Posted on 01/31/2008 2:09:25 PM PST by Jim Robinson
My friends, I have to admit that I've been in a bit of a quandary since the Real Conservatives ® Thompson and Hunter dropped out of the race leaving us to to place our bets on one the four headless horsemen. But after having a day or three to sort it all out, I'm beginning to see a ray of hope.
Number one, my worst fear that the pro-abortion, pro-gay, anti-gun social liberal Rudy Giuliani might be nominated, and thereby bring an abrupt and unholy end to the pro-life conservative movement within the GOP has been allayed. His evil culture of death platform has been soundly rejected by the Republican voters. Thank God! If nothing else is gained, that alone is a huge victory for us!
And that leaves us with the unwelcome slippery task of having to determine and select the least evil of the three remaining RINOs. But wait! When choosing between evils, why not choose the good?
McCain is insane and there are many good reasons not to choose him, but I'll list just five: McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman, the Keating 5, and the Gang of 14. No thanks. McCain is out!
Romney ran on a pro-abortion platform, is pro gay rights, is prone to BIG government solutions, promises anything to anyone for a vote, and flip-flops on important issues. Can't trust him.
Now Governor Huckabee. Could this be the good vs evil? He's a Baptist minister. A genuine 100% pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, Southron Christian social conservative!
And that would be my reason no. 1 to support Huckabee. He has the trust and backing of the Christian evangelicals and the support of the Bible Belt. You cannot win the presidency without the South, and I believe the pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, pro-America Mike Huckabee is the most likely of the three GOP hopefuls to carry the South. And that's a pretty darn good reason!
My number two reason is that he is NOT McCain (and that's a pretty darn good reason too).
Number three (and this will be a tough one for a lot of my FReeper Friends) is that he is NOT Romney.
Numbers four and five are he's NOT Hillary and NOT Obama. Oohrah!
Number six, he plays a mean bass and he's a traditional favorite at Free Republic's infamous quadrennial Inaugural Balls in Washington, DC. Perhaps we could persuade President Huckabee to drop by our ball and perform his rocking rendition of "Sweet Home Alabama!" Now, wouldn't that be a hoot!
Number seven, if we can keep Huckabee in the race all the way through, thus preventing McCain or Romney from gaining enough delegates to win the nomination, then maybe, just maybe a deadlocked convention might seek out another candidate. One who can re-unite the Reagan Coalition, save the GOP, and put us back on the conservative track. Of course, my personal favorite to be that man would be FRed Thompson.
Woo hoo!!
Let it ring out through grassroots America and on to the convention! Support life! Support the GOP! Support Huckabee! And re-draft FRed Thompson!!
Never give in, never give up, and never lose hope.
Long live the Reagan Revolution!
I’m supporting the constitution party candidate, thank you very much. I see no difference between any of the candidates running, including Hitlerey and Obama.
How about the new passionate, pro life, Mitt Romney from 2005 when the awesome weight of his prior support of death had shaken him to his core?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxV-QNXoRIc&mode=related&search=
You pulled the Huckabee stuff we posted a few weeks ago. Just saying. Welcome aboard!
I don’t know all the details of those things. But even if they are as bad as I can fear, I think he’s much easier to defend than the alternatives.
Huckabee won’t win. Huckabee may even endorse McCain. Either way he is effectively in the service of McCain. McCain will ask Ted Kennedy for his Supreme Court recommendations. Gang of 14. That’s my analysis on the abortion matter.
bass guitarist here: where’s the U tube or other clip on line to here some riffs? (I say this with a smile): put up or shut up!
“No need to, I know how he governed, I don’t need to guess how he counseled. The stance of the LDS church against abortion is pretty clear. If Mitt had ever counseled someone to get an abortion outside of church policy, he would likely have been removed from leadership.”
Excerpt on the Web from an interview that puts the lie to what you said above::
“Saturday, 9 June 2007, 8:38 pm
Opinion: Suzan Mazur
Bishop Mitt Romney’s Sadistic Anti-Abortion Counseling: Judith Dushku Interview
By SUZAN MAZUR
Judy Dushku: It was in the late 1970s. She was a woman about 40 years old, 3 ½ to 4 months into her sixth pregnancy. We’ll call her woman “X”. She was an active member of the ward where Romney was bishop in Massachusetts, at that time in a neighboring community where I was not a member. The stake president was a doctor named Gordon and was an old friend of X.
X and her husband went to the hospital because she had an aching in her leg. Her doctor was alarmed after examining her, telling her she had developed blood clots and could not carry the pregnancy to full term. He said they’d have to give her blood thinners in order to get rid of the clots and that they would endanger the baby.
X had lost her first baby; the child was born with many physical problems and died at two or three weeks old. X was already the mother of four teenage children. This would have been her sixth.
Suzan Mazur: And X and her husband decided they would abort the child because her life was in danger.
Judy Dushku: Yes.
Suzan Mazur: And she advised her bishop – Mitt Romney – that she was going to terminate the pregnancy for medical reasons. And what did he say?
Judy Dushku: First of all the stake president – Gordon – came by to see X with a friend and said well it looks like you have to do this – terminate the pregnancy. He was perfectly comfortable with X’s decision, since both she and the child were in peril. And Gordon was technically higher in the LDS church hierarchy than Mitt was as bishop.
So then Mitt came in to the hospital. X thought Mitt had come to be comforting because that’s what bishops do. They have a pastoral role. But she said that instead he was critical.
He said – What do you think you’re doing?
She said – Well, we have to abort the baby because I have these blood clots.
And he said something to the effect of – Well, why do you get off easy when other women have their babies?
And she said – What are you talking about? This is a life threatening situation.
