To: Poohbah
Without pro-lifers, the GOP would flat-line in short order. And that would result in Democrats getting elected, which in turn would result in abortion policies far worse than Condi Rice's being put in place. Brilliant strategy.
I wasn't threatening to leave. I was responding to a poster trying to drum us out of our own (pro-life) party.
I agree. Electing a pro-abortion presidential candidate would be very destructive to the republic, since it would absolutely elect Democrats.
337 posted on
03/11/2005 7:35:19 PM PST by
EternalVigilance
(Taglinus FreeRepublicus: An awesome demonstration of the fact that Free Republic is awash in genius!)
To: EternalVigilance
Electing a pro-abortion presidential candidate would be very destructive to the republic, since it would absolutely elect Democrats. It didn't in 2000 and 2004.
516 posted on
03/11/2005 8:04:45 PM PST by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
To: EternalVigilance
I agree. Electing a pro-abortion presidential candidate would be very destructive to the republic, since it would absolutely elect Democrats.In other words, you'd bolt if Condi Rice gets the nomination.
When you actually manage to work on a winning Senate campaign, come back and tell us how it's done.
1,268 posted on
03/12/2005 9:42:46 AM PST by
Poohbah
("Hee Haw" was supposed to be a television show, not a political movement.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson