I'm disappointed in all of them. On the Republican side, they're so busy pandering to their busily fracturing base, you can't take any of them seriously. On the Democratic side, they're afraid to tackle any of the issues seriously as doing so might alienate a potential swing voter. Neither of these tactics a leader makes and that's what this country really needs at the moment.
Kisses,
MNM
__________________ MNM, coming to you live from Chateau Maine, high in the Hollywood Hills.
You've got to admit though, that after years of carefully orchestrated softball Townhall Meeting questions, fake Team Bush generated "news" stories, the Jeff Gannon scandal and the recent FEMA bogus press conference, it is pretty funny to see the right so shocked, shocked I tell you about HRC staffers.
But then when she flubs non-planted questions so badly (the driver's license for illegal aliens issue), then blames Tim Russert, then blames the other candidates for ganging up on her, it's no wonder.
Dave Neiwert at Orcinus posted an interesting list of some of the bills that Ron Paul, the darling of the libertarian right, has sponsored or co-sponsored in his career.
"Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible." -- Jamie Raskin
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -- Groucho Marx
See, the pro-life angle is what really gets me. I understand the Libertarian rhetoric that the gubmint should butt out of darn near everything, but when you go so far as to say that those on public assistance or anything else shouldn't have birth control provided? Say, for example, The Pill or sterilization? That gets my hackles up.
This doozy was one that I missed when I was researching him myself, however. I can appreciate the political climate of the time, but HELLO? That's like saying every American is like Bush and not deserving of help.
__________________ Sometimes, when the world is changing rapidly, the greater risk is caution.
See, the pro-life angle is what really gets me. I understand the Libertarian rhetoric that the gubmint should butt out of darn near everything, but when you go so far as to say that those on public assistance or anything else shouldn't have birth control provided? Say, for example, The Pill or sterilization? That gets my hackles up.
This doozy was one that I missed when I was researching him myself, however. I can appreciate the political climate of the time, but HELLO? That's like saying every American is like Bush and not deserving of help.
Those bills don't say that people on public assistance shouldn't have access to birth control, just that the Federal government shouldn't be paying for it.
The Iran one, while not the brightest approach, was probably more of a political statement than a serious attempt to kick Iranian students out of the US.
He is voting and supporting a Libertarian agenda, which is very "hands off" government involvement. I can get behind that right now, because it is the fastest way back to the Constitution snd away from the fascist damage Bush has done.
We don't need a bunch of distraction looking for the "perfect" candidate. You won't find it in this bunch (or any bunch). I see the country needing a two stage intervention. First, a president like Ron Paul who can bring us back to the Constitution (he has already made it plain he will revoke the Patriot Act, get rid of Homeland Security, pull the troops home from Iraq and more, all of which are Priority Number One for the country, above all other issues), and THEN once we fix Bush's major mistakes we go for a "human rights" president in 2012 to continue fixing the wrongs Bush has wrought even further.
If people are on public assistance, who else would be paying for birth control but the government?
FEDERAL?
Most medical assistance programs are state programs. There are some which have federal funding, but not all of them.
As a side note, some of those programs are so obnoxiously in-your-face with the birth control that women seriously consider opting out. One of my sisters declined services for which she was eligible because she was tired of getting beaten over the head with birth control. You may be aware that it occasionally fails.
I heard somewhere that Tancredo just entered the ring to get his opinions on illegal imegration heard, and was just hoping one of the candidates would align himself to his POV. The fact that none of them has is what has him still in the ring at this point.
I'm in agreement with Pippa about Ron Paul. When I was listening to his campaign speaches I was with him until he got to women's rights. Then he lost me completely. It's not even that he's anti-choice, it's that he's so fervently anti-choice.
See, Margaret articulated it better than me. I get the feeling that he couches it in Libertarian-esque rhetoric but his views on choice (and by choice I don't just mean abortion!) have me running away screaming.
No Federal funding for birth control would deny it to military families as well. And I can speak from experience that too many children keep women impoverished and often unable to get out of a not-so-hot situation. I don't agree on beating people over the head with it, but I'm also aware that I'm a statistic in the failure, and think everyone should have access to birth control.
__________________ Sometimes, when the world is changing rapidly, the greater risk is caution.
I can't fault him for the thing about the Iranian students and financial aid. I remember reading a lot about the issue way back then. It was a big deal at the time, especially for those of us who were in university trying to get financial aid and who felt cranky that students who were ineligible for aid had suddenly been given $$$ , and yes, the hostages had a part of how cranky we felt, too.
__________________ When Poe ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.
"Apparently the American public prefers that its nannies, gardeners, store clerks and other workers, which it freely hires in full knowledge that this cheap labor is here illegally, take the bus to the homes of their white employers instead of putting on airs and driving cars." -- Juan Cole
Oh yes, because illegal immigration is WAY more important than, say, the deficit or the war, or the gradual disapperance of civil rights, or our standing in the international community.
__________________ Sometimes, when the world is changing rapidly, the greater risk is caution.
Not all Democrats are as clueless on this as Hillary and Obama. A tough new bill on illegal immigration which has lots of bipartison sponsorship was introduced by Heath Shuler a new Democrat to the House of Representatives, who apparently wants to keep his seat. There are also bills pending in the House to forbid states to give driver's licenses to illegals.
Those who pushed for the 9/11 Commission now seem to want to disregard its recommendations on border security and giving de facto ID cards to illegals.
I don't agree on beating people over the head with it, but I'm also aware that I'm a statistic in the failure, and think everyone should have access to birth control.
When Poe ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.