Posted on 02/05/2010 2:57:58 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican
You are relying on the claims on one writer for the LV SUN, who states he has a written letter from Lowden. I also question you why you suggested she’s catering to Mormons or that she was a Mormon herself, when her campaign page would have clearly told you she is not.
BTW, “for the mother’s health” is the biggest cop out of all, especially in the third trimester. CESARIAN is the answer.
I’m more worried about the Constitution and the survival of this country than I am about abortion at this time. If I can find a strong fiscal conservative and is a strict constructionist I’m happy.
should have been... that is a...
If it means anything, the Ron Paul fans hate her. When Sue Lowden was chair of the NV GOP, she would fight to prevent Paultards from gaining influence in the state party.
Saul Anuzis is a big Romney supporter. Chuck Heath, Sarah Palin’s father, attended a fundraiser for Danny T. Wouldn’t it be a show if Romney came out and campaigned for Lowden and Palin campaigned for Danny T?
I like Sharron Angle; in fact, I contributed to her campaign in 2006 when she almost beat Dean Heller in the primary. But her reaction to her narrow loss was unsportsmanlike and bizarre—she even sued trying to get a new election—and she then proceded to lose another election. I hate to say it, but I don’t think that she could win a statewide election.
As for Lowden, I think she has as good a chance as Tarkanian of winning the primary. If Krolicki runs all bets as off, but I think that at this point the safest move for Krolicki is to run for reelection as Lt. Gov. and then running for the Senate in 2012 (when Ensign will either retire or be very vulnerable due to his adultery and extortion scandal.
This November, among with every other Representative.
While I am pro-life with no exceptions (and believe that rape and incest exceptions are obscene—why should the baby be killed for the sins of the father?), I recognize that many pro-lifers allow for exceptions in cases of rape and incest (in fact, that’s George W. Bush’s position).
Well, no skin off my nose one way or another... I endorsed Brian Krolicki. He has more reason to take out that scum Reid than any other figure in the state of Nevada.
If he does not run, Sue Lowden has the next best chance. She has raised much more money than Danny the wannabe. He is about out of cash.
[It looks like Sue Lowden may be a little more than a Mitt Romney in a skirt who’s really pro-choice on abortion. ]
The odds that Sue Lowden will be a pro-choice deciding factor on any issue regarding abortion is nil. GWBush was in for six years with the wind at his back and nothing happened. But if you want to debate the number of angels on the head of a pin, go for it.
I like Angle but I don’t think she’s a very strong choice to beat Reid after losing 2 straight GOP primaries (I was rooting for her both times).
Yes that and her own words which you posted on this thread, nowhere does she specify the exceptions to murder the unborn which she apparently supports, why is she trying to hide the fact that she still does support the choice of abortion in certain circumstances. You would think a true conversion from being at one time pro-choice to pro-life would bring her to the awakening that all innocent life is precious.
However political expediency would have her share the abortion views of a large percentage of the population she's trying to win over, Mormons. Her views reflect that of the Mormon Church, NOT the Catholic church which she erroneously claims her abortion view is consistent with, does she not know the Catholic church's position on abortion? And the article claims in the past she donated to Reid's campaign, what's up with that? Do we really need another Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the Senate?
Tarkanian on abortion.......
Sounds like you agree more with Tark than Lowden on this issue.
I do. I also agree with his official position on abortion more than I do with George W. Bush’s position on abortion, but that does not mean that (i) George W. Bush is not pro-life enough for me to support, much less that I would have supported Tarkanian over President Bush in 2004.
Why go with pro-life lite when you can go with pro-life concentrate when polls currently show that either one can beat Reid?
First of all, the George W. Bush position is not “pro-life lite”; it’s not my 100% pro-life position, but I’m not going to toss aside a pro-life candidate that is superior on other issues (such as the right to bear arms) than the other candidate, and with far better experience, just because she gets an A- instead of an A+ on abortion.
Second, I’ve seen too many elections that seemed like sure things slip away, especially from candidates without experience winning tough races. And while Reid may be unable to recover and win the election, you never know whether the RATs will pull a Torricelli and bring in a different candidate (they already dumped Dodd in CT), and against a different Democrat (such as Titus or Berkley) it could be a far tougher election for us.
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.