So does that mean if Condi becomes president I can walk into my local Wal-Mart go to the guns section pick-up one of these....
...then go to the casher pay cash and walk out the door without any federal,state or local government interference?
Posted on 03/11/2005 8:35:05 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday pointedly declined to rule out running for president in 2008, and gave her most detailed explanation of a "mildly pro-choice" stance on abortion.
In an interview with editors and reporters in the office of the editor in chief at The Washington Times, she said she would not want the government "forcing its views" on abortion.
She seemed bemused by speculation that a Rice candidacy could set up an unprecedented all-woman matchup with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, who is widely expected to seek the presidency.
"I never wanted to run for anything — I don't think I even ran for class anything when I was in school," she said. "I'm going to try to be a really good secretary of state; I'm going to work really hard at it.
"I have enormous respect for people who do run for office. It's really hard for me to imagine myself in that role."
She was then pressed on whether she would rule out a White House bid by reprising Gen. William T. Sherman's 1884 declaration: "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve."
"Well, that's not fair," she protested with a chuckle. "The last thing I can — I really can't imagine it."
Several Republicans have floated the idea of a Rice candidacy to counter Mrs. Clinton's prospects, especially since several Republican officials with national prominence, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, have ruled out pursuing the party's 2008 nomination.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani are often mentioned as prospective candidates ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
It doesn't work that way.
There are people who don't think of themselves as political. They get up and vote when someone shows up supporting their one or two big issues. Such people are usually deeply moral a-political Christians. Such people very often vote for Republicans. Republicans are more likely to say something that motivates them. When a liberal Republican comes along, it's not that they pout and sit on their hands, they simply haven't heard anyone say anything that will drive them to the polls.
Not all voters are political hacks like us, thinking in terms of long-term strategy. They see the world in a much more cut and dry way. Too bad, but that's the way it is.
I've seen and heard this hundreds of times in dozens of focus groups over the years.
Good, as bad as abortion is, everyone forgets Roe v. Wade was a fundemental right vs. a states issue (which, in my mind it should be). The libertarian wing of the Republican party is my Republican party. Less government= better government.
And we are free to blame them for a stupid choice.
Oh no? Ask Bush 41 if it doesn't, in terms of the conservative vote. Ask Bush 43 if it didn't almost work that way when the Evangelicals sat on their hands in 2000.
It most certainly does work that way. Having one's base not show up because one isn't sufficiently hardcore happens in every election cycle.
Stupid in the eyes of who?
God almighty
Unless GWB pulls the ol' rabbit out of this butt pretty soon the republicans won't see the White House for another 12-16 years. It's unfortunate that the Republican party didn't have a stronger candidate in 2004. 8 years of RINO's is enough.
Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush should teach us, the GOP wins when it stands on firm conservative principles. Compromising the rights of unborn babies is the wrong strategy to beat Hillary in 2008. Now, Condi is a great Secretary of State and she will probably not run for President. But if she does, she'll lose in the GOP primaries (rightly so).
Pro-abortion, she's out...
People will not vote because she is "mildly pro-choice" but will put a full blown Pro-choice candaiate in. You cant count on the christian vote anyway so just assume they wont vote.
To add to your point, a President, aside from court appointments has virtually no influence on abortion regulation or lack thereof. I suppose a President may have some direct influence when it comes to HHS regulation, but that's minimal in the over all picture.
Why ever would God see a person acting according to his or her conscience as acting stupidly?
The *current* situation is one of the government (or high handed judges) forcing it's will on those of us who are pro-life.
I don't understand the jump to assume the worse. I would prefer a human life amendment, myself. But, I will accept turning the issue of abortion regulation back to the States.
I feel the same way. Why when the Republicans have made such strides in the last decade should we sell our Party short by moving centrist? When we do, as you correctly state, we will lose. I want to see a good conservative like Dan Quayle run. Dan's pro-family, pro-values, and pro-defense. He'll keep us on the moral compass like Reagan did and W does. I suggest everyone interested contact him through either phone or mail encouraging him to run (see post 14). We need to choose him.
I.....was....KIDDING!!!
Read my post again. You missed my point.
Yes. Core segments of the base stayed home in those elections. It wasn't out of some complex strategy to send a message though, or to pout, or to somehow payback for having their feelings hurt.
It was because no one was articulating a strong enough message to motivate them to go to the polls. You have to stop thinking of every conservative voter as a calculating Republican activist extrapolating out the implications of their decisions. They vote (if they vote) in a more basic way on just a few key issues.
It is a subtle but important distinction that bears on the kinds of candidates we select.
It should be returned back to the states, and thence to the people by requiring that law affecting abortion, the same as most other issues decided by judicial fiat, be enacted through legislation.
Then, if you don't like the law, vote the legislators OUT. Thats the way it should work. Those people who call for the banning of anything by judicial fiat are as bad as those who want to allow everything by the same.
So does that mean if Condi becomes president I can walk into my local Wal-Mart go to the guns section pick-up one of these....
...then go to the casher pay cash and walk out the door without any federal,state or local government interference?
2008 is beginning to worry me. Where are the solid conservatives? Great as they are, I'm really not satisfied with Rice, Romney, or Guilani as the options. Not for President.
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.