And he said – Well what about the life of the baby?
And she said – I have four other children and I think it would be really irresponsible to continue the pregnancy.
X said she found herself arguing with Romney about her medical crisis, said he was very unsympathetic, very critical, and said that under the circumstances in no way did he condone her aborting the child. And he left.
She was extremely distraught. Talked it over with her husband. They decided to go ahead with the abortion. After that she left the church.”
So, looks like Romney has already been snookered. Too late for him. If Huckabee drops out and backs McCain, McCain benefits. If Huckabee stays in McCain also benefits. In either case, it’s unlikely that Huckabee’s pro-life Christian supporters are going to switch to Romney with his pro abortion background. But if Huckabee stays in and no candidate receives the prerequisite number of delegates to win the nomination, then what?
A vote for Huck props up the Ancient Mariner and puts the election in the hands of unapologetically pro-abort politicians. While not happy with his track record I reluctantly believe the pro-life movement’s best opportunity lies with Romney.
If and when Romney goes down, I accept the fact that I will most certainly die in a nation that will legally kill unborn children for the rest of my days.
I am 44.
Do you have a link to that?
Ansel, allow me to "translate" English for you just like somebody else "translated" the English Bible into an English translation 170-odd years ago: When Seven cites this LDS statement saying "competent physician," what he doesn't tell you is that over 90% of all abortions today occur in free-standing abortion clinics "courtesy" of either local full-time abortionists or by circuit-riding abortionists who traverse between 2 or more communities in a region. The vast # of abortions are NOT done by part-time OB GYNS in hospitals or as an outpatient in a doc's office (not any more). So, in 90% of the cases--higher if the girl/woman/partner or her family really wants the abortion [cause, duh, they'll just take her to an abortionist, not their family doc]--that "competent physician" who will say she "needs" the abortion is a money-grubbing, bottom-feeder abortionist who gets paid by how high the body pile is stacked!
A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.
English translation into English: Since docs have been wrong thousands of times in "forecasting" disabilities, this statement should read, "A competent prophet-physician determines that the baby is disabled and can pinpoint their death day within usually 4-5 months..." [there, fixed it] Oh, and please note, just because this disabled boy or girl is going to die, why, that means they are now eligible for dismemberment with nothing given to the baby to offset the pain...Hmmm...aren't we all going to die??? Don't we ALL have a human condition that will mean we won't survive that disability we have called "sin?" And what does it say about a church when it targets a disabled child who's not causing any problems (under than emotional ones) for a 100% healthy mom?
Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons involved have consulted with their local church leaders and feel through personal prayer that their decision is correct.
English translation into English: Since we don't want the Mom or Dad or Grandparents of the baby to actually accept any responsibility for what they are about to do, why, we'll make God the great culprit--a before-the-act accomplice who ordered the "hit" job...Yeah, that's it...Why, He told us to dismember the baby!!! Why, we prayed about it (and our church was fully encouraging that we do...[whisper: as if those who pray about murdering a baby or not don't already likely have a predisposition toward carrying it out end-whisper] )
So, in summary, what have we learned about the "god" of this "general" counsel? Well, he doesn't always like severely disabled babies; or babies whose daddies were the sickest sinners (rapists & family rapists)...but he does bless abortionists & their business recommends...well, as long as they're "competent"...and be sure to note that I left in a caveat of this isn't "always" so because his ordering these hit jobs isn't "automatic"--why, sometimes, he just let's 'em live despite their disability or geneaology!
” But as an appointer of Supreme Court justices, his personal convictions and his respect for the law are both strengths.”
It is true that one out of four of his judges were registered to vote republican.
If he gets four Supreme Court appointments his record shows that one of them will at least be registered republican, it is something to cling to.
Please Duncan Hunter, please give Huckabee wisdom in other areas than pro-life and marriage.
Having two different positions, one for Mormons and one for non-Mormons is not a very good selling point for most of us.
He seems to have wanted the Mormon women to be ‘adamantly pro-life’ even until death, while he sold ‘pro-choice’ to the rest of us.
I think the brokered convention is a wishful-thinking longshot now that the field has narrowed so much. Besides, McCain would personally terrorize each and every delegate if he won the plurality and the subject came up, and he would know how to work the system for that.
I gauge Romney to genuinely not be pro-abortion. I think his liberal adversaries gleefully forced him onto the “third rail” knowing that his religion and the political climate of Massachusetts made it exceptionally awkward for him. Now those awkward moments against Kennedy in Massachusetts make good mud to throw back at him during the Republican primary. I think he’s truly our best hope.
More than that, I think I was too cynical about him before. His answers at the Reagan Library debate were all excellent.
“Keep pimping McDouche.”
I do not support McCain.
He seems to have wanted the Mormon women to be ‘adamantly pro-life’ even until death, while he sold ‘pro-choice’ to the rest of us.
He is now pro-life. You seem to want to punish him for that. Deborah Roe, of Roe vs. Wade fame, was obviously for abortion. She is now adamantly against abortion. You would have preferred she stay pro-choice? You win someone over to your side and then you proceed to villify that person for not acting fast enough to suit you? Romney was always personally pro-life as evidenced by his 5 sons and his 11 grandchildren. In his public life as Governor of an extremely liberal state that would brook no other way, he went along with the law as it was. However, at every opportunity he could, he came down on the side of pro-life in his decisions in office. Now, you can continue to bury the hatchet in the man’s back for no good reason, but it is small of you to do so. Geez, no one is going to want to switch to the pro-life side with moral purists like you around ready to greet them with “hello, baby killer, what took you so long.” Lots of converts to be had with that attitude.
Amen to that. And don’t even think about mentioning the border while you do it.
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.