Ron Paul blew them away.

Paul also smacked down Santorum’s policy of federal protection of the right-to-life. Note to Santorum: don’t use the Declaration of Independence like the U.S. Constitution. They are NOT treated the same at all.

Still not enough time for Paul and definitely not enough time on major policy issues.
Come on South Carolina cast your votes for Ron Paul!

Ha, I noticed that to, I’m surprised Paul didn’t eat that up. I think perhaps the google definition of Santorum is correct.

Paul 2012????    Yep  I am!

Please take just one percent of the time you take to comment on these stories and go out and vote Paul! They want you to believe by commenting in support for Dr.Paul. You really make a difference.The only and I mean only true difference you can or ever will make is to get your butt up and vote for him! Your comments really mean nothing! They want us distracted in believing our comments here mean something!!! After two days this story is gone!! Dont tell me how you feel about Ron Paul! Go tell your neighbor and friends boss or enemy how you feel about him! they want us and they count on us getting our frustrations out here.Where they can some what have CONTROL of what we say. Get your frustrations out where it counts. Talk talk talk to real people who in turn can talk to real people about the good Dr.Paul!

Trust me if we are not careful they will turn our greatest asset’s against us.Right now our asset is the internet. The word of mouth, Historically it has always been and always will be our greatest asset!!!!!GO Speak of him and with much heart and conviction and we can not be denied!!

Do not trust this box no more than you would trust your tv “box”.
If ever we let our guard down it will be our own undoing!

They stop at nothing. So to we must never stop or trust in nothing but our own convictions

South Carolina, how can you go wrong with Ron Paul?  He clearly has the knowledge and reputation SC needs to prosper again.  The most pressing is the economy, in which Ron Paul is THE MOST qualified.  Mitt Romeny ruined Taxachusetts.  Have faith in America again, have faith in your vote… Ron Paul 2012.

RON PAUL is a true and proven protector of the most sacred of all documents- the Constitution! If you demand freedom for futures of generations VOTE FOR RON PAUL!

Ron Paul is not a divider like other candidates, Ron Paul UNITES!  Did you know that while running his campaign Ron Paul also argued against indefinite detention of Americans: http://rt.com/usa/news/ron-paul-ndaa-detention-209/

Ron Paul also fights against SOPA, keeping our internet Free and Open.  So main stream media is not the only thing we must “listen” to.

Ron Paul was the only one who mentioned the War on the mexican border tonight!  More deaths than our current War in Iraq.

I am like you, I am not some young generation, I see millions of supporters for Ron Paul.  You are making the right decision to vote Ron Paul 2012.

Nice to see the crowd putting a stop to cnns tricks they try to pull with paul. Good job s.c., now get and out and vote him to the top! To heck with their stupid polls!

Excellent night for Dr. Paul.
And it didn’t take long for the “pundits” to credit the globalist Newt as the debate winner just because he told the media to eff off for asking about his ex-wife going to the press to accuse him of wanting her to be a swinger when they were married.
And the sheep just lapping it up, actually on their feet applauding with gusto and whooping like mad. Yes, I actually heard whooping. These poor brothers and sisters of ours frighteningly ignorant of what they’re endorsing.
Open borders, gun confiscation, endless wars, total subservience to the Fed as well as other (ahem) special interests, the Constitution to “die and be replaced” (his own words), end of American sovereignty, and a the piece-de-resistance, a one-world government. This is what you can expect from the Newster. Yeah, the guy who got cited for 84 ethics violations? Kicked out of the speakership by own people? Yeah, go figure, the CFR-Bilderberger doesn’t have this country’s interests at heart. Big shocker.
“But…didja hear how he told that reporter feller to eff off? I like’m! I’m votin fer him as mah president, yup. And I’ma clap reeeal hard like good slave.”
So the corporate media sock-puppets have a new talking point to regurgitate whilst ignoring the real issues, the skyrocketing fraudulent debt and the criminal erosion of our liberties to name a couple, and they follow through like the bought and paid for shills that they are.
What about you, patriot?
Are you going to follow?

