Liberal New York Times does it again....

Salon.com did an excellent piece on the the radical extremism of Bush's attempted past judicial nominations. I think the mainline of America is justifiably concerned, or should be if they're not.

Joshua

 

Joshua, Poll after poll demonstrates that the "average" American is a little "right" of center as defined today... to include a large majority that support outlawing abortion after the first trimester. Its interesting that of the competitive Senate races all but two were won by pro-lifers. "Traditional values" play well even as folks like the NYT call them "extremist views."

I know from your posts that you think that the rest of us are whacked out and most people think like you, NYT, and Pelosi but you're wrong.

Bush's nominees are not extremists from the average American's views... only from the far leftist's views.

 

I was unable to find this fine article. Can you provide a link?

If I had to guess, they label as "extremists" anyone who believes in a strict interpretation of the Constitution which of course undermines most liberal ideas.

 

Here's the link:

Clearing the Bench

It's a Salon "Premium Exclusive" so I don't know how much you'll be able to see. If you need more specifics from it, let me know.

I think Bush's appointments and platform on issues like abortion, the environment, and corporate responsibility are to the right of where most Americans are.

Regarding the abortion issue, I think only strong idealogues on the left and the right make it a litmus test of voting. Last time I checked, it wasn't even a platform issue for the Republican party as a whole.

Joshua

 

Radical extremism.

 

I don't know where they went from the comment about Scalia but if Bush could find enough Scalia clones to fill all those vacancies, the Constitution and our genuine rights and liberties would be safe for some time.

I am sure that is what you think. However, much like the challenge I issued over what you termed "mainstream Christianity", your view does not agree with available data. My information comes from reading polls by Gallup and others... the ones that get chopped by liberal new editors.

 

Scott,

Would you consider outlawing abortion after the first trimester to be the "conservative" stand? I'm not really uncomfortable with it, and I think it probably does represent where a majority of Americans are.

I don't think it's consistent with the zero-tolerance for abortion represented by Bush's heavy-handed dealings with the UN and his attempted judicial appointments.

Joshua

 

From the 2000 GOP platform: "The Supreme Court’s recent decision, prohibiting states from banning partial-birth abortions — a procedure denounced by a committee of the American Medical Association and rightly branded as four-fifths infanticide — shocks the conscience of the nation. As a country, we must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life."

 

No. But I do consider it well to the right of the abortion on demand without limitation stand by the Dems... interesting that they squelch all dissenting voices within the Dem party on this issue then call the Republicans intolerant.

I would support a ban with some possible extreme exceptions.

It is however a first position of compromise, heading in the right direction. I think Americans could easily be sold on the idea of declaring a fetus with a heart beat or brain wave a "legal life" and outlawing abortions afterwards. If I am not mistaken, the first of these develops at around the 4th or 5th week.

 

Yet another example of "invincible ignorance."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/11/13/21009.shtml

In the Father,

Russ <><

 

Wonderful Post!!! Thanks for the info.