LOL! I have a keen understanding of the term trajectory:
trajectory (trəˈdʒɛktərɪ, -trɪ)
| —n , pl -ries a curve that cuts a family of curves or surfaces at |
Posted on 10/20/2011 6:40:19 PM PDT by wmfights
It’s a nice try but this doesn’t jibe with the exchange between him and Piers Morgan.
Yesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.
I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply “order” people to not seek an abortion.
My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.
As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story.
I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.
I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life.”
No one on either side is arguing that the president has a constitutional power to issue executive orders barring women from having abortions. I’ve never heard even a diehard pro-lifer suggest that, so in essence, he wants you to believe here that he was responding with a point that no one disputes to a question that no one ever asks. Which means either he’s lying about what he understood Morgan’s question to mean or he’s so unacquainted with the most basic terms of the abortion debate that he genuinely felt obliged to reassure Americans that he won’t be sending the FBI to pregnant women’s homes to make sure they carry to term. Bad, bad news either way.
Beyond that, though, it’s simply not true that his response to Morgan was couched in terms of the limits of presidential power. Go back and watch the clip again. Morgan asks him what he’d want his daughter or granddaughter to do and Cain quickly arrives at this answer:
No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.
He’s talking about the entire government, not just the presidency, and of course it’s a core argument for pro-lifers that Congress should act to make this decision on behalf of women if/when Roe v. Wade is overturned. A moment later he told Morgan that his opinion as president shouldn’t necessarily operate as a “directive” on the nation, but then he was back to broad language about government again: “The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.” No pro-choicer could say it any better. How did we get from that to “I am 100% pro-life, end of story” in the span of 24 hours?
Question, then: Does this hurt him at all, and if it does, has the damage been done to his social conservative credibility or to his overall credibility, i.e. the basic belief that presidential candidates are fully engaged on complex but essential issues? For now, the rest of the field is attacking him on the former point. Santorum questioned his pro-life cred earlier this morning and then Perry, who desperately needs Cain to fade in social-con bastions like Iowa and South Carolina, issued this statement:
The campaign of Texas Gov. Rick Perry has responded to Cain’s comments, with Perry communications director Ray Sullivan saying, “A number of the Republicans candidates have flip flopped or been tripped up on the abortion issue. Governor Perry has been proudly pro-life for his entire career, successfully working to pass a parental consent law, a pre-abortion sonogram law, and defund Planned Parenthood in the state budget.”
That’s awfully timid. Let’s see what happens at the next debate. Until then, read HuffPo’s report on the reaction of Iowa social conservatives to what Cain told Morgan. Exit quotation from talk-radio host Steve Deace: “Cain is good at regurgitating talking points, but when he is forced to explain what he believes the devil is usually found in the details. Based on the testimony of his own words, Cain is neither ready, willing, nor able to honor the oath of office required of a President of the United States.”
Cain is 100 percent pro-life. People are trying to suggest otherwise, but it’s not so. I’ve heard him state his position. No abortions, ever, under any circumstances.
You need to read it again. He was asked whether a mother should have to raise a baby that came from rape. That was when Cain THAT was a family decision. Comprehension around here has been waning of late.
Cindie
You are a filthy LIAR and your statement is libelous. You obviously are a secularist who believes it is allowable to lie if it advances your cause. We do not like filthy liars on FreeRepublic. Why don't you just buzz off and find some scum you would be more compatible with.
Cain talks out of both sides of his mouth on abortion.
I choose to believe the side of his mouth that corresponds with his promise to sign immoral, unconstitutional “fetal pain” legislation, which doesn’t equally protect the God-given, unalienable right to life of all, and his support for pro-child-killing politicians like Mitt Romney and Scott Brown.
Your post is quite obviously inaccurate, since Cain promised to sign immoral, unconstitutional "fetal pain" legislation should he become president. These lawless "laws" define the child as a person, and then allow certain disfavored classes of them to be killed by the abortionists.
In spite of the fact that the sacred oath of office is a promise to God and man to support this imperative obligation:
"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.""No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."
That’s one of the stupidest posts I’ve ever seen on FR. And that takes some doing.
That’s Cain’s stated position. I heard him say so. Now, whether he follows through is another matter.
I simply think we ought to be fair and accurate in our criticism of candidates.
I remember John Kerry saying “life begins at conception” in 2004. So, whoopedy-do.
Not really, you have a history of them. If liars and bigots are to take over FR, it will not happen with me going along quietly.
Total BS. You’re a liar.
Oh please, you're way out of your league. Your a dishonest bigot. We are trying to get a conservative elected to the Presidency, we don't have time to play games with juveniles. Keyes isn't running so you don't have a dog in this race. Why don't you just slink off and leave these issues to the adults.
Why don’t you back up your big libelous words with a speck of evidence of bigotry on my part?
I'm sure there is no way I can match your overwhelming humility.
Also, share evidence of dishonesty on my part.
You made the accusation. Back it up.
And again, the Fred Phelps nonsense is out and out libel.
Cain is not a polished politician. That is a strength and a weakness for him. A huge part of his popularity is that he is truly an outsider. He is not a career politician. On the other hand, he has little experience at fielding these types of questions and can be tripped up fairly easily. I would vote for him in a heartbeat over Obama, but you Cain people have to take your blinders off, if you don’t think he flubbed this answer. Yes, he says he is “pro-life”. He uses that as a label, but when he explains his position, it sounds like the typical democrat pro-choice position (”I’m personally opposed to abortion, but I would never force my beliefs on someone else”). Maybe he truly is pro-life, but he’s done a poor job of explaining it. And for you supporters to say he was answering a question about adoption not abortion, go read his statement from today regarding the exchange. It says NOTHING about adoption. He clearly says it was about a President ordering someone not to have an abortion. The fact that he disagrees with you (his most ardent supporters) on what he was actually stating is more evidence that he has not been clear on the issue. Don’t stick your fingers on your ears and sing “LA LA LA”. Admit he has a problem and that he needs to fix it.
Cain's a regular person. He thought they were having a regular conversation so he pivoted to answer the new question which he clearly recognized because he pointed out that Morgan was mixing topics.
I don't question Cain's commitment to pro-life issues and HotAir, purportedly "right-leaning" media, should be sensible enough to look at the transcript and follow the threads of conversation. Of course, that would be fair-minded and honest. It wouldn't get any site hits either and they exist to pull in ad traffic.
Most of the supposed flip-flops from Cain are down to his inexperience at speaking like a politician instead of a normal person. It's a problem because the "game" is rigged against non-politicians.
Cain said he'd sign such a bill although he didn't sign the pledge because he disagreed with the wording on that clause feeling it broke the separation of powers boundaries. Other than Huntsman, I think the other 'major' candidates signed it.
From your outrage, none of the candidates suit you on this issue.
“I’ve decided that you perrywinkles are absolutely crazy...”
I was just about to formulate a well thought-out, articulate argument on this issue with a perry supporter, then I read your post.
And you’re right. These people are disingenuous. They are nuts. They’re making stuff up, then beating the drum relentlessly on thread after thread. They don’t really stand for conservative causes. They stand for Perry - that’s it.
On another thread, I was going to say something nice about Perry, but I stopped myself. NONE of his people on FR will give Cain an inch on anything. Why should I waste my time saying anything nice about their candidate?
They’re driving people AWAY from their guy in droves. I say let ‘em keep at it.
LOL! I have a keen understanding of the term trajectory:
trajectory (trəˈdʒɛktərɪ, -trɪ)
| —n , pl -ries a curve that cuts a family of curves or surfaces at |
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.