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

Skip to comments.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE 'PRO-LIFE'?
hillary clinton, Hannity & Colmes, YouTube ^ | 4.19.07 | Mia T

Posted on 04/19/2007 11:04:50 AM PDT by Mia T

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE 'PRO-LIFE'?


by Mia T, 4.18.07

 

HILLARY TAKES VILLAGE: teen abortion / no parent notification (YouTube)



From the Senate: Statement on Supreme Court's Gonzales v. Carhart Decision Washington, DC --

4/18/2007

"This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman's right to choose and recognized the importance of women's health. Today's decision blatantly defies the Court's recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."

HILLARY CLINTON ON SCOTUS DECISION

HANNITY: Partial birth?

GIULIANI: I think that's going to be upheld. I think it should be. as long as there's provision for the life of the mother then that's something that should be done.

HANNITY: There's a misconception that you support a partial birth abortion.

GIULIANI: If it doesn't have provision for the mother I wouldn't support the legislation. If it has provision for the life of the mother I would support....

GIULIANI: I think the appointment of judges that I would make would be very similar to if not exactly the same as the last two judges that were appointed. Chief Justice Roberts is somebody I work with, somebody I admire. Justice Alito, someone I knew when he was US attorney, also admire. If I had been president over the last four years, I can't think of any-- that I'd do anything different with that. I guess the key is and I appointed over 100 judges when I was the mayor so it's something I take very, very seriously. I would appoint judges that interpreted the constitution rather than invented it. Understood the difference of being a judge and a legislator. And having argued a case before the Supreme Court, having argued in many, many courts is something I would take very seriously.

HANNITY: So you would look for a Scalia, Roberts, Alito.

GIULIANI: Scalia is another former colleague of mine and somebody I consider to be a great judge. You are never going to get somebody exactly the same. I don't think you have a litmus test. But I do think you have a general philosophical approach that you want from a justice. I think a strict construction would be probably the way I describe it.

Giuliani on Hannity: VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT

 

 

COMMENT:

Premise: The only thing electorally each of us controls is our own vote.
Corollary: Each of us is responsible for the consequences of our own vote.

If we take the primary and the general election separately, that helps to define the problem.

IMO, we are faced, in the primary with selecting someone who will successfully prosecute the war, someone who will successfully protect and defend the Constitution. I suspect no one will disagree with this.

But we must also select someone who can win, for reasons that are obvious to me, but not, apparently, to some in this forum.

Anyone who demonstrates to me he can satisfy all of the above gets my attention, and the one who satisfies it best will get my support.

Notice that I do not mention ideological purity. I don't even mention ideology. Lincoln understood that sometimes you must go outside the system to save the system, that Lady Liberty cannot lift herself up by her own bootstraps.

So in step one, the primary, if you (or I) vote for and help nominate a sure loser in the name of ideological purity or for whatever reason, then yes, you are (or I am) helping to elect hillary clinton or whichever D is nominated.

In the general, if it's hillary vs. Rudy, say, and you don't vote, or vote 3rd party, then you are helping to elect hillary clinton. To think that you have any other options in this de facto 2-party system of ours is self-delusion.

And if you help to elect hillary clinton, you must bear the responsibility for all the deaths of all the children, unborn, living, and not yet even imagined that will flow from that election.

Those are the facts. You may not like them. They may disturb your idea of 'pro-life' as viewed through the narrow lens of abortion.

Dilemmas are tough. Life is full of them. Cognitive dissonance is not comfortable and many here, (and most if not all of us some time or other), find comfort in rationalizing dilemmas away.

But the problem is still there; you are no closer to the real solution. To the contrary. You are fast approaching real disaster. I sincerely hope you see it before it is too late.


POSTSCRIPT

MORALITY: Nothing less than morality undergirds my argument. What I am disputing are not your moral underpinnings--I admire them-- but rather your failure to acknowledge that your solution is no less (and I would argue, far more) immoral than the alternative.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE: No insult intended. Dilemmas cause cognitive dissonance. No option is wholly satisfactory. I understand why you don't want to vote for someone who is pro-choice. But there is a dilemma: Your solution, to vote 3rd party or sit home, ultimately helps to elect someone who is by your very own criteria far worse than Rudy.

