Who will be the next president?

I read somewhere he was referenced 18 times and his name was used 85 times. They should have had a large statue of Reagan's @ss on stage so each candidate could have had a chance to go up and kiss it.

truer and more universal words have never been uttered on this forum !!!!!

If we elect another Republican president this upcoming electition it wouldn't be suprising to see this country end up in a similiar state of that of the book "1984" after all the liberties we have seen Bush take from us.

Sorry to say, but I think only a third party has hands clean enough to carry the torch....

I think it will be another Republican Talking head. The party of inclusion STOLE the last 2 elections and we did nothing to stop them, and the current administration is not going to be impeached so I see nothing changing in the foreseeable future. The decider has done irreparable damage to this nations creditability in the eyes of the world. This war without end that he conned the US into participating in has caused the deficit to SKYROCKET. All the while lining the pockets of the war mongering capitalists, like Halliburton, Blackwater etc. I'm sure that the fact that they vice president is waist deep into Halliburton stocks had nothing to do with our involvement there. Last I checked Bush's overall public approval rating was below 30%. If 7 out of 10 isn't crushing majority then I don't know what is. Dear legislators Impeach NOW, or you have failed your Constituents, your country and future generations.
For what its worth I'll be voting for Obama but I may as well throw my vote into the street.

debate on fox, what a joke

SO, I assume he adopts a ton of children, being PRO-LIFE and all. I'm sure he wants good to come from his beliefs and doesn't just tout them for his voting base.

But on second thought, it seems as though he has alienated much of the war-mongering chicken hawk right, so I wonder if he is not catering to the rest of his party just to maintain a voting block. A block that will come out in droves at the mere mention of the word fetus.(especially since the war has become so unpopular)



To me, the phrases 'Libertarian ideals' and 'pro-life' are almost completely opposite.

Keep your laws off my body until I wanna make a law about YOUR body.

If he were so "libertarian-inclined", he'd let go of the nipple of the republicans and keep his morals on a personal level.

My problem with the Libertarian party is that they create a lot of strange bedfellows. One -issue folks who want liberties on their one issue. The gun lobby comes to mind. As does the drug law reform lobby.

But when it comes time to put forth a platform, the gun nuts, for instance, can't agree to reforming laws that jail simple possessors.

I think the trend of the Republican/Libertarian has spawned out of the GOP not being able to practice what they preach re; small government, family values, etc.

Let's face it. We could get rid of the elephants and jackasses and just combine both parties and call them the Corporatists. Neither party stands for anything except getting re-elected and stuffing their pockets.

If we are so allergic to socialism, why do we subsidize industries like oil, pharma, and defense ? That's not very free market.

And Ron Paul is just another talking head doublespeaking to the unrest he sees within the Republican voting block.

A pro life Libertarian type. I call it opportunism !

The very reason that it IS a moral issue is because it involves your beliefs. And calling it an upopular belief is underlining the notion that there is a large group of people(if not the majority) who BELIEVE otherwise. Historically, Libertarians have agreed that it is not acceptable to limit the freedoms of others because of one's own BELIEFS and that legislating morality is inherently a bad thing.

And isn't not-saving-the-undebateably-living also killing ?
That is, stem cell research is often despised by right to lifers. Why defend a fetus(or embryo) and not the lives of the terminally ill ? ???

I'll let it get back on topic. The point is that any pro life libertarian Republican doesn't fully accept the idea that not legislating morality is unconditional to a true libertarian, and is most likely an opportunist calling out the churchies' vote.

you can call it what you will, you could probably make the case that many/most laws are moral issues (ie murder, rape, stealing). libertarians also believe (correct me if i'm wrong) that personal freedom can exist as long as it does not violate another's personal freedom, so I would make the argument that abortion violates the basic human rights of the unborn person. As for stem cell research, it seems really great that we'd be saving the terminally ill; but because of what I think about when life begins I don't think that it justifies killing unborn babies.

My personal beliefs are everything should be legal as long as it involves consenting adults and does not directly affect others in a negative way. A negative effect has to be clear and demonstrable. I cannot demonstrate a zygote is a human.

Once we allow beliefs into law anything can be outlawed (just as anything might be believed by someone.)

abortion...

If the right-wingers would just take a page out of Carter's book and realize that in order to reduce the number of abortions they need to give a sh*t about the already born. That's why he started the WIC program.

Carter's personal beliefs are against abortion but at the same time he realized that it is going to happen, either in a safe clinic or by some opportunistic butcher in an alley. It's better to keep it safe and legal.

If you don't believe in abortion THEN DON"T HAVE ONE!!! Leave everybody else alone to make their own decision.

laws are always based on beliefs to some extent.

I am not pro-life because I cannot demonstrate that a fertilized egg is human and I am against allowing the government the power to take rights away on pure belief.

I am anti death penalty because I am against giving the government complete and undeniable power over life and death. I cannot agree with killing one innocent person (and that is unavoidable) when life in prison is an option.

(Once again, one can only define a zygote as an innocent person based on belief. The rights of a indisputable person supercede the rights of a "possible" person.)

This will be my last post on this subjest because as I've said before, messageboards are the worst place to discuss complex issues. I truly do respect everyone's opinion here. Peace.