59.0°F Fair [Forecast]
:: Monday, September 6th, 2010Politicalendar
... where it's happening on the Cape and IslandsPlease visit these local CapeCodToday sponsors:
Whalen Restoration Services, Inc.
Help when you need us most! Complete Fire, smoke, soot, water and mold remediation. Services - cleaning, deodorization and reconstruction. Immediate 24 hour emergency service response. (Dennis)
Help when you need us most! Complete Fire, smoke, soot, water and mold remediation. Services - cleaning, deodorization and reconstruction. Immediate 24 hour emergency service response. (Dennis)
Seacoast Imaging
Providing the highest quality images available. Experienced technologists, on-site radiologist for MD consultations. Same day scheduling/reports within 48 hrs. Non-invasive & completely safe! Transportation provided & patients up to 440 lbs. accommodated (Plymouth)
Providing the highest quality images available. Experienced technologists, on-site radiologist for MD consultations. Same day scheduling/reports within 48 hrs. Non-invasive & completely safe! Transportation provided & patients up to 440 lbs. accommodated (Plymouth)
Congressional candidate, Peter White Joins Nat'l Impeachment Vigil
08/28/06 · 3:03 pm :: posted by editor
Peter White, Independent Congressional Candidate,
Joins the National Impeachment Vigil to be held on September 1, 2006.
Independent candidate for Congress Peter White will join in the National Impeachment Vigil on September 1 that is being coordinated by the organizers of After Downing Street and Progressive Democrats of America.
White will lead a demonstration in front of Representative Delahunt's office at 146 Main Street, Hyannis, from 3:00 PM until 5:00 PM that Friday, and he invites all peace and justice supporters to join him.
"We the People must demand that Representative Delahunt follow his oath of office to uphold the laws and Constitution of the United States by introducing Articles of Impeachment of Bush/Cheney immediately," said White. "He is letting them continue the War for oil in Iraq that has killed and maimed tens of thousands of our troops, and hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Iraq. Delahunt has admitted that Bush/Cheney's policies of torture and illegal wiretapping are grounds for impeachment, and yet he refuses to start impeachment proceedings because he says that would be bad for the Democratic Party!"
White challenged Delahunt to a public debate last spring, and Barnstable High School has agreed to host the debate, but so far Delahunt has refused to participate. "Delahunt is a run and hide Democrat, as Sen. Russ Feingold calls all members of Congress who are too cowardly to stand up to Bush/Cheney!"
For more information, contact Caroline Quinn (508-778-0653) or Peter White (508-778-4288). Visit White's website here.
42 comments
Blog posts and comments are entirely the thoughts and ideas of the people who write them and in no way represent the views of CapeCodToday.com, eCape, Inc., or its employees or owners.
08/28/06 @ 4:14 pm
capecod_mom [Member] writes:
I don't blame Delahunt for refusing to debate Peter White...Have you ever met this man? He's an absolute nutjob who does more harm to the renewable energy cause than good.
[ Show all comments by this user ]
Mcfly [Member] writes:
Peter white is a poor mans version of Ned Lamont!
If Peter had the money to launch the same campaign as Lamont, Delahunt would debate him. Peter White is the typical left wing voter that put Lamont in the primary in Connecticut.
If Peter had the money to launch the same campaign as Lamont, Delahunt would debate him. Peter White is the typical left wing voter that put Lamont in the primary in Connecticut.
woodsman [Member] writes:
Peter White appears to be a one issue candidate and Delahunt is right not to debate him as it would give him more publicity than he deserves.
Monponsett [Member] writes:
Delahunt is too secure in his position... a REAL leader would walk out to that demonstration and just start steady beating White's ass in front of all his peeps.
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
I work on many issues: community-based renewable energy development (or a regional cooperative effort by the Cape Light Compact), affordable housing, wastewater management, universal health care (and the country-basec Cape Care proposal), abolishing corporate PACs and other forms of legal bribery, a Voters Bill of Rights with paper trails, and an end to the War for OIL in the Middle East, among other issues.
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
Delahunt is a corrupt status quo politician whose campaign is funded by corporate PACs and wealthy special interests. Congress is a corrupt mess, and we need more independents to overthrow the corporate domination of our government!
