vaguely envisions, Barber writes. He continues, Battered from all sides . . . he begins to feel his integrity slipping away from him . . . [and] after enduring all this for longer than any mortal should, he rebels and stands his ground. Masking his decision in whatever rhetoric is necessary, he rides the tiger to the end.
Bush's policies have incorporated risk from the outset. A few examples make that clear.
He took the risk that he could capture Osama bin Laden with a small group of CIA operatives and U.S. Army Special forces - and he failed. He took the risk that he could invade Iraq and control the country with fewer troops and less planning than the generals and State Department told him would be possible - and he failed. He took the risk that he could ignore the criminal laws prohibiting torture and the warrantless wiretapping of Americans without being caught - he failed. And he's taken the risk that he can cut the taxes for the rich and run up huge financial deficits without hurting the economy. This, too, will fail, though the consequences will likely fall on future presidents and generations who must repay Bush's debts.
For the whole article go to: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060421.html
"The wisdom of the Clinton Presidency..."
ohhhhh to quote reville guffaw guffaw GUFFAW guffaw lol
Excuse me....the Presidency is an executive position...
Palin is the only one of the four who has executive appearance. She is as ready to lead right now as Obama is. Obama has zero international experience other than one trip to talk to the Germans in a political speech.
And I would think the fact that your #1 has less experience than McCain's #2 you would stay away from the experience thing...?
He picked her because she shares his ideals..wants change in washington. Obama wants that too. McCain picked a REAL Washington outsider. Obama didn't. Soooo..they are saying some of the same things Obama is saying, but when Obama says it is good, when they say it, it is bad?
Hello President McCain, and VP Palin!
your msg. "American Presidency is an exec. role"
nm
What is the one thing you want an Obama presidency to accomplish?
Mine is curbing illegal immigration.
Bush Presidency - eight years in eight minutes
I watch Olbermann. Sometimes I agree with him. Sometimes I don't.
However, last night he hit it into the park with his attempt to review what Bush did in the last eight years into eight minutes; he ran over time a little bit because there was so much to say.
I would strongly urge anyone who is not too busy whining, moaning, groaning, hating and raging about Obama -- anyone who is truly interested in the future of America -- to watch this, from beginning to end -- especially at the end (since this is done chronologically, not by matter of importance).
THESE are the reasons people voted for Obama. THESE are the reasons that Obama supporters cannot understand why Bush worshippers still support him and reject the man who might undo the wreckage of Bush.
BUSH is the man who claimed to have a direct line to GOD. Obama never claimed anything of the sort; if he had, I probably would not have voted for him for that very reason -- because it creeped me out so much when Bush did it. So the assertion that Obama supporters are "worshippers" is ridiculous, when, in fact, it seems that those who still support Bush (the closest thing to the Anti-Christ that I'VE ever seen) are the ones who seem to think Bush is some sort of god.
Please watch every single SECOND of this video. It will give you just a taste of the grueling task ahead of Obama in trying to correct all the damage that Bush has done. We may, in fact, never know the full extent of the damage because Bush (as is mentioned in the video) has "exempted" himself from the Presidential Records Act.
THIS is why every truly honest, patriotic, honorable American who voted for Obama is so relieved he won. Not so much "happy" -- but RELIEVED -- hoping (yes, HOPING) that our country may once again resemble the USA that once held respect throughout the world, the USA where hard work was once rewarded, the USA where families could afford to feed their children, and the USA where one's ability to obtain something as basic as healthcare wasn't only limited to the wealthy. I'm not naive enough to believe this can all be fixed in four (or even eight) years, because Bush has been like a four-year-old sociopath that was armed with Daddy's credit card, an AXE and an arrogant giggle, each of which he used to its full capacity, and that's a LOT to clean up.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#28699663
This will be a very effective presidency! This is GREAT !!! read more sm
President Obama just announced that the pay of top White House employees is being frozen. The Associated Press says it will affect those in positions paying more than $100,000 a year.
"All of you are committed to building a more responsible government," Obama told top staff at a meeting now underway at the White House.
"Families are tightening their belts and so should Washington," Obama added.
The president also announced he's about to sign new ethics rules designed to restrict lobbying by current staff after they leave the administration.
Update at 2:55 p.m. ET: The White House just put out this statement about the actions the president took today.
Update at 1:31 pm. ET: "What a moment we are in," Obama also said. "What an opportunity we have to change this country."
Update at 1:28 p.m. ET: The AP adds that about 100 White House aides will be affected.