I was thrilled to see this audience demand to hear from Ron Paul. What a contrast to the other SC debate. Thank you!

South Carolina don’t support the corporate owned media, don’t fall for their agenda to brainwash you to elect who they choose for you. Elect a leader with integrity. The only person who will not be apologizing for their record in front of Obama and as a result the only person with a real chance to win is…

You know who. It is so obvious that you know.  We all do. Get out and VOTE for him South Carolina!

CNN wanted to black out Ron Paul in the debate. The audience didn’t let them.

But they are doing a black out in the post debate program.

Ron Paul was mentioned once in the entire post debate program after 54 mins. 

They mentioned that they didn’t talk about Ron Paul. And then cut to a break and changed topics.

The bosses at CNN will not be pleased with that audience. Mission blackout was ruined.

How much more evidence do you need that the media is ignoring Ron Paul? John King is married to Dana Bash, the CNN reporter assigned to cover Dr. Paul who, right before attempting to launch into her attack-dog journalism, was caught making comments that she was “afraid of Ron Paul being President”.

And now you have John King, husband to Paul-hater Dana Bash, passing over Ron Paul on a question to which he has a novel response: Don’t allow the Federal Gov’t to force moral issues on either side of the party lines.

John King is hardly an independent objective journalist. He has a strong agenda, as do his producers. Notice how much time was spent during the debate squabbling over personal attacks between the three stooges: (Santorum, Romney, Gingrich), and how little was spent discussing the jobs environment through which so many of us Americans are reeling in. Thanks John King for standing up for mediocrity and distracting us from any real issue that matters to us.

Mitt Romeny: search “mittvmitt” on youtube. Enough said.

Newt: took $37 million to lobby for Obamacare, took $1.5 million from Fannie and Freddie, was fined an unprecedented $300,000 for ethics violations as Speaker, see a pattern?

Santorum: named “most corrupt in Congress in 2006″…

Ron Paul: INCORRUPTIBLE,  

you know the $300,000 fine?  Proven to be a stupid unfounded charge.  
Perhaps you might get up-to-date talking points.  

See a democratic pattern?  False untrue charges that they keep flogging and you keep buying.  

1)   Ron Paul got very little time.  They went back and forwards Gingrich-Romney, Romney-Santorum

2)   They skipped him at least one other time as well.  RP has a mike, he needs to speak up for himself, but is too polite.  The crowd had to in the end.

3)  Did you note in the clip above.  Close up of Newt, zoom out and only show only 3 people.  Close up of Newt, again, zoom out, only 3 people.  Guess who was missing…

4)  Post debate, Ron Paul was barely mentioned when talking to other candidates.

5)  Of course, they didn’t interview Ron Paul in the post post debate.

Funny thing is, in the 2008 election, the media had the excuse that oh, “Ron Paul isn’t registering in the polls, so we don’t have to let him speak much” … but he got 2nd place in NH, and he’s polling above Santorum by 4 points in South Carolina right now.  It’s blatantly obvious how they try to marginalize him.  I guess the racist smears and first-class airfare crap didn’t work, so they’re back to the same old ignore tactic.  I think people are finally waking up though, and the more they do this, the more obvious it’s becoming.  My prediction is that Santorum will drop out after losing badly in SC to Dr. Paul.  

What was GREAT about that was he was about to go to a twitter question, and you caught a glimpse of it. It was about IRAN! 
They were going to try to screw him with the corwd with the last question of the debate. But the crowd demanded they let him speak about abortion, and damn did he knock that thing out of the park. 

Santorum tried to throw him a curve ball, and Paul took it and when he was done, in one sentence explained how his stance would repeal Roe V. Wade by virtue. It was a great way to end the debate.That’s an additional reason why the CNN team blacked out Paul from post-debate discussion—it was damage control, for having the end of the debate get hijacked away from them by the audience, to Paul’s benefit. Their intent was to make Paul look bad at the end of the debate, but their plan had been upended. 

