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

Skip to comments.

Condi "Mildly Pro-Choice"
http://www.drudgereport.com ^ | 3-11-2005 | Matt Drudge

Posted on 03/11/2005 6:32:41 PM PST by Sola Veritas

Rice pointedly declined to rule out running for president in 2008 on Friday during an hour-long interview with reporters at WASHINGTON TIMES, top sources tell DRUDGE. Rice gave her most detailed explanation of a 'mildly pro-choice' stance on abortion, she would not want the government 'forcing its views' on abortion... She explained that she is libertarian on the issue, adding: 'I have been concerned about a government role'... Developing late Friday for Saturday cycles... MORE...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; brown; condirice; drudge; hateconditime; keylife; stevebrown; stevebrownetc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 1,521-1,539 next last
To: Howlin

Yeah, that happens all the time, damnit, Howlin...FCOL.

Anything to hold onto the Death Culture around here...


241 posted on 03/11/2005 7:20:59 PM PST by ApesForEvolution (I just took a Muhammad and wiped my Jihadist with Mein Koran...come and get me nutbags.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6

:-)


242 posted on 03/11/2005 7:21:07 PM PST by Howlin (Free the Eason Jordan Tape!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: pa mom
My goodness, you'd throw out a reasoned intelligent candidate over one issue?

Ummm, yeah, the one issue where the candidate says murdering innocent babies is OK.

If you don't want an abortion, don't have one.

If you don't like slavery, don't own a slave.

Teach your children it's wrong.

Is that what you did? "Hey kids, murdering little babies is wrong, kinda, but not enough to keep you from voting for a murder advocate".

243 posted on 03/11/2005 7:21:26 PM PST by Protagoras (If the Republican Party enacts a new tax they will be out of power for at least a generation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution

Hiya Apes.


244 posted on 03/11/2005 7:21:31 PM PST by SerpentDove (What will happen at CBS? I don't give a Dan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: Righty_McRight

No, the president can't overturn Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court can. And who chooses the Supreme Court justices? The president, to be approved by the Senate. A pro-abortion president nominate pro-abortion justices. Acting like the abortion views of the president are irrelevant is ridiculous.


245 posted on 03/11/2005 7:21:47 PM PST by Irish Rose (Some people march to the beat of a different drummer. And some people tango!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
If conservatives with more libertarian views want to see a conservtive in the White House, then they will have to compromise on this issue.

Fine...if Ashcroft runs, I'll vote for him...If Jerry Falwell is the Republican candidate...I'll vote for him.

As long as the Democratic Party remains controlled by leftists, I will vote Republican.

Will you join me?

246 posted on 03/11/2005 7:21:51 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas

Amen.


247 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:06 PM PST by sine_nomine (Protect the weakest of the weak - the unborn babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
We don't need you as much as you think we do.

Without pro-lifers, the GOP would flat-line in short order.

248 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:07 PM PST by EternalVigilance (Taglinus FreeRepublicus: An awesome demonstration of the fact that Free Republic is awash in genius!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: moondoggie

Roe v. Wade could be "mutated" into something far worse if you had an Hillary Clinton appointed court ~ you might see a Chinese style population control program installed building on Roe v. Wade as a "mandatory" standard.


249 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:09 PM PST by muawiyah (gonna' be like with the anthrax thing ~ find a guy, harass him, let the terrorists escape)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution

I wonder though because everyone seems to be forgetting that Dubya 41 was pro-choice and switched in order to run for president, or was it to be Reagan's vp? Either way, if it was between Hillary and Condi, I'd be voting for Condi. No way I'd let Hillary win.


250 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:40 PM PST by cyborg (http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: zencat

>>Abortion is NOT something the Federal Government should decide. It's absurd to clog the courts and throw those in prison that choose it or practice.

Sure, good idea.. We'll just keep the government out of newborn killing too... It's absurd to clog the courts and throws hose in prison who choose it or practice it.

Why stop there? Let's allow toddler killing. It's not a federal issue after all...


251 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:43 PM PST by 1stFreedom (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sweetjane
Well-reasoned response.

A moronic response.

252 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:46 PM PST by Protagoras (If the Republican Party enacts a new tax they will be out of power for at least a generation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SerpentDove

It was maybe a little provocative.


253 posted on 03/11/2005 7:22:54 PM PST by marajade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

it does have advantages......I'm pro life myself but also think there are exceptions......I still think this is more a State issue.....I'd rather have a strong CIC and someone strong on terror........if we get a weak Pres on that cause many voted a 3rd party and we are attacked because of it, well abortions won't mean a whole lot if we can't defend our country......


254 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:02 PM PST by NorCalRepub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas

I certainly won't vote for Rice in a Republican primary, and I will vote independent in 2008 if she is the nominee. I don't see the "there" there in her "candidacy" that others do. But she could wind up the nominee. Why? Republicans hate being called "racist" or "sexist." And they think Rice would make them immune to such "charges." The GOP needs a backbone transplant.


255 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:18 PM PST by Theodore R. (Terri has already outlived Eleanor Centzone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

This thread is a great reminder of the importance of primaries, and the need for the party to stay the hell out of them and let the voters decide.

If some of the people on this thread are our "friends", the Stupid Party is in deeper trouble than I previously thought.


256 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:29 PM PST by Ogie Oglethorpe (The people have spoken...the b*stards!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Not all Republicans are single-issue voters.

And smart Republicans don't insult fellow Republicans with that Democrat slur.

257 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:36 PM PST by EternalVigilance (Taglinus FreeRepublicus: An awesome demonstration of the fact that Free Republic is awash in genius!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

"Yes, it means that she condones murder of the most helpless."

Where are you getting that from?


258 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:38 PM PST by marajade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Yes, it means that she condones murder of the most helpless.

No. It means she's carefully weighs the Life of the Child against the Liberty of the Mother. I beleive abortion should be allowed in the case of Rape, Incest, or risk of death to the Mother. Most of America does too - Republicans, Democrats, Independents.

259 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:44 PM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Sorry, it's not true; they THINK they do; but they voted in no larger numbers in 2004 than they did in 2000.

I understand this fact but take their number away and you have yourself lost candidacy.

260 posted on 03/11/2005 7:23:44 PM PST by smith288 (The GOP, Ditech of politics... "lost another one to GOP" - Howard dean)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 1,521-1,539 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