Posted on 03/11/2005 6:32:41 PM PST by Sola Veritas
The cultural pendulum here has swung center. Like we are still in election mode.
If we do this, we can win this.
Only 60 seats.
It goes on and on. One day we will shoot the elephant and all be riding asses and just get it over with.
I have one word: Whigs.
anybody who would withdraw a vote from a republican candidate and clear the way for Hillary on the basis of one issue can't be trusted.
You one issue people, your moral stance, your incredible short sightedness will help put a person in the WH who really really offends you and the republic. I think you would see this nation betrayed because of your rigid stances, your moralism.
Didn't you have one in 2004?
Why did I post that?
Because Condi and Bush have similar views on abortion. I thought that was clear. They both believe in the three exceptions.
Every pro-life leader in the country knew his position...including National Right to Life, whose position does not include a rape and incest exception. They endorsed him.
But that is not Condi's position. You and your friends are throwing dust up in the air, hoping folks can't see your subterfuge.
It was sarcasm.....I laughed.
Yes, I did vote Bush. He was the prolife candidate. The issue of the endangerment of the life of the mother has always been an issue which prolifers would consider "giving" on. The mothers life is life, like the babys life is life. We are prolife. But the life of the mother is not eminently in danger except uncommonly. One might say the diabetic pregnancy or the hyperthyroid pregnancy, or the patient with a disease heart valve is in danger. That my be true in uncommon cases, but these are far and away the exception. Today, the Rule is Kill the Baby if you choose. It is a profound decision made mostly capriciously for reasons of convienience. And a human life is taken,.... an innocent human life.
"I would say you are trying to persuade me to thinking like you do."
I am.
"Isn't that all we can ever do, really?"
That's a big part of it, but not all. We can put people in office who can do more.
Actually, I have not heard Rice speak at length. "Diplomats" rarely make interesting speeches. I never listened to George Shultz make a speak on diplomacy either. Or Edmund S. Muskie, not I. I think it will be difficult to find a Republican willing to stand up to the Clinton machine.
that guy's statement is not only ludicrous, but if that happened, then all the pregnant women killed in the attack would be having non consenual abortions anyway..brought to you by the weak Pres. on terror cause our FR friends wouldn't vote. ......how insane........
What are you talking about? The vast majority of right leaning Democrats are socially conservative. There are hardly any other right leaning Democrats that aren't socially conservative.
The same could be said for Clinton and Carter. In 98, no one outside of political junkies and Texas knew who Bush was outside of the fact that he's the son of George HW Bush. After a long and smart campaign, the name recognition problem will go away.
I forgot to mention: Al Haig was one of the few secretaries of state whose speeches were easy to listen to and understandable. And even he made gaffes.
I thank you kindly for making my point!
I have already been called a racist for being against illegal immigration. Guess I am always on the "wrong" (non-politically correct) side. Heehehee
I have been thinking all along that to fight Hillary's money/media machine, we may need Karl Rove. If Bush backs Condi, I wonder if Rove will be running her campaign.
I think everyone needs to read the article and hear Condi articulate and defend her position, whatever it is, before we all jump to conclusions.
I doubt Condi will wilt under the scrutiny. She has always come out magnificently when hard-pressed. The 9/11 commission hearings, the attacks by Richard Clarke and her attitude now at State. It may be worth it to consider that she hasn't run for any elected office, but a tough primary should be to her advantage.
Hillary, on the other hand, has to get her questions for interviews in advance and gets flustered when challenged at all. She hardly had a hard campaign against Lazio for the Senate as she played the victim card after one of their debates. She also went on a listening tour so she didn't really have to talk about her positions, she could just hear people's concerns. Unless Giuliani runs against her in 2008, she will not have a hard run.
Whoever runs against Hillary would get me vote. For me keeping that woman out of the WH is the main goal. If Condi wants to run against her, not only could Hillary not play the victim again but COndi would eat her lunch during the debates. A Condi vs. Hillary debate is must-see TV.
Those of you who are pushing this notion have gone, in a couple hundred posts, from claiming that Condi's position was exactly the same as the President's, to saying it is 'similiar'. Funny.
Either the unborn are live people or they aren't. We who know they are live people, conclude therefore that abortion on demand is murder.
Any politician at any level who believes murder is acceptable, and that these most vulnerable little ones do not merit government protection from murder, does not deserve or receive our vote.
If Secretary Rice doesn't accept that reasoning, then I would disagree with your statement that she is "reasoned".
Do you know how fast this thread is growing? It's faster than I can read and also make a post every 100 items.
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.