Posted on 09/04/2002 3:54:14 PM PDT by Reformed
September 3, 2002
When will Gray Davis recognize that Californians do not want to pay more taxes for his new abortion bills?
Tomorrow, Governor Davis is planning to sign into law three new abortion bills: SB 1301, which makes abortion "made easier;" AB 1860, which provides so-called "emergency contraception," and worstly, AB 2194, which forces gynecologists and obstretricians to undergo abortion training.
Whatever happened to the Hippocratic Oath that doctors take to protect life? And what about the doctors' religious beliefs on the taking of life? Does Governor Davis care about the religious belief held by our Founding Fathers that innocent life is inalienable?
Apparently not, because Davis' signatures will force doctors to compromise their beliefs or to quit medicine altogether.
How many more freedoms are we going to allow to be taken away from us as Americans?
As Governor, I will uphold every Californian's right to life, born and unborn. I will reject any and all legislation that forces doctors to compromise their respect for life and encourages the practice of abortion.
It is time to put principle over politics. I urge Governor Davis to examine his conscience before tomorrow's signing.
___
REINHOLD GULKE is the American Independent Party (AIP) nominee for Governor. The AIP is the California affiliate of the national Constitution Party
.
(Though I honestly can't help but wonder what'll be next.)
I just have a visual image of this guy sitting in his Double-Wide pounding out press releases on his E-Machine before he posts them to FR and other Conservative websites. He probably will wait and start picking his Cabinet later on this evenin'. Once wrasslin' is over with.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
There are six candidates in the race for Governor.
If the mainstream media gives all of them a fair look, then any candidate may win this election with just 20% of the vote.
If Frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their asses when they jumped either.
I think the two party system stinks. It can only be defeated by fame and/or money. Ross Perot could have won in 92 if he didn't go nutty. Gulke hasn't a prayer of 2% let alone 20.
How small your God is.
All things are possible through Christ.
Duty is ours. Results are God's. It is our duty to vote for the best possible candidate based on the issues and principles. Let God control the results.
Don't be a conspiratorial whack-o, William. I know you're smarter than that.
Reinhold Gulke has been in the race longer than Bill Simon. Moreover, Gulke's AIP nomination has been a foregone certainty much longer than Simon's GOP nomination, which was determined on the final day of the Primary election. Therefore, an anti-Simon conspiracy rigged by Davis is impossible in light of the fact that no one could foresee that Simon would have obtained a plurality to defeat a heavily-favored Dick Riordan....
Similarly, Gulke needs a mere plurality to win this race, which sees six candidates vying for one position.
Tired cliche, I know. Especially since Al Gore used it to death. But true nonetheless.
I'm sure Mr Gulke is a nice man, but I had never heard of him before spotting this story. And Simon's views don't seem all that different from his; I don't think he would have signed the bills Davis did, so he is undeniably a better anti-abortion candidate than Davis.
I don't doubt Mr Gulkie's sincerity; I just don't want Davis to win this election. It would be truly awful for the state if he did.
D
Voters would then be filing into computerized voting booths on election day. Instead of seeing a slate of names or parties, they instead would see the exact same list of 10-15 core questions, yes or no, up or down.
This would take time and an educated voter of course, but each voter would then punch and have his replies tablulated.
The voter's choices would then be cross matched immediately with those of the candidates and record as being for that candidate whom philsophically was the closest to the wishes of the voter.
Again, every voter would be casting a vote for precisely the kind of policies he/she wanted.
And I know too things would happen
1) probably 80-90% of the bedrock conservative vote would go to a guy named Gulke and
2) you would never hear this "aw, don't vote for so-and-so since he doesn't have a prayer."
I think conservatives would get much more in terms of vote, and all would know that votes reflected not media spin or media blackouts or strategic vote casting, but rather objective voter preferences. Sure there might be problems with this, but I am tired of people being so solidly behind a candidate's position, and even often post the same viewpoints themselves on such forums as this, and yet, they will not vote for this choice on the ballot when they are actually given it. I don't know of this farce in any major multiparty democracy in the world.
/hopeful starry-eyed optimism>
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.