Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Duncan Hunter Iowa Presidential Debate 8-5-07
YouTube ^ | 8-5-07 | YouTube

Posted on 08/05/2007 3:16:16 PM PDT by WalterSkinner

Duncan Hunter at Iowa Presidential Debate at Drake University--8-5-07

LINK



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; duncanhunter; elections; president
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

Duncan Hunter in Iowa


1 posted on 08/05/2007 3:16:19 PM PDT by WalterSkinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pissant; Calpernia; Ultra Sonic 007; Paperdoll; RasterMaster; 007girl; 230FMJ; abigailsmybaby; ...
PING For DH in Iowa
2 posted on 08/05/2007 3:17:38 PM PDT by WalterSkinner ( In Memory of My Father--WWII Vet and Patriot 1926-2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

B4DH!


3 posted on 08/05/2007 3:21:40 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

They should have given Duncan Hunter more time, and let him respond to the question about abortion.

While most of the GOP candidates are pro-life to one degree or another, Duncan Hunter and Brownback have the strongest commitment to LIFE!, and they didn’t even include Hunter in answering the question regarding LIFE!


4 posted on 08/05/2007 3:24:46 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

I LOVE THIS GUY!!!!!!!!!


5 posted on 08/05/2007 3:24:56 PM PDT by ishabibble (ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

Thanks. Needs far more than five minutes.


6 posted on 08/05/2007 3:27:03 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

You are too fast, Walt...GREAT WORK!


7 posted on 08/05/2007 3:28:05 PM PDT by RasterMaster (Rudy McRomneyson = KENNEDY wing of the Republican Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

On The Issues....

FAIR & EQUITABLE TRADE

Fair Trade, Not Free Trade = Jobs

China Cheating  on Trade / America is a GREAT Nation

SECOND AMENDMENT

Glen & Helen Show

ECONOMY & TAXES

Address to Fair Tax Rally 05-15-07

Address to CPAC

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD

Iraq Resolution / Hunter vs. Democrats / Surge is Working

Senate Amnesty Bill / Amnesty Fails / Amnesty Fails Again

LEGAL REFORM

Gonzales Firings / Pardon Scooter? / ”Fairness” Doctrine

Border Agents Compean & Ramos / Defending Border Agents

ENDORSEMENTS

Appeal to Conservatives / General Chuck Yeager

Ann Coulter / Magnificent! / Favorite

Announcement – Part 1 & Part 2 / Music Video

On the Road to the Oval Office / The Conservative Case

A Fresh Face / Blog Collection / Constitution Party / Grassroots HQ

EDUCATION

No Child Left Behind

HEALTHCARE

Ronald Reagan on Health Care

‘National’ Health Care / “One step closer to socialism”

IMMIGRATION

Border Enforcement is Homeland Security / NAFTA

Building a Fence / “Jobs Americans won’t do”?

Enforce the Law / No Amnesty / Party of One / Ted Hayes

SAFETY & SECURITY

Cooking with Hunter / War On Terror / To America’s Critics / JFK Plot

Mark Steyn on 1986 Amnesty / Firefighter’s Forum

FAITH & VALUES

Blogs for Life / Judicial Appointments / Right to Life Rally

Terri Shaivo / Mt. Soledad Cross  - Flyer / Roe vs. Wade / Hate Crimes

INTERVIEWS

Dennis Miller (June 1st – 3rd Hour)

Roger Hedgecock (4/6, 4/24, 4/25, 6/8, 6/29, 7/2, 7/17, 7/19)

Laura Ingraham – Part 1 & Part 2 / Steve Malzberg 06-19-07

Brian Preston – Hot Air / William Gheen - ALIPAC

WRKO Pundit Review Radio / Polipundit Radio

Kevin McCullough – Musclehead Revolution / John Hawkins

NHPR’s Laura Knoy on The Exchange / Irving Baxter

WESH – Orlando (Conversation with the Candidate) / Wolf Blitzer

 Hardball 07-30-2007 / Hardball - Al Sharpton / George Stephanopolis Charlie Rangel – Part 1 & Part 2 / Dennis Kucinich – Part 1 & Part 2

