Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed

  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!



    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    Display: Sort:
    I'm disappointed . . . (none / 0) (#6)
    by Kevin Rex Heine on Mon Oct 24, 2011 at 02:17:06 PM EST
    . . . in you, Scales; I honestly expected that you'd do your homework better.

    From LifeNews:

    Businessman and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain reaffirmed his pro-life views in a statement today, one day after he declined to sign the pro-life pledge sponsored by the Susan B. Anthony List that other presidential candidates signed.

    "I support right-to-life issues unequivocally and I adamantly support the first three aspects of the Susan B. Anthony pledge involving appointing pro-life judges, choosing pro-life cabinet members, and ending taxpayer-funded abortions," Cain said in a statement. "However, the fourth requirement demands that I `advance' the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. As president, I would sign it, but Congress must advance the legislation."

    "I have been a consistent and unwavering champion of pro life issues," Cain added. "In no way does this singular instance of clarification denote an abandonment of the pro-life movement, but instead, is a testament to my respect for the balance of power and the role of the presidency."

    And, from Cain's own campaign website:

    "Yesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.

    I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply "order" people to not seek an abortion.

    My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.

    As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story.

    I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.

    I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life."

    So I don't see the problem here.  Actually, that's not true; I do see the problem, and it isn't Herman Cain or his positions.

    There are some high-profile pro-life organizations that are so stuck on overturning Roe v. Wade that they don't seem to care if the Constitution is shredded in the process.  (Just outlaw abortion, and check-and-balances be damned, seems to be their position.)  These are the same idiots who gave Justin Amash a hard time because he voted "nay" on a bill that specifically defunded Planned Parenthood . . . but did not likewise defund any other similar organization.  Congressman Amash correctly pointed out that the bill in question violates Article 1, Section 9 of the U. S. Constitution ("No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.").  But again, the pro-lifers seem to be saying, screw the Constitution, as long as we get our way.

    Quite frankly, anyone who honestly claims to be a tea partier ought to have a problem with that mindset, because if we don't care about adherence to the constitution when undoing the damage that the progressives have spent the past century inflicting on our nation, then how are we any different from them?


    Display: Sort:


    Make a new account

    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!
    create account | faq | search