Rand Paul website

[ladiesbballcoach]

To be fair and balanced, here is Rand Paul's website.

 

http://www.randpaul2010.com/

[rockmom]

To be fair and balanced, what's your opinion?

[ladiesbballcoach]

To be fair and balanced, what's your opinion?

 

Can't have one till Conway comes out on some issues and tells me where he stands.

 

I voted for him in the primary of Dr. Dan since I am a registered Democrat. But honestly, that was 100% because a little time back, Hearsay recommended him in the spot Conway now is serving.

[Clyde]

Can't have one till Conway comes out on some issues and tells me where he stands.

 

.

 

If he's pro-choice is your eval finished?

[ladiesbballcoach]

If he's pro-choice is your eval finished?

 

If eval is evaluation and Rand is pro-life, than yes it is.

[Clyde]

If eval is evaluation and Rand is pro-life, than yes it is.

 

What if the candidate is pro-life and he's a George Bush/Karl Rove spending R?

[ladiesbballcoach]

What if the candidate is pro-life and he's a George Bush/Karl Rove spending R?

 

Would be disappointed and send emails to the WH to express my displeasure as I did with W/Karl Rove, but still would be better than a pro-choice O who is spending at a higher rate than W did.

[Clyde]

Would be disappointed and send emails to the WH to express my displeasure as I did with W/Karl Rove, but still would be better than a pro-choice O who is spending at a higher rate than W did.

 

Fiscally conservative blue dog Dem who is pro-choice vs a Maine-type Republican who spends like President Bush but is pro-life. Is pro-life THE issue and the others just ways to rationalize?

[ladiesbballcoach]

Fiscally conservative blue dog Dem who is pro-choice vs a Maine-type Republican who spends like President Bush but is pro-life. Is pro-life THE issue and the others just ways to rationalize?

 

Pro-life is the FIRST issue. And then if both candidates are pro-life, I separate them out based on other issues.

 

Same thing I would have hoped I would done if I voted before the Civil War and the abolishment of slavery.

Or if I had been in Germany and seen how Hitler was treating minorities.

Or I was in Darfur and seeing the genocide going on there.

 

Killing/Slavery of innocent people should take priority over other issues and should be addressed first.

[Clyde]

Pro-life is the FIRST issue. And then if both candidates are pro-life, I separate them out based on other issues.

 

Same thing I would have hoped I would done if I voted before the Civil War and the abolishment of slavery.

Or if I had been in Germany and seen how Hitler was treating minorities.

Or I was in Darfur and seeing the genocide going on there.

 

Killing/Slavery of innocent people should take priority over other issues and should be addressed first.

 

I don't agree with selecting our elected officials on a single issue like you do.

 

IMO they can't change the law of the land so its not wise to use that as your sole basis. I respect your passion for the issue but I do question your logic. To be fair, I should ask you how you think voting simply based on the abortion issue will help our economy. How will it help our borders? How will it help our education? How can a US Senator have an impact on abortion?

[ladiesbballcoach]

I don't agree with selecting our elected officials on a single issue like you do.

 

IMO they can't change the law of the land so its not wise to use that as your sole basis. I respect your passion for the issue but I do question your logic. To be fair, I should ask you how you think voting simply based on the abortion issue will help our economy. How will it help our borders? How will it help our education? How can a US Senator have an impact on abortion?

 

So, I would have been wrong for using the single issue of slavery as my determination of who I would have voted for in the Abraham Lincoln Presidential race?

 

BTW, I thought this line from my previous post would have explained my position.

 

Killing/Slavery of innocent people should take priority over other issues and should be addressed first.

[ladiesbballcoach]

How can a US Senator have an impact on abortion?

 

A lot and probably in the most direct way presently in our country through the confirmation of Supreme Court justices.

 

There is a thread on here about the history of the SC actions over the past 30 years that show how one SC justice changes the interpretation of the law in this land.

 

In one case, the SC justices went to bed with a 5-4 vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. One liberal justice was able to convince a moderate justice to change their mind and the 5-4 vote to overturn R v Wade disappeared.

[Randy Parker]

I don't agree with selecting our elected officials on a single issue like you do.

 

IMO they can't change the law of the land so its not wise to use that as your sole basis. I respect your passion for the issue but I do question your logic. To be fair, I should ask you how you think voting simply based on the abortion issue will help our economy. How will it help our borders? How will it help our education? How can a US Senator have an impact on abortion?

 

I'm with LBBC on this one.

 

I don't see it as selecting an official based on a single issue. There have been numerous pro-life candidates who would not get my vote. For me, I see a pro-abortion candidate and he/she automatically doesn't get my vote. To some that might be the same thing, but I see it differently. The abortion issue is and always will be the first thing I look at before voting. Pro-life doesn't guarantee my vote, but pro-abortion loses it.

 

If the candidate is pro-life, but takes dumb stands on other issues, such as the ones you mentioned, they don't get my vote. GWB's spending habits soured me to a large extent, and I doubt I would have voted for him if '04 was his first term & '08 had been his shot at a second. But I can never and will never vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Randy Parker
It's late and I'm cranky

[ladiesbballcoach]

I'm with LBBC on this one.

 

I don't see it as selecting an official based on a single issue. There have been numerous pro-life candidates who would not get my vote. For me, I see a pro-abortion candidate and he/she automatically doesn't get my vote. To some that might be the same thing, but I see it differently. The abortion issue is and always will be the first thing I look at before voting. Pro-life doesn't guarantee my vote, but pro-abortion loses it.

 

If the candidate is pro-life, but takes dumb stands on other issues, such as the ones you mentioned, they don't get my vote. GWB's spending habits soured me to a large extent, and I doubt I would have voted for him if '04 was his first term & '08 had been his shot at a second. But I can never and will never vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

 

LOVE how you worded that!!!!!!!!

 

And see if I would have gone to bed, I would have missed that!!!:lol::lol::lol:

[Randy Parker]

LOVE how you worded that!!!!!!!!

 

And see if I would have gone to bed, I would have missed that!!!:lol::lol::lol:

 

:lol:

 

I'd go to bed, but this whole Terrence Jones thing has me wide awake.

 

Back on topic, I'm curious to see where Conway stands on some things, namely the topic of abortion. Still a bit surprised that Rand basically throttled Grayson.