President Obama on Roe v. Wade: "Govt. shouldn't intrude on private family matters"

[Will]

President Obama echoed his support for abortion rights today, the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court's pro-choice decision in Roe v. Wade.

"Government should not intrude on private family matters," . . . .

Obama recalls Roe v. Wade, backs abortion rights - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency


I agree whole-heartedly Mr. President. I look forward to your support of a flat national sales for all Americans and the elimination of Income Taxation and government intrusion on private family matters, such as household income. It's none of your business or anyone's business how Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Doe plan their family, or fund it either. Their income is a personal matter and should remain private and free from prying government eyes.

What type of firearms John and Jane choose to purchase, keep, and carry is also a private family matter. I look forward to your endorsement of the SCOTUS decisions in Heller v. D.C. and McDonald v. Chicago.

After all, you're not a hypocrite, are you Mr. President? Your support of individual liberty and privacy is unconditional, right Mr. President?

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by _Will_

Obama recalls Roe v. Wade, backs abortion rights - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency

From the article ...

Abortion foes upbeat, see chance for tougher curbs


Abortion foes upbeat, see chance for tougher curbs


This article suggest *States Rights* to *opt-in* or *opt-out* of the Obama Healthcare plan ... this means women seeking an abortion in a state designated *anti-abortion* can simply go to another state that is *pro-abortion* for one ...

I believe this was Scott Roeders' *final-bell* when obssesed with killing Tiller ...

[Bill]

Well, great. I'll be expecting that repeal of the Patriot Act any day now. After all, since government shouldn't be involved in private family matters, it shouldn't be holding my bank hostage to snitch on me and my family about our banking relationships. It shouldn't be involved with needing to know if me and my family pay cash for our automobiles, either, and since Obama is so excited for government to stay out of my family business, I am guessing he won't allow warrantless sneek-n-peek searches of my family's house any more.

What's more, I'll be looking for the end of drug prohibition and the drug war, because what goes on in people's private homes is their business, not the government's business, right? Similarly, I should be seeing a repeal of much employment law, because individuals have a right to hire and contract with others as long as the two parties agree, right? That means minimum wage laws, overtime laws, and others should be tossed out, right? I mean, government is now going to stay out of the private business of Americans, right?

Holy smokes, this should also mean an end to anti-prostitution laws around the country, as private citizens have their rights to do what they want with their own bodies restored.




Hmm, maybe I shouldn't hold my breath for all that. After all, when has government and consistancy of beliefs ever gone together before?

[Exotix]

After the Tea Party repeals Obama I can't wait for them to repeal Illegals by finish building the *Reagan Star Wars Fence* ... charge it to the private companys and man it with tea baggers and stay out of the tax payers wallets ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

After the Tea Party repeals Obama I can't wait for them to repeal Illegals by finish building the *Reagan Star Wars Fence* ... charge it to the private companys and man it with tea baggers and stay out of the tax payers wallets ...

We don't have any money to finish the virtual fence. The cheaper way to do it would be to allow people who own property on the border to defend that property from invaders. Here in Texas, everybody understands what a "Posted" sign means. I'm betting, if Uncle Sam didn't arrest property owners and didn't allow lawsuits by illegals against citizens who defend their property, livestock and homes from invasion and theft by illegal aliens, we could tighten up the border on the cheap.

Imagine if it was your fences getting cut, your cows getting stolen or butchered, and your home and outbuildings being robbed by the illegals and coyotes? Imagine it was your loved ones scared every night because unknown hordes were trespassing and stealing from you, never knowing when one of them might decide to rape or kill your wife, daughter, or grandmother while they are stealing and trespassing?

The solution to the border problem is easy. Bring home most of the sailors stationed around the globe and put them in PT boats along the Rio Grande. That won't stop all illegals, of course, but it will cut down on the sheer numbers of illegals.

The Navy and the Coast Guard are supposed to defend America, and the Rio Grande is as good a place as any to deploy those assets.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

We don't have any money to finish the virtual fence. The cheaper way to do it would be to allow people who own property on the border to defend that property from invaders. Here in Texas, everybody understands what a "Posted" sign means. I'm betting, if Uncle Sam didn't arrest property owners and didn't allow lawsuits by illegals against citizens who defend their property, livestock and homes from invasion and theft by illegal aliens, we could tighten up the border on the cheap.

Imagine if it was your fences getting cut, your cows getting stolen or butchered, and your home and outbuildings being robbed by the illegals and coyotes? Imagine it was your loved ones scared every night because unknown hordes were trespassing and stealing from you, never knowing when one of them might decide to rape or kill your wife, daughter, or grandmother while they are stealing and trespassing?

The solution to the border problem is easy. Bring home most of the sailors stationed around the globe and put them in PT boats along the Rio Grande. That won't stop all illegals, of course, but it will cut down on the sheer numbers of illegals.

