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

Skip to comments.

Republican Party Can't Support Mitch Daniels' Truce on Key Abortion Issues
Life News ^ | 8/12/10 | Tom Glessner

Posted on 08/12/2010 4:41:22 PM PDT by wagglebee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last
Putting “first things first” should clearly mean that the destruction of innocent human life in our nation must come to a screeching halt.

Exactly!

1 posted on 08/12/2010 4:41:25 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; Salvation; 8mmMauser

Pro-Life Ping


2 posted on 08/12/2010 4:42:10 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; Antoninus; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


3 posted on 08/12/2010 4:42:33 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

If protection of innocent life isn’t Priority One, what good are your other priorities? Just asking.

So we have a smaller government, that is pro-business, and the economy thrives, and doesn’t protect innocent life, what good is that in God’s Eye?


4 posted on 08/12/2010 4:46:38 PM PDT by J Edgar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

If the GOP adopts such a truce, I’m out of the party. “Truce” on social issues means surrender. The other party will not agree to such a truce. Their agenda will continue ahead.


5 posted on 08/12/2010 4:51:59 PM PDT by Antoninus (It's a degenerate society where dogs have more legal rights than unborn babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This guy isn’t what we can call a conservative political warrior is he?

Mitch Daniels:
“The next president, whoever he is, would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues. We’re going to just to have to agree to get along for a little while,’ until the economic issues have resolved.”

“Stop dividing people as these issues do — as this administration likes to do, sadly — and try to come together in concert to do some very difficult and novel things. And this was really just an expression of the — of the hope that we might, at least temporarily — nobody changing their mind, nobody surrendering their principles — put first things first.”


6 posted on 08/12/2010 4:55:05 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

I’m out now. I will vote for a conservative if there is one on the ballot, if not I’m writing one in.


7 posted on 08/12/2010 4:56:26 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Gov. Mitch Daniels = NO SALE


8 posted on 08/12/2010 4:59:25 PM PDT by patriot preacher (To be a good American Citizen and a Christian IS NOT a contradiction. (www.mygration.blogspot.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Not only is it that the GOP “can’t” do so, but it SHOULDN’T do so.


9 posted on 08/12/2010 5:12:18 PM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (The success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity. - Dr. Wm R. Thompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Not only is it that the GOP “can’t” do so, but it SHOULDN’T do so.


10 posted on 08/12/2010 5:12:25 PM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (The success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity. - Dr. Wm R. Thompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Putting “first things first” should clearly mean that the destruction of innocent human life in our nation must come to a screeching halt.

Here's reality: while I'm pro-life, the majority of people are somewhere in the middle. If asked "Do you wish to ban all abortion, even in the case of rape and incest, regardless of stage of pregnancy?" most people will say no. If asked "Do you wish to permit any abortion, and allow it to go on as a taxpayer funded form of serial birth control at any stage of pregnancy?" most people will say no.

Yet, these are the two factions on the abortion battlefield at this point in history.

If asked "do you want to make abortion in America solely a first trimester matter, ban taxpayer funded abortions entirely, and ban convenience abortions of healthy babies by healthy mothers entirely" most people will say yes.

This is a perfect example of not letting perfect be the enemy of good. America today is largely a pagan nation. Legislatively, this is about as good as you're going to get in a representative republic because frankly, the vast majority of Americans want to preserve the right to abortion in some instances. That's a fight for hearts and minds that cannot be won in the halls of congress or in the courts.

Finally, there are two ways to stop abortion in America. One is to reverse Roe v Wade. Given the current makeup of the court and Obama's two recent apointments, this isn't going to happen anytime soon. The other is to destroy America.

The first thing that the Republican party must do to save America when it gets enough power is to (1) repeal every bit of legislation Obama has passed, (2) countermand every executive order Obama has given, and (3) demand and accept the resignation of every Obama political apointee in the bureaucracy. (4) They must cut spending drastically. No more foreign aid. No more social programs. No more federal bureaucracies. HHS and Education are two that can go right now.

These are things that the Republican party of George W. Bush, John McCain, Michael Steele, and Mitt Romney won't be willing to do.

So take heed what sort of Republicans you send to DC.

Send Republicans who are conservative versions of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. Or we're finished as a nation.
11 posted on 08/12/2010 5:22:06 PM PDT by Yet_Again
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yet_Again

Mitch Daniels is no conservative, he has already come out against a major part of the conservative agenda, that is what the BS about “truce” is, he wants to somehow skip conservatism and yet be President.

Mitch is dead in the water. There are not enough liberaltarians to make up even a tiny portion of the conservatives that he has already lost by declaring war on them.


12 posted on 08/12/2010 5:29:10 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

From the Weekly Standard:

Mitch Daniels Doubles Down on “Truce”
Mark Hemingway writes:

I got a call this morning from Indiana Governor and rumored presidential candidate Mitch Daniels. In my column yesterday on his remarks about a “truce” on social issues, I left the door open to the possibility that the Governor’s remarks may not have been a “rhetorical misstep.”

Of course, if you know anything about Mitch Daniels in this respect he’s the anti-Obama. He’s far more concerned about communication than rhetoric, he’s thoughtful and rarely speaks without consideration. Rhetorical missteps are exceedingly rare.