Glenn Beck / JD Hayworth 1 & 2 / Tom McLaughlin

DEBATES

Reagan Library 05-03-07 / After Interview

South Carolina 05-15-07 / Fox Interview

New Hampshire 06-05-07 / Spin Room - NH/ Lynne Hunter

Iowa Presidential Candidate Forum 06-30-07

POLLS

Hunter Beats McCain / Maricopa County, Arizona 01-13-07

Spartanburg, South Carolina 03-01-07

Anderson County, South Carolina 04-17-07 / Free Republic

ADDITIONAL AUDIO & VIDEOS

Young Republicans - Part1 / Part2 / Part3

Core Principles / BIG STORY WEEKEND with Julie Bandaras

Brian & the Judge: 01-10-2007 / 02-08-2007 / 03-12-2007/ Cost of WH Run

The Right Balance hosted by Greg Allen / Still in the Race / Duncan D. Hunter

 


8 posted on 08/05/2007 3:28:29 PM PDT by RasterMaster (Rudy McRomneyson = KENNEDY wing of the Republican Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

you have FRmail


9 posted on 08/05/2007 3:30:40 PM PDT by SoCalPol (Duncan Hunter '08 Tough on WOT & Illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner
It look like DH got the last word in the debate.

Wow. I hope some good Iowans watched this.

10 posted on 08/05/2007 3:37:51 PM PDT by Lexinom (http://www.gohunter08.com Don't let the press pick our candidates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

mark


11 posted on 08/05/2007 3:40:23 PM PDT by SittinYonder (Ic ■Št gehate, ■Št ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille fur­or gan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

Nice compilation! Hunter is the best man without a doubt!


12 posted on 08/05/2007 3:43:54 PM PDT by upsdriver (DUNCAN HUNTER FOR PRESIDENT!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; WalterSkinner; RasterMaster

There’s a live thread about the debate AGAIN, because it’s rerunning NOW on C-Span:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1876803/posts

Here’s the C-Span link, too:

http://www.cspan.org/watch/cspan_rm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS


13 posted on 08/05/2007 3:57:52 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

He’s the Man.


14 posted on 08/05/2007 4:02:18 PM PDT by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

..that’s the most emotion I have seen DH display this campaign—standing next to Ron Paul who basically spit on everything Hunter’s son is doing in Iraq—he could barely contain himself in his remarks...


15 posted on 08/05/2007 4:09:08 PM PDT by WalterSkinner ( In Memory of My Father--WWII Vet and Patriot 1926-2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

If ever there was a presidential candidate deserving of our support and grassroots sweat,

Duncan Hunter deserves it.


16 posted on 08/05/2007 4:09:51 PM PDT by fetal heart beats by 21st day (Defending human life is not a federalist issue-it is the business of all humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sun
They should have given Duncan Hunter more time

Yes, I want to see more air time for him at these things.
17 posted on 08/05/2007 4:11:04 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Tim 1:4; Gal 1:6-10; 1Cor 2:2; Matthew 22:30; Mark 12:25; Luke 20:34-35; 2Thess 2:11; Jude 1:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

Hunter Bump!


18 posted on 08/05/2007 4:12:27 PM PDT by Barnacle (The Emperor has no clothes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun
While most of the GOP candidates are pro-life to one degree or another, Duncan Hunter and Brownback have the strongest commitment to LIFE!, and they didn’t even include Hunter in answering the question regarding LIFE!

Mr. Hunter is better off not being seen as the "most pro-life" candidate in this field. You say that most of the GOP candidates are pro-life "to one degree or another," but most Republican voters are only pro-life "to one degree or another." I don't believe in the life amendment as most pro-lifers are proposing it. I don't believe that justice is served by putting a rape victim or her doctor in jail because she refused to carry the child forced on her by rape. A member of my family recently went through a crisis pregnancy where one doctor gave her a greater than 50% chance of ending up dead if she didn't have an abortion. She decided to carry the child and everything turned out fine. Things could have gone the other way, and no matter what happened, the decision was not the government's business. Because so many pro-lifers hate me for taking these stands, I rarely call myself pro-life anymore.

