Posted on 07/10/2007 9:06:01 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
Just in case anyone was wondering who Vigueri supported....
“When Martin asked him about potential late entries, he got a smile when he mentioned Newt Gingrich. Viguerie thinks Gingrich has the ability to join the race in the fall and knock everyone’s socks off. I asked about Gingrich’s “rather substantial personal baggage” and got a laugh. He noted that all the candidates except the Mormon have been married multiple times and that “the law is that somebody has to win it.””
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/cpac_-_richard_viguerie/
“Its ironic that conservative Republican’s like yourselves believe that the federal government must leave abortion up to state governments.”
That is not quite accurate. The dispute is with EV’s incorrect claim that the 14th Amendment *already requires* it. He goes even beyond your points. This is the kind of judicial activist reading of the 14th that gave us Roe v Wade in the first place. It’s wrong, a bad reading of the Constitution that no Federal Judge, including Scalia, would go along with.
The GOP platform advocates for a Human Life Amendment to address this issue. Why would the GOP Platform have that if the 14th amendment could fix it automatically? Reality is 14th cant and it wont be fixed/addressed without additional enabling definition of human life. HLA does that.
Note that the analogy with slavery fits - Just as addressing slavery finally did require constitutional amendment to have a national solution written in Constitutional Law, this Constitutional Amendment is a possible solution to abortion as well. Pretending that the 14th can be twisted into a pretzel to serve the pro-life cause rather than the pro-abort cause is — well, that’s smoking some mighty strong crack.
I support a Human Life Amendment but I can do the math too - it will never happen because the Democrats are as pro-abort as possible and wont ever vote in numbers to make the 2/3rds bar get met.
So, IMHO, the realistic next step is to take the issue out of the courts (who wrongly decided Roe v Wade) and put it back to the people to decide. Its easier to get 2 more votes on the Supreme Court than to get an amendment passed.
To suggest that you cant be prolife and hold this position (repeal Roe v Wade and return abortion to the states) is absurd.
Just tell me how many unborn children have been saved by EV’s position on the 14th (answer: Zero, because what he advocates never will happen), and you’ll have your answer as to whether this is really the effective pro-life position.
EV’s the kind of guy who will call people who merely advocate for parental consent ‘RINOs’, and yet abortion rates declined significantly in states that implemented the (widely popular) parential notification and parental consent laws.
The good is the enemy of the best, and extremism is the enemy of effective political activism.
Good catch.
Let them hang their hat on David M. McIntosh. He was a speaker at a recruiting seminar for the National Lawyer’s Guild in September 2004.
The NLG docs from FBI’s monitoring have just been made public
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1858230/posts?page=5#5
I said that all of Thompsons “primary advisors” , not campaign employees, were Reagan folks, which has since been demonstrated to be entirely true, by me and several others trying to bring you into reality.
You slice and dice words to suit, then call names, then ignore facts and even the supporting statements of others, all for what purpose?
To slash away at a good man and good conservative. Why?
You remain a perpetual liar!
Are you Robert Bork?
The funniest part of your delusion, and your attempt to paint a false picture for people, is, Thompson himself was not even an original Reaganite. He was a supporter of the RINO Howard Baker.
Is the problem with you that you can’t read.....or is it a comprehension thing? The info is there. Just read the darned thing.
Wow.
Thanks, my FRiend.
His juvenile rhetoric reminds of FR`s recently departed. ;^)
Read what? It’s clear that Mr. Thompson wants the abortion issue decided by the individual States. In other words, the inalienable right to life means nothing, and our Constitution remains gutted.
No kidding.
There will be a lot of wows coming out. No need playing with the FredHeads.
>>>His juvenile rhetoric reminds of FR`s recently departed
EMPHASIS bump
:) Night.
Thanks very much for the ping, Mike. Placemark this looooong thread for morning read. Thanks to all contributors and to Dick Bachert for posting.
Attacking the poster instead of substantiating your assertions is what is juvenile and obvious. Personal attacks are considered Abuse at FR. As to who is smart, well, let's just say that that distinction is pretty well established here. I don't need you as a basis for comparison. Here is a review of my work. Or you could try articles here and here.
Your guy keeps dropping in the polls the more you do this, or haven't you noticed? It takes no great effort to either be right of Bush or prove it.
As if posters at FR had such influence. "My guy" is being shut out of the media while the media-approved candidates (that would include your guy) is sucking up the oxygen, per plan. That difference alone is worth noting.
Bush has appeased the left on everything from social spending to his PC run war. Thompson has both a history and a voting record of not appeasing anyone, especially the left and nobody in America is less concerned with political correctness than Thompson.
It looks like I'm going to need EV's BS meter. I despise such things.
It doesn’t take a genius to see that every candidate except Rudy McRomney is right of Bush.
Excuse me, but your assertion was that Thompson is to the right of Reagan, not Bush, so please don't go changing the subject to get out of a squeeze. Please back up your original assertion that Thompson is to the right of Reagan, with sources. I don't think you can do it without getting subjective about what constitutes conservatism which (to educate you in the usual ploy) is the least you could have done.
So far, all I've heard is crappy shouting, epithets, and personal attacks.
It IS up to the states, the second Roe vs. Wade is overturned. That’s not a matter even up for discussion. The Tenth Amendment will return the issue to the states.
Congress would have to act in a manner within its cosntitutional capacity to create a national law or new Consitutional amendment outlawing abortion, or, the SCOTUS would have to rule that the Fourteenth Amendment applies to unborn life.
But the issue will return to the states the second Roe vs. Wade is overturned and THAT is what Thompson said.
He in NO way stated that he supported states legalizing abortion. He has a fully pro-life record. There is NO basis to make the assertions you have continued to make.
You are a liar...
Goodnight, Calpernia.
Hardly...
You’re as ignorant as he is....
PRIMARY ADVISORS .... Do you know what primary advisors are? They are NOT campaign employees...
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.