Posted on 12/21/2001 6:52:48 PM PST by LSUsoph
Dick Cheney due to health reasons decides to withdrawl his name from the ticket in 2004 after a very successful term as Vice President. He figures he can still stay close to the President and advise him in any way possible, but not have to deal with the every day hustle of being the Vice-President of the country. So who would President Bush pick to be his new VP? I think Condi Rice would be a wonderful choice but I dont know if this country (especially the Republican Party) is ready for a VP who is black, a woman, and from the South (Alabama). I also love Powell but would he and Pres Bush be able to work hand in hand as P-VP? Donald Rumsfeld is a terrific Sec of Defense and I think he would make a great President one day...maybe him being VP could lead us to 8 great years of a Rumsfeld Presidency after 8 great years of Bush. Other candidates that come to mind would be Tom Ridge, Liddy Dole, Ashcroft, and dare i say it...JOHN MCCAIN ( i know, i know, but i think the Bush-MCcain ticket would be a shoe in). My pick would have to be Rice, she is worth her weight in Gold. She is a genius, works well with Bush, and would really be great for the country. And what would the naysayers say after Bush nominates a black woman to be his right hand WOMman?? I think they would just have to throw up the white flag! GO DUBYA!
At least we are starting to understand each other now. I consider that should the pro-life issue be without a means of political participation in this country, that the United States would joing Germany in the 1930's and 1940's and cease to be a legitimate state. It would no longer have any hold on the loyalty of decent people. Should this country ever come to that point, I would hope for, and work for the overthrow of the government by any means necessary.
My challenge still stands. Show me where you have used either logic or facts on this thread and I will apologize. It would also satisfy my curiousity why you are angry that pro-lifers are dividing the conservative movement by insisting on a pro-life president (not your exact words, so feel free to correct me), when you are creating more friction on this thread between conservatives than any pro-lifers are.
I would like to add that in general I have read your replies to certain threads and I respect your opinions and conduct on the other threads I have seen you post on. I do not think that this thread reflects as well on you though.
2. She's a moderate on choice, believing in parental notification and a ban on partial birth abortion. A bunch of us are praying for her enlightenment to come to understand that LIFE comes before Liberty in the Declaration of Independence, and that between good and evil, God is not neutral. This will be a hurdle that a number of people will not leap for her if she doesn't see the light on the road to Damacus.
3. The question about never having run for office. I have seen her handle the press conferences, and she's a natural. I think she'd mop the floor with anyone she went up against and do it with grace and wit.
4. Not important now, but bound to be discussed and possibly could be an issue. Does anyone know the lady's sexual orientation?
Is this like being a "little bit pregnant".
You either value life, or you view abortion as no different than calling the "Orkin" man for pest control.
There is no path for the GOP but pro-life, for on the other path lies true evil.
I take it your morality is better. Please enlighten me as to the nature and the character of this system. Use really small words as I am not a libertarian, and I am not as intellectually and ethically developed as you are. I am just part of the 99.999999999% of the the population you refer to statists (I guess trash would be more appropriate, after all you guys treat everyone else like it).
Watts is a great Congressman, and a great guy, but I don't think he is up the the Presidential job. I wouldn't go with him unless he takes a real leap in depth.
As for those touting Kasich. He strikes me as too naive.
And Ridge is too soft spoken. It may be the military training, but it makes me feel at best disappointed and at worst, ....well, creepy.
IM2Phat4U posted an article in another thread which showing some interesting exit poll information: Of those voting Republicans whose primary voting concern was abortion, 58% voted of Bush and 41% voted for Gore.
That should be a major wake up for the GOP. There are a hefty number of Republicans who voted outside their party because of abortion.
No, he will probably vote third party or just go fishing rather than drag himself to the polls and vote for a child killer. I will do the same thing.
What you fail to recognize here is that all Conservatives aren't of the "fiscal" variety. Some are Conservative because of an ideological bent, Guns and abortion are two very important issues that have and will continue to divide the party because the loss of either innocent human life for the sake of convience or the loss of our Constitutional Right's for the sake of "safety" simply will not be tolerated by many Conservatives.
Many of us will walk first.
Bernard Goldberg recently used the example of the women who stated that Nixon couldn't have won because everyone she knows voted for McGovern. We are seeing a lot of this logic on this thread.
The law (SCOTUS) is pro-abortion. The president cannot, alone, change that. This ONE-ISSUE litmus test which, IMHO, is a relative non-issue, has done more harm in electing OTHERWISE qualified CONSERVATIVES, than any other.
I do not believe that leaning pro-abortion cancels out ALL other conservative views.
I assume you realize, lawdude, that the only way to change this is by appointing judges who will accurately interpret the Constitution. And the President gets to appoint Supreme Court Justices.
Clinton had no problem finding to radically pro-abortion judges, appointing them, and having them overwhelmingly confirmed.
You nominate Kasich, you lose a lot of people like me, who care deeply about the Second Amendment.
I just think he ought to be on people's radar screens.
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.