The best that we can realistically hope to achieve in the next four years is the appointment of one or two Supreme Court justices who will vote to overturn Roe versus Wade and maybe some tightening of restrictions on late-term abortions. In my brightest dreams, the best that I can see us doing in the next four years would be banning every abortion once the baby is past 24 weeks of gestation. Any of these candidates except Rudy Giuliani can give us this victory if the American people are ready to go that far. One of the biggest impediments to going that far is people's fear that pro-life legislators won't stop.

If Mr. Hunter is going to win the presidency, he's going to need to win votes from millions of people who are not strongly opposed to legalized abortion. Some of them want more restrictions on abortion but are not ready to outlaw all abortions. Some of them wouldn't mind banning abortion but see abortion as a low priority. Some of them don't believe that abortion should be illegal but are willing to hold their noses on this issue if a candidate is strong on other issues. Being seen as a example of the extreme pro-life fringe will not help Mr. Hunter become president. Instead, he just needs to be one more solid Republican who thinks that abortion should be illegal.

Bill

19 posted on 08/05/2007 4:14:06 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WFTR

Awwww, come on.

Do you think the candidates who WERE asked about the LIFE issue at the debate today were harmed by it, and if so, why?

Rudy is the ONLY ONE that gets hurt talking about the LIFE issue, so what does that tell us?


20 posted on 08/05/2007 4:21:51 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: All; Walter; skinner; F15Eagle

Tancredo said to Steph. there are OTHER PEOPLE IN THE ROOM!

And you know, while I heard Tancredo SAY it, when I replayed it, and put it on mute, and could READ the words, Tancredo’s words were not included, so I’m wondering if ABC will leave Tancredo’s legitimate complaint out of their transcript.


21 posted on 08/05/2007 4:28:24 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sun
I didn't see the debate. For some reason, I thought that they were holding it this evening. I don't know whether anyone was hurt by their answers, but I doubt that anyone was helped.

The important thing is that Mr. Hunter be seen in ways that will make him stand out from the crowd. Being seen as just one more Republican candidate talking about abortion isn't going to help him. Posturing about abortion will help him with those five to ten percent of the voters who vote on nothing else and whom he is splitting with Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, and maybe Tom Tancredo. Even if he could win all of these voters, he wouldn't be in the "top tier."

From what I saw on Walter's video, Mr. Hunter hit the issues where he can really distinguish himself from the other candidates. He understands the military issues. He understands how to make the Iraq War a success. Those issues are the ones that will put him in the minds of average folks who make up most of the voters.

Bill

22 posted on 08/05/2007 4:47:22 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sun
Tancredo said to Steph. there are OTHER PEOPLE IN THE ROOM!

GOOD FOR HIM!!!
23 posted on 08/05/2007 4:49:15 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Tim 1:4; Gal 1:6-10; 1Cor 2:2; Matthew 22:30; Mark 12:25; Luke 20:34-35; 2Thess 2:11; Jude 1:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

B U M P


24 posted on 08/05/2007 5:00:13 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! "Read my lips....No new RINO's" !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

Wonderful job.

Thank you.


25 posted on 08/05/2007 5:21:35 PM PDT by fetal heart beats by 21st day (Defending human life is not a federalist issue-it is the business of all humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

The debate was over 18 minutes ago here in my part of the West Coast.

Actually, I thought that John McCain came across very strongly in this debate. I did not like Romney’s stand on national health care at all. Tom Tancredo was noticeably angry at being ignored for so long, and rightfully so. The two most conservative and “right on” candidates, Hunter and Tancredo, were both given the least time, as usual.


26 posted on 08/05/2007 5:23:23 PM PDT by Paperdoll ( Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WFTR

“He understands the military issues.”

