Rand Paul: 'I am Running For President'
Options
Comments
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »cannonspike1994 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »I'd be happy to overlook Rand Paul's Tea Party affiliation and I maybe would let slide the fact he wouldn't do much to improve America's reputation worldwide with his anti-Palestinian policies, but the guy also opposes abortion lol.....he even opposes state and federal aid to support abortions. I tried to like the guy, and while I respect him, he'll never get my vote.
I like his plan to cut the debt though, he realizes how serious 18 trillion in debt is.
Abortion is evil
So a woman shouldn't have a choice to do what she wants with her body? There's enough women out there raising kids they can't afford or didn't want to begin with. That causes society all kinds of problems, if abortion is banned under Rand Paul, then expect poverty rates and crime to skyrocket.
What nonsense are you talking about just because rand Paul is against abortion doesn't mean he can/ ban it.
And how is he going to be responsible for poverty and crime skyrocketing even if he did ban it .
I don't trust any president that is against abortion, he might try some shady ? with states that support it. Also, he might appoint Supreme Court justices that are very conservative and possibly reverse the Roe vs Wade decision that made abortion legal.
And if he DID somehow ban abortion, without question it would turn America into a nation with a higher poverty and crime rate then it does now. There's a book called Freakanomics you should read.....nations without abortions often have high crime rates and worse poverty ones, while nations with legalized abortion have lower crime rates. Makes sense, if a bunch of people are having kids they can't afford and that they DO NOT WANT, then those kids are gonna end up ? up and poor as hell.
There are too many factors that go into crime to just blame abortion for crime. It's just silly and technically a logical fallacy because correlation is not causation. Other nations like Japan make getting abortions much harder and they have a much lower crime rate than America does
Banning abortion nationwide would still increase the nation's poverty rate because it means more people having kids they can't afford to take care of. America's poverty rate now is 15 or 16%, and much higher in other parts of the world where abortion is banned.....if America banned abortion, that number would get higher without a doubt. A nation with high poverty turns into a basket case quickly.
There are already too many people having kids they can't afford, imagine a whole lot more poor people having kids and WORSE, people who didn't want the kid to begin with raising them. Basket case central.
Once again your linking of abortion and poverty is a fallacy. And on top of that there is no logical justification for your irrational fear that rand Paul if he becomes president will make abortion illegal. Especially since the president alone doesn't make law. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »cannonspike1994 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »I'd be happy to overlook Rand Paul's Tea Party affiliation and I maybe would let slide the fact he wouldn't do much to improve America's reputation worldwide with his anti-Palestinian policies, but the guy also opposes abortion lol.....he even opposes state and federal aid to support abortions. I tried to like the guy, and while I respect him, he'll never get my vote.
I like his plan to cut the debt though, he realizes how serious 18 trillion in debt is.
Abortion is evil
So a woman shouldn't have a choice to do what she wants with her body? There's enough women out there raising kids they can't afford or didn't want to begin with. That causes society all kinds of problems, if abortion is banned under Rand Paul, then expect poverty rates and crime to skyrocket.
What nonsense are you talking about just because rand Paul is against abortion doesn't mean he can/ ban it.
And how is he going to be responsible for poverty and crime skyrocketing even if he did ban it .
I don't trust any president that is against abortion, he might try some shady ? with states that support it. Also, he might appoint Supreme Court justices that are very conservative and possibly reverse the Roe vs Wade decision that made abortion legal.
And if he DID somehow ban abortion, without question it would turn America into a nation with a higher poverty and crime rate then it does now. There's a book called Freakanomics you should read.....nations without abortions often have high crime rates and worse poverty ones, while nations with legalized abortion have lower crime rates. Makes sense, if a bunch of people are having kids they can't afford and that they DO NOT WANT, then those kids are gonna end up ? up and poor as hell.
There are too many factors that go into crime to just blame abortion for crime. It's just silly and technically a logical fallacy because correlation is not causation. Other nations like Japan make getting abortions much harder and they have a much lower crime rate than America does
Banning abortion nationwide would still increase the nation's poverty rate because it means more people having kids they can't afford to take care of. America's poverty rate now is 15 or 16%, and much higher in other parts of the world where abortion is banned.....if America banned abortion, that number would get higher without a doubt. A nation with high poverty turns into a basket case quickly.
