Posted on 02/18/2008 6:26:34 AM PST by Mr. Brightside
"He is pro-life in his heart of hearts, in my opinion," said Rep. Christopher H. Smith, New Jersey Republican and a pro-life movement leader, who said Mr. McCain's commitment stretches back across decades of votes in the House and Senate.
"When you contrast him with the alternative and you think about such things as Supreme Court appointments, McCain is a far better choice," said Barbara L. Lyons, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, an organization that took Mr. McCain all the way to the Supreme Court over his campaign-finance laws, and won.
"From my perspective, I see him as someone we can enthusiastically support, and I look forward to his getting elected," Mr. Jakubczyk (president of Arizona Right to Life) said, adding they have endorsed Mr. McCain every time he has run in Arizona.
"I have been on the campaign trail, I have been at meetings with him, I have been at organization and party gatherings, the issue with him is very clear that he's pro-life," (Jan Brewer, Arizona Secretary of State) said.
For Matt Salmon, a strong pro-life advocate and former congressman from Arizona, there's no doubt where Mr. McCain comes down.
"I have been with John McCain through thick and thin. This is a man I truly believe in, and I could not be as supportive as I am if I thought there was any ounce of equivocation," he said.
Mr. Salmon said that was solidified during his 1994 campaign for Congress when he was the only pro-life candidate in a crowded field of Republicans. "He endorsed me in that primary, and he told me the reason he did was because of my pro-life stance," Mr. Salmon said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
The election is not over Sherlock.
My point is that if someone has a 100 percent prolife voting record, and a ZERO chance of winning the election, he will lose... guaranteed.
Sandra Day O'Connor was an absolutely horrible Supreme Court Justice, and McCain would undoubtedly appoint judges just as destructive to the country's cultural fabric as she was.
Thus, it is worse than pointless for social conservatives to vote for McCain.
You have the pattern down pat. Expect it again.
Good. Now it won’t be an issue when he pulls pro-life out of the platofrm.
That is the real John McCain.
He has been fronting for 9 years since in order to get the Republican presidential nomination that he just secured.
Yeah. Social conservatives should vote for Obama. /sarc
Right to Life has endorsed him in every election because of his pro life voting record.
McCain is not pulling out the pro-life plank. He could not do it even if he wanted to.
McCain is pro life. Over the last THREE DECADES he has accumulated very high rating with Right to Life and a ZERO percent voting record with NARAL.
They did? I seem to remember NRLC endorsing Bush in 2000, not McCain. McCain sought to weken pro-life in the platform in 2000. He attacked Bush in the 2000 primary for being pro-life. He's often disparaged pro-lifers, talked about how the party needs to get rid of them, and how lack of abortion is a threat to women. He's told reporters and staffers he doesn't feel strongly about abortion- he just needs to pander because he's a Republican. Don't take my word for it, the NRLC's Executive Director said this: http://www.nrlc.org/news/2000/NRL02/doug.html
In a McCain GOP, pro-life issues will be DOA.
McCain would never do that, because it would mean the repealing of his signature legislation. Besides, the Dems will let a conservative be replaced by a conservatice justice, but even at 55 GOP Senators, they would never, ever let a conservative replace one of the left-leaning justies.
*********************************
And while now former candidate Fred Thompson, the former senator from Tennessee, won the coveted endorsement from the National Right to Life Committee, McCain’s voting record on the issue is just fine, says David O’Steen, the group’s executive director.
“He’s been very consistent; he hasn’t changed his position,” O’Steen says. *** He says that his group has supported McCain in every one of his senate races.*** “We’ve always considered him pro-life,” he says.
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, says her group has always considered McCain pro-life as well. And it’s not just abortion, she says.
“He voted against family planning, he voted against the freedom of access to clinic entrances — that was about violence against women in clinics,” Keenan says, adding, “He voted against funding for teen pregnancy-prevention programs, and making sure that abstinence only was medically accurate. This is very, very extreme.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1964362/posts
**********************************
Actually it is, Watson. McCain doesn't stand a chance against Hillary or Obama.
Compared to YOUR candidate?
Please tell me who that is Holmes.
Alan Keyes? Hunter?
So the NRLC was lying in 2000?
Read the quote.
Right to Life has endorsed McCain in EVERY congressional and senate race.
They chose Bush over McCain in 2000 for president.
My candidate is Paul. Theoretically, he matches up much better against Obama or Hillary than McCain. McCain only won the primaries off the backs of independents & Dems who crossed over. But they're not going to vote for him in the general, in addition to traditional conservatives who are going to stay home in droves.
Paul might have been a kook on the war but he would have neutralized the issue against Obama/Hillary and most of those independents and traditional liberals that are now swooning over Obama would have voted for him. And we all know on economic policy, trade, taxes, etc Paul would have beaten Obama/Hillary with both hands tied behind his back. The GOP is a dying party bub, they have abandoned the traditional conservatism that Paul advocated, and their embracing of McCain will be the final nail in their coffin.
Show me ANY poll that proves your point.
Just ONE poll.
No poll needed. Of the Republican candidates, Paul was the only one that attracted a huge, unprecedented grassroots following. He attracted lots of newcomers, old-line conservatives, and libertarians to his cause.
In a general election matchup with Obama, Paul would have not only retained the traditional conservative base, there would be no 3rd parties or libertarians voting LP. They'd be voting for Paul, and he'd get a chunk of the independent vote as well.
Now you have McCain who is at odds with a demoralized conservative base and all of his so-called moderate and independent friends will desert him in the end.
In other words, Paul had a large following in your own mind.
Paul would have done as well against the democrat as Dennis Kook-inish would do against the Republican candidate.
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.