What was GREAT about that was he was about to go to a twitter question, and you caught a glimpse of it. It was about IRAN! They were going to try to screw him with the corwd with the last question of the debate. But the crowd demanded they let him speak about abortion, and damn did he knock that thing out of the park. Santorum tried to throw him a curve ball, and Paul took it and when he was done, in one sentence explained how his stance would repeal Roe V. Wade by virtue. It was a great way to end the debate.

That’s an additional reason why the CNN team blacked out Paul from post-debate discussion—it was damage control, for having the end of the debate get hijacked away from them by the audience, to Paul’s benefit. Their intent was to make Paul look bad at the end of the debate, but their plan had been upended.

smart post

Ron Paul supporters: go to http://www.VoteRonPaul.us/ and make your pledge to vote for him. If the media doesn’t want to believe he can win, take a look at the map that is shown. We’ll show our support and we’ll turn it completely red.

Please, pass this link on to all supporters!

I got home after work and caught the replay of the debate. It’s so frustrating watching all the other candidates get substantial TV time, while Ron Paul has to bite his tongue and wait for his turn. It’s unfair, and unjust. It’s disgusting! Especially since it was on CNN, a network that prides itself on being “unbiased”. I’m really disappointed with the whole thing, but Dr. Paul did a great job with the time he WAS given and I’m eager to hear more from him and vote when it comes time to vote here in Georgia. Let’s go Ron Paul!

Wow……you guys are in for a long hard fight. NWO will continue to prop up these other goofballs to distract from Ron Paul`s message and i can assure you it will be a 3 man fight all the way to the convention just to try and upset the deligates that Ron Paul could garner.

Good Luck America

Mark
Aberdeen, Scotland

Paul made a two great comments; in regards to the the 60′s, that was an exceedingly rare occasion of the hearts of men/women changing before the law on a macrocosmic scale. Also, in regard to local government, movements of change are much more dynamic at the local level, because the state government is more accessible to the people and with enough education in the sciences even the bible belt states could progressively move to a pro-choice ideology; though I do believe just because you have the option, it doesn’t always have to be chosen, but it must be there as women are equal to, if not better than men in many respects.

Hi Mark,

If it is still a 3 way tie come the convention, that would strengthen Ron Pauls hand.  If for example, it goes down to Gingrich, Romney & Paul, and Paul has the delegates to hold the balance of power, he would be able to demand some serious concessions.

I suspect that there will only be one Neo-con and Ron Paul left at the convention though, with the Neo-con crowned the challenger to Obama.  I’m pretty sure that will be Romney and also predict that he will have no chance against Obama. 

RP would be the only GOP candidate who could seriously make a challenge.

Brian
Glasgow, Scotland

Ninety-Nine Monkeys For Ron Paul!

This process by which we select
Our President that we will elect
Has yielded this Year
The neocons worst fear:
The Ron Paul Hundredth Monkey Effect!

No matter how hard the media tries
To make Paul look bad in our eyes
We know his program’s correct
‘Cause we think and walk erect
And know the media only tells lies!

They’re reduced to trying to dissect
Ron on some old newsletter subject
But these media whores
Ignore neocon wars
and the Constitution they never protect.

They speak death to Paul’s message of Life
‘Cause they only know how to sow strife
But now masses reject
CNN’s neocon disrespect
And FOX news is really the Devil’s wife

But we howl and we hoot at their ire
For we know that their only desire
Is to see America wrecked
Now even presstitutes detect
That Paul’s campaign has unquenchable fire!
______________________
Charles Ulysses Feney 

#stolen.  i think this should be copied and pasted on every comment box everywhere.  obviously we are full of online supporters, now it’s time to talk to the neighbors

Remembering Paul as a true libertarian, it is sad to hear him babble on like that as, what amounts to, a sell-out to Rick Santorum morality. If a fetus is a person, as Paul now argues, then every miscarriage must be treated like the death of a person, including police investigation, forensics, and/or a grand jury determination on prosecution of the mother or anyone else, including treating physicians who may have negligently caused the early termination of a person’s life. Libertarian indeed.

