Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Ending Abortion Politics

Stump your frinds with this bit of trivia. When Roe V. Wade was decided in 1973 by a 7-2 vote, the Supreme Court consisted of 6 Republicans and 3 Democrats. Five Republicans (Burger, Blackmun, Brennan, Stewart ,Powell) and two Democrats (Marshall, Douglas) agreed with the decision. One Republican (Rehnquist) and one Democrat (White) dissented.

Since 1973, Republicans have held a majority on the Supreme Court. For three terms 1991,1992,1993 they had a 7/2 majority (Scalia, Blackmun, Souter, Thomas, O'Connor, Kennedy, Rehnquist) and yet they never tried to overturn Roe V. Wade. So why are millions of dollars raised every presidential election for the Republican candidate from anti-abortion groups with the sole purpose of overturning Roe V. Wade?

Add to this the fact that overturning Roe V. Wade would not make abortions illegal, it would simply throw the issue back to the states. This would mean that after over 30 years of fighting over this issue what we're arguing about is adding a $200 bus ticket on to the price of an abortion because states such as California, New York and Illinois show no signs of wanting to make abortions illegal.

I propose an alternative to this senseless political wrangling. Since both sides understand the negative consequences of having an abortion, why not work together to have less of them. Easy and free access to condoms for teens is one simple solution we should all be able to support. Likewise, since the pressure to have an abortion is often exacerbated by poverty, passing legislation for a living wage could help reduce the practice. I'm sure there are dozens of good ideas out there if we could focus our energies on achievable results instead of the quadrennial dead horse beating contest.


  1. I love this article -- and the reason I don't join the anti abortion folks, is I think its horrible, it may even damn the woman to hell, if you believe that stuff (I don't). But it's up to her, not some fat guy in DC who probably paid for a couple of abortions. Do you remember Bob Barr, from GA?

    Turns out, he was head of right to life in GA. And he was of course VERY vocal to pass Amendment to ban abortion, to overturn Row, etc etc. But when he got divorced, we found out he had talked his wife into an abortion -- it was HIS idea -- and she proved it. Barr of course denied it all. But the abortion clinic had a copy of the check he wrote to them personally. Then he admitted yes, he had, and he regretted it. But the details are telling.

    He talked her into this abortion "for the good of our marriage". He convinced her they both already had kids, and another child would be so much work it would take away from their relationship! So she wants to please the guy, and he drives her to abortion clinic and pays for it.

    Well, then almost immediately, he dumps her. He had another woman he was "seeing" already. He was unfaithful, and was already planning on divorcing her, when he found out she was preg. SO he talks her into an abortion, so he does not have to pay child support, and probably so he does not have to explain it to his next wife.

    And that is your HEAD of right to life in GA. That is the guy screaming his head off against abortion.

    SO who decides? Does the woman decide? Or guys like Bob Barr who themselves would talk their own wife into an abortion.

    Who decides? That's the issue. The issue is not is abortion murder. That's not the issue. The issue is who decides.

  2. OH here is what I came to your blog to say -- Fairtax. The reason Neal does not back Johnson and his good policies. Neal knows Fairtax is a hustle. I've got 50,0000 dollars to prove it.

    I have offered, for over two years now, 50,000 dollars to Neal, to you, to ANYONE, all they have to do is show me anything ANYTHING in Fairtax research or legislation that proves its a personal retail tax. That's it. You don't have to prove it works. YOu don't have to prove its rational. You don't have to prove anything, except that it's a personal retail sales tax, as they claim.

    That's how they sell Fairtax, remember that. A personal consumption tax. OVer and over and over and over -- for 15 years. IN every book, every video, every speech. A personal consumption tax.

    Guess what? It's not just a personal consumption tax. In fact, when you find out what they actually tax in addition, you find out, the personal RETAIL sales tax is actually only a small part of it.

    Get this. 3/4 of Fairtax revenue has NOTHING to do with personal retail sales taxes. Yes, they do tax personal retail sales. They tax personal consumption.

    But they tax much much MUCH, did I mention MUCH more.

    Do you live in GA? Well, the state of GA would owe massive taxes too. Every state is taxed on all expenditures -- except education. Whatever GA spends on education, is not taxed., But what they spend on roads, highways, bridges, police, sewers, libraries, prisons, parks, airports, whatever it is, WHATEVER it is -- they are taxed.

    NOt just the state, but every city.

    Not just states and cities but every county.

    ALL government expenditures are taxed. It's in their legislation, their spokesmen admit it, they just dont tell you in books videos and speeches.

    And of course Boortz knows all this. He has tried to gloss over it, explain it away. He was part of the hustle.

    Neal MIGHT not have known it was a goofy hustle at first, I don't know. I kinda think he was fooled too. But if he was, he soon learned what I am telling you. See my blog about it.

    Boortz wont admit it, but he and others backed away from Fairtax after sworn testimony to Ways and Means committee showed it was a fraud-- not just mistaken, but a fraud. YOu can tell it's a fraud by the "calculator" trick they used online. But that's explained in the blog.

    Please let me know what you learn. And check it out -- not just with Neal, he is the guy doing the con! Check it out elsewhere too, the sworn testimony to WM committee, or interviews with Jorgenson, or President Bush Tax Panel

  3. WHy did Gary Johnson support Fairtax?

    Same reason I did. Same reason you did. It sounds GREAT. They claim all this research. Who would lie about the research?

    Turns out -- Fairtax would, and did. But it takes awhile to figure that out. They have all these web pages, and experts, it seems.

    Johnson was pulled in. He didn't know either. And after he made it his central economic miracle, he could not back off without admitting he was fooled. He now kinda hesitates and parses his answers about Fairtax, and if you knew as much as I do about Fairtax, you would recognize WHY he is very careful what he says now. He will say like "that's the model we should consider" or "An income based approach is just too open to manipulation".

    WE need a new tax code, of course. Thats why I love Fiartax, I thought it was on the level.

    Gary is NOT -- NOT defending Fairtax specifics any more. He apparently found out, perhaps from me, ( I email almost everyone I can about Fairtax after I found it was a big hustle), perhaps he found out otherwise.

    No one defends Fairtax specifics, because the specifics are goofy. Massive taxes on cities? That's in their legislation. They dont say "WE TAX CITIES MASSIVELY" they say a person is ".,.... blah blah....any government". And that "certian persons" are "taxable employers"

    There is not one single place in Fairtax were it blunty states all city counties and states have to pay -- but that is how their math adds up. And their spokesmen admit it. So their math is based on it, t heir spokesmen admit it, its in t heir legislation "fine print" -- do you see why it's slippery?

    Then their math, that is the main thing, is based on all these "persons" . Gary Johnson did not see the hustle at first, but from his careful statements now, I think he knows now.

    To me, this shows Gary just wants the fun, prestige of running. I love his positions against war, for legalizing some drugs, I love all that.