There are already too many people having kids they can't afford, imagine a whole lot more poor people having kids and WORSE, people who didn't want the kid to begin with raising them. Basket case central.
Once again your linking of abortion and poverty is a fallacy. And on top of that there is no logical justification for your irrational fear that rand Paul if he becomes president will make abortion illegal. Especially since the president alone doesn't make law.
If a bunch of broke and poor people raise kids they cannot afford, it will create a basket case society, especially in a nation like America where so many things are expensive. Worse then that, if a bunch of women are raising kids they NEVER WANTED to begin with, then the basket case society would get even worse. Yes women can put their kids up for adoption, but statistics show the foster care system in America is a ? mess. I've been friends with a few people who grew up in the foster care system, they're ? NUTS.
And if Rand Paul gets elected, he can overturn Roe Vs Wade by selecting very conservative Supreme Court judges who are against abortion. If enough judges get appointed that way, then the days of women using hangers for abortion will come back. -
Supreme court judges serve for life The president cannot just change judges at will.
Illegal Abortion does not necessarily create a "basket case" society. That's just your own unsubstantiated opinion.
Poverty is created by many factors a basket case society whatever that means does not come about just because of illegal abortion. There are many nations across the global were getting an abortion is harder than it is in America and I certainly wouldn't characterize them as being more basket cases than America.
-
Supreme court judges serve for life The president cannot just change judges at will.
Illegal Abortion does not necessarily create a "basket case" society. That's just your own unsubstantiated opinion.
Poverty is created by many factors a basket case society whatever that means does not come about just because of illegal abortion. There are many nations across the global were getting an abortion is harder than it is in America and I certainly wouldn't characterize them as being more basket cases than America.
Supreme court judges serve for life but people die and retire, so Rand Paul would still have a lot of power with the Supreme Court judges. That's scary in Rand Paul's case because he won't even give a straight answer on whether he supports abortion in cases the child's mother is in danger, or if she was ? .
As far as poverty and very poor people raising kids they can't afford or even want, it's a horrible mix most of the time. Most people in the criminal justice system grew up in extreme poverty, and a huge percentage had neglectful parents. The MORE kids like that being brought up, the more screwed up a society is gonna be. Ask DMX how wonderful life is when one has a very poor mom who is also neglectful.
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »Supreme court judges serve for life The president cannot just change judges at will.
Illegal Abortion does not necessarily create a "basket case" society. That's just your own unsubstantiated opinion.
Poverty is created by many factors a basket case society whatever that means does not come about just because of illegal abortion. There are many nations across the global were getting an abortion is harder than it is in America and I certainly wouldn't characterize them as being more basket cases than America.
Supreme court judges serve for life but people die and retire, so Rand Paul would still have a lot of power with the Supreme Court judges. That's scary in Rand Paul's case because he won't even give a straight answer on whether he supports abortion in cases the child's mother is in danger, or if she was ? .
As far as poverty and very poor people raising kids they can't afford or even want, it's a horrible mix most of the time. Most people in the criminal justice system grew up in extreme poverty, and a huge percentage had neglectful parents. The MORE kids like that being brought up, the more screwed up a society is gonna be. Ask DMX how wonderful life is when one has a very poor mom who is also neglectful.
Being poor sucks that is not news but the linkage you are making with it and the legal status of abortion is a fallacy.
I Will say it again correlation is not causation. The legal status of abortion will not and cannot stop poverty. Dmx mother could have had an abortion she chose not to have one. any way you slice it some people will be born in poverty.
Condoms are in every corner store female acess to the pill is basically universal. People still choose to have children in poverty.
The judges can die at any minute but is abortion that important of an issue that you are literally scared that it might go away???? The president appoints judges but it takes the Senate to confirm them so your fears are baseless. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »Supreme court judges serve for life The president cannot just change judges at will.
Illegal Abortion does not necessarily create a "basket case" society. That's just your own unsubstantiated opinion.
Poverty is created by many factors a basket case society whatever that means does not come about just because of illegal abortion. There are many nations across the global were getting an abortion is harder than it is in America and I certainly wouldn't characterize them as being more basket cases than America.