They may disturb your idea of 'pro-life' as viewed through the narrow lens of abortion.

This statement is not meant as an insult. Being 'pro-life' means so much more than simply being against abortion. When we fail to acknowledge that fact, we do dangerous, irrational, ultimately self-destructive things like helping to elect hillary clinton.


"The power of the harasser, the abuser, the rapist depends above all on the silence of women." (Ursula K. LeGuin)



VOTE SMART: A WARNING TO ALL WOMEN ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON

by Mia T, 3.11.07
A RESPONSE TO 'VOTE DIFFERENT'
(A Mashup of Obama-Apple 1984 Ad Mashup)

YouTube Views for VOTE SMART: 320,931
PLEASE FReep

YouTube (First Month) Honors for
VOTE SMART:
#6 - Most Viewed - News & Politics - All
#6 - Most Viewed - News & Politics - English
#33 - Top Rated - News & Politics - All
#30 - Top Rated - News & Politics - English
#7 - Most Discussed - News & Politics - All
#6 - Most Discussed - News & Politics - English
#7 - Top Favorites - News & Politics - All
#7 - Top Favorites - News & Politics - English



 

 




COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

 



TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: abortionist; bilgewater
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-374 next last
To: Gracey
I agree with you that Rudy is not perfect, but neither is Fred Thompson, who I like a lot

Fred is a lot more conservative than Rudy. He's from the center of the party, and that is a position where he can hold the party together.

We can survive Giuliani, we cannot survive HILLARY.

I'm not so sure we can survive either, given Rudy's authoritarian tendencies and his willingness to disregard the law when it suits him.

51 posted on 04/19/2007 2:04:23 PM PDT by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter 08/But Fred would also be great)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

This is a joke question, right?


52 posted on 04/19/2007 2:07:37 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
“....Congratulations on serving the liberal agenda. When I read crap like you posted, I suspect you claim to be a Rudyfile but are in fact a Rodham-rodent agitprop....”

Congratulations on your making my Ignore List with a few other namecallers who cannot debate the issues but resort to cheap shots.

53 posted on 04/19/2007 2:07:54 PM PDT by KATIE-O ( Rudy Giuliani '08 - Restoring Optimism For The Republican Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Spiff; Mia T

To the FReepers in attendance and the millions watching around the world on Pay Per View…Ladies and Gentleman...

LLLLLLLets Get Ready to RRRumblllllllle!!!!

“LET'S GET READY TO RUMBLE!"® is a registered Trademark of Michael Buffer, all rights reserved.

1,500,000,000 rounds of posts, arguments, insults, cheesy graphics, name calling, and ad hominem personal attacks that pass as debate for the FUTURE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!

"Introducing first, to my right, fighting out of the red corner, wearing their Sunday best with a gold crucifix...weighing in at 810 and 1/4 pounds...the social conservatives, the religious right, the champions of family values...from the Southern States...The Evangelicals!" (wild applause)

"And in the blue corner, wearing an off the rack suit, Goldwater ’64 lapel pin and a belt 2 sizes too small...weighing in at 141 pounds soaking wet...the fiscal conservatives, the last champions of limited government...from the Western States...The Libertarians!" (wild applause)

Chapter 1: Live From the Reagan Building

54 posted on 04/19/2007 2:09:26 PM PDT by Eric Blair 2084 (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shouldn't be a federal agency...it should be a convenience store.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

You obviously took a long time to post this, and it needs to be aired. Thank you.


55 posted on 04/19/2007 2:14:55 PM PDT by Eric Blair 2084 (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shouldn't be a federal agency...it should be a convenience store.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084

Uh...no.

The dispute is not between “evangelicals” and “libertarians.”

The people supporting Giuliani are not libertarians. Giuliani is pretty much the polar opposite of a liberatarian.


56 posted on 04/19/2007 2:21:56 PM PDT by B Knotts (Anybody but Guliani!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Why is it you cannot see how similar Rudy is to the Rodham-rodent?

Because he isn't.

Do you seriously believe that if HRC had followed David Dinkens as mayor of NY in 1993, that all of the crime and pathology that characterized NY in the 70s and 80s would not have gotten worse, instead of better?