The Navy and the Coast Guard are supposed to defend America, and the Rio Grande is as good a place as any to deploy those assets.

Well then how and why the hell is the tea party disguised as (R)'s gonna repeal the 14th amendment and not do anything about it ?

[mrvette]

IF this PC culture so carefully raised by the PROGRESSIVES/liberals/commies what EVER they want to call themselves.....would just disappear into a sea of HONESTY.....we could solve about 90% of this country's problems in about a year.....

and the terror war about 6 weeks after our last man is outta the region.....

we pack up and start coming home, and the companies pack up their folks and come home, we stop buying oil, and start drilling/pumping OUR OWN, and you watch that damn stupid islamic bullshit come to a hault.....

we don't need THEM they need US.....

I getting anymore that I HATE crybabies....they will sponge or steal forever, and all the apologists can go to hell....sooner the better....

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Well then how and why the hell is the tea party disguised as (R)'s gonna repeal the 14th amendment and not do anything about it ?

I agree with you that the Tea Party got corrupted and swept into the fold by the (R)'s before they really even had a chance.

Repealing (actually clarifying, not repealing, btw) the 14th is an issue because many people don't agree with the interpretation that has been made from it. This is not particular to the Tea Party, and really shouldn't be a political issue, it should be a common sense issue.

There really is no where else on earth where one can become a citizen of a country simply by virtue of being born there. In the rest of the world, and pretty much since time immemorial, citizenship has always followed the parents. What country are your parents from? That's where you are from, too then.

Amending the 14th to make this simple truth CRYSTAL CLEAR would eliminate a whole new generation of entitlement seeking anchor baby parents from sucking on the government teat. More to the point, it would make things as they should be. If your parents are Canadian, and your Mom gives birth here, you are Canadian, as common sense tells you it should be.

Those that already are citizens because of this misinterpretation, and are already/have already sucked on the government teat are still citizens, just as much citizens as you and me.

My question to you is, why do you feel that this country should give birthright citizenship to babies born here simply because they are born here, regardless of the parent's citizenship? Explain how that makes sense to you.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

I agree with you that the Tea Party got corrupted and swept into the fold by the (R)'s before they really even had a chance.

Repealing (actually clarifying, not repealing, btw) the 14th is an issue because many people don't agree with the interpretation that has been made from it. This is not particular to the Tea Party, and really shouldn't be a political issue, it should be a common sense issue.

There really is no where else on earth where one can become a citizen of a country simply by virtue of being born there. In the rest of the world, and pretty much since time immemorial, citizenship has always followed the parents. What country are your parents from? That's where you are from, too then.

Amending the 14th to make this simple truth CRYSTAL CLEAR would eliminate a whole new generation of entitlement seeking anchor baby parents from sucking on the government teat. More to the point, it would make things as they should be. If your parents are Canadian, and your Mom gives birth here, you are Canadian, as common sense tells you it should be.

Those that already are citizens because of this misinterpretation, and are already/have already sucked on the government teat are still citizens, just as much citizens as you and me.

My question to you is, why do you feel that this country should give birthright citizenship to babies born here simply because they are born here, regardless of the parent's citizenship? Explain how that makes sense to you.

Allow me to clarify ... the Tea Party and it's base want the illegals out because they *drain the system* ... goes to the platform of burn and slash that they decree the Founding Fathers *wished* ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Allow me to clarify ... the Tea Party and it's base want the illegals out because they *drain the system* ... goes to the platform of burn and slash that they decree the Founding Fathers *wished* ...

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

My question to you is, why do you feel that this country should give birthright citizenship to babies born here simply because they are born here, regardless of the parent's citizenship? Explain how that makes sense to you.

The Founding Fathers weren't big fans of government debt, even though, ironically, they had to take on debt to secure our freedom from the British. You'll note, though, that they did pay that initial war debt off.

And it isn't a theory that illegals sap government resources. They do. We can't save the whole world. We are a lifeboat, and paying for illegals is like overloading the life boat. Sure, we want to save everybody, but the boat can only hold so many before it sinks and EVERYBODY drowns. If it is a choice between paying old age pensions for American senior citizens or paying for illegals, yeah, I'm going to go with the American Social Security recipients every time.

My question remains. Why do you agree with birthright citizenship when we are the only ones pretty much in the entire world that do that?

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Allow me to clarify ... the Tea Party and it's base want the illegals out because they *drain the system* ... goes to the platform of burn and slash that they decree the Founding Fathers *wished* ...

In fact, they do.....TWICE OVER....

I let YOU tell me how, let's see what you understand or NOT.....

challenge 101.....

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

The Founding Fathers weren't big fans of government debt, even though, ironically, they had to take on debt to secure our freedom from the British. You'll note, though, that they did pay that initial war debt off.