Supreme court judges serve for life but people die and retire, so Rand Paul would still have a lot of power with the Supreme Court judges. That's scary in Rand Paul's case because he won't even give a straight answer on whether he supports abortion in cases the child's mother is in danger, or if she was ? .
As far as poverty and very poor people raising kids they can't afford or even want, it's a horrible mix most of the time. Most people in the criminal justice system grew up in extreme poverty, and a huge percentage had neglectful parents. The MORE kids like that being brought up, the more screwed up a society is gonna be. Ask DMX how wonderful life is when one has a very poor mom who is also neglectful.
Being poor sucks that is not news but the linkage you are making with it and the legal status of abortion is a fallacy.
I Will say it again correlation is not causation. The legal status of abortion will not and cannot stop poverty. Dmx mother could have had an abortion she chose not to have one. any way you slice it some people will be born in poverty.
Condoms are in every corner store female acess to the pill is basically universal. People still choose to have children in poverty.
The judges can die at any minute but is abortion that important of an issue that you are literally scared that it might go away???? The president appoints judges but it takes the Senate to confirm them so your fears are baseless.
Some people in poverty do have kids but that's often because they live in states that have strict rules on abortion or they really believe they can help the kid move out of poverty somehow. Or maybe they didn't believe in abortion.
Either way, YES, abortion is that important an issue to me because I've seen with my own eyes how many ? up households there are out there. I've seen mothers beat their kids senseless, because the kid looks like the father or they're just angry at the world for being broke or whatever. Some people are better off not having kids in this world, especially those that don't want kids or don't think they would be good parents. People like that often turn out to be horrible parents who are neglectful and abusive.
So yes, I want abortion around to make sure there's not even more ? up people walking around. And the Senate would have to confirm the judges true, but with Republicans in charge of the Senate and the House, it's easy to see a ? , anti-abortion Supreme Court judge be appointed. It would be a disaster for the nation, and it's one reason why the media is being very hard on Randy boy lately. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »Supreme court judges serve for life The president cannot just change judges at will.
Illegal Abortion does not necessarily create a "basket case" society. That's just your own unsubstantiated opinion.
Poverty is created by many factors a basket case society whatever that means does not come about just because of illegal abortion. There are many nations across the global were getting an abortion is harder than it is in America and I certainly wouldn't characterize them as being more basket cases than America.
Supreme court judges serve for life but people die and retire, so Rand Paul would still have a lot of power with the Supreme Court judges. That's scary in Rand Paul's case because he won't even give a straight answer on whether he supports abortion in cases the child's mother is in danger, or if she was ? .
As far as poverty and very poor people raising kids they can't afford or even want, it's a horrible mix most of the time. Most people in the criminal justice system grew up in extreme poverty, and a huge percentage had neglectful parents. The MORE kids like that being brought up, the more screwed up a society is gonna be. Ask DMX how wonderful life is when one has a very poor mom who is also neglectful.
Being poor sucks that is not news but the linkage you are making with it and the legal status of abortion is a fallacy.
I Will say it again correlation is not causation. The legal status of abortion will not and cannot stop poverty. Dmx mother could have had an abortion she chose not to have one. any way you slice it some people will be born in poverty.
Condoms are in every corner store female acess to the pill is basically universal. People still choose to have children in poverty.
The judges can die at any minute but is abortion that important of an issue that you are literally scared that it might go away???? The president appoints judges but it takes the Senate to confirm them so your fears are baseless.
Some people in poverty do have kids but that's often because they live in states that have strict rules on abortion or they really believe they can help the kid move out of poverty somehow. Or maybe they didn't believe in abortion.
Either way, YES, abortion is that important an issue to me because I've seen with my own eyes how many ? up households there are out there. I've seen mothers beat their kids senseless, because the kid looks like the father or they're just angry at the world for being broke or whatever. Some people are better off not having kids in this world, especially those that don't want kids or don't think they would be good parents. People like that often turn out to be horrible parents who are neglectful and abusive.
