Dear Trinity_Tx,
I don't recall having defended any posters here, or any posts made herein. They're not relevant to what I said, nor to the falsehoods that you spewed.
Complaining about another poster's perceived lack of willingness to compromise on the issue of abortion, you said:
"It is your 'strategy' of dogmatism and rudely offending everyone who you even think veers even slightly away from your position that hasn't even been able to get rid of partial birth abortion - which would be easy to outlaw if the fight against it weren't bogged down by the heavy-handed, 'no compromise' baggage."
This is a load of dreck. It just isn't true. Your assertion doesn't have any foundation. How could it be that a "strategy of dogmatism" has prevented the banning of partial birth abortion, when partial birth abortion bans have been passed in many states and on the federal level, as well?
The only thing holding them back are a majority of black-robed demons who sit on the Supreme Court.
It may be that some posters here may be unwilling to compromise, and it may be that such a strategy may be ineffective. However, that has no relationship to the fact that partial birth abortion has not been banned.
I pointed this out to you.
First rule when you find you've dug yourself into a hole: stop digging.
You didn't follow that rule, TT. You then dug further, blaming the fascist actions of the majority of the Supreme Court on pro-lifers:
"If pro-lifers worked to elect politicians who respected the constitution, rather than blowing them off because they didn't toe the whole moment of conception, no compromise line, that wouldn't be a problem."
I pointed out that this just doesn't track with the actual history of the last 32 years. It doesn't track with reality. You have allowed your emotions, your heated feelings against people you perceive to be uncompromising and foolish to cause you to devise a version of reality that is a parallel universe to the real one.
As I pointed out to you, TT, pro-lifers have been integral to the coalitions that elected President Ronald Wilson Reagan, President George Herbert Walker Bush, and President George Walker Bush.
And it is pro-ABORTION voters who abandoned us in 1992 and 1996 that elected Mr. Clinton.
Your history is backwards.
As for the issue of compromise, whatever your feelings about the posters in this thread or on others, the actual facts of the last 32 years are that pro-lifers, as a movement, have sought every compromise, every small gain, every slice of bread from the loaf, every slice of salami. And we have won, time after time after time. Big wins and little wins.
Except in one place: The house of death known as the Supreme Court. There, we have seen most of our victories, big and small, wiped away.
This isn't from lack of effort to compromise. It's from the adamant intransigence of a fascist elite who believe that they know better than we unwashed masses, who believe that it is necessary, for "individual autonomy" and "self-definition" that women be able to procure the death of their unborn children.
And it isn't because pro-lifers haven't supported politicians who respect the Constitution. We have supported such individuals. In fact, we are often criticized because we usually decline to support Republicans who DON'T respect the Constitution, people like Arlen Specter, Jim Jeffords, Lincoln Chaffee, and others.
Your rantings against the entire pro-life movement, because of your frustrations with posters here at FreeRepublic suggests someone raving hysterically at his or her own shadows in the cave, by the firelight.
Get a grip.
Study a little bit of the history of the last 32 years.
Take a break.
Drink less caffeine.
sitetest
You know, dear sitetest, I have not been the one who has stooped to the personal insults and sarcasm here, but you have in your posts to me, this last one especially. Yet you accuse me of raving hysterically?
I have studied history, my opinions are educated and polished daily as these issues are at the forefront of my daily life in politics. Thus, I have made my points, and they are sound - no matter how verbose or full of insults yours are in return.
It is not only a matter of who is elected president, but the congressmen who would confirm them, as well as the national outcry. When you have the vitriol we've seen here, it alienates support. You may believe those are mere shadows in a cave, but I believe they seriously hinder the agenda.
Let's agree to disagree, or walk away however angry you choose - have the last word. I refuse to continue discussion with someone who has been so personally insulting to me.