Paul is in his seventies and this will be his last real chance to run for President. He can not win the republican nomination because those who have the power, the Fox News crowd, have ordained Mitt. So running as a third party, as an alternative to Obama and Romney, is Paul’s only option. On the other hand, I agree with Paul’s strategy of continuing on as a republican nominee since that gives him big time media exposure, which he needs because he lacks the funds needed to challenge the big candidates. In the end though, after they officially ordain Mitt, expect Paul to go third party. The only question is whether Trump/Guiliani gets off the ground as a fourth party.

I think John King’s just mad at Ron Paul for his supporters giving his wife Dana Bash a hard time for sucking as a journalist. http://youtu.be/geQnTX6y07Y

But yeah, Paul didn’t get nearly enough time.  Hopefully the others bickering like little babies works to his benefit.  

Santorum attacked Paul at CNN debate for leaving abortion to states, but look what he said in 2003…
So I would make the argument that with President, or Senator or
Congressman or whoever Santorum, I would put it back to where it is, the
democratic process. If New York doesn’t want sodomy laws, if the people
of New York want abortion, fine. I mean, I wouldn’t agree with it, but
that’s their right. But I don’t agree with the Supreme Court coming in.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-23-santorum-excerpt_x.htm

..Why did he change his mind?

Abortion became legal because of drugs and pornography? That is dangerously simple-minded and is nothing but demagogic pandering to the gallery. For shame

Like his policies are not, Paul is clearly the most honest when answering questions about his views and potential policies.

I know it’s becoming cliche, but Romney really does seem like he runs an algorithm before he answers every question to figure out what the focus-grouped answer should be. He just sounds phony.

Santorum and Gingrich are right to warn that Romney is the wrong candidate for the wrong time. The problem is the alternatives they offer (themselves) will be even less palatable to a general election audience.

Gingrich has already undercut his own argument that he is the only one who can beat Obama in a debate. He has raised expectations so high for himself, Obama will win the debate by simply not falling over the lectern and yelling “In yo face whitey!”

Santorum, conversely, has painted himself into a corner on every issue to the point where he can not move to the middle for the general election.

That leaves only Paul as the only true champion of rightwing economic ideas.

I thought it was great. The media on both the right and left is ignoring the only candidate who dares to speak the truth.

Santorum destroyed Gingrich in this debate, but Paul destroyed Santorum.

Gingrich and Santorum should drop out. Then Republican voters will have a clear choice.

South Carolinians have only two choices.

Sell out and nominated a plastic Northeast elitist, or vote for conservative ideas in Paul.

Voting for Santorum or Gingrich is not a choice at this point…it’s a self-inflicted wound. 

South Carolinians think voting for Paul is voting for a liberal.

But they are completely wrong.

Even the ideas that sound liberal are very conservative, such as decriminalizing drugs and ending foreign entanglements.

I wouldn’t go that far.

But if someone stuck a gun to my head and forced me to vote Republican, then Paul is the only real choice.

Paul was being a little bit facetious I think, so don’t get carried away.

Am I the only one who appreciates your poetry?

I think your obsession with the press is not healthy, as far as getting your candidate elected is concerned.

My honest advice is to tone it down a notch on the media bashing. 

Newt’s got that locked up. So if you think people are going to vote based on whose supporters bash the press the best, Newt will win the nomination in a landslide.

Stick to pressing Paul’s conservative ideas. That will get you a lot further than provoking the messengers.

Why do you think Newt got that question? CNN had to know he would go after them, like he has during every debate like Johny One Note. It’s a capitalistic journalism company. The provocations increase ratings, which increases money in CNN’s bank account.

You simply can’t win that fight. So choose your battles, and write a more aspirational poem based on Paul’s values instead.

