(Page 6 of 12)
M. Blue br> South Carolina /p>Mr. Antle seems to be a bit of a one trick pony on the subject of Mayor Rudy. Either that or he thinks that pro-lifers are the only folks that may vote against Rudy because of an actual stance and/or belief of the candidate's.
I seriously doubt if many of the folks that insist on controlling our borders and stopping the invasion of our country from Mexico are going to favor Mayor Rudy with their votes when he stands four square with Bush, McCain, Kennedy, et al for open borders and amnesty for illegals.
I suspect that the voters that object to homosexual marriage, or civil unions, or whatever, will NOT be just dying to get to the polls to vote for Rudy.
Then there are the pro-Second Amendment folks. I guarantee that they are not going to vote for Rudy, a dedicated gun controller.
p>Then there are the people like myself that disagree with Rudy on abortion, immigration, civil unions, AND gun control. Guess who I ain't gonna vote for in the primaries. I strongly suspect that Rudy's idea of "originalist" judges and mine would seriously diverge. I am still trying to figure out how someone that will not enforce our borders and wants to give amnesty to 12 million illegal aliens can be deemed strong on defense of the country and terrorism issues. br> -- Ken Shreve br> New Hampshire /p>I ask Mr. Antle and those others who make the abortion issue the central litmus test of a candidate: when another 9/11 is upon us, this time with a tactical nuke detonated in New York or Chicago, with a million of our citizens killed, what will it matter that the oooooo issue of 2008 was abortion and whether or not Rudy in the past, AS A PERSONAL MATTER, was in favor of its legality.
Really, does anyone's personal perspective on this divisive issue really matter, since the Supreme Court will be the only final arbiter of this issue? I suggest that people avert their eyes from this issue and remember that the most important function of government is the defense of the homeland and its people. Yes, the unborn are defenseless, but electing a true enemy of not only the unborn, but of all of our rights and freedoms, is not going to do us a whit of good.
p>I don't want to fly the flag into the hellfire of lost causes. I suggest that Mr. Antle and others read the excellent article in
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.