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

Skip to comments.

An Open Letter to Rick Santorum (Vanity)
February 18, 2012 | no dems

Posted on 02/18/2012 7:27:44 AM PST by no dems

An Open Letter to Rick Santorum:

Dear Senator:

As a strong, common-sense Conservative, I have a favor to ask of you. Could you please consider not answering, off the cuff, every question thrown at you? Would you please engage your brain before putting your mouth in gear? I’m beginning to see now, how, as an incumbent, you lost your Senate seat by 18 pecentage points to the brain-dead Bob Casey. Women vote Senator; and, they vote in large numbers. Now, please consider this common-sense observation from a Conservative male:

Women have been in combat for years now. Women have used birth control for decades now. Some of your comments are so unbelievably naive. When you said that contraception was “bad for America”, I thought: “Hey Rick, if we didn’t have contraception, we’d have millions more bastard kids to support through the Welfare system than we have now.” People are going to have sex, Rick. Just because you believe it is primarily for procreation, some of us like a little intimacy with our spouse once in awhile without having 19 kids, like the Duggar family that has endorsed you.

Sorry, Rick, but, sometimes, you embarrass some of us who want to support you. And the comment, re: birth control, made by your biggest donor, Foster Friess, was over the top. He reminds me of Clayton Williams, the GOP candidate for Governor, who had the election in the bag against Ma Richards, until he made his stupid comment about women and rape.

Please Rick, you and Foster need to slow down, think, and then speak. Maybe a little more elucidation, before publication?

I wish you well.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bobcasey; claytonwilliams; duggars; embarrassment; family; fosterfriess; friess; ibtz; idiot; liberaltrollposter; lookmeimimportant; lunatic; marichards; pennsylvania; procreation; ricksantorum; santorum; whaaaaaaaa; whineyloserpost
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last
The Primary Process is starting to look better and better. We're having to deal with, and get a lot of stuff behind us before the General Election, that would hurt us in the General Election. But, on second thought, we've given Obozo tons of campaign fodder on all of our candidates; his team won't even have to do research.
1 posted on 02/18/2012 7:27:56 AM PST by no dems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: no dems

I think you have the “moderate” talking points down pat.


2 posted on 02/18/2012 7:35:28 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Can’t disagree.


3 posted on 02/18/2012 7:35:51 AM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Ann Coulter is a joke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Rick is simply stating what the Catholic Church believes. Guess that makes him unelectable.


4 posted on 02/18/2012 7:37:26 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems
Women vote Senator; and, they vote in large numbers.

Which is why Gingrich could never win.

5 posted on 02/18/2012 7:41:28 AM PST by Arkady Orinko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems

As a woman I thought the Foster Freis aspirin comment was funny. People need to lighten up and recognize a joke when one is offered.


6 posted on 02/18/2012 7:49:12 AM PST by jellybean (Bookmark http://altfreerepublic.freeforums.org/index.php for when FR is down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
Rick is simply stating what the Catholic Church believes. Guess that makes him unelectable.

It does, even among most Catholics - a population that itself is ignorant of and in disagreement with official church doctrine.

7 posted on 02/18/2012 7:49:29 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Dear Senator,

I also want to wish you well. While no Dems has a point, I think you are for the most part answering the gotcha questions brilliantly! No one on our side has yet dared to throw Rev Wright into the media’s faces. I love it.

And keep doing that pleasant little laugh, mocking their questions. I think no Dems would agree. When they ask you a gotcha, don’t slither out with no response, point out to the American people their bias like you’ve been doing. It’s brilliant. Keep it up. “you are asking me what? [chuckle] are you also going to ask President Obama about xyz?? Or is your bias showing??”. Don’t be belligerent lime newt, just pleasantly find it all so very humorous. Alinsky the alinskyers.

You are doing very well and I’m so proud. I’ve got your bumpersticker on here in Orange County CA and I hope you come speak here. Another donation coming tonight from us.

Oh, and you may have to reframe the birth control issue. Just clearly say that this whole issue is media invented to try and get you. Keep saying that.

And take vitamin d! And get enough sleep! You have to stay healthy and mentally fit. Continued success!!