Update at 1:25 p.m. ET: Obama also announced he is directing federal agencies to be more open, in part by returning to pre-Bush administration policies regarding the Freedom of Information Act.
"Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," he said.
I'm just voting for him because he is the lesser of the two evils who are running for presidency
x
And you think that terrorist attack was planned in just a few months during his presidency?
nm
versus
The first sura of the Qur'an is an example of this. It is a short prayer that is repeated by devout Muslims each day and ends with these words:
Keep us on the right path. The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray. (1:6-7)
Muhammad was once asked if these words pertained to Jews and Christians. His response was, "Whom else?" (Bukhari 56:662).
you need versus?
xx
Senator Santorum
Senator Santorum said if gay marriage is allowed, it will lead to bestiality!!!! Now that is one sick mind..How can anyone equate two humans loving each other with bestiality? Crazy times in crazy America.
thank you senator clinton!
for backing Obama:
http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbXkuYmFyYWNrb2JhbWEuY29tL3RoYW5rc19teXNwYWNl
The junior senator is going to owe A LOT of
favors should he be elected. He has been groomed by the Chicago political machine for this position and his many associates will expect their due. He can give very eloquent, enthusiastic speeches, have millions listen to him, rally around him and accept his word as truth, much like many of the dictators of the last century. Socialism is on the way and most people are turning a blind eye to it.
How did he become a Senator then? Did no know look into his background then?
Supposedly he is being called a terrorist, Muslim and is involved with all of these organizations, so I do not understand why and how he has been allowed to serve our government???? Did no one care about all of this when he was elected?????
VT, Socialist Senator
Bernie Sanders. Isn't that special?
Senator Boxer
Did anyone else get a laugh out of this? I thought it was pretty dumb and haughty of her. I mean it's not like the general was trying to degrade her...they are trained from day one to ma'am and sir everyone. Shoot my cousin's the same age as me and he ma'ams me! LOL (he's Navy.)
Oh well. Just wondering if anyone else heard about it. javascript:editor_insertHTML('text','');
mean versus Obama
Notice how many of the really mean posts, like the one who called Senator Obama, Osambo, are pro-McCain/Palin. John McCain and Sarah Palin never focus on the issues. Listen to them closely - what exactly are they going to do about unemployment, foreclosures, poverty, the meth epidemic across the nation, health care, taxes, and the war that has been going on far too long? Can you answer these questions? All John McCain does is talk about Obama. John McCain is losing the election and running scared, so he attacks Obama. Check out the facts. Obama was 8 years old when Bill Ayers was a radical. Ayers is in his 60s and a washed-up radical. Have you even looked at a picture of this man? It will make you laugh when you realize this is the guy McCain is associating Obama with in hopes that McCain can win the election. It is one attack after another. Senator Obama was raised in Kansas by his "white" grandmother. Senator Obama has two young children whom he takes to soccer practice regularly. McCain is making Obama sound like some kind of terrorist. How many terrorists take their kids to soccer practice? Do you think Senator Obama would jeporadize his children's lives by being a terrorist? His kids look pretty well-adjusted to me.
I live in Arizona where McCain is our senator. Arizona also has a huge meth epidemic, high percentage of poverty, horrible health care, and racism to say the least. Even Arizona's State Governor, Janet Napolitano, is endorsing Senator Obama. She has had to work side-by-side with John McCain and she isn't even endorsing him. Do you think the Governor of Arizona would endorse Senator Obama if he was the terrorist that the McCain/Palin ticket is trying to make him out to be. Even a 1st grader could see that McCain is bitter because he is losing.
You have to be really gullible to believe anything the McCain/Palin ticket has to say. Honestly ask yourself what you think John Mcain is going to do for this country in the next four years if he can't even help his own state of Arizona.
Upwards of $500,000 versus $10.....sm
It does make one wonder, doesn't it?
I wonder if the POTUS can be held in contempt of court?
Don't let your pets anywhere near Senator FrankenFrist
First he adopts the animals, promises to love and take care of them, waits for them to trust him and then ZAPS them. Not far afield from the Republican MO we've seen for the last six years.
I think we should force all politicians to undergo a PET scan of sorts -- an in-depth history of how they have treated animals during their lifetimes. I find this to be deplorable. Makes me wonder how Bush might have treated animals in his past, as well.
Ironic how someone who is clearly devoid of a heart be drawn to cardiology, but I guess that's where the big bucks are.
http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060612/COLUMNIST0101/606120346/1092/NEWS
Kitty-killer label litters Frist resume for president
Published: Monday, 06/12/06
There's a potential pothole in U.S. Sen. Bill Frist's road to the White House: He's a confessed kitty killer.
