I have been listening to Dennis Praeger's radio show...at least portions of it.
Yesterday he spent an hour speaking with Michael Medved and Hugh Hewitt, all three--Praeger, Hewitt, Medved--staunch pro-life conservatives.
The tenor of their conversation is my preference to the Rush/Ingraham tone on this topic, but preferring one over the other does not mean one is less pro-life as has been the erroneous charge tossed around here oh so casually.
I haven't heard any talk radio in an age...what are the main differences being touted?
Speaking of Laura Ingraham, she just played Terri trying to communicate to questions about her pain. She was trying to answer each question the person was asking. The questions were asked and then she would try to answer it. Amazing. Don't know many turnips that can pull of that trick.
I disagree. There are those who believe that it is morally okay to kill someone by starvation/dehydration, if it is what they wished. I think a case can be made that is not a pro-life position. We can agree on most pro-life positions, but that doesn't happen to be one of them.