8 posted on 02/18/2012 7:51:35 AM PST by Yaelle (Go Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jellybean

I agree that Foster’s comment was funny and that people need to lighten up. It’s the only thing I disagree with on this post.

THE PROBLEM IS — Foster supports a candidate who had a successful charisma by pass operation and is totally without humor - thus setting a non-humorous tone for all Santorum efforts. It was totally out of character. It’s the first sign of humor I’ve ever seen from Santorum or any Santorum supporter for that matter.


9 posted on 02/18/2012 7:51:52 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Yes, Santorum can’t win. He’s just too conservative. Guess we had better back Romney, a responsible, electable moderate in the tradition of Landon, Willkie, Dewey, Ford, Dole and McCain.


10 posted on 02/18/2012 7:52:43 AM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems
--a pat on the back for everything you said--it appears to me that now that the Republidunces have succeeded in destroying each other, The One will get about 400 electoral votes--

--every time I see one of those idiotic "birth control hurts women" statements, I'd like to scream--"so does having a litter of ten in ten years--"--just check the birth and death records of a century ago---

11 posted on 02/18/2012 7:55:22 AM PST by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the media or government says about firearms or explosives--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkady Orinko

As my cousin, a Pastor and marriage counselor confirmed to me from his 20 some years of counseling - the folks who are most bothered by the infidelity of others are those who are stuck in miserable marriages and who feel self righteously that everyone should stick it out in a miserable marriage as well.

(I also think there is some research that those same folks tend to gravitate towards sweater vest wearing men).


12 posted on 02/18/2012 7:55:22 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: no dems
Hey Rick, if we didn’t have contraception, we’d have millions more bastard kids to support through the Welfare system than we have now.

Watch yourself, that's a great liberal point in favor of abortion as well. In other words, most people are no damned good anyway, so cut them off at the pass. Far, far, from seeing each child as God's special soul and of potentially great value to the rest of us.

13 posted on 02/18/2012 7:57:41 AM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill
Yes, Santorum can’t win. He’s just too conservative. Guess we had better back Romney, a responsible, electable moderate in the tradition of Landon, Willkie, Dewey, Ford, Dole and McCain.

WTF are you talking about? This is not about conservatism. I totally reject your definition of conservatism as foolishly going into areas that is none of government business. RS is NOT that conservative. His ACU ratings are between 83 and 88, depending on where you search it out. That ain't great. He is not a great pro liberty pro Constitution candidate. Not at all.

14 posted on 02/18/2012 7:58:08 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I can tell from your tagline that you are probably a devoted Christian. And, that is extremely commendable. But, even us Believers like to have sex without having to worry about another pregnancy. If that makes me a “Moderate” then I guess I’m a Ronald Reagan-loving Moderate.


15 posted on 02/18/2012 7:59:26 AM PST by no dems (I can't back Santorum anymore. He's so frickin' out of touch with the real world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

Exactly.


16 posted on 02/18/2012 7:59:46 AM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Arkady Orinko

“Women vote Senator; and, they vote in large numbers.”

Which is why Gingrich could never win.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You are probably right. So, as my Granny used to say: WE ARE IN ONE MELL OF A HESS.


17 posted on 02/18/2012 8:02:25 AM PST by no dems (I can't back Santorum anymore. He's so frickin' out of touch with the real world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Wow, a whole new take on argument. It needs a name—how about ad hominem?


18 posted on 02/18/2012 8:02:25 AM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
THE PROBLEM IS — Foster supports a candidate who had a successful charisma by pass operation and is totally without humor - thus setting a non-humorous tone for all Santorum efforts. It was totally out of character. It’s the first sign of humor I’ve ever seen from Santorum or any Santorum supporter for that matter.

Well, at least Romney makes attempts at humor, such as when he suggested that "spacious skies" in the song "America the Beautiful" is a reference to NASA and the US space program.

19 posted on 02/18/2012 8:02:48 AM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: no dems
If that makes me a “Moderate” then I guess I’m a Ronald Reagan-loving Moderate.