Monponsett [Member] writes:
Maybe you should beat him, then... works in Japan.
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
further egads, Peter -- we agree on Delahunt!
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
Hey Jack, I hope that you and family are well!! I'm sure that we agree on a lot of issues, but we probably disagree on some of the solutions. As a Representative, my job is to work for what the majority of voters want: impeach Bush/Cheney, end the War for OIL and bring our troops home, community-based renewable energy development, and universal health care are supported by most people in the MA 10th District!!
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
Thanks, Peter, same to you and yours and good luck with the campaign. Nothing I'd like more than to see the craven incumbent sent packing, albeit by Jeff Beatty and not you ;)
Just a thought, but don't you think all that energy spent trying to impeach Bush might be better spent getting a Democrat elected president in '08?
Just a thought, but don't you think all that energy spent trying to impeach Bush might be better spent getting a Democrat elected president in '08?
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
NO, because Bush/Cheney will have 2 1/2 more years to expand the War for OIL into Iran and start World War Three!! Too many people have been killed already, and we must withdraw oure troops and work to stop the killing!! Bush/Cheney, as Commanders-In-Chief (actually Cheney is the "decider"), will keep sacrificing our troops for the oil companies if we don't stop them ASAP!!
The Democrats will win after they come up with some positions and proposals!! I mean, what DO the Democrats stand for?? Most of them are "run and hide" politicians, as Sen Russ Feingold says (I'd vote for him!!).
The Democrats will win after they come up with some positions and proposals!! I mean, what DO the Democrats stand for?? Most of them are "run and hide" politicians, as Sen Russ Feingold says (I'd vote for him!!).
woodsman [Member] writes:
Mr. White, I would think that if a "majority" of Americans wanted Bush impeached, he would have been by now. As a person who voted for Bush in '04, I would like to see him finish his term. Besides, if you impeach Bush, you get President Cheney. Sounds like you don't like him either, so what's your point?
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
The Articles of Impeachment at www.impeachbush.org also include Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and Gonzales, who have all lied to Congress, supported policies of torture, illegal detentions, illegal wire tapping, and other violations of the laws and Constitution of the United States and the Geneva Convention. The majority of Americans support impeachment if it's proven that they lied to start the War for OIL in Iraq, which they obviously did. There are 37 Congressmen signed on to Rep. Conyers Impeachment Inquiry, but Delahunt is a "run and hide" Democrat, so he's done nothing to stand up to Bush/Cheney and the oil companies. Just call him "Delawon't"!
woodsman [Member] writes:
While I support our invasion of Iraq, I am disappointed in how the war has been managed. BUT, cut and run is NOT the answer. You say that the war was "obviously" started for oil. What proof do you have? By the way, what about the dems who voted for the war? Will you impeach them as well? Hillary voted for it and has refused to apologize for her support. Is she on your list?
Sorry Mr. White, you are a single issue politician. You may have other ideas, but IF you got elected, (and thank God that does not seem likely), I would bet that your only focus would be on the impeachment of a president that I support.
Sorry Mr. White, you are a single issue politician. You may have other ideas, but IF you got elected, (and thank God that does not seem likely), I would bet that your only focus would be on the impeachment of a president that I support.
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
You are incorrect, as I have many issues that I will work on in Congress: universal health care, renewable energy development, doubling the mileage standards for vehicles, a national DARE program, election reforms including outlawing corporate PACs that bribe most members of Congress, support for the Kyoto Treaty, and maybe even a national holiday on election day to give everyone the incentive to vote!
Why do you support Bush/Cheney?? Don't you relaize that they lied to start the war in Iraq, their policies of torture and illegal detentions violate the Geneva Convention, ilegal wire tapping, no-bid contracts to Halliburton, etc. I would think that reasonable people would want the most corrupt Administration in U.S. history remvoed from office ASAP!!
Why do you support Bush/Cheney?? Don't you relaize that they lied to start the war in Iraq, their policies of torture and illegal detentions violate the Geneva Convention, ilegal wire tapping, no-bid contracts to Halliburton, etc. I would think that reasonable people would want the most corrupt Administration in U.S. history remvoed from office ASAP!!