Hunter understands the military issues like no one else!

And he’s pro-LIFE, and I wouldn’t back him, if he tried to hide that fact, but he does NOT!

Also, don’t take pro-lifers for granted. A Republican cannot win the presidency without us.


27 posted on 08/05/2007 5:30:24 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner; WFTR

You did it again, Walter! Great presentation! See my #26. Thank you. Ros :)


28 posted on 08/05/2007 5:33:09 PM PDT by Paperdoll ( Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner
Was Duncan Hunter in that debate?

Which one was he?

I can never understand Stephanopolis..

Was Hunter the one introduced as "Hunk O' Clutter"?

My reception isn't that good here.

29 posted on 08/05/2007 5:34:50 PM PDT by humblegunner (Word up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sun
Also, don’t take pro-lifers for granted. A Republican cannot win the presidency without us.

I'm not taking pro-lifers for granted, but I'm saying that a candidate gains no advantage from the "the most pro-life" in this field. The GOP hasn't nominated the "most pro-life" candidate in a competitive primary since 1980, and in 1980, the "most pro-life" candidate was Ronald Reagan who had governed California as a moderate on abortion. The GOP has never nominated someone who came across as a pro-life extremist. Mr. Hunter will not win by pushing the abortion issue too hard. His being a consistent pro-lifer helps him, but being the most zealous does not.

Bill

30 posted on 08/05/2007 5:41:05 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WFTR

“I’m not taking pro-lifers for granted, but I’m saying that a candidate gains no advantage from the “the most pro-life” in this field. The GOP hasn’t nominated the “most pro-life” candidate in a competitive primary since 1980, and in 1980, the “most pro-life” candidate was Ronald Reagan who had governed California as a moderate on abortion. The GOP has never nominated someone who came across as a pro-life extremist. Mr. Hunter will not win by pushing the abortion issue too hard. His being a consistent pro-lifer helps him, but being the most zealous does not.

Bill”

It appears that you don’t have the passion for the life issue as Reagan, Brownback, Hunter and I, so have already made up your mind to fit your interpretation of voters’ intent on the LIFE issue.

There is no such thing as a pro-life extremist, as all life is sacred, from conception to natural death.

Many pro-lifers were against the war (I happen to support the war), and the antiwar pro-lifers supported Bush because he is pro-LIFE.

President Reagan and Duncan Hunter are on the same page on the life issue, and Reagan said the only people who aren’t pro-life are born.

Unlike former Gov. Romney, President Reagan didn’t flip flop just before the primaries, and he regretted a decision he made while gov. on the life issue.

Anyway, you are deflecting, but I don’t think it’s on purpose. The point is that they did NOT even ask Hunter the pro-life question. They ignored him, and it would have helped him, as more pro-lifers would have knocked on doors, etc. to support him.

Polls have shown that pro-life voters will vote for a candidate if they are pro-LIFE, but pro-”choice” candidates as a rule will vote for other issues.

Being strongly pro-LIFE does not weaken Hunter’s positions on fighting the WOT, borders, speaking out against Red China, etc. - it HELPS Hunter!


31 posted on 08/05/2007 5:59:52 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: WFTR
Bill... you're interjecting logic rather than emotion.

You should rethink your post.

32 posted on 08/05/2007 6:09:31 PM PDT by nctexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

On a far more relevant note, anything Hunter say that you disagreed with?


33 posted on 08/05/2007 6:14:05 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007 (Look at all the candidates. Choose who you think is best. Choose wisely in 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ishabibble

I, too, love this guy. He’s the best that the Republican Party has to offer- a winner. He has everything. What must we do to get that point across?

DUNCAN HUNTER ‘08


34 posted on 08/05/2007 6:24:29 PM PDT by tennteacher (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sun
It appears that you don’t have the passion for the life issue as Reagan, Brownback, Hunter and I, so have already made up your mind to fit your interpretation of voters’ intent on the LIFE issue.