Valkyrie101 – agreed. But there’s some conflict in his statement that a) the states should decide whether to allow abortions, and b) amending the constitution to make fetuses humans with full rights of citizenship. I think he oversteps his bounds on personal belief there, but perhaps it is some weird compromise to a republican base that leans so far right these days that you have to be Santorum crazy about counting your sperm counts in the census polls in order to get the nomination.

But if Paul is going to be elected it will not be based on an abortion issue. It will be because he’s the only one running who knows a fig about the economy and won’t start an Iraq 2.0 war with Iran.

The right of a woman to choose is a fundamental right and the states have nothing to do with deciding that.

John King is married to Dana Bash (CNN) who consistently bashes Ron Paul. Now, last night King was the king of ignoring Ron Paul…

But, to the point of abortion and the hypocrisy of Santorum: Ron Paul has been the most consistent and knowledgeable voice on the issue of abortion. Besides being a doctor who delivered over 4,000 babies, many people don’t know that “Ron Paul wrote a book in 1983
entitled Abortion and Liberty where he discusses the ramifications of the heinous act of the murder of innocents. Ronald Reagan’s Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop wrote the forward where he praises Paul’s thoughtful position on this issue and its impact on the natural rights of men.

Ron Paul’s consistency on issues flies in the face of the hypocrisy of the other candidates. His stance is to return the abortion issue back to the States because he believes it is a State issue and not Federal. Thus, in one swoop, Roe vs. Wade would be overturned. Pretty clever, eh?

But, Santorum who criticized Ron Paul for not voting at the Federal level on an issue, voted against “Right to Work” because it went against what his State did. This is where a shining light shows the difference between Ron Paul and Santorum. Ron Paul votes his convictions consistently, Santorum would vote against his convictions because as he said “I was representing my State…” And, what if Pennsylvania was for abortion or for gun control, I wonder what would Santorum have voted for? Would he have voted “his convictions” or “against his convictions to represent his State?” You know one thing for sure… Ron Paul always votes how he thinks and is not swayed by outside influences (like Santorum the lobbyist).

BTW, I live in Texas and know someone who was delivered by Ron Paul when he was a doctor. Pretty cool to think that an ex-doctor and possible next President brought life into the world instead of taking it away. Ron Paul is very Pro-Life, which is why he is also against unjust and unconstitutional wars, though that is another topic, but on the point of how much this man cherishes life (liberty and the pursuit of happiness)!

Ron Paul 2012. The only honest candidate there is.

Watch the guilty look on ZNN John King’s face.

If ever there was a strong argument for abortion – it is these GOPster candidates.

Poor Johnny, playing the fool card and winning.

That’s not what he said, though I can’t fault you for your confusion, Paul tends to ramble.  He was stating that the ’60s were a time where beliefs about morality were shifting in America and was giving examples to that end.  Abortion was one example in which moral beliefs changed and the legality reflected that change.  His argument is essentially that for Repubs or whomever to change the laws on abortion there must first be a cultural shift into believing abortion is morally wrong, not the other way around, as has been futilely attempted over the years. 

They do when not everyone agrees that it is a fundamental right to willfully terminate a viable pregnancy.  Because there is such a polarized split of opinion over the morality of abortion, Paul rightly concludes that decisions on its legality should be made at a local level.  It is morally objectionable to have a centralized federal decision on such an entrenched, dichotomous topic.

I watched the debates in Myrtle Beach the other night and couldn’t believe my ears. The crowd actually booed Ron Paul when he mentioned the golden rule. What has this nation turned into. I’m ashamed of my fellow South Carolinia neighbors. Newt is one of the most corrupt congressmen ever and he got most of the applause, unbelivable. My wife and I will be out early tomorrow morning casting our votes for Ron Paul, the most honest and senseable candidate we have had in a long time, maybe ever, in our lifetime.

He just eviscerated them on that.  John King looked like he just took a bite out of a turd sandwich.

