Posted on 09/18/2007 8:04:36 PM PDT by freedomdefender
Monday night the Value Voters Debate for Republicans was skipped by the so-called “top” candidates, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, and John McCain. Thus showing they don’t have any values, and are chicken.
The Value Voters Debate involved the Republican “base,” the folks who win elections. The “top” candidates ignored them.
Of course, Ron Paul attended, and won. He has more values than all the other candidates combined. Here’s his closing statement.
And here are the questions the “top” four candidates refused to answer by not attending. Even though they weren’t there, lecterns were set up for them, and questions were asked. There were no answers, of course. But the questions are revealing.
As quoted in Salon’s War Room:
Question for Rudy Giuliani, asked by a teenage girl with an apparent speech impediment:
“Eighteen years ago, an abortionist was hired to kill me, but he failed. Nuns came and rescued me and took me to the hospital, where I stayed for two months. My heroic parents then adopted me. Mayor Giuliani, your position on abortion would have left me dead. Now that you see me, Mayor Giuliani, do you honestly believe that an abortionist had a right to kill me?”
Question for Mitt Romney, asked by Peter LaBarbera from Americans for Truth About Homosexuality:
“Governor Romney, you are running as a pro-life and pro-marriage candidate, but you have a history of being strongly pro-abortion on demand and pro-homosexual. You supported Roe v. Wade and said abortion should be, quote, ’safe and legal.’ In 2002, you opposed a state constitutional amendment that would have stopped homosexual so-called marriage in Massachusetts. You said homosexuals should be allowed in the Boy Scouts of America and, as governor, you officially celebrated ‘Gay-Straight Youth Pride Day,’ whatever that is. You sat on Marriott’s board of directors for 10 years, while it profited off the sale of hardcore pornographic videos to its guests. My question is: Why should voters trust you after you spent so much of your career aggressively promoting anti-life and anti-family positions? I understand a change of heart, but a change of position on life, marriage, gun control, pornography and immigration, all preceding your run for president?”
Question for Fred Thompson, asked by Mat Staver, founder of the Liberty Counsel:
“While you were senator, you opposed the federal marriage amendment, but recently you stated that you would support a marriage amendment that would prevent judges from imposing same-sex marriage, so long as it would not prohibit state legislatures from adopting same-sex marriage. This reasoning is like saying that you favor a constitutional amendment that prohibits judges from imposing slavery so long as the state legislatures were free to do so. Does not your position fundamentally misunderstand the universal importance of marriage in the same way my latter example about slavery indicates a misunderstanding of human dignity?”
Question for John McCain, asked by Janet Folger, president of Faith2Action:
“Senator McCain, I know that you were invited because your office called several times to say, “Stop the phone calls. We’ve shut down the campaign. We can’t make outgoing calls, there’s so many coming in,” encouraging us to come to the debate, which I just want to remind you that all those calls are all those voters. Just a little reminder. But my question to you, Senator McCain, is this: I was troubled by the lawsuit that you and other members of Congress filed against Wisconsin Right to Life for airing radio and television ads to encourage the public to lobby their senators to oppose the filibuster of the judicial candidates. While, thankfully, Wisconsin Right to Life won the lawsuit, was it really your goal to gag and prevent groups from being involved in the legislative process during the ‘no free speech zones,’ 60 days before a general election and 30 days prior to a primary election, as your campaign finance reform law required?”
How much aluminum foil was there?
Once again you are avoiding the issue myfriend, you are not answering my “faulty logic” thereby diluting your point becuase you fail to answer it; and as a result my points are not seen as faulty (becuase they aren’t)..
I could care less what you call (helper of Democrats..ect?)
AND you didn’t answer my question: Can I take that as a, YES?
Sure makes sense now..
You sure as hell are not going to get better Judges, economy or respect from Democrats. So why do things that help them get elected?
I’ve heard all the religious or pure conservative arguments for most of a decade now and it is immature to think that way.
What are the fruits of what you want to do?
President Hillary Clinton.
That is why you do the best you can in the primary and then go for the Republican.
You are going to have either a Republican or Democrat win and the Democrat side is so left it’s ridiculous now.
Support DUNCAN HUNTER.
Problem solved.
How is is immature?
You still refuse to anwser my point; you call them “immature”, “stupid”, yet my points STAND becuase they haven’t really been challenged..?
Yo, I don’t have to support the Republican candidate (as a Conservative) like I said, I think the Primary system is stacked: there isn’t a way for a true Ronald Reagan style conservative to win..and if a liberal does, I will NOT support them..
I think I will take the ANSWER to the Question of do You have personal vested interest in this fight as: YES.
Now you haven’t really pointed out why my arguments are “idiotic”..infact you really haven’t answered me at all.
Will you..?
In anycase instead of continueing to go in circles metaphorically. It is pretty much useless to argue with you unless you actually want to debate my points (and yours too, instead of the attacks!). SO unless you do, this will be my last post to you becuase YOU only post the same thing, over, and over, and over..again!
You don’t in the primary need to support the Republican candidate but during the main election you sure do unless you are for getting Democrats in power.
It really is as simple as that.
NO, I (WE Principled Cons) do NOT@!
(chuckle)
That’s why many here including myself fell third party types are just liberals who like to talk a little conservatism to get by.
I look at what they do, and what they do gives liberals more power than conservatives, so that is where I consider their loyalties to be since that is the outcome they enable.
FELL = FEEL
Oh yes you are!! Don't you realize the 'new' definition for patriotism is partisanship?!? If you don't support the 'right' government idiot (and show a good dose of jingoism), you can't be patriotic....
Of course the attitude that has taken over the Presidential nomination process is pretty much what we were warned of by the Framers.
Aw jeez. I bet I skipped church the week these guys were appointed guardian of my values.
Like I said myfriend; I am only taking this measure (this EXTREME measure) for the President ‘08, because I think it is EXTREME circumstances; and we Can-not afford a liberal especially a liberal Republican President!
I think I got ~memmo~ quite clear from A CA Guy..several times.
Afterall My Soul is bought and ~PAID~ for by the Republican Party, not Jesus Christ (Sarc/off).
Nah, they just don't view the group "Value Voters" as worthy of their time.
By the way, I am a values voter, but I would never want to be affiliated with a group that has such narcissistic tendencies.
Nope, he lost, even with the spamming...
Results Summary
Mike Huckabee 63%
Ron Paul 12%
Alan Keyes 7%
Sam Brownback 5%
Duncan Hunter 4%
Fred Thompson 4%
Tom Tancredo 2%
John Cox 1%
Rudy Giuliani 1%
John McCain 1%
Mitt Romney 0%
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.