Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tcostell

Thank you for explaining your views. And yes, I do understand. However, think about your liberties under the Pantsuit's reign. What kind of country would we be? And would we even survive against radical Islam?


137 posted on 02/07/2007 6:01:34 AM PST by Miss Didi ("Good heavens, woman, this is a war not a garden party!" Dr. Meade, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]


To: Miss Didi; tcostell
However, think about your liberties under the Pantsuit's reign. What kind of country would we be? And would we even survive against radical Islam?

Will be reflecting on the Stalinist shortly. Will ping you

139 posted on 02/07/2007 7:28:43 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

To: Miss Didi; JulieRNR21; PGalt; All
I posted this elsewhere this morning. (It is an expansion of a prior post of mine.):

"a law that would make it illegal to perform a specific abortion procedure conducted in the last six months of pregnancy known as 'partial birth abortion,' except in cases necessary to save the life of the mother."

 

This is exactly Rudy Giuliani's position.

Moreover, he will appoint justices who are strict constructionists, in the mold of Alito, Roberts and Scalia. Isn't that the bottom line to stop these horrendous procedures and to protect life and liberty?


Yet some here are arguing, threatening, that if the candidate is too 'liberal,' they will place their de facto vote for a Stalinist. Does this make any sense?

The political direction of our government lags behind, but reflects the political direction of the electorate. If the conservative cause grows, it will be reflected in political wins. If it is in decline, it will face losses.

It does the conservative cause no good to become petulant and self-destructive.

Personally, I will back whichever candidate gets the nomination. I understand that it is crucial to keep the clintons out of the White House.

But some who find the Republican candidate too 'liberal' will be placing their de facto vote for a Stalinist (and a rapist, and someone who wants to crush the Religious Right and who was the proximate cause of 9/11).

And the payoff: a Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court instead of an Alito, Roberts or Scalia, marginalization, if not worse, of their religious beliefs.... And G-d knows what depth of failure in the War on Terror. Good going.

I find it hard to believe that those people aren't able to discern the difference between Giuliani and clinton. Frankly, if true, it is frightening.

I am advocating for Giuliani not because of his ideology. I am advocating for him because I believe he can win, and because I believe he possesses the qualities that this country desperately needs in these perilous times.

The other night, I heard a man who is not perfect, but a man of rare intelligence, humility, warmth, competence, strength and leadership.

We will be fortunate, indeed, and our babies, born and unborn, living and not yet imagined, will be infinitely safer, if he is our next president.

146 posted on 02/08/2007 5:49:24 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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