Posted on 02/12/2010 9:38:03 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Former Fresno Mayor Alan Autry today endorsed Republican Carly Fiorina for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Democrat Barbara Boxer.
(Excerpt) Read more at fresnobeehive.com ...
Abortion isn't an issue to some of us. It goes right to a person's character. If a person is pro-abortion, I wouldn't support them for any position. They are fatally flawed people and unworthy of my vote. Period. End of discussion.
My question would be the same. I am able to juggle with multiple issues.
I see your point now. Boxer advances your cause and you are happy with her in office.
No, my point is anyone running on the Republican ticket had better be pro-life. Pro-abortion is the epitome of RINOism.
Well, fitting ‘you’ is fine; it’s your vote. But if we all vote only the perfect candidate per our persuasion; not sure whom would win that one. Finding the ‘greaster good’ amongst a few; is a challenge; but by same token; we do not want the lesser man/woman to succeed; particularly when our Country is in crisis. IMHO.
(Am not voting in Californina; and don’t know whom I wouild support if I did; but would note again, in only for correction; that Carly Fiorina is not pro abortion; much less; avidly so. Do know, whomever is Repub Party choice; I pray they win!).
Do us all a favor and don’t ever again compare Fiorina and Governor Palin as being the same when it comes to life, or you will surely draw some serious examination of Fiorina and her “pro life” credentials, that is something that you do not want.
Here is an example of why you should leave sleeping dogs lie.
http://www.redstate.com/trevino/2009/08/25/carly-fiorina-and-life-issues-unanswered-questions/
Your strong rhetoric would imply a 'strong' case against Ms. Fiorina. Ironically; much of analysis at the link you provided, surrounds McCain's candidacy and his own questionable - dubious? - Pro-Life MO. That you use Sarah as well; as an arbiter per your challenge; when she in fact, is campaigning for McCain - and is 'proud to do so'; seems; on your behalf; just a bit contradictory or. . .perhaps hypocritical; or just a mistake (regardless, of Sarah's depth of commitment which we surely, all do know).
It is a bit much; in light of above; for you to challenge me for using names of both; in same sentence/breath! Doing so; surely stretches the conversation here.
Your link served up the following:
(excerpt)link
In June 2008, Fiorina assured a group of politically active women (reported in some outlets to have been discontented Clinton supporters) in Columbus, Ohio, that John McCain “has never signed on to efforts to overturn Roe vs. Wade.” Why would a pro-lifer regard this as a positive attribute to be touted? Why would a pro-lifer sign on as a surrogate for that sort of candidate?
More to your point; perhaps you should first, or at least, as well; ask Sarah. . .
. . .link cont:/
We are therefore presented with the strange spectacle, in 2008 and since, of Fiorina proclaiming her pro-life sentiments for the first time, even as she amassed a record of publicly delivering a series of cues to the contrary.
Sarah's commitment (versus Fiorna's cues) carry the greatest weight,of course; but that is not even the debate; save, that is, for your making it one.
Autry? Who is Autry?
I’m hoping to be able to vote for your candidate if I have to, I really don’t know why you are trying so hard to annoy the pro life crowd and draw them into exposing her weakness on the issue.
I don’t know why you want to open this can of worms by continuing to drag Sarah Palin’s name in with Fiorina.
Why start a pissing contest between supporters of a famous pro life champion and someone that, let’s say, isn’t.
Look; seems the debate goes on; but it IS getting confusing; you have offered above that you were thinking of Whitman; not Fiorina. Have no clue about Whitman; and don't care to.
As for Litmus test; abortion is an imaginary 'freedom' of choice. It is not a liberation. It IS a stealing of life; and worse; IMHO. That said; while I think those who support abortion share an ignorance; do not'necessarily' think it is a malevolent ignorance. Nor is it 'always'. There are many, of course, for whom it is both. McCain is pro-life; but can we measure his commitment per 'depth'; say against that of Sarah Palin's. (No; but do need to. ..it did not matter; and it was other RINO issues; in any event or just an 'issue' that defeated McCain.
Whatever the case; we now have a Prez; who is not only pro-abortion; he is pro-abortion - no matter the age of the fetus; the baby. . .the child; the patient; the sick 'Senior'. . .he is pro-abortion for all who oppose him. Obama will, we already know; 'abort' families; our Military; our space program; our jobs; our bank accounts and savings accounts. . .our national security; our capitalism and our freedom. Obama IS aborting our Country.
This Dem/Progressive Compared to Liberal McCain.. .cannot be compared. And therein lies my problem with 'one' issue determinations per a candidate. That's all.
Don't think I started it; but sensitivites are hot not only re abortion - of course - but whenever Sarah's name is mentioned. See no reason, however; particularly with FR 'MO' to ignore the ironies and contradictions when they arise; as they always do, of course.
I once mentioned that this response reminded me of what Obamanauts do; or something to that effect; and 'hell' opened up. Which only seemed to confirm - 'seemed' mind you. . .nothing more - and so, never mind.
I voted McCain/Palin; so guess I can go there, in any event. And much of the vitriol comes from those who did not. But not going there either. . .at least, not again. ..or at least not tonight/sigh.
Don't know. 'Gene'. ..Son of Gene? Did not look; but it WAS 'his' picture. Or his Dad's/lol. . .(guess it could be Gene!) Will go back and look. . .tomorrow/lol.
Good gosh, now I remember who you are, you are the pro immigration, pro Mitt Romney, indifferent to abortion liberal, that doesn’t even live in California.
You drag Palin in with Romney and now Fiorina and try to blend them together on abortion, you probably believe that Reagan was “adamantly pro choice” like Romney tries to tell people. I do know that you are incredibly long winded and bland in your politics, I have no idea why you bother with a conservative site.
“””Thought; in basic ‘context’; had made myself fairly clear; but okay. . .and perhaps, in more words than necessary/sigh. . .(and again offered; only because Sarah may not ‘be there’ and we can duly note; neither may Mitt - but he does stand as current and most popular foil and Conservative nemesis.)
Political opportunism is a fact of politics and falls on both sides - (of course, one side, absolutely survives on it) and keeping in mind Romney’s Constituency, can see why he comes appears too close to ‘splitting hairs’ - when push comes to shove. Given that he believes, as does Sarah Palin; that it is a ‘States Rights’ issue; as President; think there is little question that he would adhere to Roe v. Wade - in the same way as would Palin.”””
I forgot, you also (sigh) a lot in your posts.
Your head must explode with all the props. What do you do with more than one issue? Complexity of an issue is obviously waaaaaay beyond your capability. Do you justify killing babies when a women is raped? Is that ok or not?
Other than being fired from HP; know little of Carly; except what I saw of her on Glenn Beck this week. Was impressed; but preferred the 'other guest'; who was on Beck as well; and running for same seat. Nope; cannot remember his name; but will find it.
Meantime; Sarah supports McCain (don't like it; why not-a-RINO, J.D.Holingworth?) Meantime, Romney and Scott Brown of same cloth; but Brown, too; campaigning for McCain (and not J.D.) and so along with Palin as well. Can you explain - if even mention/name these strange bedfellows? Guess not. . .
Sigh/double sigh! (Ignorance does make me tired; albeit my own; which I can 'usually' handle. More; it is the ignorance of others that makes me really tired.) /lol/(yep; I laugh often as well.)
Autry played Bubba a long time ago on TV. I think the series was In The Heat of The Night. My point though was this started out talking about Autry’s endorsement, but Autry quickly disappeared from the discussion.
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.