Let's look at some numbers. In 1992, voters had the choice of G.H.W. Bush who was opposed to legalized abortion even though he wasn't as passionate as some pro-lifers wanted, Bill Clinton who favored legalized abortion, and Ross Perot who favored legalized abortion. The combined vote of the candidates who favored legalized abortion was sixty-two percent against only thirty-eight percent who opposed legalized abortion. In 1996, the even less pro-life Bob Dole won about forty-three percent of the vote against the same two pro-abortion candidates. In 2000, the pro-life G.W. Bush won about forty-eight percent of the vote against the pro-abortion Al Gore and Ralph Nader. In the primaries, G.W. Bush was often considered too soft in his pro-life stances by the hard-core pro-lifers. In 2004, the pro-life G.W. Bush finally received more than fifty percent of the vote, but he was helped by the fact that several states had gay marriage on the state ballots to drive up conservative turnout, people still supported him as a wartime president, and John Kerry was a very weak candidate. A pro-life candidate will not have any of those advantages in 2008.

A careful examination of the facts suggests that my interpretation is correct. People are less comfortable with abortion than they've ever been, but they aren't ready for the kind of complete prohibition that hard-core pro-lifers want. I think someone with Mr. Hunter's beliefs can win, but he doesn't help himself by posturing on the issue every time the voters see him.

There is no such thing as a pro-life extremist, as all life is sacred, from conception to natural death.

I'm sorry, but this statement is just so much nonsense. Some situations can kill the mother before the baby has time to develop well enough to survive. In these situations, the question is not between life and death. The question is between one life and the other or sometimes between one death or two. Pro-life extremists are people who insist that two deaths are better than one if saving the mother depends on treatment that would kill the baby or who believe that they have the right to make the decision of which life to save. Let me make this clear. You don't have the right to decide which life will be saved, and if a woman decides to save her own life, that's none of your business.

Unlike former Gov. Romney, President Reagan didn’t flip flop just before the primaries, and he regretted a decision he made while gov. on the life issue.

Unlike President Reagan, Governor Romney acted in favor of life whenever the issue arose during his term as governor. Governor Romney's rhetoric has not been all that the pro-life movement would like over the years, but his performance in office was good. The question becomes whether we want posturing on the campaign trail or performance in office.

Anyway, you are deflecting, but I don’t think it’s on purpose. The point is that they did NOT even ask Hunter the pro-life question.

No, my point is that Mr. Hunter was not hurt by the fact that they didn't ask him the question. He doesn't need to spend more time posturing about the abortion issue.

They ignored him, and it would have helped him, as more pro-lifers would have knocked on doors, etc. to support him.

The pro-lifers who are willing to knock on doors are people who will research the candidates on their own or people who have already decided and are just watching the debate in order to see how their candidate would do. Having another chance to posture on this issue would not have gained him any volunteers. He did a great job with the questions that he received. More time would have been nice, but one more repeat of his abortion position would not have changed anything.

Polls have shown that pro-life voters will vote for a candidate if they are pro-LIFE, but pro-”choice” candidates as a rule will vote for other issues.

No one is suggesting that Mr. Hunter would get more votes by supporting legalized abortion. No one doubts that Duncan Hunter is pro-life, and he doesn't have to answer one more abortion question in one more debate to solidify his pro-life credentials. He already has as much of the hard-core pro-life vote as he's going to get. The rest of the support that he gets will consist of people who think that abortion should be illegal, and most of them would vote for someone else if Mr. Hunter weren't against legalized abortion. However, the notion that he's going to win more votes by more pro-life posturing is wrong.

Bill

35 posted on 08/05/2007 8:30:27 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nctexan

Thanks, I’m glad that someone noticed.


36 posted on 08/05/2007 8:30:54 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: WFTR

You’re making a short story long.

Let’s try logic.

Why do you think the candidates, outside of Rudy, were falling all over themselves to show that they are pro-life?


37 posted on 08/05/2007 8:38:27 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: WalterSkinner

Thanks Walter.

