Election Results/Discussion

[mary_bobo]

That’s not necessarily true… A lot of those conservative democrats were specifically recruited by the party… Including Casey, whom the Pro-death Democratic governor, supported so much, he manovered virtually know opposition to him in the primary (real that is)…

In Illinois, Melissa Bean well she’s pro death but she’s moderate on fiscal issues etc, and doesn’t necessarily vote lock step with her party, and she got huge support…

The democrats are starting to realize that the American people lean right to center, and so I think they are realizing they need conservative democrats, if they want to be a national party…

I agree that is why they recruited conservative dems, but those Dems are not in charge. All the presumed committee chairs are of the far left persuasion. Just ask Joe Lieberman.

 

[rayne89]

if your gonna say that the republicans kept us safe the last 4 years, then you might as well also say the same thing about president clinton the 4 years previous to 9/11 since there were no major terrorist attacks then either. of course i never believed that govt could keep you safe from anything, especially from itself

I guess the first attack on the trade center and the USS Cole attack doesn’t count as terrorism in your eyes.

 

[Al_Masetti]

I guess the first attack on the trade center and the USS Cole attack doesn’t count as terrorism in your eyes.

AND the attacks on the U.S. embassies AND the barracks AND others as well.

 

[mary_bobo]

I really fear for this country and the pro life movement. With the Senate in the hands of the Democrats Bush will not be able to nominate any pro life Supreme Court justices. The election in 08 scares me.

I believe after the Democrats screw up this country badly in the next 2 years the Republicans will win but more than likely it will be a pro death Republican like Guiliani, McCain, Mitt Romney or someone of that ilk. On the other side you got the walking spokesperson for the Culture of Death, Hillary Clinton. If Hillary wins this country is doomed.

If the Presidential election was yesterday Hillary would have won by a landslide. But after the Democrats raise taxes and screw this country up like I am sure they will people will vote out the Dems as quick as they voted them in. But the problem is, all the front runners for the Republican Presidential nominee are all pro death. So having President Bush in office was the best chance the pro life movement had at getting pro life justices. We got 2 but we won’t get any more.

You are right. At the present time, all the front runners for the GOP presidential nomination are in favor of abortion. But two years is a lifetime in politics and with some knowledge of how the GOP inner workings run, I think those guys will have a hard time getting the nomination. Guliani has too much personal baggage, McCain is a maverick, and Romney is not a conservative. I think there was a lot of hope invested in Allen, but that is down the tubes. Between now and nomination time, someone will arise that catches the fancy of the party faithful. Let’s wait and see.

 

[Thomas_B]

You are right. At the present time, all the front runners for the GOP presidential nomination are in favor of abortion. But two years is a lifetime in politics and with some knowledge of how the GOP inner workings run, I think those guys will have a hard time getting the nomination. Guliani has too much personal baggage, McCain is a maverick, and Romney is not a conservative. I think there was a lot of hope invested in Allen, but that is down the tubes. Between now and nomination time, someone will arise that catches the fancy of the party faithful. Let’s wait and see.

I think, especially after yesterday’s vote, that the Republicans will run someone who is perceived as a centrist, with good name recognition, and generally well-respected for president. So my money is on them running McCain. And I think that he would have a really good chance of winning too. And I think hard-core conservative Republicans would support him too, to keep the presidency in Republican hands.

 

[chicago]

You are right about the new Dems in the Congress. Emanuel did a masterful job of selecting candidates to run against incumbent Republicans who were more in line with the thinking of the majority of Americans.

Ironically, his influence probably moved Tammy Duckworth to the left, which may well have cost her in a tight election. But, hey, I’m glad to see Peter Roskam win.

But don’t expect them to have any influence over the far left wing of the party. If they want to be given committee assignments, etc., they will keep their mouths shut and do what Mrs. Pelosi says.

And is she wants THEIR support, she has to make some concessions, also.

 

[chicago]

I agree that is why they recruited conservative dems, but those Dems are not in charge. All the presumed committee chairs are of the far left persuasion. Just ask Joe Lieberman.

It’s a matter of sticking around long enough to move up the ladder. Also, House Democrats have traditionally been allowed to hold true to their own positions which play in their district. It is when they move up to Senate that the moneybrokers have pushed them left. Though if the same brokers understand that they need to move right to stay in power, they will. Really, the true hardcore believers in the socially liberal agenda aren’t necessarily always one and the same as the people who just want power.

 

[Sheeniac]

I think, especially after yesterday’s vote, that the Republicans will run someone who is perceived as a centrist, with good name recognition, and generally well-respected for president. So my money is on them running McCain. And I think that he would have a really good chance of winning too. And I think hard-core conservative Republicans would support him too, to keep the presidency in Republican hands.

Considering that many conservative Rs didn’t vote for the R party because they are not holding true to limited government, etc., I wonder if going to the middle is a good idea.

Factor in that the pro-life movement and the pro-2A movement supplies a lot of the grassroots troops working the campaigns, it would be disastrous for them to run a “moderate”.

 

[Sheeniac]

I’m with James 1441 on this one. I keep hearing this line “vote Republican and support life.” But other than the Partial Birth Abortion Ban (which was great), what else have Republicans done for pro-life. Some of them talk a good game, but in their 12 years of House rule, 11 years of Senate rule, and a Republican president for six years- what have they done. Seems to me like the some Republicans just use the pro-life issue to get votes, but don’t make it much of a priority.

1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade
2. Reversed Clinton’s move to strike Reagan’s anti-abortion Mexico Policy.
3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton’s policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.
4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.
5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.
6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004.
7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman.
8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents.

