Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: pissant
>>>>>Well, the Reagan choir specifically wanted to attack abortion from multiple angles, not just make a federalist argument. One more reason that Hunter is the only Reganite in the race.

Falsehoods abound. LOL

My goal has always been to see Roe v Wade overturned adn an end to abortion on demand as Americas national policy. By default, abortion will then head back to the states. I have called for a right to life amendment since the earliest days of Roe`s passage. And Hunter is not the only Reaganite running. Cong Tom Tancredo is also a Reaganite. And so is Fred Thompson!

My man Tancredo and your man Hunter are going nowhere fast. Once FredT announces, the race for the GOP nomination will get real intetesting. Remember, the target is the liberal Giuliani. FredT is not a target for conservatives who want to knock Rooty out of the race.

91 posted on 08/28/2007 3:51:22 PM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]


To: Reagan Man

I did not say that abortion alone made Hunter the only Reaganite. His entire campaign of peace through strength, his virulent anti-communism, his unwavering faith in the goodness of America, his unparalleled career fighting for our military and our borders, his belief in America as the beacon of freedom, his ability to scare the crap out of the mullahs and chicoms, his championing of causes long before they were ‘mainstream’ in the GOP, his stalwart protection of US sovereignty, and his complete lack of nuance and tapdancing make him the only Reaganite.

Rudy will be defeated, but that is not and cannot be the only goal of conservatives.

If you want to hear echoes of RWR, go here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1885750/posts

and here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1887675/posts


93 posted on 08/28/2007 4:02:06 PM PDT by pissant (Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
By default, abortion will then head back to the states.

Do you recognize the difference between the argument that "if Roe were overturned it would go back to the states," and "the states should be allowed to decide this," as candidates like Romney, McCain, Thompson, Brownback and Paul, and Huckabee have all been known to claim?


”Under the 9th and 10th amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid”.Ron Paul, January 2006

"I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support. . . I’m a federalist. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states." - John McCain, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, 11-19-06)

"Roe v. Wade is based on a real stretch of Constitutional application--that somehow there is a greater privacy issue in the abortion concern--than there is a human life issue--and that the federal government should be making that decision as opposed to states making that decision. So, I've never felt that it was a legitimate manner in which to address this and, first of all, it should be left to the states, the 10th Amendment, but secondly, to somehow believe that the taking of an innocent, unborn human life is about privacy and not about that unborn life is ludicrous.” Mike Huckabee, Interview with Right Wing News, 2006

"“It’d be OK. It would be OK to repeal it. It would be OK also if a strict constructionist judge viewed it as precedent, and I think a judge has to make that decision…the court has to make that decision, and then the country can deal with it.”Rudy Giuliani, GOP debate, 2007.

"The answer is not, as some have claimed, the nationwide prohibition of abortion. Rather, as the Constitution contemplates, the decision of whether and how to regulate abortion would return once again to the states. There, the democratic, deliberative process would work its will, and the People could reach an acceptable accommodation on the fundamental issue of life.” Sam Brownback, press release, 6-23-2005)

"My view is that the Supreme Court has made an error in saying at the national level ‘one size fits all for the whole nation’ and instead I would let states make their choice….I’d let states make their own decision in this regard. My view of course is that I’m a pro-life individual and it’s the position that I support. But I would let states have this choice rather than let the federal government have it." - Mitt Romney, August 2007

"Mr. [Fred]Thompson, who has formed a "testing the waters" committee and is likely to make an official announcement of his candidacy soon, has long taken a federalist approach to abortion, saying that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that states should decide the issue for themselves. He opposes a constitutional amendment banning abortion, his spokesman, Mark Corallo, said yesterday." – June 2007, NY Sun

96 posted on 08/28/2007 4:13:09 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (States' rights don't trump God-given, unalienable rights...support the Reagan pro-life platform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson