She might have been sincere, but she was misguided.
She defended her position the morning on ABC when George Steffy asked her point blank.
I think that’s a stretch that she did it for effect.
Will she issue a correction? I would hope she would. But the net difference between what was discussed versus what is seen still ends up with the same result - a dead child.
Yes, perhaps - in fact, but not in principle.
I look at it this way. If one were to do an expose many decades ago about, say, Auschwitz and the goings on and included footage from Dachau while discussing it, would it make all that much difference?
I’m not in any way in the tank for her. To me I just don’t see her as my candidate, but I’ll give her her due on this. A disgusting and horrible topic where the actions claimed very likely happened, even if not “on camera” at the time.
Don’t worry about her...the “fix” is in.
They made a special exception to the rules to allow 11 instead of the original 10 to debate. The reason? She was a female and all of the others were male. So? What is the solution? That’s right! Bend the rules to allow 11 to debate.
Hell! If Carson didn’t make the top 10 they would have expanded the debate to 12 so that blacks could be represented too.
A perfect example of political manipulation to garner favor with any and all special interest groups.
It’s the Republican way: “Go along to get along.”
There’snothing sincere about Carley. She’s a loser, period!
But was not the details of the practice described by the PP people exemplified by that insertion so one could see the state of an aborted child at that period? Does it not put credence to a picture is worth a thousand words?
Up to this time all we have had is words, back and forth. Those PP people in the video were giving the God awful details of what they were doing. All the insertion did was put to the lie that it was just “tissue”.
I would not vote for her, but I do give her credit for raising the issue for millions to set and wonder. Their most strident question will be why were we not told this by the media?
“It opens it to the charge of emotionalism for effect and to charges of hearsay evidence because of her misrepresentation.”
Yea, no it wont. Fist of all it didn’t make as big of an
impact as people are playing it up to be. Fiorina did ok
but she’s just being blown up to be some kind of winner
of this debate and by the end of the week she’ll be a
dud again. This Fiorina fawning is all forced out like a fart. It’s just the media helping the GOPe pick the only
candidate that can loose against the democrats. Like they
did the last two elections. Like Bush, she’s just another liberal
pretending to be a republican.
It’s OK if she was inaccurate.
REPEAT IT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND MAKE IT THE TRUTH
Just like uncle Saul Alynsky taught us