For those who have access to it, yes...if you know where to look. Most of all this is what the candidates or their supporters put out for everyone. So in a sense, the proverbial bushel basket.
I disagree that he hid his views under any bushel, proverbial or otherwise.
quote:
You raise up the past voting record, but as to why he didn't gain the bid back then for the White House, oh well?
I raised up the issue of the past voting record to substantiate my assertion that he has consistently been prolife. There is no speculation involved in the voting record. It speaks for itself. As to why he lost the bid, there could be numerous factors involved. For one thing, he ran out of money and George Bush didn't. To speculate that he might have lost the nomination for comments made or not made is irrelevant, IMO, because just as you said, "the world will never know." But if that really is the case, why aren't Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee the leading contenders for the GOP nomination.
There can be doubt with regard to the voting record.
quote:
Huckabee. And Ron Paul for another.
So you are going to support Huckabee or Ron Paul because, in your opinion, they have been more vociferous about their pro-life positions than McCain, and that assures you of their positions? Well, if either Huckabee or Paul garners the GOP nomination, I will vote for whichever one that is. Voting for a third party candidate can only make a Clinton or Obama victory more certain.
Apparently we're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't believe he was as silent as you believe. The National Right to Life considers him prolife and has always supported his senate races. NARAL Pro-Choice America is clearly against him because of his pro-life positions.
True, as I've acknowledged before, he is not 100% prolife because of the embryonic stem cell research position and his exceptions to being able to procure an abortion. In that respect he basically holds to the same beliefs as George Bush and most conservatives do not consider GWB proabortion. He's not the ideal prolife candidate, either, but we made a few gains during his presidency, particularly two staunch prolife justices on the Supreme Court. And then there's partial birth abortion...
But to repeat what I've said numerous times, I did not want McCain to be the nominee and do not consider him an ideal prolife candidate by a long shot. I did not even vote for him in my state primary. I don't think he's as bad as some are portraying him, however, because he does have a solid prolife voting record. I will support him in the General Election if he wins the Republican nomination because there are proportionate reasons to do so. He is more prolife than Obama or Clinton.
What are these issues that you referred to whereby Obama is, in your view, more conservative than McCain?
So you are going to support Huckabee or Ron Paul because, in your opinion, they have been more vociferous about their pro-life positions than McCain, and that assures you of their positions?
There is a difference between just acting, and getting out there and saying something as well as acting.
Yes.
As for Obama, I will not answer that question yet, if at all, in this thread. This is a pro-life thread based on what I believe and remember about McCain and whether he truly deserves the vote.
My reasons for liking Obama are a side issue.
You are right that we are going to have to agree to disagree. I have to see this from my view point as both Catholic and teacher. I don't see him speaking out on his positions in the past like he should have, and yes, that makes a difference for this voter.
He needs to be able to put his mouth where his money is, so to speak.
As for a "third party candidate", Huckabee and Paul are both Repubs, so why give up on them? Because we fear that a Dem would get in? No. We vote on them because by far, they are the better candidates for the Repub nomination on the pro life side.
What does it say about Catholics who give an inch and vote for McCain when there truly IS a better choice?
Re: Why did Mike Huckabee take stem-cell money? Obama still is for abortion is he not? I know the country is back in debt again & supposedly we were out of that before Bush... I always used to vote dem but have been mostly rep past few times voting. I just havn' seen anything dem that appeals to md anymore. :(
--- ...Bless my enemies, O Lord. Even I bless them and do not curse them.
Amen
As for Obama, I will not answer that question yet, if at all, in this thread. This is a pro-life thread based on what I believe and remember about McCain and whether he truly deserves the vote.
My reasons for liking Obama are a side issue.
Begging your pardon here, but I believe you are the one who brought the subject of Obama's alleged conservatism on other issues into this thread in the first place. But if you don't want to discuss it now, or maybe never, okay. I'll accept that.
quote:
He needs to be able to put his mouth where his money is, so to speak.