Does HRC believe criminals are at fault for their crimes, and should be punished? Does HRC believe welfare recipients do not have a right to the money and should be made to work? Does HRC believe blasphemy should not be paid for with public money? Does HRC believe pornography and prostitution laws should be vigorously enforced, and that families and children should be protected from both?

Would HRC have ordered Arafat to be confined to his hotel in NYC, or would she have welcomed Yassir and Suha to Gracie Mansion? Would HRC have told the Saudi price to shove ten million dollares up his toches, or would she have kissed him there?

You people who think Rudy and Hillary are the same are delusional.

57 posted on 04/19/2007 2:23:23 PM PDT by Jim Noble (But that's why they play the games)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

bump


58 posted on 04/19/2007 2:23:24 PM PDT by Wolverine (A Concerned Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld; Spiff

First of all, let me just say that the idea that human beings are even asking for the right to kill their own children is baffling.

Why are we even having this debate? Not even Rats (and I mean real rats not Democrats) would do this to their own unborn offspring.

I was reading the liberal NE newspapers today talking about the SCOTUS decision and some of them saw fit to place pictures of what looked like Bible thumpers hunched over in prayer on the sidewalk for dramatic effect.(tell me why, or I will) I don’t care if you believe in Jesus, Muhammed, Moses, Vishnu, Buddha, Mark Messier or any other God or deity.

The idea of sticking a sharp object into a human beings head to deliberately kill them is reprehensible and inhuman. You don’t need to be born again (and I don’t need to be since my mother got it right the first time) to know that. It’s immoral, inhumane and disgusting.

What the hell was I talking about? I forgot the whole topic of the thread? Oh yeah, Rudy. I do have a problem with somebody who ever at any time approved of Gubmint sanctioning of killing viable human beings.

I’m going to go watch the South Park episode I TiVo’d last night. I’ll be back in 20 minutes to hear everyone.


59 posted on 04/19/2007 2:26:29 PM PDT by Eric Blair 2084 (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shouldn't be a federal agency...it should be a convenience store.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Like I said in a previous post. Her and Registered have really sunk in credibility.


60 posted on 04/19/2007 2:26:44 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ben Franklin, we tried but we couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone; Mia T
Thanks for the ping

& waving hello Mia T (:
61 posted on 04/19/2007 2:26:55 PM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MACVSOG68
I notice from the 30 plus posts here so far, that you are getting little more than the usual inanities I see regularly aimed at anyone who believes that Hillary is infinitely worse than any Republican candidate.

Perhaps you should re-read the mission statement of the website.

It is adamantly against abortion, and so are most of its members.

The "inanities" we are posting is the God-honest truth. Rudy is pro-abortion, all the cute little graphics that Mia T posts will not change this irrefutable fact.

62 posted on 04/19/2007 2:29:57 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ben Franklin, we tried but we couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Gop1040
The same old “usual suspects” who tried to debunk your argument went down on flames

Give me a break. The poster doesn't have a leg to stand on and her argument is flat-out wrong.

You guys pushing for Rudy on a CONSERVATIVE website ought to be ashamed of yourselves. If I owned this site I'd zot all your asses.

63 posted on 04/19/2007 2:35:08 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ben Franklin, we tried but we couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
My positions aren’t etched in stone. That would be foolish.

Tell that to God. He put his positions into stone. What is good and right today will be good and right tomorrow.

Conditions change.

Typically heard out of a 'progressives' mouth when talking about why we need Homosexual marriage after thousands of years of Marriage being Man and Woman! Typically heard out of a progressives mouth when talking about idiotic Sexual Harassment and Gun Control Laws! Typically heard out of a 'progressives' mouth when talking about hate crimes.

The idea is to win so that the defective and dangerous clintons do not retake the White House, not that any particular R becomes president.

In winning at all cost we become the Clintons.

We should field the strongest R. To do any less would be irresponsible.

So if we could get John Skarry, The Goreacle, or Bubba himself to run as a R, and they had the best chance of beating Hillary you would vote for them?

