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

To: skeeter

Gotta love some of that foreign reporting. Where else can you get the straight up facts about what’s going on here without baked-in bias?

Someone on here specifically said their caucus went for Santorum because they agreed he was the best candidate to speak about issues like the contraception and gay marriage stuff that happened this week.

I firmly believe the Obama administration is carrying out a specific plan with this and the timing of it. Obama is the campaigner-in-chief. They don’t make any move that isn’t aimed at getting him reelected. This might be a gamble, but their whole reelection campaign is a gamble no matter what they do. Dick Morris just said Obama is doing this to try to make BIRTH CONTROL the issue this year, as opposed to abortion, because more women would be opposed to bans on birth control than on abortion.


17 posted on 02/09/2012 8:51:30 PM PST by JediJones (Newt-er Romney in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: JediJones

As much as the New York Times disgusts me, tonights story was spot on. They said the Catholic Bishops knew well in advance what the Obama Administration was up to. They were quietly planning behind the scenes to get them if they pulled such a stunt. Well the Obamaites picked a fight they can never win, and the NYT said the rapid response by a united front of so many Catholic bishops and cardinals across the land was their “Pearl Harbor” on the Obama Administration.


19 posted on 02/09/2012 10:54:17 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo (Santorum is worth a good second look, my friends. Why is it the media and White House hate him so?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

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