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
By the way, you "thank God" that I may not be elected, do you think that God likes what Bush/Cheney have done, killing, lies, torture, corruption, destruction?? I think that God would disagree with you!! If there is a God, then he/she/they want us to love and help others, not kill them!!!
woodsman [Member] writes:
So I take it you are against abortion??
After all, if you are against killing, then you must be against the murder of the unborn....
Still waiting on that proof about the invasion of Iraq being done for oil only.
After all, if you are against killing, then you must be against the murder of the unborn....
Still waiting on that proof about the invasion of Iraq being done for oil only.
woodsman [Member] writes:
As for Iraq, I favor the war as a response to a threat that Iraq posed to the world in general. Saddam has had WMDs and has used them in the past against the Kurds and the Iranians. While I am NOT linking Saddam to 9/11, I would say that the possible threat to the world by a dictator with WMDs that he has used without hesitation in the past, and the real possibility of those weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, Al-Qaida or whoever, would be a clear and present danger. As president, this would have made me, in a post 9/11 world where ANYTHING is possible, to strongly consider and most likely initiate, an attack on a country like Iraq.
War is hell, Mr. White, and it is awful that so many have died. But, failure to act may have been worse. This rationale may also need to be considered as we look at N. Korea and Iran. Whoever the next president is, he/she will have to make the tough choice on which is worse: action or inaction.
War is hell, Mr. White, and it is awful that so many have died. But, failure to act may have been worse. This rationale may also need to be considered as we look at N. Korea and Iran. Whoever the next president is, he/she will have to make the tough choice on which is worse: action or inaction.
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
I believe in the God-given right to personal freedom for all, so I support the freedom of choice and freedom of marriage, decisions that each person can make for themselves in a FREE COUNTRY!!
Saddam and Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, Woodsman, don't your read the papers?? He couldn't even attack southern Iraq as his long-range missiles had beed disarmed by the United Nations. Iraq did have all that oil, why else would Bush/Cheney invade?? There was no other reason!! Bush/Cheney are now planning to invade Iran to control their vast reserves of natural gas, which America is also addicted to. Bush/Cheney are the largest threats to world peace at this point in history!! We must impeach those corrupt, murderous liars before they start World War Three!!
Saddam and Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, Woodsman, don't your read the papers?? He couldn't even attack southern Iraq as his long-range missiles had beed disarmed by the United Nations. Iraq did have all that oil, why else would Bush/Cheney invade?? There was no other reason!! Bush/Cheney are now planning to invade Iran to control their vast reserves of natural gas, which America is also addicted to. Bush/Cheney are the largest threats to world peace at this point in history!! We must impeach those corrupt, murderous liars before they start World War Three!!
Monponsett [Member] writes:
To be honest... and I know how evil it sounds.... I'd approve of an Iran War and the Iraq occupation as long as we're guaranteed $.50/gallon gas.
I figger... terrorists, free oil, and a huge kickstart to our economy... it's like getting a free sundae with your meal.
I figger... terrorists, free oil, and a huge kickstart to our economy... it's like getting a free sundae with your meal.
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
Your sound VERY evil!! You don't care that hundreds of thousands of innocent children, women, and men are killed as long as you have cheap gas?? First of all, the oil companies are going to keep raising the prices because they can, second of all Bush/Cheney are the worst terrorists in the world, third of all, you are just as sick as they are!!
Monponsett [Member] writes:
I think we'll end up fighting Iran someday, and I'd rather do it when we can hit them from Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time. It beats fighting our way back onto land in 10 years.
I'm also a fan of doing it while we're nuclear and they aren't. Leaving Iran with no army or nukes is Priority #1.
Taking their oil is Benefit #1. They're going to use it to mess with us, so we may as well just get it for ourselves.
We give them some Democracy, we win a huge battle in the War on Terror, and we solve the energy crisis. I'm with that.
I don't think we'd kill anyone who we wouldn't be eventually killing anyhow, so we may as well try to get as much out of the current situation as we can.
It's really the only way Bush can save his reputation in History, and everybody benefits once the shooting stops.
With the exception of North Korea, I can't think of anyone who needs to be disarmed and given a puppet government more than Iran. If the oil can help pay for it, let's deliver that baby!
I'm also a fan of doing it while we're nuclear and they aren't. Leaving Iran with no army or nukes is Priority #1.