64 posted on 04/19/2007 2:39:53 PM PDT by N3WBI3 (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
'08 Candidates: Consideration
ABC News/Washington Post poll

--------Definitely would NOT support--------

  54%    47%    45%     40%     36%    35%

Romney McCain Clinton Giuliani Obama Edwards

--------------------------------------------
http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/1036a4Election.pdf

Clinton is one of the weakest Democrat candidates to come along in recent memory. Why would we increase her chances of success by nominating an equally-weak candidate like Romney, McCain, or Giuliani?

65 posted on 04/19/2007 2:39:54 PM PDT by Gelato (... a liberal is a liberal is a liberal ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084; Mia T; doug from upland
Insane, even the thought of butchering a in situ infant.

And Mia T, I appreciate your work in keeping the FR world updated on Her Nastiness, but I won't vote for a pro-abort just to deny her getting the job of POTUS.

I even go so far as to remind hardcore lefties where the profits from Mena and other "off budget" funds went to.

Sometimes other FReepers will say (to the effect) of "We're gonna get an abortionist, one way or the other, so go with the one who will be easiest on your wallet".

Wrong

66 posted on 04/19/2007 2:48:52 PM PDT by investigateworld (Abortion stops a beating heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

If we don’t win, we will HAVE the clintons.


67 posted on 04/19/2007 2:54:35 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
So your choice is, Win By becoming the clintons or lose to the cintons. Sorry I avoid lose lose situations Expect me to back someone who would not say “most of my positions line up with hers (Hillary)”.
68 posted on 04/19/2007 3:03:02 PM PDT by N3WBI3 (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld

Thanks for the expression of appreciation. :)

I don’t want to see any of our children—the living, the unborn, the not yet even imagined— ‘butchered’. But surely you understand that one will ‘butcher’ them more efficiently than hillary clinton.

To be clear, to avoid voting for Rudy, (who will appoint strict constructionist judges and prosecute the war with all he has-what more can a president functionally do?), you will, in fact, be placing your de facto vote for hillary clinton, inept, corrupt and seditious, who WILL SURELY NOT ONLY APPOINT PRO-ABORTION JUDGES, SHE WILL MAKE SURE ABORTION IS MORE READILY AVAILABLE THAN IT IS NOW. And that doesn’t even begin to explore all the other ways she will put our children’s lives in peril.

If this isn’t immoral, irrational and self-destructive, I don’t know what is.


69 posted on 04/19/2007 3:11:24 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Their positions are very similar, their motives may be very different however.


70 posted on 04/19/2007 3:24:09 PM PDT by MHGinTN (You've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

Isn’t that remark you all have been attributing to Rudy supposed to have been referencing MR. clinton?

Nothing reflects a president’s philosophy more than the justices he will appoint. Contrast Rudy Giuliani’s statements about Roberts and Alito with hillary clinton’s. (see above.) Nothing more need be said.

Hatred of Giuliani and years of looking at the issue of ‘life’ through the narrow lens of abortion can and has warped reality for some here.

Be careful. You can easily wind up with your worst nightmare.


71 posted on 04/19/2007 3:26:34 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld
Should read: But surely you understand that no one will ‘butcher’ them more efficiently than hillary clinton.
72 posted on 04/19/2007 3:31:32 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

Another point: You really have only 2 choices in this de facto 2-party system of ours, R or D. If you vote 3rd party (or sit it out), you will be helping to elect the D.


73 posted on 04/19/2007 3:34:42 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
If this isn’t immoral, irrational and self-destructive, I don’t know what is. Moi?

Sorry m'am, but Rudy's track record as to appointing judges etc, shows a 85%+/- in favor of "D" party members.

Then we add in his 'open borders' and anti Second Amendment attitudes ....

I can over look his draft dodging, hell we were all scared kids in those days, some found their manhood, other choose to act manly via chasing ladies (Little shot at Newt there too).

If this is the best the Republicans can do, then we (IMHO) deserve to lose.

Cold blooded surely, but if the Party has moved that far left, then I'm gone.

74 posted on 04/19/2007 3:35:18 PM PDT by investigateworld (Abortion stops a beating heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Excellent. bump.


75 posted on 04/19/2007 3:37:13 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Funny there were a ton of names on the 2004 Ballot


76 posted on 04/19/2007 3:58:13 PM PDT by N3WBI3 (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

Illusions. Mirages.