So yes, I want abortion around to make sure there's not even more ? up people walking around. And the Senate would have to confirm the judges true, but with Republicans in charge of the Senate and the House, it's easy to see a ? , anti-abortion Supreme Court judge be appointed. It would be a disaster for the nation, and it's one reason why the media is being very hard on Randy boy lately.
Why are you so idealistic and unrealistic???? You always sound so scared of everything. The examples you give of poor people are the extreme minority most poor folks don't abuse their children AND most POOR people have children because they want children not because they lack access to contraception or the murder that is abortion. most poor people in america are not so poor that they cannot afford condoms, the pill or the morning after pill.
As for the bolded you keep going back to this same fallacy. The republicans being in control of the senate does not mean that abortion will be done away with if there is also a republican president.The odds of everything happening that would be needed for the total end of abortion to come about are unrealistic. First a judge would have to die then a president would have to appoint an anti-Abortion leaning judge then the senate would have to confirm him then all the judges would have to vote to change the law and they would have to have a good legal reason to do so.
the media is not being hard on rand paul at all yet, these recent ? accusations about him being harsh on female reporters is light weight nonsense.
LOOK be realistic for once going by historical pattern the next president should be republican so you are going to have to face your fears anyway. -
Kats off on a tangent with this abortion talk real deal I am against abortion but I am prochoice. I do not believe the government should tell me I have to keep or ? my child and people have to realize that the flip side of things is yes governments can, do and will force sterilization and abortion. Foreign government do it without a ? and ours has done it on smaller scale under the radar. All citizens should have the choice though to choose their poison per se and deal with the conequences associated with that choice. I have the right to choose to blow someones head off but the context under which I make that choice determines whether it is a crime or not and I have to live with the end results. It does not matter drugs, guns, abortion, who I consensually marry or do business with should all be my choice and those consequences that come with that choice are the burden I should face...
-
Soloman_The_Wise wrote: »Kats off on a tangent with this abortion talk real deal I am against abortion but I am prochoice. I do not believe the government should tell me I have to keep or ? my child and people have to realize that the flip side of things is yes governments can, do and will force sterilization and abortion. Foreign government do it without a ? and ours has done it on smaller scale under the radar. All citizens should have the choice though to choose their poison per se and deal with the conequences associated with that choice. I have the right to choose to blow someones head off but the context under which I make that choice determines whether it is a crime or not and I have to live with the end results. It does not matter drugs, guns, abortion, who I consensually marry or do business with should all be my choice and those consequences that come with that choice are the burden I should face...
That is basically the heart of the whole matter it only relates to abortion because society has decided that it's going to allow females the privilege of escaping the consequences of their actions with regard to sex.
while at the same time giving to respect to the life she carries or to the wishes of the male who helped her become pregnant. -
the great thing about libertarianism is that it's focus is on freedom and it would be great to have a more libertarian leaning president.
-
the great thing about libertarianism is that it's focus is on freedom and it would be great to have a more libertarian leaning president.
I will say this, libertarians are way too laissez faire with the economy for my taste. They want EVERY thing privatized with pretty much no oversight. I don't think it's possible for an economy to run with no oversight without crashing before long. -
i think this comes back to the whole "if she doesn't have to do ? to get your vote..." thingIf Hilliary wins she not doing ? for your black ? . Her pandering is going to be to white women and ? . Y'all wanna talk about how Obama ain't helping y'all LOL
also, i will bet money that no Republican president gets any kind of abortion ban passed
well, it's not automatic even IF that happened.kingblaze84 wrote: »And if Rand Paul gets elected, he can overturn Roe Vs Wade by selecting very conservative Supreme Court judges who are against abortion. If enough judges get appointed that way, then the days of women using hangers for abortion will come back.
also, i am cool with a couple of "conservative" judges next (not that you can always predict how it'll turn out) so a future court won't ? with my guns; the last two didn't help out on that front. not sure that President Rand Paul would run with the MOST conservative justices, though -
i think this comes back to the whole "if she doesn't have to do ? to get your vote..." thingIf Hilliary wins she not doing ? for your black ? . Her pandering is going to be to white women and ? . Y'all wanna talk about how Obama ain't helping y'all LOL
also, i will bet money that no Republican president gets any kind of abortion ban passed
well, it's not automatic even IF that happened.kingblaze84 wrote: »And if Rand Paul gets elected, he can overturn Roe Vs Wade by selecting very conservative Supreme Court judges who are against abortion. If enough judges get appointed that way, then the days of women using hangers for abortion will come back.
