Posted on 06/21/2005 1:35:35 PM PDT by cpforlife.org
I'll give up on politics as a viable solution to the problems facing the USA.
OK. I'll grant we must assume the Dems were not fanatical pro-deathers and gave him the nod :-)
I think the main reason is that we are the party that advocates individual responsibility.
There are obviously a lot of factors -- tax cuts, crime, the military. But a big-government Dem who was socially conservative -- like Truman or even Kennedy although he supported tax cuts -- would win, I think.
Actually, the more telling point is that GOP voters are voting on principles & ideals. We want to do what's right for the country, not necessarily what's convenient or best financially for us.
The hysterical writer of this screed, (in a Catholic paper owned by the Legionnaires of Christ, an organization with problems of its own), is wringing his hands over possibilities!!
Bush is the most pro-life president this country has ever had, and has taken some difficult and heroic pro-life stances.
Yet, in this ridiculous article, his name is never mentioned.
That's true. And we are.
EXACTLY!
And it bears repeating that the GOP White House and GOP controlled Congress have increased Title X funding for abortion EVERY year since Bush took office.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” And gullible Republicans!!
Bump!
From the same poster that insists no plane flew into the Pentagon on 9/11.
Five bad Republicans can scuttle every pro-life judge, no matter how many good Republicans are in support support.
If just 5 people in your church could set policy for the entire church, would you blame the pastor and church as a whole for the actions of those 5 people?
That is one of the most sensible things I've ever seen written in regards to the abortion debate!
Truthfully, I am pro-life, but I am not a one-issue voter, nor is it even my number one issue when considering what candidate to support. However, I am very thankful that the one-issue pro-lifers are on the Republican side.
That being said, I've often wondered what would have happened if the pro-life movement had invested HALF of the time and money into advertising and education campaigns that they have into political efforts.
Basically, GWB has accomplished NADA (Spanish for zilch, he speaks illegal) for the country, only his foreign policy is excellent. If he does nothing that people voted him in for ASAP, he will loose the GOP majority in both houses. I see a BIG majority being disgusted and not voting.
BTW, it is not only Catholics, but also all other orthodox people who voted Republican, including Orthodox Jews.
How do you figure?
Certain people's disagreement of an article only strengthens it.
I noticed the same thing -- your first sentence described this article perfectly!
Certain people's disagreement WITH an article only strengthens it.
Anybody? Not if anybody's McVain. He's a kook, and I'd rather have a crook than a kook.
"Did Santorum HAVE to support Specter over Pro-Life Toomey?"
Yes, because the First Commandment of Politics is "Thou Shalt Not Undercut Incumbents in Your Party's Caucus."
"Certain people's disagreement of an article only strengthens it."
Certain people's agreement with an article proves that it's FOS.
Yes. The Pastor should have removed those 5 bad people from influence.
What we need are Congressional GOP leaders with the testicular fortitude to stand up to the 'Rats and tell them that we are ready to go to any lengths to force up or down votes of judicial nominees in the Senate. People can try all they want to blame this on Bush, but the problem is that the GOP leadership in the Senate has been unwilling to go to the mat on this issue.
"Yes. The Pastor should have removed those 5 bad people from influence."
How does President Bush do that with 5 bad Senators?
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.