The media can’t make Paul look bad unless they lie about him, so they just ignore him as much as possible hopeing he will go away. Paul is getting stronger as people get to really  know him and realize he is the only answer to turning this country around. We can’t afford to elect another Bush or Obama, time is running out for America,

the bible supported abortion, that was done by a priest, in god’s name, in his holly temple!
the 1984 NIV footnote of numbers 5:11-31 explained what “to thy thigh to rot, they belly to swell” meant: numbers 5:21 “or causes you to have a miscarrying womb and barrenness” to CAUSE a miscarrying womb IS an abortion.

the judeo-christian god is a myth and historical evidence proves it.
3.3.3 ATHEISM: A HISTORY OF GOD (Part 1)

THIS IS THE LAW:

ABORTION IS A CIVIL AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT SUPPORTED BY THE RIGHTS TO PRIVACY, THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT, AND THE 13TH AMENDMENT.

NO HUMAN has a right to life or any due process rights by the 14th amendment to use another human’s body or body parts AGAINST their will, civil and constitutional rights: that’s why you are not forced to donate your kidney—the human fetus is no exception; this is supported by the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, which makes reproductive slavery unconstitutional.

wikipedia org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause

consensual s*x=/= a legal, binding contract to an unwanted fetus to live.

THIS IS SCIENCE:

FETUS IS NOT A BABY (GOOGLE THE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT CHART), but a parasite because the classification of the biological relationship that is based on the behavior one organism (fetus) and how it relates to the woman’s body.

as a zygote, it invaded the woman’s uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG— so her body doesn’t kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

“The placenta functions as an immunological barrier between the mother and the fetus, creating an immunologically privileged site. For this purpose, it uses several mechanisms:
It secretes Neurokinin B containing phosphocholine molecules. This is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.[2]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_tolerance_in_pregnancy

“Progesterone enriches the uterus with a thick lining of blood vessels and capillaries so that it can sustain the growing fetus. Due to its highly-negative charge, hCG may repel the immune cells of the mother, protecting the fetus during the first trimester. It has also been hypothesized that hCG may be a placental link for the development of local maternal immunotolerance.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_chorionic_gonadotropin

“It is also possible for a symbiotic relationship to exist between two organisms of the same species.”
http://www.answers.com/topic/symbiosis  — Gale’s Science of Everyday Things.

just like a parasitic twin — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_twin

“an animal or plant that lives in or on another (the host) from which it obtains nourishment. The host does not benefit from the association and is often harmed by it”
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/parasite

pregnancy CAUSES HARM: http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm

since a man can kill his tapeworm at anytime, so should a woman abort unwanted, human-parasitic fetus, too.

Good, then you should have no problem getting that into a constitutional amendment.

If Eve aborted her pregnancy, no one would exist. I don’t think the Creator had this in mind Not too meny years ago doctors took the hippocratic oath and some still do, unfortunatly many do not and have no problem with taking a life with the wishes of the mother.

Don’t put all South Carolinans in the same boat. The uneducated are for Gingrich, the intelligent are for Ron Paul.

I wish there was some way we could do this through the TV

I hope Gaingrich and Romney also drop out. We don’t need another Bush or Obama leading us to oblivion.

It’s unlikely Paul will go 3rd party, however if he does, it might be the first time a 3rd party candidate wins the presidential election. Wouldn’t that piss off the GOP ? It would serve them right.

There truly are no limits some people will go to to justify their arguments.  Do we give up humanity and compassion so easily, even for the sake of scientific ontology?  While I am personally conflicted over the abortion debate, I do know that to equate a human fetus to a tapeworm is shameful, no matter the perceived incorruptibility of the empirical analysis.  Whether or not a woman decides that an abortion is the best choice, the decision is one that should be done with consideration and solemnity.  The picture you’ve painted for us implies almost a twisted sense of gleeful and determined cleansing.  Whether you believe it to be a miracle or a complex biological phenomenon, heman reproduction is a beautiful process and we do well to remember that.

 There is only one mention of a miscarried fetus is Exodus 21:22 in the context of a woman who is injured and miscarries.  The fetus is treated as less than any other human, even a slave:
If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her,
and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as
the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
The killing is a tort, but only a fine is levied

LOL, nice poem!

