Jane Roe (of Roe v Wade) to Endorse Ron Paul?

[electronicmaji]

I'm 18 and im pro life


'nough said.

 

[dreicher]

Oh, no, they'd report that, they'd just spin it somehow...

Former lesbian, abortion crusader Jane Roe, of Roe v. Wade, endorses Ron Paul. (something like that, you mean?)

 

[KurtBirk]

Booo... the abortion issue is not good for this movement. Young people are overwhelmingly pro choice.

Children, in the sense of future workforce and that is maninly boys, will be worth gold in the western world as our ecnomy tanks.

With a bad economy and with plenty of raw material, boys will be our chance for recovery.

The family will again play an important role and not want government intrusion on their lives.

 

[Deborah K]

Remember what the good Dr. says about group-think and categorization.
I listen to Stern every day, and I have voted in every election that I was qualified to vote in, and they were all well-researched votes too.
When we put people into groups it does nothing to advance the movement. This is about realizing and respecting the sovreignty of the individual.

And a great big bababooey to you too!

Excuse me but I didn't "group" anyone. Not in the way Ron Paul means it. He's talking about minority groups not being allowed to have the same liberties as the majority - or- minority groups getting preferential treatment based soley on their classification. At worst all I did was generalize. Big difference. And if you read other people's comments you'll note that everyone tends to generalize at one point or another. Just look at some of the other posts i.e. "pro-lifers", "christians", "young people", etc.

While I agree that we shouldn't "classify" or "group" people and then deny them or give them preferential treatment, I don't have a problem with generalizations.

 

[hawkeyenick]

Children, in the sense of future workforce and that is maninly boys, will be worth gold in the western world as our ecnomy tanks.

With a bad economy and with plenty of raw material, boys will be our chance for recover.

The family will again play an important role and not want government intrusion on their lives.

I don't give a shit about "the family", I care about my personal rights!

 

[Guymontag]

Booo... the abortion issue is not good for this movement. Young people are overwhelmingly pro choice.

 

[amy31416]

The election was a huge issue on Howard in 2004.. he talked about the election half the time for months..

We need RP on Stern.. Period


.

I like Stern, am a long-time listener, but I honestly think RP has too much class to be on Howard.

 

[0zzy]

She is:

A former lesbian,
who said she was raped,
later said she wasn't,
later said she was used by ambitious lawyers,
became pro-life,
entered the catholic church in 2005,
and became unlesbian,
and now,
she endorses Ron Paul.

Confusing women, but she's famous! She's was apart of the most cited case in the history of cases.

 

[lynnf]

two-fer

nice.. but I have NO belief that the MSM will report it.

you're right, this is a 2'fer (or really two against) -

1. Ron Paul
2. pro-life

twice the reasons to not report it


lynn

 

[krott5333]

I have mixed feelings about this. And I'm not sure Howard Stern listeners even bother to vote, do they? But then again, if they didn't in the past, maybe they will now.

you need to stop with such generalizations.

alot of Ron Paul supporters never voted before. Thats whats going on, were curing apathy here, and you cant leave out a huge group of people for fear of evangelical backlash

 

[amy31416]

Children, in the sense of future workforce and that is maninly boys, will be worth gold in the western world as our ecnomy tanks.

With a bad economy and with plenty of raw material, boys will be our chance for recovery.

The family will again play an important role and not want government intrusion on their lives.

Fresh off the boat from China are you?

 

[tarabyte]

I have mixed feelings about this. And I'm not sure Howard Stern listeners even bother to vote, do they? But then again, if they didn't in the past, maybe they will now.

I think that RP on Stern is a great idea. Stern has a huge amount of influence. He could really give a huge bump to the campaign.

 

[RSLudlum]

She needs to request a spot on one of the news shows to discuss the court decision and then bust our with her endorsement!!!

 

[Galileo Galilei]

Only people already born, support abortion!

ha

I disagree w/ Dr. Paul on abortion, but support him 100%.