77 posted on 04/19/2007 4:00:00 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Perhaps you should re-read the mission statement of the website.

Oh, I don't need to re-read it. I have seen it posted here a hundred times by all those who fear reasoned debate and simply want all but the social right to disappear, much like what happens on DU.

It is adamantly against abortion, and so are most of its members.

I don't think I or anyone else on the side of reason has said otherwise.

The "inanities" we are posting is the God-honest truth. Rudy is pro-abortion, all the cute little graphics that Mia T posts will not change this irrefutable fact.

Oh, I know. My statements as well as those of the author are not for you. They are for the hundreds and thousands of lurkers who are afraid to challenge the far right and its agenda of political suicide.

Nor did I mention Rudy. I simply posited that any of the Republican candidates would be infinitely better for this Nation than would Hillary...and explained why.

For what it's worth, few Americans believe that any of the myriad of abortion related issues comes close to the real challenges facing the Country. It's unfortunate that those here who continually claim to be conservatives don't start acting conservative.

Insults and threats of banning are hardly conservative tactics.

78 posted on 04/19/2007 4:00:42 PM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
“If I owned this site I’d zot all your asses.”

You really have a knack for words. Conservatives come in may different stripes. Social conservatives, economic conservatives, and a combination of both. I happen to be of the third kind. You don’t define me, I define myself on how I vote. I've voted for the Republican candidate in every single election. I'll support the Republican nominee no matter who it is. That's more than you can say. You few issues guys seem to think that it’s your way or no way. Sorry, I don’t buy that.

79 posted on 04/19/2007 4:11:47 PM PDT by Gop1040
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld

Sorry m’am, but Rudy’s track record as to appointing judges etc, shows a 85%+/- in favor of “D” party members.

Then we add in his ‘open borders’ and anti Second Amendment attitudes ....

________________

wait wait wait... Rudy’s track record on judges was in NYC where he had to choose from a list, provided by a democratic group - unfair to judge on that.

I was just in Des Moines where he said he was for a wall between Mexico and the US - how is that open borders.

2nd amendment - again IMO unfair to say he’s a gun grabber because of what he did in NYC. He has said he knows there needs to be different guidelines in “montana verus nyc” for example.

I understand you guys hate him but I don’t think you’re noting is positions clearly.

Fiscal conservative, tough on GWoT and I believe he will make good judge choices - good enough for me.


80 posted on 04/19/2007 4:19:33 PM PDT by IOWAfan (What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld

The judges: A canard. His universe of candidates was a preselected pool of Ds.

I’m not going to reargue Rudy’s strengths. They are well-known.

The underlying flaw in your argument is a failure to compare Rudy Giuliani with hillary clinton. You are foolishly comparing Rudy with some imaginary beau ideal of conservatism.

Continue to do that and you may very well get what YOU deserve.


81 posted on 04/19/2007 4:32:59 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Bump! So many excellent posts, bravissimi!

So my question is, why is Rudy still leading in the polls? Hello, are we not at war?
82 posted on 04/19/2007 5:01:11 PM PDT by Miss Didi ("Good heavens, woman, this is a war not a garden party!" Dr. Meade, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gracey
I agree! Mia has hit another one out of the ballpark with her intelligent approach of a complex situation.
83 posted on 04/19/2007 6:06:58 PM PDT by KATIE-O ( Rudy Giuliani '08 - Restoring Optimism For The Republican Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Mia T; MHGinTN
It's simple for me, Mia. I'm Conservative by nature and a Republican by choice.

Politics is a team sport! You fight-like-hell in the Republican primaries for the candidate of your choice!

When the Republican Candidate is chosen by voting, any person of minimal intelligence throws all their support behind the Candidate and votes for that Candidate!

To do anything else could result in electing a dimocRAT! 'If you vote for another Perot, you'll get another clinton!'

BTW, always encourage Ralph Nader to run again. Don't give him any money, but cheer him on ............. FRegards

84 posted on 04/19/2007 6:16:48 PM PDT by gonzo (I'm not confused anymore. Now I'm sure we have to completely destroy Islam, and FAST!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Maybe you are correct, but sometimes I feel like an idiot for voting for Bush and donating money to the Swifties.