G O H U N T E R - 2 0 0 8


38 posted on 08/05/2007 8:50:30 PM PDT by WildcatClan (Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WFTR

I know many women who were told the same thing by their doctors, and there turned out to be nothing wrong with their babies.

Rape traumatizes women. Abortion also traumatizes women. You do not erase the memory or trauma of the rape by killing the baby.

I know a young lady who is the product of a rape. She is sweet and joyful and the love of her mother’s life.

It is good your friend did not listen to the bad advice she got. She may have joined the silently suffering mothers and fathers throughout the country who silently grieve over their mistakes.

There is nothing extreme about being prolife. Without life, there is no liberty. This country was established to defend our rights and the first unalienable right that was recognized was the right to life.


39 posted on 08/05/2007 9:05:17 PM PDT by fetal heart beats by 21st day (Defending human life is not a federalist issue-it is the business of all humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: nctexan

“Bill... you’re interjecting logic rather than emotion.
You should rethink your post.”

Lately all of the pro-”choicers” and other libs are acting as if emotion is a bad thing. Are you a lib sir/ma’am?

And speaking of LOGIC, does one have to be devoid of emotion to have logic?

Over 46 million preborn babies killed since Roe. You can bet your butt, we’re emotional.


40 posted on 08/05/2007 9:36:53 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: fetal heart beats by 21st day
It's fine for you to say that abortion and rape both traumatize a woman, and I have nothing against advocating that rape victims not have abortions. However, there's a difference between what I will and will not recommend and what should and should not be punishable under the law. I've given to crisis pregnancy centers that do everything they can to help a rape victim through her pregnancy just as they would help any other woman. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to send these rape victims to jail if they decide against carrying the baby.

I'm happy that my family member survived her pregnancy as well, but the choice was hers, not yours, not the government's. I think that getting a second opinion when the doctor says that the pregnancy is a super high risk is a great idea just as one should get a second opinion for any diagnosis. However, sometimes the second opinion will be the same as the first, and that opinion will be that carrying the baby is likely to result in the death of the mother. When that's the diagnosis, the decision belongs to the woman and her family, not to you, and not to the government. This notion that we will threaten women with jail if they don't agree to die while carrying a problem pregnancy is wrong.

Most abortions in this country have nothing to do with either rape or the life of the mother. We should focus on stopping those abortions and leave other women in these rare but difficult situations alone.

Bill

41 posted on 08/05/2007 9:55:00 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sun

He wasn’t included in most of the questions. What else can you expect from a mod that used to work for the Clintons? Questions carefully picked, commentary cut off when it goes in the “wrong” direction...

Did I miss it, or are they really refusing to discuss illegal immigration and terrorism? Terrorism was mentioned, correctly so, but only by the candidates?

Was I asleep? I thought I watched the whole thing?


42 posted on 08/05/2007 9:58:57 PM PDT by Califreak (Go Hunter!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lexinom

I was happy that at least he did get the last word.


43 posted on 08/05/2007 9:59:54 PM PDT by Califreak (Go Hunter!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sun
Why do you think the candidates, outside of Rudy, were falling all over themselves to show that they are pro-life?

Uh, because Life matters to the GOP base. Seems logical enough to me. It's amazing that some people are too smart to get it.
44 posted on 08/05/2007 10:04:36 PM PDT by Antoninus (P!ss off a leftist wacko . . . have more kids.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Califreak

“He wasn’t included in most of the questions. What else can you expect from a mod that used to work for the Clintons? Questions carefully picked, commentary cut off when it goes in the “wrong” direction...

Did I miss it, or are they really refusing to discuss illegal immigration and terrorism? Terrorism was mentioned, correctly so, but only by the candidates?

Was I asleep? I thought I watched the whole thing?”

Questions carefully picked is correct. Designed to make the Republican candidates look bad in order to make the Dems look good.

Maybe the Republicans should have more debates on FoxNews with various moderators. This is getting nuts.

I don’t remember anything about immigration or WOT by Steph., either.


