To be honest though, borrowing money from China to pay for troops in Australia as a defense strategy in case China ever starts feeling froggy probably isn’t such a bad idea.
This is the current court:
This was in 1993. Nothing has changed after Bush I and II got more of their guys on the courts.
A fact is a fact. The Republican party clearly does not have a long held tradition of being against abortion or of electing good justices. Based on the decisions of the last 30 (?) years when the Republicans controlled the courts (most people seem to be unaware they actually did control it) I am confident in the uselessness of Republican nominees. It is always the Democrats faults. The Republicans are just poor Huckleberry Hounds. Yes, the Democrats are awful. Yes it is a tragedy that Catholics do not oppose abortion and some openly support it. But the Republican party has had zero success in ending or significantly limiting abortion. The only success was partial birth abortion which most people are against. The court did nothing and the Republicans went no further than the will of the people.
I dont know why they dont try other strategies. I’m not sure why they put all their eggs in one basket. They could at least try an amendment. When all other attempts have failed I would switch things up. Some are probably insincere, in that they have employees who are mostly taking a check and working a job. Think about Bill Bennett the great moralizer and anti-abortion crusader who has a terrible gambling problem to the tune, allegedly, of millions of dollars in loses. He needs money to fuel his addiction. Maybe it is just a racket for him. There are evil people everywhere, even in good institutions. That should come as no surprise for anyone who is aware of Judas’ betrayer of Christ.
I mostly offer money to help Ron Paul’s campaign. I promote him to friends. I would help in his campaign. But I do not look to him to solve the abortion scourge. To solve that I do my part to promote the Christian Faith and especially the great demands Christ puts on us to live holy lives.
What?!?
No details yet…
Why do you keep asking us this question? You should be asking your Representative, assuming they are a Republican. If you support Santorum, ask him if he supports such measures. Right now you just seem to assume that they wouldn’t work because you haven’t heard of them, but these strategies have been around for years and have worked on several other issues as has been pointed out several times on these threads at this point.
In order to be in a hypothetical match up with Obama, he has to hypothetically win the GOP nomination. I get my information from many sources - mainstream and non-mainstream. I get my ability to reason from God.
Here is a link to that story
No, he didn’t have a chance.
Beats me.
So Paul lost because people are too stupid? I am used to hearing that reasoning from liberal elitist columnists from the NY Times to explain why their favorite liberal candidate lost, but I am surprised (and disappointed) to see you borrowing from that playbook.
Interesting, because last I heard they all tied at 7 which means none of them lost.
People are for the most part ignorant of our current economic situation. Iran should be the least of our worries while our debt has surpassed our GDP. Are you saying that people know politics, and are educate enough to fully understand Dr. Paul’s beliefs?
That’s exactly the problem. Ron Paul supporters are the only smart, informed voters in the country. Everyone else are sheeple who don’t know anything.
Once again, this analysis is absolutely wrong. Joseph Sobran was brilliant, but he had an ax to grind. Here is why it is wrong: The “eight Republican appointees” that Sobran speaks of, how many were nominated by Republican presidents (Nixon and Ford) before abortion became a national issue and certainly before the pro-life movement was organized to the point that it could pressure the president to try to nominate constructionist supreme court justices who might overturn Roe V Wade. Nixon was pro-choice even. Is this something you overlooked or are you just deliberately trying to be misleading by falsely lumping all Republican justices together - the ones nominated in the early 70’s with the ones nominated after abortion became a big national issue?
Four reasons: Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts. Two more: Romney and Gingrich who have promised to nominate justices in the mold of those four. Are you not aware that Bush 1 had to deal with a senate that was dominated by pro-abortion liberal Democrats like Kennedy, Biden and Patrick Leahy? (who were also catholic) ??? Considering that political reality its a wonder Bush was able to get even one good justice on the bench in Clarence Thomas. Here is another reason: a GOP controlled senate.
The Republicans didn’t “control the courts”. That is a false statement. You had different justices who were nominated in different era’s in entirely different circumstances. I realize this doesn’t fit your view, but facts are facts. Based on your thinking, I might say, “we should vote Democrat because sometimes Democrats nominate anti-abortion justices - Byron White was nominated by JFK” Which is totally wrong, but that’s essentially the level of the analysis you’ve displayed.
Well, like I said, we can’t really do much until we overturn Roe V Wade. We have four solid votes right now. One more would do it. But apparently you want to quit because you’re frustrated with the big bad Republicans! This election will decide much. If you give up now its like quitting a marathon a mile or two before the finish.
Yes, I am sure that Bill Bennet is secretly pro-life because it helps him fund his gambling habit. LOL. That just about sums up your analysis doesn’t it.
Fine, support Paul. I just hope that when the eventual GOP nominee is decided, you will discern your moral duty in light of political reality, rather than the historical fantasy masquerading as political analysis you’ve displayed here. You might want to bone up on some political history before posting next time.
So if it weren’t for the ignorance on the part of the primary voters, Paul would be winning?
Paul has never had a chance. Could he have pulled off a primary or caucus victory by some fluke? Maybe. But the guy has never been a serious candidate. He is talking about serious issues, but be honest, a 77 year old congressman from Texas who ran on the Libertarian ticket before? Please.
Is this how it works? I provide my opinion and you provide empty rhetoric?That’s exactly the problem. Ron Paul supporters are the only smart, informed voters in the country. Everyone else are sheeple who don’t know anything.
