RNC Chair Michael Steele: Abortion Is "an Individual Choice"

[Frozen Sooner]

L: How much of your pro-life stance, for you, is informed not just by your catholic faith, but by the fact that you were adopted?

M: Oh, a lot. Absolutely. I see the power of life in that. I mean, and the power of choice! The thing to keep in mind about it, uh, you know, I think as a country we get off on these misguided conversations that throw around terms that really misrepresent truth.

L: Explain that.

M: The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.

L: Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?

M: Yeah. I mean, again, I think that's an individual choice.

L: You do?

M: Yeah. Absolutely.

http://men.style.com/gq/blogs/gqeditors/2009/03/the-reconstruct.html
He then goes on to state that he thinks that Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided. Elsewhere he states that he thinks homosexuality is "nature" and not a choice.

I don't think that this one is going to play out particularly well for him.

[Whet]

:pop: good for him! See, his party can have differing viewpoints!

[Frozen Sooner]

Hey, if the Republican Party starts to make a wholesale shift to being OK with first-term abortion and recognition that homosexuality isn't a choice, I'll be the first in line cheering for 'em.

I'm just curious if the Palin wing of the party is going to be OK with the chair of the RNC saying these things.

Speaking of the Palins, I saw today that it looks like Bristol's going to be a single mom after all. Sucks.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Hey, if the Republican Party starts to make a wholesale shift to being OK with first-term abortion and recognition that homosexuality isn't a choice, I'll be the first in line cheering for 'em.

I'm just curious if the Palin wing of the party is going to be OK with the chair of the RNC saying these things.

Speaking of the Palins, I saw today that it looks like Bristol's going to be a single mom after all. Sucks.Your concern for the welfare of the Republican Party and the Palin family is touching, Mike.

[Frozen Sooner]

You don't have to thank me. Caring about single mothers just comes naturally to Democrats. ;)

[soonerinabilene]

one would think that these questions would have been asked before he became the chair of the committee.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You don't have to thank me. Caring about single mothers just comes naturally to Democrats. ;)As well as encouraging single motherhood.

[Whet]

How hard would it be to find a pro-life or pro-death penalty Democrat that is not ostracized by the other members of that party?

[Frozen Sooner]

As well as encouraging single motherhood.

So you think Bristol should have had an abortion?

Man, personally I think she's going to do a wonderful job raising that kid. She seems pretty committed.

[Frozen Sooner]

How hard would it be to find a pro-life or pro-death penalty Democrat that is not ostracized by the other members of that party?

There's plenty of both, actually. Want some names?

[Frozen Sooner]

That Barack Obama has certainly been ostracized by the Democratic Party for his pro-capital punishment stance. I bet he couldn't even get elected dogcatcher!

[King Crimson]

anyway, i thought most of you asshats (minus Froz, in this instance) weren't GOp anymore? jsut "true Reagan conservatives": you don't sound like whiners at all, really?

btw, i posted a few time "back inna day" about what a crap job Steele was ding...

[King Crimson]

civil liberties? let's pick and choose the one's WE want and call the other people Big Brother...after Patriot Acts? That's what the Bill of Rights is for.

[Whet]

Obama's "General Candidate Questionnaire":
Will you support a single-payer health plan for Illinois? Yes.

Do you support Medicaid funding for abortions? Yes.

Do you support insurance coverage of abortions for state employees? Yes.

Do you support parental consent/notification for minors seeking abortions? Depends on how
young -- possibly for extremely young teens, i.e. 12 or 13 year olds.

Do you support any other restrictions on abortions. No.

Do you support capital punishment? No.

Do you support criminal prosecution of juveniles as adults? No. -- Not even if they commit multiple murders?

Do you support mandatory sentencing? No.

Do you support work release, home monitoring, other alternative sentencing? Yes.

Do you support state legislation to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.

Do you support state legislation to ban assault weapons? Yes.

Do you support state legislation to mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080328_obama_iviquestionaire_091096.html

[Frozen Sooner]

Ah,

RHETORIC: "When Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was seeking state office a dozen years ago, he took unabashedly liberal positions: flatly opposed to capital punishment, in support of a federal single-payer health plan, against any restrictions on abortion, and in support of state laws to ban the manufacture, sale and even possession of handguns."

REALITY: As evidence of Obama's "unabashedly liberal positions," the reporter points to a questionnaire that Obama never saw or approved. It was filled out by an aide who has conceded she never got Obama's sign-off. Some of the answers accurately reflect Obama's position. Others do not.

RHETORIC: "The questionnaire, which was provided to Politico with assistance from political sources opposed to Obama's presidential campaign, raises questions of whether Obama can be painted as too liberal and whether he is insufficiently consistent."

REALITY: Obama has been consistent on every issue raised in the story. See below.

