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

To: svcw

As bad as Romney was, Allen, Mourdock and Atkins were worse. Not because they were liberals, just the opposite. They were professed conservatives who expressed views on abortion which were so bizarre that they set the pro-life movement back substantially.


27 posted on 01/22/2013 8:50:35 AM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Lucky

And worst of all the lost us the senate of their BS. Really screwed us.


28 posted on 01/22/2013 8:52:41 AM PST by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Lucky

First is that Akun and Murdoch really didn’t address abortion it was comments about rape. That said they can take as much credit for this poll as any hag on Emily’s list. Their misogynistic and factually untrue statements were used against us. They gave the enemy the rope.


46 posted on 01/22/2013 9:23:45 AM PST by Blackirish (Forward Comrades!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Lucky

Exactly. As a long-time pro-lifer, those peons and their bizarro comments bear no resemblance to the (mostly female) antiabortion activists I’m familiar with. They are stereotypical good old boy politicians who should have been retired years ago.

Most urban, modern liberal types have limited contact with the pro-life movement and people like that simply play into the totally bogus stereotype of pro-lifers being old white men who have a tin ear for women’s concerns.


69 posted on 01/22/2013 10:25:50 AM PST by LifeComesFirst (http://rw-rebirth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Lucky

Exactly. As a long-time pro-lifer, those peons and their bizarro comments bear no resemblance to the (mostly female) antiabortion activists I’m familiar with. They are stereotypical good old boy politicians who should have been retired years ago.

Most urban, modern liberal types have limited contact with the pro-life movement and people like that simply play into the totally bogus stereotype of pro-lifers being old white men who have a tin ear for women’s concerns.


70 posted on 01/22/2013 10:25:55 AM PST by LifeComesFirst (http://rw-rebirth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Lucky
As bad as Romney was, Allen, Mourdock and Atkins were worse. Not because they were liberals, just the opposite. They were professed conservatives who expressed views on abortion which were so bizarre that they set the pro-life movement back substantially.

Nope, you missed it completely.

Mourdock and Adkins statements were pounced on by the media, twisted, perverted and made a ridiculous cause celebre. The difference was that in decades past, the Republican party nominee at the top of the ticket at least pretended to be a pro-lifer with stones and was happy to fight with the media about the issue and articulate our side in a meaningful way.

Not so with Romney. He piled on Mourdock and Adkins and in doing so, we lost a major opportunity to educate the public on pro-life issues.

THAT is the difference. And THAT is why I will never vote for another Republican who is not a staunch, articulate pro-lifer. To hell with them otherwise.
85 posted on 01/22/2013 11:01:06 AM PST by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

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