He fessed up in his 1989 book, Transplant, to adopting cats from shelters when he was in medical school, treating them like pets for a while, and then using them in his research experiments. Maybe in hindsight, Trent Lott should have seen it coming.
To his credit, the future senator wrote that it was a heinous and dishonest thing to do.
Last week, Frist started shopping around a new memoir to New York and Tennessee publishers. Here's the burning question: How will he spin the cat tale?
It came up in Tennessee's 1994 Republican primary, when Frist faced five opponents for the nomination. It was Chattanooga's Bob Corker (he's in a similar cat fight for Frist's seat now) who tried to inflame the feline furor. Corker sent beef-and-bacon-flavored
9 Lives Cat Treats to reporters and put out a press release saying Frist had lost the Garfield vote.
It was a short-lived local story that briefly flared in the national press. Yes, what Frist did was odd and rather icky, but he also saved a lot of lives as a heart surgeon. The kitty killer charges were widely dismissed, and Frist won the primary.
But running a national race is a different animal from running a statewide one. He'd better have an answer ready on the cat thing before he can even think about winning the GOP nomination. Running for president requires candidates to dump out their underwear drawer for all to see, answer questions about what color eye shadow their prom date wore, and explain any cross word ever said to their dry cleaner.
In other words, it'll be brutal.
Bet Frist wishes now he'd refrained from giving out too much information in his first book. He made his case in Transplant for saving lives by learning through experiments with animals while at Harvard. It's the part where he kept them as pets first that is bothersome.
Desperate, obsessed with my work, I visited the various animal shelters in the Boston suburbs, collecting cats, taking them home, treating them as pets for a few days, then carting them off to the lab to die in the interests of science. And medicine. And health care. And treatment of disease. And my project.
It was, of course, a heinous and dishonest thing to do, and I was totally schizoid about the entire matter. By day, I was little Billy Frist, the boy who lived on Bowling Avenue in Nashville and had decided to become a doctor because of his gentle father and a dog named Scratchy. By night, I was Dr. William Harrison Frist, future cardiothoracic surgeon, who was not going to let a few sentiments about cute, furry little creatures stand in the way of his career. In short, I was going a little crazy.
Frist recently commented about the power he felt when holding the last beats of a dog's heart in his hand. Good thing little Scratchy had a decent hiding place while Frist was in med school.
This will be media catnip. Think of the potential for protests and endorsements. A Saturday Night Live skit would be a no-brainer: Toonces, look out! It's the kitty-killing gentlemen from the state of Tennessee!
Maybe Frist should title his coming memoir Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.
Because, as Big Daddy would say, there's great potential here for mendacity. And he better get ready to dance on some hot shingles.
Published: Monday, 06/12/06
|
Senator Wants IRS to Chase After Pimps
I don't have a problem with prosecuting and fining pimps, so I think Grassley is definitely on to something. I do have a problem with calling them employers and seeking tax money from them. That just sounds nasty (for lack of a better term). Just call them fines IMHO.
-------------------------------------------------
Senator Wants IRS to Chase After Pimps
Sen. Charles Grassley wants the IRS to chase after pimps and sex traffickers
WASHINGTON, Jun. 28, 2006
By MARY DALRYMPLE AP Tax Writer
(AP) Pimps and sex traffickers could soon find themselves being chased by tax collectors, not just the vice squad.
Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, wants the Internal Revenue Service to chase after pimps and sex traffickers with the same fervor it stalked gangster Al Capone for tax evasion.
Grassley, R-Iowa, would hit pimps with fines and lengthy prison sentences for failing to file employment forms and withhold taxes for the women and girls under their command.
The proposal would make certain tax crimes a felony when the money comes from a criminal activity. A one-year prison sentence and $25,000 fine would become a 10-year sentence and $50,000 fine for each employment form that a pimp or sex trafficker fails to file.
Grassley planned to propose the penalties when his panel meets Wednesday.
The thugs who run these trafficking rings are exploiting society's poorest girls and women for personal gain, Grassley said. The IRS goes after drug traffickers. It can go after sex traffickers.
Michael Horowitz, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, said the change has the potential to put pimps out of business without difficult trials that require women to testify to abuse and mistreatment.
We need to simply treat the pimps and massage parlor operators the way we would treat anybody who takes the proceeds of a customer transaction from somebody and then gives a fraction of it back, he said.