DEATH PENALTY
REALITY: OBAMA CONSISTENTLY SUPPORTED THE DEATH PENALTY FOR CERTAIN CRIMES BUT BACKED A MORATORIUM UNTIL PROBLEMS WERE FIXED...

1999: Obama Said That Certain Precautions Had To Be Taken Before One Could Consider The Death Penalty, Supported A Moratorium. "As for death penalty moratoriums, Obama, who's also a constitutional lawyer, said unless proper due process exists, no one should be put on death row...'I was a main sponsor of a bill that would have put an immediate moratorium on the death penalty,' said Obama. 'We need to put more resources into the Public Defender's office, so they can do things like DNA testing and take other means to make sure you've got the right person before you consider the death penalty.'" [Chicago Weekend, 9/23/99]

2004: Obama Said He Supported The Death Penalty For Certain Crimes, But Did Not Support How The Death Penalty Was Administered. Obama said, "I support capital punishment for heinous crimes. I cannot, however, support the current system which is rife with error and lacks sufficient safeguards against wrongful convictions." The Chicago Tribune reported, "Obama qualified his stance, saying that his support eroded further when looking at how the death penalty 'is currently administered in this country.'" [AP, 3/10/04; Chicago Tribune, 2/20/04]

2007: Obama Said That He Supported The Death Penalty For Certain Crimes But Opposed The Death Penalty In Its Current Application And Would Not Change Those Views To Attack A Republican Opponent From The Right. Obama said, "That was something about him that I respected. Because my own views on the death penalty are very complicated. I've said that in theory I don't object to the death penalty for heinous crimes--terrorism, mass murder, child killers. But, in its application, it's been racially biased, highly unreliable, inconsistent. So for me to try to pretend that I was a cheerleader for the death penalty, simply to score a political point, that wasn't reflective of my views." [New Republic, 11/29/07]

[Frozen Sooner]

And frankly, I wish he did oppose the death penalty.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton were pro-death penalty as well.

[Whet]

..
But a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago nonprofit group that issued it. And it found that Obama -- the day after sitting for the interview -- filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama's own handwritten notes added to one answer.

[JohnnyMack]

Dear michael Steele,

Remember when you used to be head of the RNC?

Sincerely,

Two Months From Now

[Harry Beanbag]

anyway, i thought most of you asshats (minus Froz, in this instance) weren't GOp anymore? jsut "true Reagan conservatives": you don't sound like whiners at all, really?

btw, i posted a few time "back inna day" about what a crap job Steele was ding...


I know what a blast it is to poke fun at people for their beliefs without actually saying anything about what you believe in, but to tell you the truth, until this thread, I had no idea who the **** Michael Steele was.

And if you want to know where I stand, after reading the Libertarian platform, you'll find me over in that line. That's why I voted for that juggernaut Bob Barr. :rolleyes:

This country is ****ed as long as it adheres to the pub/dem line. They're both the same nowadays.

[Frozen Sooner]

So, Whet, please explain to me why both major candidates for the presidential nomination would claim to be in favor of the death penalty when they would be ostracized by the entire party for taking such a stand?

On the one hand you have a conservative blog saying Barack Obama isn't for the death penalty. Fair enough-earlier in his career there's a questionnaire that either he or someone on his campaign said he did not. On the other hand you have the Obama's own website directly quoting him as recently stating he supports capital punishment for heinous crimes.

Why would he take that stand while campaigning for the Democratic nomination if it would ostracize him?

[King Crimson]

but to tell you the truth, until this thread, I had no idea who the **** Michael Steele was.


see that's what's funny. no idea who Micheal Steele is.

if you wanna go libertarian, i'm with you....but the thing to having an ethic about it is not GOP retreat but is not picking and choosing among the Bill of Rights that suits your habits or personal preferences. like guns or having dark skinned people as citizens....or FBI electronic eavesdropping on the books i check out of the library.

[Frozen Sooner]

Libertarianism is a very seductive philosophy because it can mean almost anything to anyone. Where most people (and Harry, I'm not trying to say that this describes you, I assume you've put a lot of thought into it) fail is to take it to logical conclusion.

[tommieharris91]

Don't worry guys. Rush will absolve him of his sins after his penance.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Libertarianism is a very seductive philosophy because it can mean almost anything to anyone. Where most people (and Harry, I'm not trying to say that this describes you, I assume you've put a lot of thought into it) fail is to take it to logical conclusion.


Anarchy?

[SCOUT]

Anarchy?

It isn't anarchy. Each individual would just be responsible for their own actions. I think it is well established that when left to their own devices individuals will do the right thing. Right?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

As well as encouraging single motherhood.Refers to the democrat penchant for additional welfare benefits for additional children out of marriage.

[Crucifax Autumn]

oops

[Crucifax Autumn]

Refers to the democrat penchant for additional welfare benefits for additional children out of marriage.