Taking their oil is Benefit #1. They're going to use it to mess with us, so we may as well just get it for ourselves.
We give them some Democracy, we win a huge battle in the War on Terror, and we solve the energy crisis. I'm with that.
I don't think we'd kill anyone who we wouldn't be eventually killing anyhow, so we may as well try to get as much out of the current situation as we can.
It's really the only way Bush can save his reputation in History, and everybody benefits once the shooting stops.
With the exception of North Korea, I can't think of anyone who needs to be disarmed and given a puppet government more than Iran. If the oil can help pay for it, let's deliver that baby!
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
Well, maybe she's messing with me, but talking about killing hundreds of thousands of people like Bush/Cheney have done in Iraq is not a joke!! Iran is next, and Bush/Cheney are planning to invade next year, which will start World War Three and give our children endless war, pollution, and corruption. Go ahead and laugh instead of helping our Nation to change the course of history.
woodsman [Member] writes:
So Mr. White, let me get this straight. Killing a child in Iraq is "evil,", but aborting (killing) a child in America is "choice."
Yep, you'll make a good congress-critter if you ever get elected. As they say, "If the oppisite of PRO is CON, then what is the opposite of PROgress?"
By the way, if we can get a better rate on oil, then Iraq was worth it. Hmmm, I wonder what Haliburton is trading for on the market....
Yep, you'll make a good congress-critter if you ever get elected. As they say, "If the oppisite of PRO is CON, then what is the opposite of PROgress?"
By the way, if we can get a better rate on oil, then Iraq was worth it. Hmmm, I wonder what Haliburton is trading for on the market....
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
Mopo, the conventional wisdom after Reagan took office 25 years ago was that a nuclear war with the Soviets was inevitable. Just the opposite occurred; the Iron Curtain collapsed within a decade.
Along the same lines, it may not be necessary to use force against Iran to keep it from acquiring a nuclear weapon (Israel is more likely to do so anyway).
Reagan provided an example of an effective strategy to follow, as did JFK in the Cuban Missile Crisis. One of the reasons I have such respect for both leaders is that each prevailed against a dangerous foe without firing a shot.
It is also important to keep in mind that roughly half of Iranians were born after the shah was deposed in 1979 or are too young to remember their country's revolution. There is widespread revulsion among Iranians toward their regime, along with a covert yearning for the West (if you doubt this, I suggest the book, "Reading Lolita in Tehran").
The demographics in Iran are in our favor; we should take advantage of them well before embroiling ourselves in another war.
Along the same lines, it may not be necessary to use force against Iran to keep it from acquiring a nuclear weapon (Israel is more likely to do so anyway).
Reagan provided an example of an effective strategy to follow, as did JFK in the Cuban Missile Crisis. One of the reasons I have such respect for both leaders is that each prevailed against a dangerous foe without firing a shot.
It is also important to keep in mind that roughly half of Iranians were born after the shah was deposed in 1979 or are too young to remember their country's revolution. There is widespread revulsion among Iranians toward their regime, along with a covert yearning for the West (if you doubt this, I suggest the book, "Reading Lolita in Tehran").
The demographics in Iran are in our favor; we should take advantage of them well before embroiling ourselves in another war.
Monponsett [Member] writes:
The feeling that nuclear war with the Soviets was "inevitable" was only held by those types who moved to Montana, built an underground shelter, and joined a rather over-zealous militia.
The rest of the world saw it more like I see war with Iran- a huge problem that could pop up unless we keep them in check.
Like Iraq, we needed some propaganda to hate them properly. To be honest, I'd want a powerless Germany and a buffer zone too if I were the Russians... and once my army was there, I'd establish that reality.
Likewise... if we had a chance to end the Cold War before it began, there is a certain appeal to crushing Russia in 1945.
Sure, it would have been ugly. So would nuclear war, or pissing away the Treasury for 45 years in an arms race. If war was "inevitable," only a fool would wait until Russia got nukes.
Likewise, it won't be pretty in Iran... but crushing them does a large part towards ensuring that 50 years of our kids won't have their wallets emptied by an incessant threat of war.
The troops are there, the time is right, and we can control our own future.