I think I've provided enough sources to show that he has done that with regard to abortion on demand. He's spoken out on national television. If none of it is to your satisfaction, so be it. We agree to disagree.
quote:
As for a "third party candidate", Huckabee and Paul are both Repubs, so why give up on them? Because we fear that a Dem would get in? No. We vote on them because by far, they are the better candidates for the Repub nomination on the pro life side.
Do you mean in the General Election? The only time a third party candidate won the presidency was in 1860. What chance do either Paul or Huckabee really have if neither secures the GOP nomination? I look at it as being realistic. Worse could happen for the prolife cause than McCain.
As Catholics we know we are allowed to vote for the lesser evil if we have proportionate reasons to do so. In the General Election we have that option if McCain secures the nomination, as he is likely to do. Huckabee and Paul are better candidates for sure on the prolife issues, but unless one of them can garner the nomination, he has virtually no chance at all to win the presidency. What good will splitting the conservative vote do the prolife cause when that is more than likely to end in a win for the Democrats?
Even Govenor Huckabee acknowledges that running as a third party candidate is likely to get a Democrat elected. He said:
quote:
“...I think a third party only helps elect Hillary [Clinton],” the ordained Baptist minister and staunch conservative told The Washington Post on Thursday. “I don’t see that being a good strategy for those who really care about pushing a pro-family, pro-life agenda.”
quote:
We vote on them because by far, they are the better candidates for the Repub nomination on the pro life side.
In the primaries we have the luxury of doing this. The General Election is a different story. It does no good to the prolife cause if the candidate I'm supporting can't get elected. Check the Rasmussen Reports site for updated polls.
quote:
What does it say about Catholics who give an inch and vote for McCain when there truly IS a better choice?
If you are referring to the General Election and not the primaries, it says we're realistic in that we recognize a third party candidate has virtually no chance of winning. If Huckabee or Paul can not even secure the GOP nomination how can either realistically be expected to win the election? It says that we recognize if Obama or Clinton wins, partial-birth abortions will likely start again and since McCain has voted against them three times, if he is elected they likely will not resume under his presidency. It says we're practical enough to accept that we have to do the best we can with who can actually get elected, even if he's not 100% prolife. It says we're going to try to mitigate the damage that the Democrats will do by getting the lesser evil elected. It says we understand that it does the unborn no good to vote on principle for a candidate who can't win.
Father Frank Pavone:
And in the pragmatic matter of elections, what matters is not how closely a candidate measures up to my preferences and convictions. Instead, it’s a question of who can and will actually get elected. It does little good if the person I felt most comfortable supporting doesn’t get to actually govern and implement those positions I like so much.
The vote can be used just as much to keep someone out of office as to put someone in.
Then the general election season arrives, and we may find that we don’t like any of the names on the ballot. At that point, we have to shift our thinking and focus on “better” rather than “best.” The reality usually is that one of several unsatisfactory candidates will in fact be elected. So we use our vote to create the better outcome and to limit the damage. That’s the shift that some fail to make.
Begging your pardon here, but I believe you are the one who brought the subject of Obama's alleged conservatism on other issues into this thread in the first place.
No. I said I would for him over McCain. I never mentioned the reason why. In later threads, you asked for me to clarify, and I chose not to because the reasons do not come into the topic of this thread.
You chose to repeat it. I chose not to change the topic of the thread. End of story.
quote:
I think I've provided enough sources to show that he has done that with regard to abortion on demand. He's spoken out on national television. If none of it is to your satisfaction, so be it. We agree to disagree.
You seemingly missed half of my arguement somewhere. I am also referring to the past experiences I have had in choosing McCain vs. someone else.
He may have mentioned certain things in Fl, but not necessarily in Texas. I am not worried about the reason, but based on my experiences, I would not vote for McCain. Why no one can understand that simple point is beyond me. Agree to disagree.
quote:
Do you mean in the General Election? The only time a third party candidate won the presidency was in 1860. What chance do either Paul or Huckabee really have if neither secures the GOP nomination? I look at it as being realistic. Worse could happen for the prolife cause than McCain.
Let us get thru the primaries first before we start sweating out the General Election, which may I point out, is still a while away yet. A lot can happen between now and then.
quote:
but unless one of them can garner the nomination, he has virtually no chance at all to win the presidency.