And this endorsement is great for Dr. Paul, I'm happy.

 

[KurtBirk]

I don't give a shit about "the family", I care about my personal rights!

I my view, the "destruction of the family" (*) played an important part in splitting families and thus prepare us for easier manipulation by the governments; The political is personal and vice versa!

We now have a large group of young men who not see any reason to uphold, work and fight for their country. A large part of them are going their own way!

This again leads to further shifts in the demographics.

Restoring You personal rights is of first and foremost importance, yes.

EDIT

* Gramsci et al . . .

 

[jblosser]

so.. how much could this help us???

honestly??!

EDIT: this is not rhetorical, it is a serious question.

A lot. Between this, Goldwater, Mary Pride, and the various Minutement endorsements, we are building quite a stack to challenge what Huckabee and McCain are building.

What remains is the people hearing about them. The MSM is not going to cover it, we need to. Give the campaign money today so they can run ads about this and fly these people around to stump for Ron. That's a major thing we need to see more of.

 

[Kotin]

A lot. Between this, Goldwater, Mary Pride, and the various Minutement endorsements, we are building quite a stack to challenge what Huckabee and McCain are building.

What remains is the people hearing about them. The MSM is not going to cover it, we need to. Give the campaign money today so they can run ads about this and fly these people around to stump for Ron. That's a major thing we need to see more of.

thank you!!

 

[hyoomen]

I'm extremely reticent to embrace what this press conference could lead to within the Ron Paul movement. We are all of extremely varied personal beliefs on topics such as euthanasia and abortion -- our unity comes from a common distrust of the federal government. It is difficult to believe that anything he could say in the context of running for the White House regarding abortion, no matter how focused on court activism he will hopefully be, could be construed as anything other than the monotonous drone of anti-abortion rhetoric that consistently drives a huge segment of the voting population (especially fiscally conservative, socially liberal women) away. Maybe he will eat the cake and have it as well, but more likely this seems like a fortuitous opportunity for his adversaries to see a major dividing line in our tidy, little revolution.

I, for one, know that I have fought staunchly against the knee-jerk reaction of many of my female friends when they allow his stance on abortion to override their interests in the defense of Liberty. The primary success I've had comes through underscoring his commitment to state's rights on such issues, but even this is tentative given his persistent attempts at establishing a national (by Congressional recognition) definition of life as beginning at conception. It just seems like he's about to further erode any hope of circumventing the topic.

Here's to the hope that I'm as wrong about this as I was that there wouldn't be a potential candidate in my lifetime whom I'd be able to choose apart from the "lesser of two evils" paradigm.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

I'm extremely reticent to embrace what this press conference could lead to within the Ron Paul movement. We are all of extremely varied personal beliefs on topics such as euthanasia and abortion -- our unity comes from a common distrust of the federal government. It is difficult to believe that anything he could say in the context of running for the White House regarding abortion, no matter how focused on court activism he will hopefully be, could be construed as anything other than the monotonous drone of anti-abortion rhetoric that consistently drives a huge segment of the voting population (especially fiscally conservative, socially liberal women) away. Maybe he will eat the cake and have it as well, but more likely this seems like a fortuitous opportunity for his adversaries to see a major dividing line in our tidy, little evolution.

I, for one, know that I have fought staunchly against the knee-jerk reaction of many of my female friends when they allow his stance on abortion to override their interests in the defense of Liberty. The primary success I've had comes through underscoring his commitment to state's rights on such issues, but even this is tentative given his persistent attempts at establishing a national (by Congressional recognition) definition of life as beginning at conception. It just seems like he's about to further erode any hope of circumventing the topic.

Here's to the hope that I'm as wrong about this as I was that there wouldn't be a potential candidate in my lifetime whom I'd be able to choose apart from the "lesser of two evils" paradigm.

Basically, RP says abortion is a state issue, not a federal issue. According to the U.S. Constitution, he's right.

 

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

This should be moved to Hot Topics.