Titus -
First, it was my understanding that the Church's stance on abortion was doxy, not opinion as are the Pope's views on Iraq. If they are simply the musings of the Pope, fine, your point is valid, but I am of the understanding that it directs members to oppose abortion as a sin, they do not do that concerning Iraq. But like I said, if being anti-abortion is simply an opinion of the Popes then I withdrawal the accusation, but if it is spoken from the position of infallibility then your reasoning falls apart.
****
On who you said you supported in the past, you wrote:
"Secondly, when did I EVER say I "supported" Obama? Were I inclined to vote for EITHER candidate in the general election, I'd probably lean towards Clinton..."
"I have never said I was supporting anyone on the Democratic side of the isle."
Really?
Let me direct you to your post of Monday January 8th, 2008 entitled "Too Quiet Here." You began it as follows:
"So let me stir the shit and see what floats to the top, okay?A couple of points, just to draw out some comments from the crowd:
I hate the term "conservative" when it is used to describe Republicans.
I am convinced that this "rebate" that is supposed to stimulate the economy is the second biggest waste of Federal money and effort EVER.
I am going to vote for Obama."
Scroll down a bit in that post & you'll get this load of tripe regarding Obama:
Say what you will... this guy has character. He is as charismatic as Bill Clinton ever was, and is 100% more so now. He actually answers questions when he is asked them, and hasn't stumbled a bit with all the mud-slinging the Dems have managed since Iowa. Hillary has Bill's foot in her mouth nearly every day, and Edward's says nothing at all. Barring something HUGE on Super Tuesday... Obama is the top Dem right now, no question.Can I support him? He is pro-abortion, very anti-Iraq War, and hasn't impressed me as overly committed to strong international military resolve... but no GOP candidate has impressed me in these regards, either. All three of the biggies (Romney, McCain and Huckabee) fail here in my eyes, and Paul is out of the question. Giuliani is the only real choice for me as a candidate (now that Thompson is out), but he won't win the nomination. None of the GOPs, if elected, will over-turn Roe v Wade, and none will do any more than follow the "surge" through, then abandon Iraq to it's own fate. None have promised to do anything more than offer pre-election lip-service to issues like border security, increased conventional forces at home and abroad, comprehensive immigration reform, serious tax reform (other than Paul, and he's not a contender)... and what little they have said will never get past a Democratically-controlled Congress anyway. All have, in one way or another, endorsed this blatant attempt by a very nearly USELESS Congress to buy themselves back into office... which by itself is a strike against all of them.So, can I support Obama?How refreshing would it be to see a President that offered some promise? Some hope of a new point of view in DC? A fresh perspective from the Oval Office? I think that after 6 years of growing distrust and resentment from all corners of the American public, that it would be damn nice.From what I have heard to date, I am beginning to think I CAN support Obama.
So there!
Check it yourself, I'm right, you're wrong. So either confirm your support or retract it. By the way, something just struck me. You wrote today:
The first thing I'm going to say is that the news about Dr. Wright comes as no surprise to me at all ...Why do you think both Barak and Michelle are so proudly "anti-American" in their positions? He won't wear an American flag pin on his lapel... EVER...
You acted with NO surprise to Obama's preacher. You wrote like this was inevitable (finding out about Wright) because the signs were there all along which you picked up on such as Obama refusing to wear a flag lapel pin. Meaning you knew that of Obama when you wrote of voting for him & wrote that stunningly supportive essay of his character. So how can you have spoken so glowingly of a guy whom you knew - all along according to you - had an anti-American philosophy bubbling beneath the surface? So which is it? Does he have character or is he a raging anti-American that you've known about, or was it support, or was it ... wait, um, I mean ....errr... They're playing the National Anthem old man - get up, turn off the TV & go to bed.
Check & mate dear friend.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I want to add one thing - since time & memorial I remember you being a stickler for correctly defining a phrase or word, at nauseum. For example, "the Soviets weren't 'really' communist in the true sense of the word" - if I here you say that one more time I'm going to puke. Or because of Raegan's military spending he wasn't really "conservative" (that one's just silly). At any rate, using your own standard will you please in your future posts STOP saying the next president won't "overturn" Roe v Wade. Of course no president will, in fact NO ONE in the executive branch of govt will - a court will. The judiciary. Not to mention it sets up a straw man, i.e. "He or she won't overturn it so I need not consider abortion as an issue when voting." That's patently absurd. Let's say that the Church's direction on abortion is only an opinion and not doxy, fine. But you have to come to terms with something as a pro-lifer: Presidents do affect the amount of abortions via vetoing funding and the judges they appoint, trying to stack the court for an eventual overturn. There have been some ideological betrayals on the court - Sooter etc who were dissapointments in this area. However, if abortion is a primary voting issue for you then you as a voter don't stop voting for candidates that promise consructionist judges just because we've been unsuccessful in stacking the court thus far (although we're closer then ever now). What you have to decide is how important abortion is to you. We have a narrowly divided court, the next appointment could get us a truly conservative court, in action not name, so you need to decide what is more important - the fiscal/economic policies of the Democrats you seem to lean towards OR the social issues of the GOP that you seem to lean towards. Which will it be? Whatever the choice you can no longer claim "they (as president) won't overturn Roe V Wade anyaway", anymore. Presidents matter on this, a great deal.
Post a Comment