also, i am cool with a couple of "conservative" judges next (not that you can always predict how it'll turn out) so a future court won't ? with my guns; the last two didn't help out on that front. not sure that President Rand Paul would run with the MOST conservative justices, though
If Rand Paul would explain his positions better on air, instead of fighting reporters all the time, maybe he can make his case better to people. He has a temper tantrum problem at times, lol at this video.....it's kind of comical how bad his temper is, not good traits in sensitive times such as these
https://youtu.be/iD-VOp6t5E8
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »Supreme court judges serve for life The president cannot just change judges at will.
Illegal Abortion does not necessarily create a "basket case" society. That's just your own unsubstantiated opinion.
Poverty is created by many factors a basket case society whatever that means does not come about just because of illegal abortion. There are many nations across the global were getting an abortion is harder than it is in America and I certainly wouldn't characterize them as being more basket cases than America.
Supreme court judges serve for life but people die and retire, so Rand Paul would still have a lot of power with the Supreme Court judges. That's scary in Rand Paul's case because he won't even give a straight answer on whether he supports abortion in cases the child's mother is in danger, or if she was ? .
As far as poverty and very poor people raising kids they can't afford or even want, it's a horrible mix most of the time. Most people in the criminal justice system grew up in extreme poverty, and a huge percentage had neglectful parents. The MORE kids like that being brought up, the more screwed up a society is gonna be. Ask DMX how wonderful life is when one has a very poor mom who is also neglectful.
Being poor sucks that is not news but the linkage you are making with it and the legal status of abortion is a fallacy.
I Will say it again correlation is not causation. The legal status of abortion will not and cannot stop poverty. Dmx mother could have had an abortion she chose not to have one. any way you slice it some people will be born in poverty.
Condoms are in every corner store female acess to the pill is basically universal. People still choose to have children in poverty.
The judges can die at any minute but is abortion that important of an issue that you are literally scared that it might go away???? The president appoints judges but it takes the Senate to confirm them so your fears are baseless.
Some people in poverty do have kids but that's often because they live in states that have strict rules on abortion or they really believe they can help the kid move out of poverty somehow. Or maybe they didn't believe in abortion.
Either way, YES, abortion is that important an issue to me because I've seen with my own eyes how many ? up households there are out there. I've seen mothers beat their kids senseless, because the kid looks like the father or they're just angry at the world for being broke or whatever. Some people are better off not having kids in this world, especially those that don't want kids or don't think they would be good parents. People like that often turn out to be horrible parents who are neglectful and abusive.
So yes, I want abortion around to make sure there's not even more ? up people walking around. And the Senate would have to confirm the judges true, but with Republicans in charge of the Senate and the House, it's easy to see a ? , anti-abortion Supreme Court judge be appointed. It would be a disaster for the nation, and it's one reason why the media is being very hard on Randy boy lately.
Why are you so idealistic and unrealistic???? You always sound so scared of everything. The examples you give of poor people are the extreme minority most poor folks don't abuse their children AND most POOR people have children because they want children not because they lack access to contraception or the murder that is abortion. most poor people in america are not so poor that they cannot afford condoms, the pill or the morning after pill.
As for the bolded you keep going back to this same fallacy. The republicans being in control of the senate does not mean that abortion will be done away with if there is also a republican president.The odds of everything happening that would be needed for the total end of abortion to come about are unrealistic. First a judge would have to die then a president would have to appoint an anti-Abortion leaning judge then the senate would have to confirm him then all the judges would have to vote to change the law and they would have to have a good legal reason to do so.
the media is not being hard on rand paul at all yet, these recent ? accusations about him being harsh on female reporters is light weight nonsense.
LOOK be realistic for once going by historical pattern the next president should be republican so you are going to have to face your fears anyway.
I can live with the next president being Republican, but I want to make sure it's one whose not a nutjob. There are too many Republicans like that out there. Of course many Democrats are that way too, but Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush are especially scary people, considering they both still think the war in Iraq was the right move.
