Posted on 11/10/2004 4:44:19 PM PST by GeneralHavoc
And I think the party has more than 50 percent in favor of a woman's right to choose, with some limitations. But that branch of the party has never been vocal. So that as the party has tilted more to the south and west, the pro-choice Republicans have been in a distinct minority and there's been a concern about having a pro-choice Republican as chairman of the (committee). Listen, you saw it all during the primary, that was their mantra, their bugle call. The same people that are after me now were after me in the primary.
...
There really is an urgent need for more vocal participation by moderates and pro-choice Republicans. I think the statistics are that at least half or slightly more than half of Republicans favor a woman's right to choose, subject to some limitations.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
We should just let this guy keep talking.
I can't even think of anything to say.
Yes we are pro-choice. Pro- choice in choosing LIFE.
What planet IS he on?
Most Senate (so-called) Republicans, maybe.
I think there was a story today that the GOP's pro-life position gave the GOP a net of 12 points in the last election. The Pro-life position is our biggest net winner. I would guess anti-gay marriage was number 2.
Arlen, you are an old man who doesn't know when to shut up. But, keep talking...the hole you dig justs keeps getting deeper.
I was going to ask which alternate universe does he live in?
I am sure there are plenty who disagree with me who are fellow republicans, but I see the opposition as against the Union since 1861.
Yea, he is really digging himself into a hole.
Hmm. I thought the pro-life guy in the recent election got 51% of the vote. Out of *all* the people, not just out of the Republicans.
How many Democrats (Catholics, black conservatives) are actually PRO-LIFE?
>>>Yes we are pro-choice. Pro- choice in choosing LIFE.
I'm pro choice...but think the time for choosin' is before your knickers hit the floor...
He's adding to his troubles.
Thats easy! Rendell's Philadelphia were all is possible, even voting from the Dead.
I think the closest a conservative would ever come to pro-choice as far as a Republic is concerned would be:
NO ABORTION.
Except for due to rape, incest or the proven death of the mother. I would also want police reports for the rapes or incest on those abortions.
From a religious position, I believe in NO abortion. Let me make that clear.
As a country where no Establishment of religion is allowed, I can see the above statement be the eventual model for the country. That model would save over 95% of the children we abort today, so I would hardly call that a pro-choice majority.
I think Specter is for any abortion any time and that is not a conservative philosophy.
Pro-school choice, pro-gun ownership choice, but pro-murder? @#!$@ no!
This is Specter's concept of a charm offensive?
Ok folks who on the committee is ambitious enough to want the chairman job?
Indeed.
Poll: Abortion Voters Gave Pres Bush 12% Advantage ("values voters" speak loud and clear)
LifeNews.com ^ | November 8, 2004 | Steven Ertelt
Posted on 11/09/2004 6:33:15 AM EST by Liz
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A post-election poll of voters shows that a majority of Americans are pro-life and the abortion issue gave pro-life candidates such as President Bush a twelve percent advantage.
Some 42 percent of voters said that the issue of abortion affected the way they voted in last week's election.
Those voters favored pro-life candidates by nearly a two-one margin with 25 percent of all voters saying they voted for pro-life candidates who oppose abortion and only 13 percent of all voters saying they backed candidates that favor abortion.
That twelve percent margin in favor of pro-life candidates no doubt helped the president win re-election in several battleground states.
"You'll note that the margin of victory of the Bush-Cheney ticket in a number of states, including Florida and Ohio, was less than 4 percent," said David O'Steen, executive director of National Right to Life.
Highlighting the increasing importance of moral issues like abortion in the 2004 presidential election, 34 percent of voters said abortion has always been a motivating factor impacting how they cast their votes. About 9 percent said abortion made an impact on their vote for the first time this election year.
Closer to the truth................
MOST REPUBLICANS ARE PRO LIFE AND ANTI SPECTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Amen. I tried to explain the difference between self defense and abortion to a liberal but got a little tired *LOL*
I agree because I am one of them. However they are few and far between in the Republican party and making this statement won't save his job.