And it isn't a theory that illegals sap government resources. They do. We can't save the whole world. We are a lifeboat, and paying for illegals is like overloading the life boat. Sure, we want to save everybody, but the boat can only hold so many before it sinks and EVERYBODY drowns. If it is a choice between paying old age pensions for American senior citizens or paying for illegals, yeah, I'm going to go with the American Social Security recipients every time.

My question remains. Why do you agree with birthright citizenship when we are the only ones pretty much in the entire world that do that?

I answered the question and several times here ... you just added 1/4 triilion dollars to the debt in exchange for extended unemployment benefits ...

Next step is to say Obama added 1/4 trillion dollars to the debt ... so we need to slash & burn ...

If you thought the joke of the GOP 2008 primaries gave you McPalin ... well maybe Paulie is up to bat now ...

Good Luck in 2012 ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

I answered the question and several times here ... you just added 1/4 triilion dollars to the debt in exchange for extended unemployment benefits ...

Link? I'm new here.

Next step is to say Obama added 1/4 trillion dollars to the debt ... so we need to slash & burn ...

I blame Obama, the Dems and the Pubs equally for that mess. I know I sound like a broken record player, but what part of "we have no money for that" is so difficult for our elected officials to understand? Everybody that voted for that fiasco ought to be run out of town on a rail.
If you thought the joke of the GOP 2008 primaries gave you McPalin ... well maybe Paulie is up to bat now ...
Good Luck in 2012 ...

I didn't vote for McPalin in '08. I voted for Chuck Baldwin, Constitution Party, because Bob Barr, Libertarian candidate, was about as un-libertarian as it could get.

Whyt the heck should I vote for the people responsible for putting us in the mess we are in now back in office? At least RP votes no on deficit spending, every time, all the time.

Sooner or later, that won't seem so crazy anymore.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

I didn't vote for McPalin in '08. I voted for Chuck Baldwin, Constitution Party, because Bob Barr, Libertarian candidate, was about as un-libertarian as it could get.

Whyt the heck should I vote for the people responsible for putting us in the mess we are in now back in office? At least RP votes no on deficit spending, every time, all the time.

Sooner or later, that won't seem so crazy anymore.

Well, maybe I'm not making myself clear ... over here on VBPR&C we do things a little different than over on CFPR&C ... we get to the meat of the matter with little tolerance for those who want to babble about or fake about or gibberish about hoping to clog up threads with their idealologies and demogogies in ad nauseam and redundancy ...

We like expression of thoughts and plans that make sense and are well thought out ...

However, the exotix, although who likes to be reasoned with and logic'd with ... always likes to be bargained with ...

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by mrvette

In fact, they do.....TWICE OVER....

I let YOU tell me how, let's see what you understand or NOT.....

challenge 101.....

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Well, maybe I'm not making myself clear ... over here on VBPR&C we do things a little different than over on CFPR&C ... we get to the meat of the matter with little tolerance for those who want to babble about or fake about or gibberish about hoping to clog up threads with their idealologies and demogogies in ad nauseam and redundancy ...

That's great. I like weighing the facts, and giving opinions backed by some modicum of logic, rather than merely spouting off party talking points. Win.

We like expression of thoughts and plans that make sense and are well thought out ...

Me too.

However, the exotix, although who likes to be reasoned with and logic'd with ... always likes to be bargained with ...


I'm always happy to oblige.

Originally Posted by Exotix

I answered the question and several times here ... you just added 1/4 trillion dollars to the debt in exchange for extended unemployment benefits ...

OK, just stick to facts and opinions. What would you have done? I gave my analysis (no extension of Bush tax cuts, coupled with cutting off unemployment compensation, not extending it for yet another year). What would "The Exotix" have done in that situation?

Next step is to say Obama added 1/4 trillion dollars to the debt ... so we need to slash & burn ...

He did, plus much more. Fact. He signed it, he owns it. Obama does have ink in the veto pen, right?

If you thought the joke of the GOP 2008 primaries gave you McPalin ... well maybe Paulie is up to bat now ... Good Luck in 2012 ...

Already asked and answered.

Still waiting for your reasoned opinion of why the 14th should NOT be fixed to say that freshly born babies are citizens of the country where the parents are citizens.

Link or cut and paste from another Exotix post.....OK.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

Already asked and answered.

Still waiting for your reasoned opinion of why the 14th should NOT be fixed to say that freshly born babies are citizens of the country where the parents are citizens.

Link or cut and paste from another Exotix post.....OK.


OK, just stick to facts and opinions. What would you have done?

I gave my analysis (no extension of Bush tax cuts, coupled with cutting off unemployment compensation, not extending it for yet another year).

You're gonna need some kind of bizzare graph to slide this one by the exotix ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

You're gonna need some kind of bizzare graph to slide this one by the exotix ...

s
t
u
c
x
a
t
h
s
u
B.......................ill's position right here.
f
o
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
x
e
o
No more unemployment benefits.Isn't99weeksenough?Damn.


This is the best I can do. Where the Hell is Red when you need him?

[ChasC5]