Site Visitors

Friday, January 4, 2008

Happy 2008 to all!

Hi all! I’ve been busy doing my part for the candidate whom I believe should be our next President. But here I am to answer the two questions left as comments to my last post as well as add a little something bugging me these days.

First is the question presented by Dan and he writes:

I know you are pro-life...but are you anti-choice?

As he has written, I am pro-life personally and could not imagine giving up or having aborted any of my children. But to clear things up, I am not anti-choice at the federal level. This is one of the issues that I believe should be out of the hands in Washington D.C. I would like to see the laws be made at the State level as the highest level. Personally, I would like to see it be a county or community decision. Since we are a nation of many peoples and supposedly the land of the free, I don’t believe in a “one answer fits all” system of government for the issue of abortion. Will people leave one area and travel to an area where it is legal to have an abortion? I’d like to answer with a sure “no”, but we all know that it will happen in some instances. But at least those women would have more time to change their minds as they travel or would agree with the laws of their community and not go through with the procedure. Lastly on this subject, I believe with the proper education provided, that we can reduce the need for abortion all together. This would tie in with my idea to give the education system back to the people of their communities. People should be able to decide what to teach their children with much looser federal guidelines.

Now for the second question, from anonymous, who writes:

Don't you think it is time we put God and discipline back in our school systems? All we have to do is walk around any major city and see the product of our failed schools.

Personally, I would answer with a yes, but again, I believe in throwing back to a time when the local community cared about their children’s education and had a say in it. I believe in an education system where the majority votes win and is not constrained by ridiculous requirements handed down by the folks in D.C. That includes the issue of placing God in schools. If the majority of people want God in the school and a few oppose it, then He should be placed back in that school. And the opposed have three choices from there… Accept the teaching, ignore the teaching, or move to a more suitable school. We can not please everyone. We are learning that at the expense of Christians right now. And the failed schools are not just in the major cities. It’s any place where the community doesn’t get involved. It’s anywhere that lets government make the decisions about what their children need to learn. And it’s really this “No Child Left Behind” act, which is made up of complete horse manure. See my earlier postings for a whole article on my ideas about the current state of education as well as my ideas for the future.

Okay, here’s a headline that has irked me today…

Online protests seek to include Ron Paul in N.H. debate

NASHUA, N.H.--An online protest is growing over presidential candidate Ron Paul's exclusion from a Fox News debate here on Sunday, even though other Republicans receiving fewer votes in Iowa or scoring lower in the polls were invited.
Paul received a fifth-place 10 percent of the GOP vote in Iowa's caucus Thursday, ahead of Rudy Giuliani, who received 3.5 percent. He's also ahead of Fred Thompson in New Hampshire polls,
polling 7 percent to Thompson's 2 percent.
But both Giuliani and Thompson still appear to be invited to Sunday evening's debate sponsored by Fox News and the New Hampshire Republican Party. Paul isn't.


I placed a response to Fox News with the hopes that it will open the eyes of many FoxNews loyalists of the link between Rudy Guiliani and the FoxNews station. It read:

"Fox News was launching, with Ailes at the helm, and Time Warner, which provided cable service to 12 million homes nationwide, had decided it would not carry Fox News. Time Warner was the dominant cable operator in New York City, meaning that not only would 1.1 million city homes not get Fox, but the fledgling network would go unseen by media powerbrokers in the nation's media capital.
Three days after Murdoch learned of Time Warner's decision, a call from Ailes to Giuliani set in motion a series of unprecedented moves in favor of a cable network by the Giuliani administration. As calls and meetings continued between Fox and city officials, including Giuliani, the Giuliani administration reportedly threatened Time Warner executives with the loss of their cable franchise if the cable provider didn't accept a deal in which the city would give up one of its own government channels so Fox News could take the slot. (Some 30 other cable networks had tried and failed to win channel space on Time Warner.) When Time Warner refused to take the deal, the city announced that it would go ahead with the plan anyway and force the cable provider to carry Fox News. A legal battle ensued."

Read the full article @
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/11/15/regan/

I think they are helping out their guy by taking out the biggest threat to Rudy any way they can like after the last debate when they said that the "Paulites" were texting over and over to vote him as the winner when for days prior, they were touting how there would be only 1 vote allowed per phone. I hope this opens everyone's eyes to the real nature of this "fair and balanced" Faux News!

Please take the time to read the whole article and respond to me with what you think. Until then, Please take it easy in these hard times.
Rich