I'm pro choice...but think the time for choosin' is before your knickers hit the floor...
My thoughts exactly!!
taking a position instead of having a belief
I know some of you may have seen my earlier post, but this is the last straw. I know I personally hate the guy, but I thought that it would be in the best interest of the party to let him have the chair and let Frist & co. set him straight when he got feisty, but the more i research him, the worse it gets. i just read that the senators vote by secret ballot for the chair, and they had better make it Kyl. He's the only pro-choice repub this side of NY.
"Liberal" version:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Specter will stay.
after today...I'm sure of it.
Their choice is they don't want you.
How many Democrats (Catholics, black conservatives) are actually PRO-LIFE?
Clarify that one, will ya?
Are you saying that Catholics are Democrats???? You don't know many Catholics, do you?
As one who was taking a wait-and-see attitude on this guy I have to say he sounds loonier by the minute.
After I saw Rove on two of the Sunday shows,
I decided that the WH could handle him. I still
believe that.
BUT, as you pointed out, the GOP senators will vote
secret ballot and when I perused the Judiciary list,
I determined his chairmanship just might not be a sure
thing, altho I suspect they may give him the nod...
not wanting to cause trouble within the party.
Huh? speechless
This guy is standing at the intersection of Doom and Oblivion waiting for the slow train to nowhere.
APf
ZOT Specter!
I'm refering to the "blue collar" Catholics in the Midwest, otherwise known as Reagan Democrats, and also Latino Democrats, who are largely Catholic and Pro-life. And conservative Christian blacks who are largely Democrat, and Pro-life.
Yup. And the first rule of holes is: "When in a hole, stop digging."
Apparently he does not recognize his position, i.e., in a hole. I say give the man a better shovel. Maybe a backhoe.
There is no section of the Constitution which grants the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, or individual Committee members, or any indiviual Senator, veto power over Presidential nominations. The Senatorial "advise and consent" role concerns FITNESS FOR OFFICE, and nothing else.
Senator Daschle believed he had a third-way around the unfortunately predicament of being out of power in both the Executive and Legislative branches, i.e. use extra-Constitutional "Senatorial Rules", or tradition, to prevent a vote on nominations by the Senate, as directed by the U.S. Constitution. In other words, FORMER Senator Daschle and his fellow Democrat Senators conspired to evade Constitutional Law.
Now, all the mudraking and B.S. aside, Senator Spector, do you support Constitutional Law, or as you did in the case of Judge Bork in the 1980's, are you prepared to do anything necessary to advance your cause, including subverting the Constitution to your own ends?
There is nothing in Senator Spector's background of voting pattern which would indicate he'd properly perform the rule of Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and ample evidence, both word and deeds, that he'd pull another Dashle in a split second, if it served his political interests.
If the GOP Senate places Spector into this role, they'd better hope to hell that he changes "big-time". If he dictates President's Bush's Judicial nominees, he'll do to the GOP in 2006 what the San Francisco fruit-cake Mayor did for the DNC's Legislative opportunities in 2004.
He'll split the party, and the GOP will lose seats in the Senate, perhaps even it's majority. This is not a wild-eyed threat, but an accurate reading of the rank and file of the GOP. If we bust our tails to elect our President and our Legislators, yet the GOP Senate allows one, single, idealogically extremist from Pennsylvania to undo years worth of work, the BELIEVE ME, IT'S OVER for the GOP in 2006.
SFS
I have never been a member of an activist pro-life group but one of the things I liked best about Bush was his stance on abortion. He didn't just say no-abortion, he also talked about the beauty of adoption for people that can't have children.
The liberals are flip-floppers in their philosophical "choices". They believe it is alright for a woman to arbitrarily kill a baby, right up to the time for birth. But, they don't want the death penalty for someone who has had a chance at life and proceeded to --- never mind, they wouldn't want the death penalty because they think it is alright for someone to kill, so why give a killer the death penalty. Now, they are finding a new fun game to use to kill babies. The fetal stem cell game -- lets see if we can use these dead babies to cure a disease that a criminal in prison has!
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.