 

[mary_bobo]

It’s a matter of sticking around long enough to move up the ladder. Also, House Democrats have traditionally been allowed to hold true to their own positions which play in their district. It is when they move up to Senate that the moneybrokers have pushed them left. Though if the same brokers understand that they need to move right to stay in power, they will. Really, the true hardcore believers in the socially liberal agenda aren’t necessarily always one and the same as the people who just want power.

I hope you are right. We shall see.

 

[mary_bobo]

I think, especially after yesterday’s vote, that the Republicans will run someone who is perceived as a centrist, with good name recognition, and generally well-respected for president. So my money is on them running McCain. And I think that he would have a really good chance of winning too. And I think hard-core conservative Republicans would support him too, to keep the presidency in Republican hands.

You may be right. But the real conservatives will never back him.

 

[Ruthmary]

If they want further campaign money, they’ll get right in line with the ultra-liberal leadership. They know where their bread is buttered. Anyone who voted for a so-called “conservative democrat” voted for a pack of lies.

Read the article by Thomas Sowell. He agrees with you. He calls it the new form of voter fraud.

gopusa.com/commentary/tsowell/2006/ts_11071.shtml

If these new moderate candidates are elected and give the Democrats control of Congress, that control will be exercised by senior Democrats who will hold leadership positions – and all of them are liberal extremists, whether people like Nancy Pelosi in the House or Ted Kennedy and John Kerry in the Senate.

Getting people to vote for moderates, in order to put extremists in power, may be the newest and biggest voter fraud.

 

[Thomas_B]

1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade
2. Reversed Clinton’s move to strike Reagan’s anti-abortion Mexico Policy.
3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton’s policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.
4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.
5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.
6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004.
7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman.
8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents.

Yes, I’ve seen this list before. The first five are abortion related and I agree these are good moves. But come on, 12 years House rule, 11 years Senate rule, and 6 years of the presidency and that’s it? I really expected the Republican Party to do more. I’m obviously not in his shoes, but it seems to me that Rick Santorum for instance could have sponsored a lot more pro-life legislation.

 

[rlg94086]

None of that is good enough, so they’ve decided to give the Democrats a chance. I’ll be waiting in rapt attention for the list of pro-life accomplishments by the Democratic Party.

1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade
2. Reversed Clinton’s move to strike Reagan’s anti-abortion Mexico Policy.
3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton’s policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.
4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.
5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.
6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004.
7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman.
8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents.

 

[Thomas_B]

None of that is good enough, so they’ve decided to give the Democrats a chance. I’ll be waiting in rapt attention for the list of pro-life accomplishments by the Democratic Party.

Alternatively we can keep corrupt politicians in office for another decade hoping that they deign to give us another piece of pro-life policy legislation and in the meantime let them continue their out-of-control spending and bankrupt the country while they enjoy the good life on lobbying $$s?

 

[Sheeniac]

Yes, I’ve seen this list before. The first five are abortion related and I agree these are good moves. But come on, 12 years House rule, 11 years Senate rule, and 6 years of the presidency and that’s it? I really expected the Republican Party to do more. I’m obviously not in his shoes, but it seems to me that Rick Santorum for instance could have sponsored a lot more pro-life legislation.

True - but how much would have gotten through with Clinton as President? Our majority was slim, and there were enough Rs that were “moderate” that these were major accomplishments (IMO).

 

[CatholicMetis]

if your gonna say that the republicans kept us safe the last 4 years, then you might as well also say the same thing about president clinton the 4 years previous to 9/11 since there were no major terrorist attacks then either. of course i never believed that govt could keep you safe from anything, especially from itself

I guess you forgot about the first WTC bombing, the USS Cole, the US Embassy being bombed. That doesn’t even count the mess in Somalia that Clinton got us into.

Clinton devastated our military and he devastated our intelligence community. You do realize that the technology North Korea used to build the Atomic bombs was given to them by the Slick One don’t you? So I would go as far as saying Clinton created 9/11 and Clinton created the nuclear standoff in North Korea.

 

[CatholicMetis]

I love how all the Republicans seem to conveniently forget that in this country, with your party controlling the entire federal government for a LONG time now, abortion is STILL LEGAL! The republicans have sold the pro-life movement down river; republican is not a synonym for pro-life. Most Democrats that have been elected are conservative democrats. And, quite honestly, I am going to be far more concerned about the war that is currently killing our soldiers with no plan to end than I am about the abortion issue that continues to go around in circles. There are other issues at hand.

Go Dems!

What liberals and people like you (I don’t know if you are a liberal or not) don’t understand is the Republicans can’t just pass a law making abortion illegal. The way they have to go about making abortion illegal is through the courts. President Bush and the Republican Congress is doing this through nominating and confirming pro life judges. (we hope) Now that the Democrats are in control Bush will not be able to nominate pro life judges.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for abortion on demand all the way up to partial birth abortion.

 

[rlg94086]

**Alternatively we can keep corrupt politicians in office for another decade **hoping that they deign to give us another piece of pro-life policy legislation and in the meantime let them continue their out-of-control spending and bankrupt the country while they enjoy the good life on lobbying $$s?

Um…the election is over…the Democrats won. Are you giving post-election voting tips, because time machines haven’t been invented. BTW…the latter half describes all politicians from both parties.

 

[chicago]

Now that the Democrats are in control Bush will not be able to nominate pro life judges.

Sure he will. They’re just in for a fight and may not get confirmed. If the President and his appointees want to box it out publically, they can.

Though, of course, should Virginia somehow be retained, then the Republicans WILL maintain control of the Senate.