And indeed, Daniels called me to say that he’s dead serious about the need for the next president to declare a truce. “It wasn’t something I just blurted out,” he told me. “It’s something I’ve been thinking about for a while.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/mitch-daniels-doubles-down-truce


13 posted on 08/12/2010 5:32:45 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yet_Again
What Daniels and his ilk need to understand is that politics is about matters far more important than mere money. Another 1.5 million sliced, diced and hamburgerized thoroughly innocent babies slaughtered while the materialists whine about the fate of their portfolios and the rates present and future of their taxes as somehow more important than the ongoing American Holocaust is no platform for victory over the barbarians running the SCOTUS, the Congress and the White House. If you are not on board for the end of abortion, then prepare to move to another country or to pay Comrade O's taxes because I am not the only conservative or the first one who will refuse to turn the GOP and the conservative movement over to a mindless pursuit of greed at the cost of the babies's lives. I am a Roman Catholic. My Church does not elect the likes of Obambam as pope. It deserves my first earthly allegiance and it will get that allegiance.

If the majority of Americans are somehow "in the middle," then they had better smarten up or they will be paying Obambam's taxes and submitting to his tyranny and that of others like him for as long as they are "in the middle" (the middle being defined as a willingness to soothe their consciences by having a vague willingness to threaten to shut off a handful of the more egregious abortions each year). Pro-lifers can sit out any contest between varying degrees of pro-aborts and I am betting they will. I know I will.

14 posted on 08/12/2010 5:47:18 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Society: Burn 'em Bright!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
We had sixteen years of clearly pro-life Presidents 1980-1988 and 2000-2008. During that period, abortion continued in all fifty states, with the only check on its growth being a (heartening) increase in pro-life sentiment during the last few years.

If Mitch Daniels appoints judges to the Federal bench who will vote to remove a right to abortion from case law, that's really all he can do. It's as much as Reagan or Bush did, and it's enough for me.

If you want to see who is responsible for the continuation of abortion in America, don't point to Mitch Daniels.

Look instead at the millions of Catholics and Protestants who talk the pro-life cause 364 days a year, but on Election Day vote for the Kennedys, Daleys, Durbins, Kerrys - anything to keep that government cheese coming.

My state of West Virginia is chock full of people like that, which is why I am more and more dubious about "social conservatives" every year.

15 posted on 08/12/2010 7:14:18 PM PDT by Notary Sojac (I've been ionized, but I'm okay now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

Since conservatism pretty much consists of what is called social conservatives, then you don’t have conservatism with out them.

The anti-social conservative category of voter is the base and the majority of the Democrat voting block.

Don’t let the minority of liberal but economically conservative deceive you into thinking that they make up even half of the conservative vote.


16 posted on 08/12/2010 10:33:11 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac
Look instead at the millions of Catholics and Protestants who talk the pro-life cause 364 days a year, but on Election Day vote for the Kennedys, Daleys, Durbins, Kerrys - anything to keep that government cheese coming.

Protestants have only voted Democrat in 1932, 1936 and 1964, so don't start mocking their conservatism.

You anti-social conservatives and seculars, vote overwhelmingly Democratic in every single election, you are their constituency.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

17 posted on 08/12/2010 10:41:58 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Daniels was recently quoted as saying that there needs to be a “truce” in the country on moral issues such as abortion.

This is the same guy who, a year or two ago, said that the Republican party needs to "get over Reagan".

At that moment I knew this Daniels guy was no good -- so this is no surprise.

18 posted on 08/12/2010 10:49:04 PM PDT by rhinohunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Do you consider Reagan and GWB to have been strong pro-life Presidents?

Other than encouraging speeches, and court appointments (which have yet to be tested on the issue) what exactly did they do to stop abortions?

I consider myself as pro-life as the vast majority of Freepers. It is one issue on which I disagree with my libertarian friends 100%.

What I do not believe is that it's particularly relevant to the Presidential election, other than not voting for a candidate who is explicitly pro abortion.

Abortion is going to gradually become extinct in our country. It is the one issue on which social conservatives clearly are winning over the hearts and minds of Americans. But it's not going to magically occur all at once on any given inauguration day.

19 posted on 08/13/2010 5:23:48 AM PDT by Notary Sojac (I've been ionized, but I'm okay now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac
Gw did get legislation passed to ban late term abortions (Obama set it aside), immediately. GWB also banned using fetal tissues for research and cloning, knowing that if allowed the demand for such tissues would increase greatly.

GWB did not make major executive orders, especially where they were largely opposed by the public... As I recall.

Ground once given back to the enemy, is seldom ever recovered. VERY POLITICAL!

To some of the poor it is desired, probably through lack of information and understanding. There is a morning after pill.

THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR ABORTION,EXCEPT RARE OCCASIONS WHEN IT IS LIFE THREATENING DUE TO A COMPLICATING DISEASE OF THE MOTHER. moo

God Help us in our day, in Jesus name,amen.

20 posted on 08/13/2010 8:05:11 AM PDT by geologist (The only answer to the troubles of this life is Jesus. A decision we all must make.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

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.

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