Condi "Mildly Pro-Choice"

http://www.drudgereport.com ^ | 3-11-2005 | Matt Drudge

[sandbar]

>No it's not.
>Pro choice is pro abortion.
>War has nothing to do with it.
>How pathetic.

No, what's pathetic is that you have not responded at all to my point. All you did is repeat the catch phrase above and the intellectual "No it's not".

So I'll say it again, to state that pro-choice is pro-death is the same as saying pro-war is pro-death. There are times when it is necessary. To say otherwise is as illogical as Michael Moore and the other loons with the "No excuse for war".

[Howlin]

Well, now, you know Bush isn't a real, true conservative.

[muawiyah]

Hey, it's OK for God to judge all He wants, but doggone it, He put me in this universe to lead a moral and righteous life. That does not include toleration of those who slaughter the innocent.

[Trinity_Tx]

I have no position on Condi either, but the problem with Mark Sanford is that he has no name recognition.

[pa mom]

I hate the direction our country is headed culturally. Our kids don't own video games, see PG-13 movies (minor exceptions--and they are 13) or MTV. We explain why we don't approve of these things.

The point is, by teaching our kids, we can fight against some of the sewer debris all around us. Even while abortion is legal if you are against it, tell them why. I hate smoking, but think it should be legal (though maybe not within 20 feet of me!) and I tell my kids why it's wrong.

[Howlin]

I'm sure you'd be delighted to tell somebody their child should die.

[Peach]

Um, maybe you didn't know, but most Republicans aren't one issue voters like so many on this thread.

And nearly all my friends are staunch conservatives, but they believe in exceptions regarding abortion.

This makes us less Republican in your eyes probably, but our vote is worth just as much as yours. More, probably. Because we'd NEVER sit home and let a Democrat win just because there's ONE issue we don't like in a Republican.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

In due time, should she run, we will know about Condi.

If she takes a strong pro-life position, she will win.

If she doesn't, she won't.

Many hear may hate that fact, but the only way the GOP wins the presidency is by bringing all the factions together (evangelicals, pro-growthers, moderates, etc.). Bush did that - by campaigning on base issues using moderate language.

Lose the pro-lifers, you have no chance of being elected - period.

It may be hard for some here to accept, but a GOP pro-abortion candidate simply cannot be elected President today (and I'm not talking about someone who merely supports the three exceptions). It may have been possible 20 years ago, but the tide of history is rolling and will not turn back, unless the GOP forfeits the pro-life fight.

[ApesForEvolution]

OMG U ARE UNREAL!

[Protagoras]

I am pro-life and pro-choice. Abortion should be legal, but NEVER occur.

Total BS.

But you inadvertantly stumbled into one truth, murder isn't a federal matter.

[Cicero]

I would happily vote for Ashcroft. I might also vote for Falwell, too. But he is NOT a politician. He's a decent man, but as a politician he has foot in mouth disease.

[wardaddy]

it's all part of the same theme.....liberalize or perish according to some.

though some have been social libs all along .

[Dan from Michigan]

IF the GOP wants to run a Pro-Death candidate, their organization and support will dry up in the South

And the Midwest. The life issue is number one among conservatives here in Michigan. I'd even put it ahead of guns and unions.

[Theodore R.]

I will never vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

If you were a TX voters, would you reelect Congressman Bonilla and Senator Hutchison even though both have "endorsed" Roe v. Wade?

[Howlin]

I see you are trying to change the subject from our last little exchange.

[editor-surveyor]

"No. It means she's carefully weighs the Life of the Child against the Liberty of the Mother."

SAve that crap for the outhouse, I wasn't born yesterday. Before Roe v Wade there never was any question, a doctor always saved the most viable life if there was any question, but in reality the question didn't arise; the unborn child is never any threat to the mother, and if any problem exists the child usually mis-caries spontaneously due to the lack of oxygen.

There is no liberty to take a life, it's murder.

[section9]

For the first time, I'm going to tell you to take your sarcasm and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

I respect your experience, but why the hell do you think she would give this kind of interview, without any clearance, to the Times, out of the blue? Look, I know you don't like her, but Bush has a legacy to look after, and George Allen just ain't gonna cut it. I know you don't want to believe that, but hey, some of us have to live outside the fringe.

Unless your living in fantasyland with Senator Alan Keyes.

From Illinois.

We can have an intelligent discussion, but you can take that sarcasm bullsh*t and talk with someone else.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[EternalVigilance]

Did you vote for President Bush? Condi's views mirror his.

No they don't.

[Graymatter]

I don't like it, any better than I like her endorsing LOST; but when the chips are down...We could either have a gung-ho pro-death Hillary (and all else she would do as president) or we can have a mildly pro-death candidate.

Think about that. President Hillary Clinton. She would do grievous harm to America as president, if we all refused to vote for Condi Rice.

I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me Hillary or give me Darth---is not a decision I can afford to avoid.

[FreedomCalls]

there is equivocating between the unborn slaughter for convenience and collateral damage in wartime

But you are doing the same thing. Allowing an exception for rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is threatened is not advocating "the slaughter of the unborn for convenience."