The rest of the world saw it more like I see war with Iran- a huge problem that could pop up unless we keep them in check.
Like Iraq, we needed some propaganda to hate them properly. To be honest, I'd want a powerless Germany and a buffer zone too if I were the Russians... and once my army was there, I'd establish that reality.
Likewise... if we had a chance to end the Cold War before it began, there is a certain appeal to crushing Russia in 1945.
Sure, it would have been ugly. So would nuclear war, or pissing away the Treasury for 45 years in an arms race. If war was "inevitable," only a fool would wait until Russia got nukes.
Likewise, it won't be pretty in Iran... but crushing them does a large part towards ensuring that 50 years of our kids won't have their wallets emptied by an incessant threat of war.
The troops are there, the time is right, and we can control our own future.
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
War wasn't inevitable with the Soviets, mopo, any more than it is with Iran. That was my point, as you would see if you scrolled back and read what I wrote.
As for that alleged lack of a widespread perception that nuclear war was just a matter of time after Reagan was elected, I suggest you google the phrase "nuclear freeze movement" and read through a few of the thousands of hits that will come back.
Those militias you referred to -- they flourished under Clinton, not Reagan, remember?
That a denizen of the fringe Left feels compelled to disclaim the fear of nuclear holocaust after Reagan became president comes as no surprise. It stems from the same impulse that gives the man no credit for being instrumental in ending the Cold War.
If you are genuinely concerned with the "incessant threat of war," you'd think twice -- once even -- before your oddly
ardent calls for war without end.
As for that alleged lack of a widespread perception that nuclear war was just a matter of time after Reagan was elected, I suggest you google the phrase "nuclear freeze movement" and read through a few of the thousands of hits that will come back.
Those militias you referred to -- they flourished under Clinton, not Reagan, remember?
That a denizen of the fringe Left feels compelled to disclaim the fear of nuclear holocaust after Reagan became president comes as no surprise. It stems from the same impulse that gives the man no credit for being instrumental in ending the Cold War.
If you are genuinely concerned with the "incessant threat of war," you'd think twice -- once even -- before your oddly
ardent calls for war without end.
Monponsett [Member] writes:
What you aren't getting from my discussion is that I believe- and either of us could be wrong- that throwing an Iran war into the blender with the current Troubles won't really alter the basic "we're stuck in the desert for a generation" aspect we currently face.
Regardless what you think of my war aims regarding Iran.... very interesting tactical position, no?
On one hand, we'd be adding a third war.
On the other, we're getting them at- if they do end up developing the bomb- the weakest they'll ever be. We have armies on two of their borders. We have a fleet just offshore. We have a Prez who doesn't have to get elected again.
Sure, it's an ugly war. But if we have to come back and fight them again, they'll most likely be nuclear... and we'll have to hit the beach and fight our way in.
No one deserves to have Democracy puppet-governmented down their throats worse than Iran does. The fact that they have oil we can take only makes it that much more tasty. That oil goes to us, not BP.
War on Terror? Dealt a possible death blow. Energy crisis? Averted.
Regardless what you think of my war aims regarding Iran.... very interesting tactical position, no?
On one hand, we'd be adding a third war.
On the other, we're getting them at- if they do end up developing the bomb- the weakest they'll ever be. We have armies on two of their borders. We have a fleet just offshore. We have a Prez who doesn't have to get elected again.
Sure, it's an ugly war. But if we have to come back and fight them again, they'll most likely be nuclear... and we'll have to hit the beach and fight our way in.
No one deserves to have Democracy puppet-governmented down their throats worse than Iran does. The fact that they have oil we can take only makes it that much more tasty. That oil goes to us, not BP.
War on Terror? Dealt a possible death blow. Energy crisis? Averted.
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
What ever happened to the goal of "Thou shalt not KILL??" First Bush/Cheney killed 200,000 innocent people in Iraq, and now you want them to do the same to Iran??? Anyone who advocates killing innocent people are as bad as the terrorists!!
woodsman [Member] writes:
So then anyone who advocates abortion is a "terrorist" in your view???
Funny that you would quote one of God's commandments if, as you said on 8/31, that you question His existence.
You sound like a congress-critter already!
Funny that you would quote one of God's commandments if, as you said on 8/31, that you question His existence.
