Posted on 11/12/2008 4:26:15 AM PST by prairiebreeze
Scroll down the page on this link and they have several references to it:
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Michael_Steele.htm
Who can forget the vile Anita Hill?
What a disgrace she is.
If a politician opposes overturning Roe/Wade, then they are a clone of Ted Kennedy on that subject. Ted maintains he’s a Catholic, and that he “personally” opposes abortion, but he doesn’t want to “impose” his beliefs, yada, yada.
If we want a culture of life, we cannot tread on the principle of the sacredness of life.
Actions speak the truth.
Killing babies or agreeing to ANYTHING that aids or abetts the killing of babies in any way is evidence that we don’t truly believe in the sacredness of life.
Roe v. Wade MUST be overturned, though to protect life we will have to go much further.
Without some form of human life amendment, abortion will still be widespread.
I am not interested in any law that ends with some version of “and then you can kill the baby.” I want abortion gone except for the handful of cases where without a D&C the mother and generally the baby will die.
Steele is strongly pro-life. Just because he is not for the immediate repeal of Roe v. Wade doesn’t mean he isn’t for its eventual repeal. He is simply being realistic at this point in that it can’t be overturned. Until we get a majority of pro-life Supreme Court Justices, Roe v. Wade will not be repealed. Steele once studied for the Catholic priesthood, but decided against it. He may be a little on the AA side and he is a little squishy on the death penalty, but he is and always is pro-life. He is the right man for the right job like this. I’ve heard him speak, and he is far a better speaker than Obama. Very eloquent, very passionate, and very sincere. I think he will be aggressive but non-threatening in rebuilding the RNC. He will make us proud. Plus, his mom is a native South Carolinian.
So you’re okay with Newt pushing for Immigration Reform?
When the Republican Party gets its Conservative Principles back, it will get me back.
...and not before.
I can't say for sure, but I think that Mr. Steele's statement in 2006 was a compromise of what he truly believes, in order to get elected.
If he still holds that view - that Roe shouldn't go - then HE should go.
To the Party of Satan.
However, if he is willing to repudiate that statement - I don't much care what lie he tells to do it - then although I disagree with him for making the compromise, living in Maryland, I will at least understand why he did it.
It's not like he's spent the last decade or two of political life saying that Roe should stay, on the contrary.
sitetest
I just read an article by Ken Blackwell against racial preferences. I wish I had noted the site, but I didn’t.
It just occurred to me that he might make a good candidate.
No ,I am not. So are you for Steele being moderate on everything? Only the two have been put out there in the last few days. Newt is the better option.
With that definition in hand, Michael Steele is Pro-Abortion.
Now, show me a quote where Michael Steele has publicly stated that he believes Roe v. Wade should be overturned.
...............
Crickets
lame really lame.
Indeed. Steele's position is as lame as it gets.
“I get the feeling he is really pro-life but he was trying to win a Senate seat in an a very Liberal state, but I don’t like the pandering.”
I’m from Maryland. That’s exactly the case. He’s a real conservative and during the Senate election he tried to make the point in uber liberal Maryland, that there is nothing he can do as a US Senator to overturn RW.
He’s always been Pro Life. I prefer Gingrich myself, but Gingrich apparently took himself out of 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.