Thoughts? bailout related.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2003
Thoughts? bailout related.
33
Tue, 09-30-2008 - 6:42pm
The Politico)

Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2008
Tue, 09-30-2008 - 7:58pm

Some people replied about the bailout here:

http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-psmomspol&msg=4332.1&x=y

If we bail them out, the Government will quickly take over Wall Street and the financial arena. Obama WANTS this to become a socialist nation. He WANTS the Government to be IN CONTROL of your life. And you will not have ANY say about where your money goes.

It will NO LONGER be "land of the free"

Kiss your paycheck goodbye.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2003
Tue, 09-30-2008 - 8:08pm

I was mainly curious as to the ACORN angle/this article... and what people, primarily dems thought ... as opposed to thoughts on the bailout and if/how it should happen itself.

Photobucket

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-23-2008
Tue, 09-30-2008 - 9:16pm
Hmm - last time I checked it was the other party that wanted to take away my right to choose, take away the rights of gays to enter into civil unions, and wiretap citizens without probable cause. Just sayin.




~Ashley~




pregnancy week by week







~Ashley~

Lilypie 1st Birthday Ticker

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2008
Tue, 09-30-2008 - 10:31pm
i dont understand why the money would go into a potential fund for ACORN instead of the the general fund.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2008
Tue, 09-30-2008 - 11:07pm

Hmm - last time I checked it was the other party that wanted to take away my right to choose, take away the rights of gays to enter into civil unions, and wiretap citizens without probable cause. Just sayin."

There is no consitutional right to choose, and there is no other "right" to choose. In fact, the phrase doesn't even appear in the Roe v. Wade opinion. There is only a right to privacy, which was extended by Roe v. Wade, to include the "qualified right {of a woman} to terminate her pregnancy." Under the Constitution, there is no specifically enumerated power of the Federal Government relating to abortion. Absent an activist ruling, and by a plain text interpretation of the constitution, it is simply a state issue, where your right to abort or lack thereof would be a state-granted right.

Gays DON'T have a right to a civil union--that's why they're fighting for it. It's not a right, it's something that's being DEMANDED as a NEW right.

Please cite a source for the demand of Republicans to wiretap citizens without probable cause. I thought suspected terrorist activity WAS probable cause--just as suspected drug activity is probable cause to search a car or home.

And just to be clear, ALL rights are privileges subject to lawful limitation or removal. That's what RIGHT means. It is the right of the legislature, the Supreme Court, or the government to amend the constitution in any way allowed by due process, and your rights are legally, fairly and by design of our system of government, GONE.

LOVE IT! PRO LIFE Pictures, Images and Photos

siggy1
pregnancy week by week
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2003
Wed, 10-01-2008 - 7:11am

don't understand why it was written that way or thought to be said that way?

Photobucket

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-23-2008
Wed, 10-01-2008 - 10:03am

Regardless of how you classify the "rights" that I set forth, it is the Republican party who is striving for removal of freedoms, that was my point. I actually swing Libertarian on a lot of these issues and I feel that what I do with my body is my business. I also (will probably get flamed for this) think that guns should remain legal, prostitution should be legal, and safe drugs such a marijuana should be legal and taxed like alcohol and cigarettes for additional revenue. I think that making all of these things illegal makes us MUCH less free. I don't agree with hardly any laws that are put in place to out and out BAN people from doing things that do not really affect other people. I am also against seatbelt laws (except for children) btw. It's your body - your decisions. If you choose to harm your body in any way - that is not the government's concern. That was my point. If anyone is trying to be big brother here - it's the republican party, IMO.

As for warrantless wiretapping - just read the Patriot Act.

When a person is suspected of criminal activity, law enforcement must have probable cause to search their home. They can't just say, hey you look like a drug dealer - we're going to search your house. They have to have evidence and get a search warrant. Not so under the Patriot Act. They can eavesdrop on anyone without needing a court order AND they can search people's houses, etc. It is a HUGE step backwards in terms of civil liberties.

There are other sites that discuss the Patriot Act, but the wikipedia article seems (at first glance) to be accurate and it's short.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

You can actually read the act in its entirety here:
http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

I recommended to another poster and I will recommend to you as well - read 1984.





~Ashley~




pregnancy week by week







~Ashley~

Lilypie 1st Birthday Ticker

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2008
Wed, 10-01-2008 - 11:01am

<>


well either, i guess. i dont see how giving money to ACORN helps the country establish economic stability.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-17-2005
Wed, 10-01-2008 - 11:11am

I

Susan

Lilypie 3rd Birthday Ticker

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2003
Wed, 10-01-2008 - 11:15am
and apparently those who voted 'no' agreed

Photobucket

Pages