45 posted on 08/05/2007 10:13:33 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

“Uh, because Life matters to the GOP base. Seems logical enough to me. It’s amazing that some people are too smart to get it.”

And pro-life is in the Republican platform.


46 posted on 08/05/2007 10:16:47 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: All

I thought this was interesting:

“As for Romney, there is no single reason to explain why he hasn’t gained more traction. However, his sole remaining claim to being a top-tier candidate rests primarily on his leads in Iowa and New Hampshire polling. But, even those leads may be less than meets the eye. As governor of Massachusetts, he has a tremendous home court advantage in New Hampshire and is the only candidate spending money on TV advertising in that state. It will be interesting to see if his lead holds once the other candidates go up on the air as well.”

excerpted from http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/2008_republican_presidential_primary


47 posted on 08/05/2007 10:33:01 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Sun
I think the candidates are trying to be pro-life because most Republicans believe that most abortions in this country should be illegal. The fact that most Republicans believe that most abortions should be illegal does not mean that most Republicans agree with the most hard-core pro-lifers on the details.

The most extreme part of the pro-life movement no longer supports exceptions, but many Republicans still agree with both the mother's life and the rape exception. Others agree with the mother's life exception but not the rape exception. I've met a few who agree with the rape exception but not the mother's life exception. Those who agree with exceptions aren't in favor of abortions in these cases, but they see these cases as situations where the criminal justice system should not be involved.

Another part of the issue is what will happen if life is defined at conception and politicians want to interpret that definition to mean that birth control pills that have any ingredient that would discourage implantation are suddenly illegal. Every Republican voter who wants to stop most of the "scrape and suck" early abortions does not want to outlaw birth control pills.

The abortion issue isn't a "short story" issue. That kind of knee-jerk approach will win a candidate cheers from a small group of zealous pro-lifers, but most people see the issue as being more involved. Candidates are trying to skate around this situation so that they can win the votes of the zealots without losing the votes of people who don't want extreme measures taken.

If we reach the debates next year and someone asks, "Are you willing to throw a woman or her doctor in jail for aborting a baby when the continued pregnancy would kill the woman?" and our candidate says "Yes," our candidate will lose the election. By demanding that a Republican candidate answer this question in that way, the hard-core pro-lifers are dooming our candidates to defeat. The right answer would be, "No, I am not willing to throw a woman or her doctor in jail in that situation. We abort millions of perfectly healthy babies whose hearts are already beating, whose brain waves are already active, and who are developing in perfectly normal pregnancies every year simply because the mother doesn't want to face the natural consequence of her choices. Those are the situations that the law should address." If the candidates would focus on these issues, we'd have a chance of passing laws that would close the clinics that turn out thousands of dead babies like a commodity product on the street corners of our big cities.

Bill

48 posted on 08/05/2007 10:37:21 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: All

Besides everything else, Duncan Hunter is the best on trade, and eloquently talked about trade in the debate.

Here’s something else I found:

“He (Hunter) said China rebates its own taxes on all of its exported goods, and then imposes taxes on American imports, thus providing about a $34 advantage for every $100 of actual value of its own products. The United States, though, does not impose import duties of that sort, nor does it rebate the taxes on our own exports.

“Republicans are the party of markets, but we’re not the party of dumb markets,” he said. “Trade agreements are business deals, and it is more important than ever that we have smart business deals. What I am proposing is not protectionism, it’s just reciprocity. And it is important because they are using the trade to develop 75-100 short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles each year and to construct a large number of submarines....That’s ominous.”’

excerpt from: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11188


49 posted on 08/05/2007 10:50:35 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: WFTR

These little ones should not be killed. They are not exceptions, they are preborn human babies:

[img]http://www.cwcobgyn.com/images/4dpics_3.jpg[/img]
ULTRASOUND OF PREBORN BABY PIX
[img]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b253/mware/18week125-1.jpg[/img]
18-week Old Fetus

We, as human beings, have no right to take life away from another human being.


50 posted on 08/05/2007 10:52:51 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson