Posted on 03/03/2012 6:02:33 PM PST by nuconvert
Mitt Romney has won the Republican caucuses in Washington state, according to a CNN projection.
With 43 percent of precincts reporting, Mitt Romney leads with 37 percent of the vote in Washington state, followed by Ron Paul and Rick Santorum with 24 percent, and Newt Gingrich with 11 percent. Go to the Tumblr page of the Washington state Republican Party for the latest results. CNN projected Romney as the state's winner at 5:49 p.m. Pacific Time
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
“you seem to be insane.”
Do you often characterize Santorum supporters as ‘insane’?
“Did you read post 90 and post 114 where I quoted that portion of the 1990 switch that you keep saying I haven’t quoted?”
You’ve yet to cite the thing in it’s entirety, including the portion that contains Santorum insisting that abortion kills an unborn child? Why?
I’m not certain you can actually type those words. Perhaps you’ll surprize me here.
See- to me if you’re going to cite something, it makes sense to cite the relevant portions of the text. You’ve cited all around it, but not it. Why is this?
“Now explain why you keep pretending that Santorum has not told us that he was pro-abortion for his entire life before he switched to run that 1990 campaign.”
I never said anything of the sort. I simply said that the only evidence we possess proves that Santorum in 1990 stated that he believed that abortion kills an unborn child.
We do not possess, nor do you possess anything written by Santorum to prove otherwise. Unless you have that evidence, all we have to go on is hearsay.
There are different evidentiary standards, and I’m asking you to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt. Santorum saying that he is X, doesn’t mean much to me without the actual statement.
I have heard people in the past claim they were prolife but upon examination were actually prolife and the inverse. Santorum says, “I’m an X”, well fine. I want to see the proof in the pudding. Right now there’s no pudding, no writing no nothing.
Just a 1990 statement where Santorum confirms that abortion kills an unborn child. That’s it.
Romneycare funds abortion just like Obamacare does. I cannot support Romney. Simply cannot. If Romney is the nominee, then I have no choice but to go with the candidate that is closest to what I believe.
And that ain’t Romney.
Would you explain what you are talking about?
Is this it? “Abortion is such a deeply wrenching issue because it poses a conflict between essential values. The unborn child’s very life is at stake; the mother’s future often hangs in the balance too, as an unwanted pregnancy can be unspeakably traumatic as well as limiting her educational, personal, and job opportunities”
You don't consider Santorum telling us himself that he was pro-abortion until 1990 "proof"?
Hard to explain idiocy, to an idiot. You camp on these threads for the sole purpose of spreading hate, you do nothing to uplift your candidate by your constant tirade of negativity and insults to Rick Santorum.
The result of all your hard work will be to put Romney on the ticket. If you are actually working to put someone in the VP slot, then I guess you have a point, otherwise not so clever.
I love Newt's style, always have, but he is currently running 4th in a three man race. Long past time to revaluate your tactic.
You make Newt supporters look bad, and I doubt he would approve your trash talk.
Maybe I would care if you weren't joined at the hip. Peas in a pod, you two.
I didn’t think that you could explain yourself, angry people are seldom coherent.
For me to call someone prolife or pro abortion, I would have to see something that they wrote from that particular time period. It’s not usually too difficult to figure out, but you cannot rely on labels. I’ve been burnt in the past by labels.
I’ve worked with folks on both sides, and it’s my experience that a great many folks who label themselves one way, especially if they are not politically active, one way while actually affirming the opposite position.
What they lack is the political consciousness to understand what the label means - oftentimes taken things at first glance.
Finally, you quote the first half of that statement. Yes, that’s what I quoted the first time I replied to you.
Glad to see I’m finally getting through
“Abortion is such a deeply wrenching issue because it poses a conflict between essential values. The unborn child’s very life is at stake;”
Finally? You mean just like the other times I posted that to you on this thread?
To: LeopoldvonRanke
This is bizarre, you are totally ignoring his own, firm, statement, “I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress,” he said..
Then you take the 1990 position letter WRITTEN FOR THAT RUN FOR CONGRESS that he wrote trying to soften his previous pro-abortion life, and you cut off the statement to leave off the part about pregnancy being a problem for women.
Here is that portion of his new campaign position for that race. “Abortion is such a deeply wrenching issue because it poses a conflict between essential values. The unborn child’s very life is at stake; the mother’s future often hangs in the balance too, as an unwanted pregnancy can be unspeakably traumatic as well as limiting her educational, personal, and job opportunities”
90 posted on Sat Mar 03 2012 22:07:29 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by ansel12
Do you mean like Rick Santorum telling us himself, in his own words, that he was pro-abortion until he switched in 1990 to run for Congress?
Rick Santorum-Quote: “I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress,” (in 1990)
Yet Romney is advocating hard to have Obamacare not fund abortion. So I don’t agree with you.
He’s advocated killing Obamacare entirely.
Look, if some of you want Obama to have another 4 years and push us past the point of no return, have at it. That’s not where I will be going with my vote.
Which is why he made the point of funding it in Romneycare?
Sorry - no sale.
He can flip flop on this all he wants, but his record is pretty clear that he supports forcing people to pay for abortion.
“This is bizarre, you are totally ignoring his own, firm, statement”
Not so. I want to see something he put on paper, something that he wrote down explaining his position. Like was done for him in 1990 where he clearly wrote his support for the unborn.
This is the exact same evidentiary standard and would provide proof for your claim that he was in fact pro choice.
Wow, it’s like you totally ignored that entire post.
I want to see something other than the label.
Labels are unreliable.
So Santorum telling you that he was pro-abortion until 1990, does not count to you?
I already explained why. It’s a label - do you have any evidence of him writing what exactly he believed at that point in time?
If you do, I’d like to see it because that would be concrete evidence in your favor and not hearsay.
Santorum tells you that he was proabortion until 1990, and you just put your fingers in your ears and go lalalala can't hear youuuu.
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.