You sound like a congress-critter already!
PeterWhite [Member] writes:
NO, abortion is a family planning choice. I wish people who were so concerned about making other people's choices were more concerned about all the children living in poverty - 20% in the U.S. Many anti-freedom of choice people are pro-Bush/Cheney War for OIL, which includes a lot of killing!!
Freedom, democracy, and justice are the key values of our country, so every stand I take involves those values.
Freedom, democracy, and justice are the key values of our country, so every stand I take involves those values.
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
Peter, a question for you from a voter in the district where you are running:
A perfectly healthy woman, eight months pregnant, is bitterly angry at her husband, father of the child-to-be, for cheating on her. The couple decides their differences are irreconcilable, the woman wants no further connection to her husband and decides to have an abortion.
Should she be allowed to get one?
A perfectly healthy woman, eight months pregnant, is bitterly angry at her husband, father of the child-to-be, for cheating on her. The couple decides their differences are irreconcilable, the woman wants no further connection to her husband and decides to have an abortion.
Should she be allowed to get one?
woodsman [Member] writes:
Justice?? What "justice" does the aborted fetus get?
Equating abortion with "family planning" is like equating the holocaust with "population planning."
Equating abortion with "family planning" is like equating the holocaust with "population planning."
CapeCodGuy2 [Member] writes:
woodsman
is any abortion no matter what the circumstances always wrong?? what about rape, incest, mothers life in danger, malformed fetus?. I dont like to see abortion but a womans body is her business and we should butt out and let her make the decision. The alternative is the federal goverment dictating what we can and can not do to our bodies...remember Terry Schaivo and the circus surrounding that?? Ive had family members in a similar situation of prolonging their suffering or helping them die gracefully. I hope you never have to make such a decision... there is no black and white but various shades of gray
is any abortion no matter what the circumstances always wrong?? what about rape, incest, mothers life in danger, malformed fetus?. I dont like to see abortion but a womans body is her business and we should butt out and let her make the decision. The alternative is the federal goverment dictating what we can and can not do to our bodies...remember Terry Schaivo and the circus surrounding that?? Ive had family members in a similar situation of prolonging their suffering or helping them die gracefully. I hope you never have to make such a decision... there is no black and white but various shades of gray
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
Since Peter White is apparently too busy to answer a question from a voter, I'll put the same question to you, CapeCodGuy -- should a woman be allowed to get an abortion in the scenario I described?
woodsman [Member] writes:
Capecodguy:
I would support abortion ONLY if the mother's life was in danger. Otherwise, if we start to make exceptions on who should be born and who should not, are we any better than those who are involved in genocide? "Sorry, you are mentally retarded, malformed, etc., you must die. We only want perfect people with no deformities, and we don't want to spend the money to provide endless medical care."
Or what if there are NO indications of problems before the child is born, but AFTER birth, an incurable problem comes up. Is it ok to just kill the kid?
Where do we draw the line?
I would like to see an answer to Jack's question, too.
I would support abortion ONLY if the mother's life was in danger. Otherwise, if we start to make exceptions on who should be born and who should not, are we any better than those who are involved in genocide? "Sorry, you are mentally retarded, malformed, etc., you must die. We only want perfect people with no deformities, and we don't want to spend the money to provide endless medical care."
Or what if there are NO indications of problems before the child is born, but AFTER birth, an incurable problem comes up. Is it ok to just kill the kid?
Where do we draw the line?
I would like to see an answer to Jack's question, too.
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
Could be a long wait, woodsman
CapeCodGuy2 [Member] writes:
I believe that if the fetus can sustain itself outside the womb then it should be given the chance. I dont like partial birth abortions, a very bad thing. However I do believe a woman has the right to make decisions on her own body and shouldnt be forced to keep an unwanted fetus. Some peole think a child is created the instant a sperm and an egg come together... some feel any form of birth control is wrong, including condoms, some think there should be no restrictions what so ever. Some people think a woman can make any decision she wishes up to and including partial birth abortions. Not an easy call on any level, luckily Im a man so its not my choice to make. However as an American and a libertarian we must default to the rights of the woman/individual over the rights of the goverment. Remember Terry Schaivo and the circus the congress created. Ive had to watch a family memeber fail and die from old age... its something I would never want the goverment to have control over. These issues will get more complicated as science advances, artificially grown organs, cloning....
