Posted on 04/05/2007 11:53:02 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Except I already showed you just how loosely he defines strict constructionism.
Throw in the fact that he hates abortion so much that he addressed NARAL twice, and he cannot possibly present any positive to the pro-life movement now.
Why are you so logical? It’s not allowed on a Rudy bashing post! ;-)
Thanks...I’ve actually two of them....
Thoughtful post.
Duncan would be my candidate but he’s a 2 percenter. Let’s get real. The idea is to make sure Hitlary/Clintonista’s don’t set foot in the WH again. Anyone who doesn’t see that is not too bright.
The name of the game is to WIN.
No, I'd say they "got" Rudy. But even if Rudy is pro choice in his heart of hearts, he should not have replied the way he did. One can be pro-choice while recognizing that the SCOTUS over-stepped its bounds in 1973.
Well the latest Fox poll said the American people think a Democrat will win in 2008. And I believe that if the Conservatives play dirty and alienate their top three candidates they will LOSE just like the American people say they will.
President? Yes.
Pope? Probably not.
Wow - that’s an interesting observation.
((((PING))))
I’m a maverick. First I try to see things clearly. Then I think about it, and draw meaningful conclusions.
Increasingly on both sides of the political aisle, I see people coming to their conclusion first and then try and figure out how to justify it.
Bad form, for liberals or conservatives.
But...doesn't it depend on what Rudy's definition of the word "is" is...?
That’s showing a nice sense of humor - I laughed anyway.
I try to call them like they are, even if I don’t like what I see.
The tide is turning indeed - against the pro aborts! Pro lifers are growing within the Democratic party at the grass roots level, challenging the totalitarian party line.
The public tide is going to force Dems in office to change their positions. Watch for it.
Hardly. I don't think there has been a major SCOTUS abortion decision since Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and in that case the majority was O’Conner, Kennedy, Souter, Blackmun and Stevens.
Alito has now replaced O'Conner. Kennedy is the only swing vote, and from what I have heard, he feels conned by being convinced to vote with the majority in Casey and is moving back more to a pro-life stance.
So would Rudy appoint another strict constructionist who would overturn Roe as activism? Or keep it as precedent?
The tiebreaker goes to Rudy saying presidents appoint judges who agree with a president's basic philosophy. And he is showing himself to be pro-choice in his recent statements.
Rudy would NOT be a catalyst for overturning Roe. His past efforts at smoke and mirrors have been shown as just that.
I take no pleasure in it, as I have been pro life my entire life. But I gotta call it like it is.
My compliments for reasoned and rare discussion.
That's a hoot. Americans are looking at the current top three GOP candidates and deciding the Dems will win. What does that say about the top three?
I will tell you what might help change the tide to more pro-life. Those wonderful specials on filming inside the womb, like the one National Geographic did.
If you can watch that and not love life - you need to watch it again.
Beautiful.
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.