Can't resist...so all those women should be required to abort? lol

[King Crimson]

automatic "common sense"

edit: yeah i did.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I'm gonna do the chicken dance naked with a lampshade on my head!

[def_lazer_fc]

I'm gonna do the chicken dance naked with a lampshade on my head!

just as long as there are no kids around :D

[Crucifax Autumn]

Well, crap...I was gonna juggle three newborns and a midget prostitute, but if ya don't think it's appropriate...

[Frozen Sooner]

Go for it. But make sure that the newborns are babies of the midget prostitute.

[tommieharris91]

And since this is a thread about abortion, it would only be fitting if the babies were the aborted fetuses of the midget prostitute.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I thought that went without saying...and the aborted are actually giant locusts!

[tommieharris91]

Generally, aborted first-trimester fetuses aren't considered newborns.

[yermom]

You don't have to thank me. Caring about single mothers just comes naturally to Democrats. ;)

read: "strippers"

[Harry Beanbag]

Libertarianism is a very seductive philosophy because it can mean almost anything to anyone. Where most people (and Harry, I'm not trying to say that this describes you, I assume you've put a lot of thought into it) fail is to take it to logical conclusion.


Have you taken the Democrat or Republican philosophies to their logical conclusion?

[olevetonahill]

Hell I took an Online Test once to see what party I should belong to :D
It said I was Libertarian / Border line Anarchist:cool:
As far as Abortion Goes , I dont agree with it. But I also dont think its the ****in Gubmints Jod to Provide or Deny .

The gay question , That was brought up in this thread.
I aint got a freakin Clue weather Its Choice or Nature .
Nor Do I care .Again I dont Care who you ****. Dont mean I agree with that either
Again it aint the Gubmints Jorb to decide ether.

Now I dont think this was brot up yet in this thread.
But Let me tell Ya how I feel about Stem cell research.
Since I dont agree with abortion I think It shouldnt even be a problem or something that the Gubmint has to decide
However
since there are abortions going on daily . why the hell waste em ?
To me its Kinda like that Deer my buddy hit and Killed a year or so ago .. I cut its throat, Harvested what I could of the meat
Wasnt wantin to kill the Deer, but dayum sure wasnt gonna let it go to waste either .

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Conclusion: Possibility of ACORN buying off the powers that be in the Republican party, to get Steele as RNC Chairman, in order to dry up financial support for the party.

[Frozen Sooner]

Have you taken the Democrat or Republican philosophies to their logical conclusion?

That's a nice "turnabout" type question, but in reality it doesn't mean anything.

The Libertarian Party is based on one overriding principle: the government that governs least governs best. Thus they cannot include anything in their platform that would tend to increase government power and be logically consistent (other than enforcement of contract rights and provision of national defense, of course).

Neither the Republican nor Democratic Party has such an overriding principle. As such, both parties are free to modify their platforms as needed to account for things that work or don't work in real-world application. This isn't mean to suggest that they've actually done so, by the way, but the possibility is there.

[LosAngelesSooner]

Conclusion: Possibility of ACORN buying off the powers that be in the Republican party, to get Steele as RNC Chairman, in order to dry up financial support for the party.
Yes. Right. They did this right after they paid to get Dubya re-elected, knowing that he'd be such a huge failure that they'd be able to win both houses of Congress and the Presidency under his second term.

Conclusion: You wear a lot of tin foil hats.

[Harry Beanbag]

That's a nice "turnabout" type question, but in reality it doesn't mean anything.

Sure it does. If left to their own devices and without the other one butting heads with them, they both lead to totalitarianism. Hell, now that they are basically one and the same, the checks and balances of both of them against each other may not exist any longer.




The Libertarian Party is based on one overriding principle: the government that governs least governs best. Thus they cannot include anything in their platform that would tend to increase government power and be logically consistent (other than enforcement of contract rights and provision of national defense, of course).

Yeah, that's kind of the point.

Look, I don't want the government. If I was like Bruce and could afford it, I would move my family and my closest friends, those who I know share the same beliefs and desires, into the mountains and give the middle finger to the rest of the world. Solar power, water well, the works. That's how I want to live.

We disagree mightily on the role and function of government, I can accept that.


Neither the Republican nor Democratic Party has such an overriding principle. As such, both parties are free to modify their platforms as needed to account for things that work or don't work in real-world application. This isn't mean to suggest that they've actually done so, by the way, but the possibility is there.

You kind of snuffed out your own argument here. ;) I understand what you're saying, but there is no perfectly right philosophy and it appears we both can agree that government should/can not be trusted.

[Frozen Sooner]

Sure it does. If left to their own devices and without the other one butting heads with them, they both lead to totalitarianism.

Totalitarianism does not follow logically from either parties' platform. We will have to agree to disagree.