Posted on 11/03/2010 8:08:40 AM PDT by exit82
Citing Roe v. Wade, regardless of its date, would have been the mark of a true Conservative.
Agree 100%.
Laz—she doesn’t put out (all the way)!
Well, that would have made her fall in Wolfie's little trap, now wouldn't it?
If she mentioned a decison from January 22, 1973, and the question was about a RECENT SC decision, that would have made her look foolish, and invite the inevitable follow-up comment--"I said "recent"!" from Blitzer.
Christine has stated her prolife position in her campaign literature, and in her debates. And she contrasted her position to her opponent's views.
I don't know why you persist in kicking her when she is down.
She went into the arena, she is a qualified candidate, and she did her best.
There is NO question that Mike Castle, Delaware's GOP leadership, Tokyo Rove, AND the Dems, along with the local and national media, were all out to get her.
When you have completed a grueling campaign and won a Senate seat, then YOU can talk.
She should have cited Kelo, the imminent domain case.
It all depends upon your definition of “recent” with regard to the Supreme Court. Many judicial scholars would define it as “within our lifetime”.
I am not kicking anyone; just trying to give a word of wisdom to those who would sally forth into battle totally unprepared.
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.