John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Mitt Romney all make the same claim.
20 posted on 02/18/2012 8:02:58 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

21 posted on 02/18/2012 8:02:58 AM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
RS is NOT that conservative. His ACU ratings are between 83 and 88, depending on where you search it out. That ain't great. He is not a great pro liberty pro Constitution candidate. Not at all.

OK, so we should support Romney who, after all, is "severely conservative."

22 posted on 02/18/2012 8:05:22 AM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

No, not accurate. May tick you off, but that’s not the definition .


23 posted on 02/18/2012 8:06:26 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

24 posted on 02/18/2012 8:06:54 AM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill
Yes, Santorum can’t win. He’s just too conservative.

You're almost right. He's too socially conservative. We're a long way from the 1950's.

On the fiscal front, no worries .... Santorum would never be confused with a conservative.

25 posted on 02/18/2012 8:07:17 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
It does, even among most Catholics - a population that itself is ignorant of and in disagreement with official church doctrine.

While I most unfortunately must agree with your statement in regards to the general voting public, I am absolutely convinced that 0bama has lost the Catholic majority in 2012. In 2012, most Catholics will help kick his skinny butt out of the Oval Office and back to Chicago. Time will tell who's right, but my money is on Cardinal-elect Dolan and his fellow Bishops: "We Cannot - We Will Not Comply With This Unjust Law”

Cardinal-elect Dolan - What's the chance of the Bishops and the USCCB reconciling with 0bamacare?

Updated: *167* Bishops (More Than 90% of Dioceses) Have Spoken Out Against Obama/HHS Mandate

26 posted on 02/18/2012 8:08:00 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jellybean; All

As a woman I thought the Foster Freis aspirin comment was funny. People need to lighten up and recognize a joke when one is offered.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A lot of ignorant, Texas Rednecks thought it was funny when Clayton Williams (GOP Gubernatiorial candidate) said: “Rape is like rainy weather. There’s nothing you can do about it, so just lay back and enjoy it.” Those two sentences gave us, and this nation, Ann Richards for more years than we needed.

I thought it showed him to be a crass, old man who might be filthy rich but extremely ignorant. I’m all for “lightening up” but dummying-down is not needed when this nation is going to hell in a hand basket.


27 posted on 02/18/2012 8:08:16 AM PST by no dems (I can't back Santorum anymore. He's so frickin' out of touch with the real world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

No, I cannot stand Mitt. There is still someone in the race who has a helluva lot more total votes so far than RS who just got two big cash infusions back into his campaign in the last 36 hours.

HOWEVER, thats not the point. Your notion that someone who yells about a very few conservative issues is overall a great conservative is simply extremely flawed. AND, the notion that not supporting Santorum is akin to supporting Dole, McCain, etc, is just plain, well, not very intelligent extrapilation.


28 posted on 02/18/2012 8:08:29 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Arkady Orinko

Well this letter is not to Gingrich it is to Rambling Rick Santorum. He is giving the dems daily talking points. Here is the thing about Rick. He is not very well informed on many topics so he attempts to be thoughtful in his response, doesn’t say what he thinks and then just keeps talking. Sadly, if he should be the nominee, the TelePrompTer pres will kill him, the media will eat him and the voters will spit him out.


29 posted on 02/18/2012 8:09:02 AM PST by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

Oh, I agree that Obama could well be toast with Catholics. You are right.

What I reject is the notion that Santorum will necessarily gain Catholics because he believes it is appropriate to make Catholic beliefs part of his presidential campaign.


30 posted on 02/18/2012 8:10:56 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: no dems

“Hey Rick, if we didn’t have contraception, we’d have millions more bastard kids to support through the Welfare system than we have now.”

Would we now? When we didn’t have contraception, long before we had abortion, we had conventions. Call it “if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.” The stigma of unwed motherhood worked a whole lot better than whatever we’re using now, since unwed-mother pregnancies and abortions in all economic classes have risen exponentially since the bad old days. The more we failsafe promiscuity, the greater debt we’ll carry—in more than one sense.


31 posted on 02/18/2012 8:11:08 AM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems

I’m more concerned about the comment that Foster Friess made in an interview that indicated they are open to a Santorum/ Romney or Romney /Santorum ticket. Friess, like Santorum, endorsed Romney in 2008.

