Skip to comments.Erick Erickson: Trey Grayson is Attacking Conservative Ideas and Sarah Palin
Posted on 04/15/2010 1:56:59 PM PDT by American Dream 246
RedState.com top gun and CNN contributor Erick Erickson shoots down Trey Grayson's hot air balloon:
The man has refused to take a substantive position on bailouts, etc. for the longest time. Hes peddled false smears against Paul that Paul is pro-choice. In fact, Rand Paul is very much pro-life, but thinks because abortion is a non-constitutional issue contrary to Roe v. Wade, it is an issue for the several states to ban and not for Congress, except for the bit about defunding federal payment for abortion, which he gladly supports doing.
Then there is the latest...
Now Trey Grayson is attacking Sarah Palin because Palin endorsed Rand Paul. Grayson says Palin is unfit for office and he questions her judgment.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the Republican that D.C. Republicans say we should all get behind.
Not me. Us neither. Good on you, Erick.
Besides the polls,
here’s why we won’t have to worry about Trey Grayson becoming Senator from Kentucky:
Good news - thanks :-)
So, he thinks that a person being deprived of LIFE without proper due process is a non-constitutional issue? He believes that one person owning the LIFE of another (thus giving them the right to take it) is a non-constitutional issue?
This is one of those fundamental differences that Libertarian leaning Republicans and Conservative Republicans part ways. The latter believes that Constitutionally protected individual rights trumps State rights- especially the right to one's own life.
we have been trying your way for the last 37 years, not much progress.
I believe it is a better state issue from political standpoint, at this time
i am in KY and when SP endorsed Paul, that was influential for me and with Bunning now also on board, I hope this will do it.
trey g was very foolish, as a candidate for leadership behind in the polls, to insult someone on his own team. Exactly what kind of leader would he be?
When I heard Grayson had been a D who voted for Clinton, what a fiasco—another rino being groomed. I voted for McConnell and would bote for him again but I hope they get a new R leader in the Senate. It was bad how McConnell publicly humiliated Bunning.
Where’s Leadership in the GOP? Steele is NOT a Leader and has no Leadership Qualities.
FIRE Michael Steele.
HIRE Sarah Palin.
Strategically, I am all for the state-by-state approach, however, this isn’t about strategy, this is about a fundamental belief in how one views the Constitution and individual rights.
Murder is not a federal crime, that’s why. However, I think a 14th amendment argument for equal protection could be made if a state didn’t equally protect the unborn under that state’s murder laws. But he’s right that those kind of criminal issues are intended to be legislated from the State. Jefferson makes such an argument at the beginning of his Kentucky Resolution.
As long as it is a federally recognized and protected practice, then it is a violation of the 4th and 5th Amendments (prohibiting depriving of life without due process and guaranteeing one be ‘secure in one’s person’. Also the 14th as you stated. I’ve also seen some good arguments that it is a violation of the 13th Amendment in that one having the right to take the life of another is akin to ownership of another’s life and could be construed as a type of slavery.
Excuse me, but that’s how it was before the 1973 ruling. Where was the concern before that?
-—”Excuse me, but thats how it was before the 1973 ruling. Where was the concern before that?”-—
Actually it was quite a concern, and Pro-Lifers had made some considerable headway. That’s why the Liberals felt the need to put forth a patsy case (Roe v. Wade) through which they would have a stacked Court declare it a Constitutional Right.
The Libertarian vs. Conservative view on Abortion was well under way even before 1973. As I remember, the Libertarian Party almost instantly adopted a Pro-Choice stance on the issue, even before the Democrats were bold enough to do so.
Just a point of clarification. The Libertarian Party of course doesn’t reflect the views of most libertarians who are not members of the party. Many libertarians are pro-life. Afterall, what about the natural rights of the unborn person?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.