Under tax law, that relationship makes the pimp an employer, requiring the filing of a wage statement and the withholding of payroll taxes, including Social Security.
Grassley envisions creating an office inside the Internal Revenue Service to prosecute sex traffickers for violating tax laws. The office would get $2 million to get started, and it would be allowed to keep a portion of the taxes it collects.
The IRS work is intended to build on efforts under way to curb worldwide trafficking. The Justice Department, collaborating with U.S. attorneys offices nationwide, would identify pimps and sex traffickers and refer them to the IRS.
Grassley also wants to change the IRS whistleblower program to allow the girls and women to participate.
If the IRS goes after pimps and sex traffickers for tax offenses now, it conducts lengthy audits of their lifestyles in order to estimate their incomes from illegal activities and determine taxes due.
MMVI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Congratulations to Senator Obama.
My heartiest congratulations to Senator Obama and to Senator Clinton for her campaign, and for quickly meeting with him this evening to discuss unifying the party.
I believe that the torch has been passed to the next generation of American citizens, with their high hopes and wonderful ideas for the future of this country, a future that includes all races and genders, and the potential of a better future for all of us.
Again my congratulations to Senator Obama!
Every senator on the floor during these votes....
has the identical experience Obama has. Does not make them foreign policy experts. How many times does someone have to say she was at the state level? She has as much foreign policy experience as Bill Clinton did when he was elected PRESIDENT. Geez. Your #1 guy has done...that is why he has Biden. He has never made an executive decision in his life, even in his campaign other than I am Barack Obama and approved this message.
John McCain is the only one of them, including Biden, with real and extended foreign policy experience. He has actually met with world leaders, not run the foreign relations committee. He is already known and respected worldwide. That is a no-brainer...and HE is the one running for the job.
Is someone in this thread related to Senator
 Is that his nick name for McCain supporters? Hey how about McCain sell a few of those houses and give it to the financial companies???? How about the rich do something for a change???? How about that????
This makes me sick, all of it! We need to be addressed by these candidates and not set aside until oil companies and rich folks figure out what happened!!!! We are looking at who is going to be our next President and all Bush cares about are his pockets being lined? Poor thing; did he invest in the wrong stock???
I must be really whacked, but I feel this candidacy is waaaaay more important than IGA, IGM, Wash Mut, Bank of America, Lehman, Looman, Dooman, or dooofus, whatever!!!!! These lenders loaned the money to people who they knew couldn't pay it back and now it has come back to bite them and now its the rest of us having to bail them out. No sympathy here! I stayed within my budget; so sorry others did not!!!!!!!! These candidates are going to run this country. I think Obama is right; let's get it on with the debates.... JMO...
95.71% match for Senator Obama.
!
Maybe Senator Obama believes in following the
"First Admendment" to the Constitution of the United States.
When he was the honorable senator from Illinois...
Amnesty is the largest of these rewards and gives illegal aliens a path to citizenship or makes them instantly legal. Senator Barack Obama voted in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens.
Senator Barack Obama has voted in favor of giving illegal aliens further rewards and other incentives to come such as in-state tuition, educational benefits, welfare and health care services.
As have most of the members of his party. And they do it because they want their votes...heck if you were in this country illegally and one of the parties was for giving you everything but the kitchen sink, wants you to be allowed to vote, etc....wouldn't YOU vote for them???
No, I don't blame him personally...although he has to take personal credit since he voted for it...I blame the PARTY. For you to deny it is, in your words...UNFREAKINBELIEVABLE. But then all the Obama worshippers are pretty unfreakinbelievable...sigh.
Never hurts to have a senator's wife
Doesn't mean she has to actually DO anything to earn the bucks. She got a great big raise (nearly triple - and still claimed they had trouble paying off their college loans) when he was elected to the senate. I imagine her primary duty at the hospital was simply to be Mrs. Senator Obama, so naturally no one could possibly replace her.
Whenever I see a photo of MO with that huge toothy grin I am reminded of a Kate Hepburn line as Eleanor in Lion in Winter. She describes one of her husband's former mistresses as having prominent teeth, ''She smiled to excess, but chewed with real distinction.''
wilson versus rove
Ms. Wilson is Valerie Plame, she is married to Joseph Wilson. She worked for the CIA but Rove gave her name to Robert Novak, thus jeopardizing her life.
abortion versus rudolph
Science has not determined when life begins, at conception? After the first trimester? But the argument is moot, actually, as it is legal to get an abortion, it is not legal to take the law into your own hands and kill because you do not agree with the legal medical procedure that is being performed. Enormous difference. Law abiding citizens do not kill because they disagree with the law.
