If you are implying that my post is not consistent with my posting history, that’s wrong. I have consistently said I like Fred better than the rest, but I’m disappointed about the Schiavo comments. (As I have written before.)
Never have I expressed anything positive about any others but Hunter (whom I’ve never supported outright or preferred).
So, what’s your point and what’s your problem? Or do you just prefer misleading innuendo?
So you were disappointed about FT comments concerning Schiavo. I suspect you will find that most of us do not have 24/7 to keep up with all issues in all 50 states - we do keep up with those that are important to us as individuals. My children will decide what is to become of me should this occur - not any government entity. Perhaps this one very, very slim issue is of more importance to you for some reason. I do not see that FT’s initial response was indicative of a position. So since this is obviously important to you, please share with us exactly what you would like a Constitutional Amendment to say that would cover all life/death issues.
You would let “one comment” by a candidate turn you off of the most conservative candidate that we have offered to us? WOW! I am a a loss for words.