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
Perhaps you'd want more a say in the matter, CapeCodGuy, if you were the father in the scenario I described. Men have no less of a right to an opinion about abortion than women did about national defense before they served in the military.
There's a reason why so few people who describe themselves as pro-choice are willing to respond to the question I asked. To end a pregnancy in that situation isn't abortion, it's infanticide.
There's a reason why so few people who describe themselves as pro-choice are willing to respond to the question I asked. To end a pregnancy in that situation isn't abortion, it's infanticide.
CapeCodGuy2 [Member] writes:
It would be completely different if I was the father, but if Im not then I have no business telling a woman what to do... neither should the goverment
Jack Coleman [Member] writes:
How about a week before the baby is due, CapeCodGuy? Or 24 hours? Or within an hour of birth, perhaps?
woodsman [Member] writes:
CapeCodGuy:
You said that "if the fetus can sustain itself outside the womb, it should be given a chance." If that's the case, then babies conceived through rape or incest, should also be given a chance. After all, does how they were conceived impact their ability to survive outside the womb?? You've already contradicted yourself!
Jack, I'm glad to see CapeCod Guy at least tried to answer your question. Interesting how Mr. White has failed to do so. I guess he's practicing to be a congressman by ducking the tough questions...
You said that "if the fetus can sustain itself outside the womb, it should be given a chance." If that's the case, then babies conceived through rape or incest, should also be given a chance. After all, does how they were conceived impact their ability to survive outside the womb?? You've already contradicted yourself!
Jack, I'm glad to see CapeCod Guy at least tried to answer your question. Interesting how Mr. White has failed to do so. I guess he's practicing to be a congressman by ducking the tough questions...
Please visit these local CapeCodToday sponsors:
Vetorino's Landscaping & Irrigation Services
Always on time and on budget. Offering planning and design to landscape construction, installation, irrigation, waterscapes and landscaping maintenance. Plus quality lawn hydro-seeding. (Barnstable)
Always on time and on budget. Offering planning and design to landscape construction, installation, irrigation, waterscapes and landscaping maintenance. Plus quality lawn hydro-seeding. (Barnstable)
All Gift Baskets and More
Award-winning gift baskets since 1990 ideally suited for any professional or personal occasion. All baskets come in a variety of sizes and prices to fit any budget. Same day nationwide shipping. Register on our site for a drawing. Toll Free (877)880-3395
Award-winning gift baskets since 1990 ideally suited for any professional or personal occasion. All baskets come in a variety of sizes and prices to fit any budget. Same day nationwide shipping. Register on our site for a drawing. Toll Free (877)880-3395
IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR COMMENTORS & BLOGGERS: CapeCodToday now requires a one-time validation of your
account email. When logging in or registering for the first time, you will be emailed a link to click that will validate your
email and complete your login. The link in the email must be clicked in the same session when you are logged into the site for security purposes
(i.e. retrieve the email right away and do not close your web browser).
This is a one-time-only process (or if you change the email on your account), and will help CCToday keep out the spammers. If you cannot validate your email because it is invalid, and you are a legitimate user, feel free to contact us and we will update your account to your current email.
This is a one-time-only process (or if you change the email on your account), and will help CCToday keep out the spammers. If you cannot validate your email because it is invalid, and you are a legitimate user, feel free to contact us and we will update your account to your current email.
Please Login or Register to leave a comment. There are 4,638 registered commenters!
CapeCodToday requires readers register an account with us in order to post comments. Become a trusted commenter and receive the benefits of posting instantly throughout the site. It's quick and easy!
Please note: If you are a CapeCodToday registered blogger, you can use your blogger login. Your login for the blogs is separate from your CapeCodToday main site login (if you have one).
Previous/Next posts in this blog
About This Blog
Free Political Event Listing: A non-partisan listing of Cape Cod political events from campaign kick-offs to fund raisers, informational sessions, debates and monthly committee (party) meetings. To list an event, please send all the pertinent information to the Editor of CapeCodToday.com.
We welcome all parties, and urge candidates and their campaign managers to use this free service to inform the voters about political matters affecting Cape Cod residents.
