Well, each candidate says they will appoint strict constructionists, and most say they hope it will lead to the overturn of RvW. There is no guarantee that that will be the case. Only Hunter says he has a litmus test. Beyond ‘constructionist’ he says they will recognize the value of the unborn as humans or not get an appointment.
In addition, Hunter has been pushing hard for Right to Life legislation, to bypass the courts AND wants an amendment to overturn RvW.
He is 3 for 3. Fred is 1 for 3.
But this alone does not make my decision to support Hunter. His pro-sovereignty record, his willingness to kick China in the teeth, his 26 year effort to stop illegal immigration and DEPORT the illegals here, and his knowledge of all things military make him the best choice.
How's Rudy on those? If all we social conservatives flush our votes down the toilet on a candidate who can't win, that's who the nominee will be.
Hunter is not going to be the nominee. That is a fact. So our choice is between supporting a solid pro-lifer who might be in a position to save some lives in 2009, or support a solid pro-lifer who will not ever be in a position to save lives in the Oval Office.
You've made your choice. I've made the choice that will save lives.