GOP insiders in PA. have confirmed that the in order to prevent a brokered convention, there is an establisment deal to combine santorum and Romney delegates. The only thing being worked out in the primaries is who will be on the top of the ticket.

This comes from a well connected personal friend of mine in PA. Her family has always been extremely active in GOP politics, and have roots going back to William Penn. I’ve known her for 40 years, so I consider her reliable. She was going to vote for Romney, and is one of many Pennsylvanians who does not like Santorum. She is now voting for Newt, because she will not support any ticket with Santorum on it.

Since many of us have sought a Not Romney candidate,it would be wise to keep our eyes and ears open to how this develops.

I am unapologetically a Newt supporter, but I wouldn’t vote for him with Romney on the ticket, and I don’t believe he would make that deal.


32 posted on 02/18/2012 8:11:59 AM PST by conservativejoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia

“We’re a long way from the 1950’s. “
Indeed. It’s a pity that civilization has fallen that far.


33 posted on 02/18/2012 8:12:22 AM PST by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

I agree with you that stigmas being reduced is a huge problem. I disagree it’s any legitimate part of a campaign when the very liberty guaranteed by our Constitution is under assault and statements like this will make many folks confuse which party is really pro liberty.


34 posted on 02/18/2012 8:12:40 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

35 posted on 02/18/2012 8:13:07 AM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Arkady Orinko

I’ve always found that the biggest benefactors of birth control and legal abortion have been predatory males. the biggest losers, other than the babies, have been the women, themselves, who have become nothing but sex toys to those males.

For less assertive women, the most convincing refusal to have no-commitment sex was fear of having illegitimate babies.

The irony is that this has happened in spite of, or maybe because of, the feminist movement.


36 posted on 02/18/2012 8:14:55 AM PST by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: no dems

A nation that wants its women to be warriors is a shameful nation. Men who love women don’t want them to be warriors.

A nation that wants its progeny to be small is a shameful nation. Men who advocate consequence-free sex are harmful to society. Men who love women don’t want them to be sex toys.

You are either a jackass or a boy who has no idea what a man is.


37 posted on 02/18/2012 8:15:04 AM PST by Notwithstanding (1998 ACU ratings: Newt=100%, Paul=88%, Santorum=84% [the last year all were in Congress])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CainConservative

Second cartoon is hilarious. Problem is, I don’t want to ride a tricycle with a geeky flag into the general election, and that cartoon rendering of RS is all too appropriate to me.


38 posted on 02/18/2012 8:19:57 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
There is still someone in the race who has a helluva lot more total votes so far than RS

No, I can't support Ron Paul. I agree with him on a lot of issues, but not foreign policy.

39 posted on 02/18/2012 8:20:46 AM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Thank goodness you posted this. Rick called me just this morning to see if I knew how he could get ahold of you for your insight and campaign advice. I told him you post on here sometimes and that you were probably waaaay to busy for a private consult. This is PERFECT. Again, good job. I think you may have changed the course of the whole race. Wow! Neat huh?


40 posted on 02/18/2012 8:21:44 AM PST by GulfBreeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Conservatives are so stupid.

It’s so easy to get them to turn on each other.

Libs always circle the wagons - especially on issues they consider important.

But you conservatives will argue over things that don’t even matter.

Why don’t you morons go pay your taxes? There’s going to be a lot more of them after the libs win the election this Nov. :)


41 posted on 02/18/2012 8:21:59 AM PST by Tzimisce (Never forget that the American Revolution began when the British tried to disarm the colonists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GenXteacher
“We’re a long way from the 1950’s.

Indeed. It’s a pity that civilization has fallen that far.

So you really miss segregation and the little woman at home barefoot and pregnant?

Be careful what you long for, friend.

42 posted on 02/18/2012 8:25:49 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

“[T]he folks who are most bothered by the infidelity of others are those who are stuck in miserable marriages and who feel self righteously that everyone should stick it out in a miserable marriage as well.”

Are you saying Rick Santorum is NOT one of “these folks”? Even if you’re not making this connection, “the folks who” is sufficient for proving both cases of ad hominem.

