The Republican You Tube Debate: Abortion pt 2

The next question was:

If Roe v Wade was overturned, and Congress passed a bill banning abortion, would you sign it?

Giuliani to his credit, said he would not sign the bill, would leave it up to the states. The foundation of such an action, vetoing the bill, must be a belief in a woman’s right to have an abortion. Despite being at a Republican primary debate, where the political pressures favor the right-most candidate, he held firm to his belief.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, would sign the bill, but he said that the country isn’t there yet. So where is the country Mitt? What is it that we want? According to him, “Where America is, is ready to overturn Roe v. Wade”. So let’s be clear about this, Mitt wants to overturn Roe v. Wade, and he believes the American public is ready for it. Aside from the fact that the current court has indicated is preference for precedent, Mitt Romney is flat wrong. The American public does not support overturning Roe v. Wade, as this study earlier this year indicates.

Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney both are making fire about overturning Roe, a long held goal for conservatives. Although this may work in the primary, once the general electi0n begins, things change. If either candidate's anti-abortion stance catapulted them into the nomination (as it could since the front runner is pro-choice), the issue that defines either candidate's success will become abortion, and their stance against it will be clear and undeniable. But as the chart indicates, the public is not ready to overturn Roe v. Wade. Convincing fellow republicans is difference than convincing the sea of moderates, who favor the courts ruling. This opinion would undoubtedly affect their choice for president, the Republican nominees ignore this fact at their own peril.

The Republican You Tube Debate: Abortion pt. 1

These YouTube debates have been good. The questions are much more interesting than the one’s journalists generally ask and since the YouTubers themselves ask the question, each new round brings a new questioner. Some have an edge of resentment for politicians. Most offer an authentic perspective. Still Others were plants from Hilary Clinton’s campaign. These factors created a tension for the candidates that occasionally yielded more honest glimpses of their true personalities. Crucial since the stakes are raising because America is beginning to tune in.

The first religious question asked, “if abortion were illegal and a women got one anyway what should the punishment be?”

Ron Paul was up first and he began by claiming that the federal government shouldn’t dictate the punishment for abortion. Under his administration, it would be left to the states to decide, in part because it is such a controversial issue, he doesn’t think it should be “all fifty states the same way”.

He then said that the “abortionist” (an Orwellian term for a highly educated Professional Doctor who performs abortions, and therefore endorses it ethically) should be punished not the woman. Ron Paul is utterly opposed to abortion, probably stemming from his deep religious faith, after all he was nearly a Lutheran minister. If he believed in a more forceful Presidency, this could be a killer for his campaign, but since he would leave regulation to that states, its seen as consistent with his views.

Fred Thompson said same thing as Paul except he sounded more nervous, spoke less intelligently, and induced me to suicidal boredom. Grampa Fred puts the room to sleep again.

Tompson and Paul have the sense to know a modern political truth. Something we'll talk about more in the next segment; that it is politically deadly to be anti-abortion in a national campaign.

Ron Paul’s Problem with the Jews

I ran across this article while stumbling. It talks about the increasing success of Texas congressman Ron Paul. His libertarian message and non-imperial foreign policy is earning him quite a bit of attention in a ruckus race.

Government Shrinker - Ron Paul

While his fortunes are growing, the article claims that one potential threat to his continued success, is the kinds of supporters that are joining up.

Indeed, Ron Paul has become the most popular candidate among right-wing extremists, including white separatists, neo-Nazis, and conspiracy theorists who believe that “the Zionists” were behind 9/11. This group includes Frank Weltner, creator of the antisemitic website JewWatch.com, who in a YouTube video, accuses the “Zionist-controlled media” of attacking Paul’s candidacy. Paul has also received favorable coverage from the Vanguard News Network, a White Nationalist news organ, members of Stormfront, an online neo-Nazi community, as well as the National Alliance, the “mainstream” White Nationalist group featured prominently in Marc Levin’s 2005 film Protocols of Zion.

The article claims that this will cause a problem in the long run, since Jewish voters will be less likely to join up and support the candidate along side neo-Nazis.

Mashugana!

Ron Paul has a “Jewish Problem” like Dennis Kucinich has a problem slam-dunking a basketball, or I have a problem spending a million dollars. In other words, Ron Paul's, isn't a problem at all. In order to have a problem with your election, your election has to be possible. That’s Ron Paul’s real problem, he doesn’t have any votes. Not nationally. Not in any of the important primaries. It is interesting how much fuss has been made over Ron Paul, without any ability to increase his poll numbers at all. Without a surprise showing in Iowa, New Hampshire, or South Carolina his candidacy will be over before spring.