Posted on 07/18/2006 1:26:54 PM PDT by RWR8189
1) When did Senator Allen change his views and drop his support for the so-called "Assault Weapons Ban"? Why did he do so?
2) Does he still believe that abortion is a states' rights issue, and not one of the fundamental God-given, unalienable right to life?
3) Does he still think that abortion is a "quality of life" question? Does he still believe that human life commences at the commencement of brainwaves?
4)Does George Allen still believe that abortion is okay for "fetal abnormality"?
5) Does the Senator still believe in a "virtual" fence on our southern border?
6) Does he regret supporting some of the more egregious liberal spending bills that have been signed by this President?
I have more questions, but this is a good start.
I don't think he'll manage that.
Voters often look for a different type of person to fill the White House than the man who served immediately prior. They turned to John F. Kennedy after Dwight Eisenhower. They opted for Bill Clinton after George H.W. Bush. They opted for George W. Bush after Clinton.
If Republican voters decide that eight years of George W. Bush is enough, they may well look for a different kind of person to carry their party’s banner in 2008. And that’s why Allen is no longer the man to beat for the GOP presidential nomination. Source
I don't know if this is true of Republicans, but it describes the swing voters pretty well, and I doubt the GOP would want to lose them.
A lot of what people found appealing about Bush in 2000 has lost its attraction for crucial voting blocs.
Voters will probably be looking for another sort of candidate in 2008, so coming across like George Bush won't be an asset for George Allen.
2008 won't be a good year for a Republican who wants to come across as "Old South" either.
>>>If not an atheist, Jefferson was certainly a deist -- believing foremost in man's unbridled capability to perfect the world through reason.<<<
This is a lie. Jefferson was not a deist. He was a Christian who believed in future rewards and punishments.
>>>He distrusted any government involvement in matters of morals or faith. Thus it comes as little surprise that the "wall of separation between Church & State" comes not from the Constitution, but from Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists.<<<
This is deceitful. The meaning of Jefferson's statement to the Danbury Baptists had no correlation whatsoever with the modern-day interpretation of "separation of church and state", which is a bastardization of the 1st Amendment.
Tell us Evelyn, who signs your checks to trash George Allen?
I'm confident you'll be proven wrong. Talk to me after he takes care of this year's Senate race.
No one.
They're simple, legitimate, questions.
Can't you answer them?
They've been answered. Dozens of times.
Can't you understand them?
Who's "Evelyn"?
Who's signing your checks to promote him?
Would you prefer "Evie?"
No they haven't. If they had, I'd quit asking them.
You seem to be GA's biggest fan on FR.
Why can't you give simple answers to such simple questions?
Thank you for the compliment.
The questions HAVE been answered and you know it. You just don't like or can't understand the answers.
If I thought anyone around here put any value in your opinion, I'd be concerned.
As it is, you're just useful for the entertainment value.
Not really.
I'd prefer honest answers to my simple questions.
Here's another one:
If the Senator is now so hot for border security, why does he have the top open borders lobbyist in America, Ed Gillespie, running his PAC?
Earlier this week you told me you thought Allen was a "shoo-in" for the nomination. If you really believe that, it certainly seems like you're doing your darnedest to derail the GOP candiate to pave the way for Hillary.
Good night EV. I hope you find a candidate you can support.
I sure don't like the evasions you've given that you try and pass off as answers. But I do understand you quite well.
So, I'll keep asking them until you give satisfactory answers.
They're really not that complicated. You should be able to handle them easily.
What was the Senator's rationale when he was a supporter of the "Assault Weapons Ban"? What explanation did he give for abandoning that position?
What confounds me (and others, I'd wager) is that seemingly intelligent people, having succeeded politically with a conservative record, "go wobbly" and move to the left.
Gotta be something in the water?
He is...in a field that is as weak as Giuliani, McCain, Romney, et al.
But there will be a conservative yet.
Go ahead and run away without addressing the questions asked.
That speaks louder than words.
My friend, George Allen has been faking it all along.
He managed to fool some very smart people for a very long time.
That time is no more.
But let me tell you: powerful folks in the party are lining up to support him.
If they succeed because conservatives didn't field the real deal, look forward to at least one term of BushLite.
If he can win the general, which I seriously doubt.
Juvenile.
Thanks for showing us your true face.
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.