“The connection between the abusive and the circumstantial varieties of argumentum ad hominem is not difficult to see. The circumstatial variety may even be regarded as a special case of the abusive. The first use of the circumstantial charges people who dispute your conclusion with inconsistency, either among their beliefs or between their preaching and their practice, which may be regarded as a kind of reproach or abuse. The second use of the circumstantial charges one’s adversaries with being so prejudiced that their alleged reasons are mere rationalizations of conclusions dictated by self-interest. And that is certainly to abuse them . . . sometimes called “poisoning the well.”

Irving M. Copi, Introduction to Logic, 1986.


43 posted on 02/18/2012 8:26:24 AM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

He’s not the one who is still ahead of RS in raw vote.


44 posted on 02/18/2012 8:27:48 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: no dems
And the comment, re: birth control, made by your biggest donor, Foster Friess, was over the top.

I cannot believe how so many fall for that silliness -- not the aspirin comment -- the reaction to mild humor from years ago. It was a polite way of advising a woman that if she is worried about getting pregnant then do not have sex. Catholic women had to use St. Joseph aspirin.

Nowadays of course we have to be "cool" like Bill Clinton telling women his method for them to avoid getting pregnant -- I guess I just an old fuddy-duddy.

What's next?

Headline: "Take my wife... please!" Not funny, Mr. President!
Outrageous Insult to All Women!
The House impeaches President. "Off him!" demand NOW.

45 posted on 02/18/2012 8:29:17 AM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daveinyork

“Men tend to take abortion lightly; they regard it as one of the numerous hazards imposed on women by malignant nature, but fail to realise fully the values involved. The woman who has recourse to abortion is disowning feminine values, her values, and at the same time is in most radical fashion running counter to the ethics established by men. Her whole moral universe is being disrupted....[H]ow could they fail to feel an inner mistrust of the presumptuous principles that men publicly proclaim and secretly disregard? They learn to believe no longer in what men say when they exalt woman or when they exalt man; the one thing they are sure of is this rifled and bleeding womb, these shreds of crimson life, this child that is not there.” - Simone de Beauvoir, feminist leader and advocate of legalized abortion, in The Second Sex, 1952


46 posted on 02/18/2012 8:30:01 AM PST by Notwithstanding (1998 ACU ratings: Newt=100%, Paul=88%, Santorum=84% [the last year all were in Congress])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

You totally missed the use of illustrative analogy and you also read abuse into a potential observation that surely does not rise to the level of abuse.

You also disregarded my “evidence” - which while was somewhat anecdotal, does speak to a truth that can be and has been backed up by more scientific research.

And then there’s the notion that the definition you used for Ad Hominem is the accepted definition in today’s parlance. I do not.

Oh for 4.


47 posted on 02/18/2012 8:32:04 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Daveinyork
I’ve always found that the biggest benefactors of birth control and legal abortion have been predatory males.

The irony is that this has happened in spite of, or maybe because of, the feminist movement.

Ding. Ding. Ding. Hammer ... meet nail. And this was all FORETOLD IN 1968!

Four Prophecies

In Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI made four rather general "prophecies" about what would happen if the Church's teaching on contraception were ignored ...

1) Infidelity and moral decline ...

2) Lost Respect for Women ...

3) Abuse of Power ...

4) Unlimited Dominion ...

"Whoever has ears ought to hear ... they hear but do not listen or understand."

48 posted on 02/18/2012 8:32:04 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Daveinyork

“The freedom that women were supposed to have found in the Sixties largely boiled down to easy contraception and abortion; things to make life easier for men, in fact.”

Julie Burchill, British feminist and abortion advocate, in Damaged Goods, 1986


49 posted on 02/18/2012 8:33:25 AM PST by Notwithstanding (1998 ACU ratings: Newt=100%, Paul=88%, Santorum=84% [the last year all were in Congress])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: no dems
And the comment, re: birth control, made by your biggest donor, Foster Friess, was over the top.

Good Lord! It was an old cornball joke, so clean Bob Hope could have told it a ladies' tea party.

We have become a nation of English countesses, fainting from the vapors at any hint of frivolity.

50 posted on 02/18/2012 8:34:28 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 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