Posted on 02/02/2007 4:47:11 PM PST by PhiKapMom
Ask nopardons. It's really of no consequence or interest to me.
These Rudy threads are bringing back memories of the Buchanan/Bush wars! JimRob oughta erect a steel cage around these threads.
not at all. Rudy will not use a pro-Roe litmus test to select a SCOTUS nominee, Hillary would. remember, no openly anti-Roe pick can be confirmed by the senate. the best our side can get, is a nominee who has upheld Roe under stare decisis, but who has a judicial philosophy that we THINK might lead them to review it. Roberts and Alito are two examples of that.
could Rudy appoint such a judge? I think so. Would Hillary? NOT A CHANCE.
We had anti- abortion Presidents for 14 years. Reagan and Bush. Abortion is still legal and readily available.
The POTUS has little say in these issues. It is really a State issue. If Roe is finally overturned, all that would do is turn it back to the States to decide. It will not ban abortion.
COLMES: Now, on abortion — now, you are pro-choice, right?
GIULIANI: Yes.
COLMES: You're a pro-choice Republican.
GIULIANI: I am.
~snip~
COLMES: Now, Roe vs. Wade -- You are pro-choice. How important is it to you as a pro-choice Republican to have a pro-choice on the court as someone...
GIULIANI: That is not the critical factor. And what's important to me is to have a very intelligent, very honest, very good lawyer on the court. And he fits that category, in the same way Justice Ginsburg fit that category.
I mean, she was — she maybe came at it from a very different political background, very qualified lawyer, very smart person. Lots of Republicans supported her. I expect, and listening to Senator Nelson, I expect that John Roberts will get support from a lot of Democrats.
Is that supposed to be indicative of residential qualification? Also not that His Majesty King Hussein I of Jordan,Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel,President Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union got the same award.
You're an embarrassment to Free Republic and the whole human race. LOL
Personally, it's not to me.
Politically, it's a landmine. Do you think the Dems will refrain from running these images in the deepest Red states to pull support away from Rudy if he wins the nomination?
Irrelevancy aside, do these hard heads not realize that even their most revered choice could be lying through his teeth, ala Ahhhhnold? It's too soon to get this frantic, and I don't like being beat over the head by certain posters.
Oh Peach, you're going to get this whole Brady Bill signing "splained" to you real soon.... I feel it in the air.
Well said. Not that I expect most people to "get it", but well done.
It is against forum rules to post private Freepmail on a thread.
I have reported you to the Admin Moderator.
While I'm here, I'll also say that we get very tired of the cheap shots, the gratuitous obscene adjectives, and the constant pinging of the abuse button over things that are just plain silly.
My mom always said if you don't have something nice to say, just be quiet. I wish we could all give that one a try.
See Post 50, 113, and 398.
Did you know Bill Clinton signed the Brady Bill?
McCainiac will be the the GOP guy served right up to you, Watch...
BTW; how much money has Rudy milked off the poor dead souls of 9/11?
Thanks, AM.
No, the democrats are smarter than the posters here who think it's a biggie.
If Hillary and her HINO get back in the White House, the USA and the Free World are doomed.
Oh, I'm quite sure. They can also bank on the fact that I shall ignore it, as I'm ignoring all their silly little posts and spam.
No matter how they want to spin it (and spin it they will) Reagan signed gun legislation.
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.