Facts versus opinion.
If you choose to ignore the facts, so be it.
unborn versus born
I do not think they would choose their life over a child that was already born, but I do think many would choose (and do choose) their own life over an unborn child's life. And by life I don't necessarily mean a medical condition. If my daughter were a teenager (she is not quite there yet) and she was pregnant, and she chose abortion, her father and I would certainly support that choice versus her giving up a promising future to raise an unwanted child, especially at such a young age.
I know others would not choose that, but many do everyday. Certainly, I think men and women should choose birth control, abstinence, etc., but birth control fails, mistakes happen, rape happens, incest happens, and I don't feel anyone should have to give birth if they don't want to or aren't prepared for the responsibility of parenting.
Many women chose to give their babies up for adoption, and that is a wonderful choice for them. However, not the best choice for everyone. I want everyone to be able to have that choice.
Attack versus observation
So if someone called me a big, fat, smelly, ugly, loud-mouthed, foul hag that could qualify as an observation (in your words) and would therefore be acceptable? I mean, technically someone could say they OBSERVED these traits in me. When does something cross the line and become a personal attack?
My take on all this is that if it originates from one of the C-posters it's an observation. If it originates from an L-poster it's an attack. Not always, but in general. Could be due to the whole political board system have a very very far right-leaning slant........
experience versus wisdom
to change the downward course of the nation. Haven't you been listening?
Income tax versus sales tax......sm
Since sales tax was brought up below, let's take a little poll..........
Do you believe that a federal sales tax to replace the current income tax system would be a good move? Do you think it would be more fair or less fair and why?
I'll post my opinion separate from this.
deflation versus inflation
Deflation is better no matter what they say.
There has never been a country who went into hyperinflation that did not have a collapse of the government. (bankruptcy or worse)
I will go with the pay cut and cheaper gas.
Stimulus versus tax cuts
Stimulus means SPENDING
Non-refundable tax rebates means every $1.00 spent creates $1.02 in economic activity. 2 freaking cents (makes sense to the pubs.....I guess)
Infrastructure - every dollar spent equals $1.59 in economic activity (bridges, roads, etc.)
Food stamps (which the pubs want to cut out of the bill) - every dollar spent equals $1.73 in economic activity. This is the single most productive stimulus we have. Food stamps will get SPENT, unlike tax rebates.
If the pubs have their way, the bill will be 42% tax cuts which will not benefit job creation or improve the economy. They want to fail. Why? And you all call your senators to support this? If it gets pushed through like this, you have only yourselves to blame when everything goes to helll. You can't blame Obama for this cluster.
Independent versus Liberal...sm
" In the political realm, an Independent is generally the term used to describe a candidate who is not affiliated with any political party. The word has evolved to some degree and can also be used to describe a candidate who is not a member of a country’s main political parties. In the United States, if one is not a Republican or a Democrat, one might be referred to as an Independent or a third party candidate
Liberalism in the United States is a broad political and philosophical mindset, favoring individual liberty, and opposing restrictions on liberty, whether they come from established religion, from government regulation or grom the existing class structure.
"First, liberalism holds that there is no way to authenticate and prove as true any one version of the Christian faith...Second, liberalism rejects the Bible as being the actual Word of God to man...Third, liberalism restates the doctrine of Christ to show his utter humanity...Fourth, liberalism denies that the Bible has any inherent moral authority over men...Fifth, liberalism denies that mankind is lost and under the condemnation of sin...Sixth, liberalism has no concern with the New Testament concept of the church."
According to this I qualify as a political Independent and a religious Liberal.
Obama Rated the Most Liberal Senator
We're talking even more liberal than Ted Kennedy! Hillary talks about the "good" of the people. That's a Socialist quote, but no surprise there.
McCain is a "Maverick" for going to the other side. That's literally changing parties. And how about that famous temper? When have the Dems gone to the "other side?" The only exception is (surprisingly) Diane Feinstien, who is appalled by the Compeon & Ramos border patrol agents, who have been put in shackles & solitary. Compeon was beaten badly as well, and was never treated.
"W" has been a disappointment as well, but he's not a conservative, either. At least he's pro-life & pro-military, so I;ll give him that. Check out www.eyesontheborder.com
I've never missed an election, but I'm simply in a huge quandry, as NONE of these candidates are worthy of running our wonderful country. The only option is to vote for conservative Reps.