I didn't vote in the '00 election, after seeing that child drug out by JBT (Elian Gonzales), I knew Bush had it in the bag.

Kind of fits in with the knowledge I have about Mena Airport. (But the Algore is so stupid (?) he hasn't figured out that cost him the election LOL.)

After seeing Bush I take a dive in his reelection campaign to allow Slickmeister to replace him, everything I knew about ... off budget funding of certain projects came to jump up larger than life*.

Didn't really want to face it, as I have walked precincts for "R" candidates. I would have reminded apolitical but Kerry annoys me. Can't explain it, just something about posers/traitors ticks me off.

Then came Bush II.

He made good noises about stopping abortion. I don't like his globalism - open borders and contempt towards the working class.

There is a reason Hispanic-Americans don't vote for him en mass. They don't trust him. They see how he has sold out Afro-Americans and know they could be next. They're hardly stupid.

.

Do you think sending in machine gun armed Federal Swat Teams to arrest dog Chapman and the Border patrol guys was wise?**

Bottom line is I don't trust the Washington cabal. Thus if a pro- abortionist carries the Republican banner, I'm off to a (now) obscure Third Party.

I know Democrats very well. Did a little drinking with them when they were trying to woo my cop union to support Rose Bird for Cali's Supreme Court.

Under the influence of Mr. John Barrelycorn, several of them admitted they were communists, but quickly added "But not of the Soviet Model".

They crave power like an addict seeks his next fix, more-so if possible.

They live in a world of their own, everything seen in term of the Marxist viewpoint. And I believe they would love to see US troops being taken off the roof of our Embassy in Baghdad, a la Saigon. I hate to see them anywhere near the levers of power, as I will be amongst the first to be sent to a reeducation camp. But I cannot vote for a politician who supports abortion (except in limited cases of rape-incest-mother's physical health)

A conflict? May be, but those babies are precious in the eyes of their Creator and I cannot argue with the Man Upstairs. The folks that run Washington know that there are many of us that hold abortion as a litmus test, so they are pushing for "R" candidates who are unsupportable.

* See my home page

** A simple Yes - No answer will suffice.

Sorry about the rambling, but please keep hammering the Beast.

85 posted on 04/19/2007 6:18:51 PM PDT by investigateworld (Abortion stops a beating heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
I will not vote for a gungrabbing pro-abortion candidate. If the GOP nominates a gungrabbing pro-abortion candidate (i.e., Rudy), they forfeit my vote.

It will not be my fault, but the fault of GOP, and all the Rudyphiles.


There are many like me.

86 posted on 04/19/2007 6:24:44 PM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: MACVSOG68
Insults and threats of banning are hardly conservative tactics.

Oh yes they are. We put up with mealy mouth Republicans far too long and look what we got for it.

We can stand up to a liberal like Rudy and his cohorts. Problem you folks have is you can only bully the people who have been the strength of this party.

Your RINO buddies sell out to the RATs and have become no better than RATs. You people have a fixation on the DU and don't care about your own.

87 posted on 04/19/2007 6:34:28 PM PDT by dforest (Fighting the new liberal Conservatism. The Left foot in the GOP door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Miss Didi

So glad to see a few with political intelligence on FR. :-)


88 posted on 04/19/2007 6:41:27 PM PDT by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld

I agree with you. The root cause of the problem is entrenched power. (Why AREN’T Sandy Berger and the clintons in the slammer (at a minimum)?)

We won’t solve our problems unless and until we purge DC of the professional pols and replace them with citizen politicians, people of high character and achievement who will lend their expertise for a term or two and then return to their day jobs.

Until then, we must do everything in our power to keep the clintons (or any of their seditious buddies) out of the WH.

Putting doctrinal purity ahead of making sure a defective and dangerous clinton never again controls this country is pre-clinton thinking. We no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to massage our sensibilities, to indulge our indignations. We will not survive another clinton. (We may yet not survive the first.)


89 posted on 04/19/2007 7:26:00 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
Oh yes they are. We put up with mealy mouth Republicans far too long and look what we got for it.

Just what did you get for it?

We can stand up to a liberal like Rudy and his cohorts. Problem you folks have is you can only bully the people who have been the strength of this party.