If Rand Paul sounds rational on pro choice and foreign policy matters, I may change my opinion on him. But his temper is worrying independents such as myself, if he can't keep a cool head with a reporter, then what else is he gonna freak out on.
-
his so called temper tantrums are being blown out of proportion.
-
And it's about time for a poltician put these reporters in there place. They stay twisting the public's perception into their organizations own biased viewpoint instead of giving fair interviews.
-
I like some of the ideas the Paul's have... I just can't seem to give as ? about either of them
-
Soloman_The_Wise wrote: »Kats off on a tangent with this abortion talk real deal I am against abortion but I am prochoice. I do not believe the government should tell me I have to keep or ? my child and people have to realize that the flip side of things is yes governments can, do and will force sterilization and abortion. Foreign government do it without a ? and ours has done it on smaller scale under the radar. All citizens should have the choice though to choose their poison per se and deal with the conequences associated with that choice. I have the right to choose to blow someones head off but the context under which I make that choice determines whether it is a crime or not and I have to live with the end results. It does not matter drugs, guns, abortion, who I consensually marry or do business with should all be my choice and those consequences that come with that choice are the burden I should face...
I can definitely live with this. We have the right to make choices and at the same time deal with the consequences of each choice....I definitely don't believe in forcing anything, including sterilizations -
And it's about time for a poltician put these reporters in there place. They stay twisting the public's perception into their organizations own biased viewpoint instead of giving fair interviews.
Some reporters do get out of line but the CNBC reporter was actually making some good points about Rand Paul's stance on "voluntary" vaccinations, and how some schools and amusement parks have been shut down because so many are coming down with measles and the mumps, diseases there are VACCINATIONS for.
And even if she was wrong, he could have done it with more class. That footage is gonna haunt him down with the female vote. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »And it's about time for a poltician put these reporters in there place. They stay twisting the public's perception into their organizations own biased viewpoint instead of giving fair interviews.
Some reporters do get out of line but the CNBC reporter was actually making some good points about Rand Paul's stance on "voluntary" vaccinations, and how some schools and amusement parks have been shut down because so many are coming down with measles and the mumps, diseases there are VACCINATIONS for.
And even if she was wrong, he could have done it with more class. That footage is gonna haunt him down with the female vote.
The elections and primary are too far away for this little ? to be the cause of his losing -
If Rand is anything like Ron on economic policies, then he has my vote. I personally think however that government has gotten too big to allow for someone like Rand to come and change things.
-
Yeah, ? abortion.
-
Rand Paul: still not good at interviewskingblaze84 wrote: »If Rand Paul would explain his positions better on air, instead of fighting reporters all the time, maybe he can make his case better to people. He has a temper tantrum problem at times, lol at this video.....it's kind of comical how bad his temper is, not good traits in sensitive times such as these
-
Rand Paul: still not good at interviewskingblaze84 wrote: »If Rand Paul would explain his positions better on air, instead of fighting reporters all the time, maybe he can make his case better to people. He has a temper tantrum problem at times, lol at this video.....it's kind of comical how bad his temper is, not good traits in sensitive times such as these
Yep, I think that's gonna be his downfall. He's against abortion and with SOOOO MANY reporters being female and pro-choice out there, they're gonna trip his ass up on purpose, watch. He needs to find a way to stop letting them get to his head.
And his position on "voluntary vaccinations" is controversial enough without him yelling and hushing reporters when they have questions about it. And I thought Chris Christie had a temper. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »
Rand Paul: still not good at interviewskingblaze84 wrote: »If Rand Paul would explain his positions better on air, instead of fighting reporters all the time, maybe he can make his case better to people. He has a temper tantrum problem at times, lol at this video.....it's kind of comical how bad his temper is, not good traits in sensitive times such as these
Yep, I think that's gonna be his downfall. He's against abortion and with SOOOO MANY reporters being female and pro-choice out there, they're gonna trip his ass up on purpose, watch. He needs to find a way to stop letting them get to his head.
And his position on "voluntary vaccinations" is controversial enough without him yelling and hushing reporters when they have questions about it. And I thought Chris Christie had a temper.
When did he say he's going to stop abortions??? I don't think you understand what him being a libertarian means.