Also, nowhere in the Constition states voting on various dates. All voters should be able to vote on the same date. My state didn't get the option of choosing my "preferred candidate!"
Google this & you'll learn the facts.
NATIONAL JOURNAL: Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007 (01/31/2008)
Barack Obama, D-Ill., was the most liberal senator in 2007, according to National Journal's 27th annual vote ratings. The insurgent presidential candidate ...
nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/ - 77k - |
Senator Obama was a paid employee,
community organizer. He did not do this on a volunteer basis.
So how he can still be Senator then. Don't they have to pass an FBI check? Guess not.
So what other Senators, Congressmen and woman, legislators, etc have past associations out there??? why are they allowed to serve in our government. Do not get it.
If anyone knows about swine odor, it's Senator Harkin! nm
*
Chickenhawks versus true heros
Oh wow, this is a great post. Makes the point and leaves no doubt about who the true heros are.
Chavez oil versus American fat cat oil companies
Article from Juan Gonzalez, a NY Daily News columnist, RE: Hugo Chavez and his oil versus American oil companies:
Oil fat cats vs. Hugo Chavez |
|
|
I pulled into the Mobil gas station on 11th Ave. in Manhattan yesterday for my weekly stickup from the oil companies.
Their take this time was an astonishing $3.05 per gallon for premium unleaded.
"Every three or four days the price goes up," said Patel, the man in charge of the station. "Lots of complaints from my customers."
Complaints from everyone except oil executives.
Last year, Exxon/Mobil, the world's largest corporation, posted the highest profits of any company in history - more than $25 billion. The oil giant, based in Irving, Tex., is on track to shatter that mark this year, with revenues that now approach $1 billion per day.
Which brings me to Pat Robertson and Hugo Chavez.
Robertson, the right-wing evangelist and friend of the Bush family, publicly called this week for the U.S. government to kill - or at least kidnap - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
"This is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us badly," Robertson said. His less-than-Christian remarks ignited an outcry and forced him to issue an apology of sorts, though he still insisted that he had at least "focused our government's attention on a growing problem."
That "problem," quite simply, is that Chavez, a radical populist who has been voted into office repeatedly by huge majorities in his own country, controls the largest reserve of petroleum outside the Middle East.
Neither Robertson, nor former oil executives George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice, nor their buddies at Exxon/Mobil, Chevron, etc., are happy about all this.
Even more scandalous for Big Oil, Chavez is using Venezuela's windfall not to fatten his own country's oligarchy but to benefit the Venezuelan poor and help neighboring countries.
Yesterday, while Robertson was issuing his half-baked Chavez clarification, the Venezuelan president was in Montego Bay, Jamaica, where he announced a new oil agreement with that country's prime minister, P.J. Patterson.
Under the agreement, Venezuela will supply 22,000 barrels of oil a day to Jamaica for a mere $40 a barrel. That's far lower than the current world price of about $65 a barrel. With the price of gasoline in that destitute nation already more than $3.50 a gallon, the Chavez plan means more than half a million dollars a day in savings for Jamaica on oil imports.
Chavez also announced his government will provide $60 million in foreign aid to Jamaica and finance the upgrading of that country's oil refineries.
The agreement is part of a broader Chavez plan called Petrocaribe, which he unveiled at a Caribbean summit in Venezuela last June.
At that conference, Chavez offered the same kind of deal to the leaders of more than a dozen other neighboring nations, including Dominican Republic President Leonel Fernandez and Cuba's Fidel Castro.
Fernandez jumped at the offer because his government is nearly bankrupt from oil prices. Last year, the Dominican Republic spent $1.2 billion on oil imports; this year, it expects to fork out more than $3 billion. The price of gasoline in Santo Domingo has zoomed past $4 a gallon in recent days.
Pat Robertson looks at Chavez and sees a devilish danger. He wants our government to "take him out." Over at the White House, Bush and his aides may use more restrained language, but their goals are not much different.
But there's a whole different view down in Latin America, where a half-dozen nations have seen liberal and populist governments swept into office in recent years.
Down there, Chavez has become the new miracle man of oil. Unlike Exxon/Mobil and the Big Oil fat cats, who wallow in their record profits while the rest of us pay, Chavez is spreading the wealth around.
A dangerous man, indeed.
|
Roe versus Wade majority and problems with the law
Actually, I've read where if put to a vote polls have shown that Roe versus Wade would be overturned. Whether abortion is right or wrong aside many people, including many liberal lawyers say that RVW is a badly written law in the first place.
|
