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

To: sitetest

People keep *proving* my point ...
They are willing to give Reagan the Icon slack they won’t give real-live candidates today. Why are you bothering to defend Reagan’s actions when *he himself* admitted he was wrong! And this lame “That’s certainly how the law was [mis]interpreted, but not how it was written.” It was written that way or it wouldnt have been abel to be ‘misinterpreted’. The exception in law was not life it was ‘health’ and we all know that is a mack-truck sized loophole. Reagan was warned about it even then. He signed it. A mistake.

Why cant people admit that and *move on*? Why this bizarre refusal to admit Saint Gipper once made a mistake?

“People aren’t lying when they note that ...”

Reagan was a FDR and Truman Democrat. For more than 30 years.

yet today we can’t even accept a *convert* who is banging on the gates to join the cause. fer cryin out loud, we are outnumbered and need reinforcements. This is a fine way to lose in 2008. Bash our own candidates when they say truthful things and disdain politicians for moving in our direction politically.

What moron came up with *that* as a political activism strategy? Dumb as a post!


126 posted on 05/09/2007 8:54:16 PM PDT by WOSG (The 4-fold path to save America - Think right, act right, speak right, vote right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]


To: WOSG

Converts are fine. They’re more than welcome to climb on the bus. But, they’re not welcome to drive, until we’re a whole lot more sure that they’re not still committed to driving American life and liberty over a cliff.


127 posted on 05/09/2007 8:56:21 PM PDT by EternalVigilance ("A [Free] Republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]

To: WOSG
Dear WOSG,

Mr. Reagan was wrong in that he wasn’t 100% pro-life in 1967.

But 95% pro-life isn’t the same as “pro-choice.”

On the other hand, at least since 1994, Mr. Romney bragged that he’d been in favor of legal abortion since at least 1970.

If you can’t see the difference between someone who believes there should be some access to legal abortion in exception cases, and someone who believes that abortion should generally be legal, I can’t help you too much.

“Why cant people admit that and *move on*? Why this bizarre refusal to admit Saint Gipper once made a mistake?”

I don’t have a problem with the fact that Mr. Reagan erred.

I DO have a problem when people lie that he was a pro-abort, especially to make their own pro-abort past look better.

As for Mr. Romney’s candidacy, I think that if he were better at faking his sincerity, he’d get a lot more votes.

His problem is not that he “converted,” but rather that his “conversion” appears to be a fraud.


sitetest

139 posted on 05/09/2007 9:16:00 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | 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