Everyone agrees it is human, and everyone agrees it is alive. It has rights in the courts as a human. Inheritance rights if a pregnant woman’s husband dies, and if a pregnant woman is in a car crash caused by a drunk he is charge with MANSLAUGHTER. Just because YOU say the argument is closed does NOT mean it is closed. It just means you are close minded. Did you actually THINK before you wrote any of that? Thank you AGAIN Dept. of Ed and Jimmy Carter!

Momma dropped you on your head a LOT didn’t she? You poor thing.

Yah I know, heres Politifact verifying everything. 

Need more proof, let me know.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/dec/21/restore-our-future/did-newt-gingrich-pay-300000-ethics-fine-back-1990/

No, you have that backwards. A woman’s right to preside over her own body is the law of the land, per our Supreme Court. If you want that to change, perhaps your side should be going for the Constitutional Amendment. It won’t suceed, however, since most people still support a woman’s right to choose.

A woman’s right to choose is the law of the land, per our Supreme Court.

MYTH #7: Newt Gingrich was reprimanded and fined by the House of Representatives. Here are the facts: Mr. Gingrich was charged with 83 ethics violations. Eighty-two of them were dismissed. He was reprimanded for the final infraction and agreed to pay the House $300,000 to cover the cost of the investigation. One year later, the IRS weighed in and said Gingrich did nothing wrong. He was innocent. Candidates who flout Mr. Gingrich’s ethic charges are being dishonest, because Gingrich was exonerated. Whether you like Gingrich or not, let’s shoot straight on this issue and drop it.
http://quinersdiner.com/2012/01/03/more-myths-from-2011-exposed/

My wife and I just arrived back from the polling booths and we voted for the only honest and sensable candidate running in this primary, Ron Paul.

We did our good deed for the day, GO RON !

Valkyrie – what you may think is the “law of the land” is not, in fact. The courts do not create law, they interpret it. So your premise of “looking at the asupreme court” is inherently flawed. Look at what they are doing in Oklahoma for example. It’s just as legal and heavy handed, and equally effective, as the type of “law of the land” that you’re advocating. If you seriously think that you are on a moral high ground in the Abortion issue, then why would you be concerned with allowing each of the 50 states to come to the same conclusion that you have? I mean if this is an obvious case of a woman’s right to choose, and half of the people in each of the states are women, then you would have nothing to fear.

I personally don’t have a problem with your stance on abortion. But I do think you have a problem in supporting these universal morality laws at the federal level. There is a lot of gray in issues like abortion. And the last thing you want is to cause such outrage over an ultra-conservative constituency (by forcing them to pay for abortions through the federal level, or to tolerate the practice in their own communities), that these outraged folks end up voting for an establishment figure like Obama or Santorum simply because of their agreement or disagreement on this one issue. The problem is in the government mandating a method of handling moral situations, because then it becomes a matter of one group claiming moral superiority over an issue which, from the looks of the abortion issue, is deeply divided between 2 or more groups, so to create a law forcing everyone to take sides for one or the other is itself immoral to someone.

Again, if you claim universal moral high ground, then you should have nothing to fear from having each state definitively declare that abortions are legal. So far, we do not have such a law. We only have one Supreme Court case that implied jurisdiction through a muddled interpretation, and a weak interpretation at that which was, itself, deeply divided. If you have not yet looked into Roe v Wade I recommend that you do so. It may convince you that in order to actually, legally, protect against abortion, a definitive law supporting it will need to be passed. That is not likely to happen at the federal level, but I welcome you to try it on the state level so that you don’t find yourself empty handed should Roe v Wade be challenged by a Santorum and overturned,

Shout at John King?… Or smack him upside the head with a two-by-four?  :o)

And in Nazi Germany, the claim was made that disabled people and Jewish people were societal parasites. Just an attachment to your commentary.

CNN got even during the post-debate commentary… about three of the four candidates.