Recent Comments
- I guess I am an unpredictable being...lol.
52 mins ago - Might I suggest some kind of limerick contest based on
1 hr, 39 mins ago - TRB,
Every generation has its struggles. And every generation seems to
3 hrs, 17 mins ago - Nanci,
Sure. Ronnie promised 2 things:
1. Amnesty - and -
2.
3 hrs, 26 mins ago - Guess which President allowed thousands of illegal immigrants apply for
3 hrs, 31 mins ago
- site sponsors -
CCT Blog List
Blogs with posts in the past 60 days are listed here in order of newest posts. For a list of all blogs, visit Blogs A to Z
- Newest Blog Posts
- Newest Comments
- Editorial
- Cape Cod History
- TRB
- Fox Robbins Business Blog
- Cape & Islands News
- The Belly Check
- EXTRA...
- Latimer on Law
- Police and Fire News
- Conservative's Conscience
- Off-the-Shelf
- Entering Falmouth
- Entering Bourne
- The Poet's Perspective
- Sea Street
- Cape Yoga
- In My Footsteps
- Politicalendar
- CapeCodToday Featured Event
- Citizen Kane
- Cape Cod Rock Hopper
- Cape Cod Pets
- Cape Native
- Cape Politics
- On the Campaign Trail with Bill
- Long Bridge Runner
- My day
- Op-Ed
- The Blogfather
- Mercy Otis
- The Ballyard
- Travel Tales
- Soaring with David Gessner
- Letters to the Editor
- Dan Wolf's Blog
- Through a Washashore's Eyes
- Cape Cod Performing Arts
- Speaking Turtle's Cafe
- Trail Hound
- Town Notes
- Business on Cape Cod
- Cape Cod Barrister
- Wellfleet Bay Sanctuary
- CapeCodToday Arts
- Reflections on a Quarter-life Crisis
- Bismore Park
- Cape Eyes
- Seufert's Scenes
- Rob O'Leary's Blog
- Cape Cod Kidz
- Energy Media
- Media Watch
- Footnotes
- At the Movies
- Ned Sonntag
- Joe's Blog
- Cape Cod Crusader
- College Chat with Christine Chapman
- Washington Window
- Resolute
- Literary Pop
- One Day at a Time
- Cape Cod Tracker
- Buckley's Blog
- State of Cape Cod
- Three plus lives
- Boston Cod
- Cape Wind Conversation
Archives
- September 2010 (1)
- August 2010 (6)
- July 2010 (4)
- June 2010 (8)
- May 2010 (6)
- April 2010 (9)
- March 2010 (11)
- February 2010 (6)
- January 2010 (8)
- December 2009 (7)
- November 2009 (4)
- October 2009 (6)
- September 2009 (7)
- August 2009 (3)
- July 2009 (6)
- June 2009 (1)
- May 2009 (4)
- April 2009 (9)
- March 2009 (8)
- February 2009 (4)
- January 2009 (3)
- December 2008 (1)
- November 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (12)
- September 2008 (14)
- August 2008 (7)
- July 2008 (4)
- June 2008 (5)
- May 2008 (7)
- April 2008 (13)
- March 2008 (13)
- February 2008 (13)
- January 2008 (9)
- December 2007 (12)
- November 2007 (11)
- October 2007 (8)
- September 2007 (8)
- August 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (1)
- April 2007 (1)
- March 2007 (1)
- February 2007 (2)
- January 2007 (1)
- November 2006 (3)
- October 2006 (28)
- September 2006 (21)
- August 2006 (5)
- July 2006 (13)
- June 2006 (10)
- May 2006 (14)
- April 2006 (12)
- March 2006 (16)
- February 2006 (16)
- January 2006 (10)
Become a CapeCodToday Blogger!
Are you passionate about your community? Do you blog or at least harbor thoughts of doing so?
If so, CapeCodToday.com would like to host your blog on our CapeCodToday weblog publishing platform.
Blog Newsfeed
CapeCodToday uses standard web "newsfeeds" (RSS) to automatically update the latest blog entries in your browser or newsreader.
Use any of the links below in your newsreader or web browser to get "Politicalendar" postings delivered to you, or use the RSS icon in your browser's address bar.