Bully? You are saying you have been bullied? I would say that calling someone a treasonous cretin for looking favorably at a Republican candidate for president is bullying. Wouldn't you? I would say that heaping every conceivable insult on those who do not share the far right agenda is bullying. I would say those who threaten them with expulsion constantly is bullying. Wouldn't you?

I understand your desperation, knowing that the social agenda will no longer be the in the mainstream of the Party, but it is not gone, nor should it be. Almost all Republicans are against abortion to varying degrees. But almost all Republicans understand what is at stake in one of America's greatest challenges since the Civil War. Republicans understand that the social agenda is a small part of conservatism, and above all, they recognize that the Party is the one best hope for the continuation of conservatism. They want all Republicans to come together after the primaries and concentrate on the defeat of Hillary Clinton. And I know that most will.

Your RINO buddies sell out to the RATs and have become no better than RATs. You people have a fixation on the DU and don't care about your own.

The only RINOs I know are those who say that if their 1% candidate does not win the nomination, thereby dooming our Party in 2008, that they will leave the Party and sit it out or vote 3d Party. Those are the Republicans in name only. They are not the conservatives who will do everything they can to defeat the Democrats next year. They are the ones who know that the top 3 candidates currently have about 70% of the support of the Republican Party, and that all 3 are continually being trashed by their own, who call themselves conservatives.

Not sure what you mean by a fixation on DU, but its safe to say that quite a number of folks here can put DU to shame with their vitriol, refusal to discuss issues, and threats to anyone they feel like targeting.

As for not caring about my own, my own are conservative Republicans like myself, who understand what is at stake, and will do everything to win next year. They are the Republicans who understand what it will take to bring together our Party with conservative Democrats and independents; who are not afraid of negotiation and compromise just as with Ronald Reagan. I care very much about them. They are my own.

This Party has a place for everyone interested in conservative government, the far right, the moderates and the center-right. This Party has a place for minorities of all kind who believe in conservative government.

I truly hope you folks can once again come into the mainstream of the Party, push the candidate of your choice, and in the end help propel our Party to victory.

90 posted on 04/19/2007 7:27:44 PM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

I agree with you, I really do. And no one need or EVER needed to convince me of that. But Guiliani is not the man who will get it done.


91 posted on 04/19/2007 7:28:38 PM PDT by TAdams8591
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

I think Mia is, and I say this with all due respect, so petrified of another Clinton in the Whitehouse, she cannot think straight.


92 posted on 04/19/2007 7:31:07 PM PDT by TAdams8591
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
""(We may yet not survive the first.)

Frankly, I give the "R" Party less than five years after Bush gets his Amnesty. I saw what the '87 Amnesty did to Cali, now imagine 5 to 8 times worse.

93 posted on 04/19/2007 7:32:31 PM PDT by investigateworld (Abortion stops a beating heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld; All
Why AREN’T Sandy Berger and the clintons in the slammer (at a minimum)?

And where is the unredacted Barrett report, anyway?


STALINIST RISING?
HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER
(WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)


94 posted on 04/19/2007 7:33:49 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

(((((STOP RUDY 2008 PING)))))


95 posted on 04/19/2007 7:42:35 PM PDT by Doofer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

You make a good point. Politics has muddied up the terminology.

Perhaps if I phrase it this way: Does your concern for the lives of babies stop at the womb? It sure seems that way to me. Otherwise you would be far more concerned with a clinton takeover than a Giuliani presidency.


96 posted on 04/19/2007 7:54:56 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
I will vote for whichever R is nominated. I understand the danger of the clintons.

As will I. Thanks for all that you do, Mia T. OUTSTANDING!

97 posted on 04/19/2007 8:39:37 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

GRRRRREAT graphic and text and the top of this thread BUMP!


98 posted on 04/19/2007 8:41:49 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Don’t vote for him. It’s a free country. Why does everything have to be your way. You seem to be the AUTHORITARIAN around here, pushing your beliefs on everyone. God Bless you.


99 posted on 04/19/2007 11:00:33 PM PDT by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: MACVSOG68

Your post 90 is beautifully written and so to the point. Thanks for adding intelligence to this thread. Keep it up.


100 posted on 04/20/2007 2:00:18 AM PDT by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-374 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