All I can say is if people don't vote for them because they are worried about the power and charisma of McCain, then they can't garner any nomination, can they?!
Is your entire arguement with me based on the general elections only, or can we still try for something much better?
quote:
Even Govenor Huckabee acknowledges that running as a third party candidate is likely to get a Democrat elected.
Once again we aren't there yet, and before he said that, he was asking for people to vote for him in the primaries in the hopes of deadlocking any nomination for the Repubs.
quote:
If you are referring to the General Election and not the primaries, it says we're realistic in that we recognize a third party candidate has virtually no chance of winning.
My reality is that you are arguing a general election view point with someone who has not yet voted in a primary.
This is not quite yet worth the time to argue for me.
quote:
Father Frank Pavone:
And in the pragmatic matter of elections, what matters is not how closely a candidate measures up to my preferences and convictions. Instead, it’s a question of who can and will actually get elected. It does little good if the person I felt most comfortable supporting doesn’t get to actually govern and implement those positions I like so much.
The vote can be used just as much to keep someone out of office as to put someone in.
Then the general election season arrives, and we may find that we don’t like any of the names on the ballot. At that point, we have to shift our thinking and focus on “better” rather than “best.” The reality usually is that one of several unsatisfactory candidates will in fact be elected. So we use our vote to create the better outcome and to limit the damage. That’s the shift that some fail to make.
No. I said I would for him over McCain. I never mentioned the reason why.
That's right, you said you would vote for him over McCain. So I asked you on the basis of what proportionate reasons you would do this. You didn't answer that but stated this:
quote:
Now let me say this: I think Obama is better based on the other policies outside of abortion. That AND he hasn't been near as flip flopping as I have seen. He takes a more conservative stand on some issues than most Dems.
Since you made that statement, I didn't see any reason why I could not ask you to explain further. If you choose not to discuss it, okay, but since you made the statement I decided to ask.
quote:
You chose to repeat it. I chose not to change the topic of the thread. End of story.
Yes, I chose to ask you again about the statement that you made. I asked for proportionate reasons first and next asked what are the issues on which you consider that Obama takes a more conservative stand. The latter I asked about twice. I agree that I asked again but I had no way of knowing if you were ignoring my question or just forgot about it.
As for the topic of this thread, it's Why did Mike Huckabee take stem-cell money? This thread changed topics after the first few posts.
quote:
In later threads, you asked for me to clarify, and I chose not to because the reasons do not come into the topic of this thread.
Correct, I did ask you to clarify what exactly you meant and you did not respond. So I asked again. Since you made the original statement about Obama and other policies, and his alleged conservatism, I felt it was within reason to question this.
This thread went off topic after the first few posts.
quote:
You seemingly missed half of my arguement somewhere. I am also referring to the past experiences I have had in choosing McCain vs. someone else.
From my perspective, you only offered a personal opinion based on personal experience that McCain has not spoken out against abortion prior to this election. I posted quotes from 2000 where he spoke on national television and in print to the contrary, none of which was satisfactory to you. So be it. We agreed to disagree.
quote:
He may have mentioned certain things in Fl, but not necessarily in Texas.
What I quoted was spoken and written nationally. But maybe you did not see Senator McCain on television or read any of the print articles from that time.
quote:
I am not worried about the reason, but based on my experiences, I would not vote for McCain. Why no one can understand that simple point is beyond me. Agree to disagree.
I don't know who "no one" is. I don't understand not voting at all, voting for a third party candidate, or voting for a democrat over McCain, in the General Election. No matter how much one dislikes him, he is still more prolife than Clinton or Obama, who would only cement a victory if the conservative vote gets split in a three way race in the General Election.
I do understand why you would not vote for McCain when there are more prolife candidates in the primary. As I've said about five times now, I did not vote for McCain in my own state primary. I sure as heck don't expect you to do it.
quote:
Let us get thru the primaries first before we start sweating out the General Election, which may I point out, is still a while away yet. A lot can happen between now and then.
We have been discussing both primaries and the general election in this thread as well as other issues. It's gone back and forth. When you said you would vote for Obama over McCain that was in reference to the General Election.
quote:
As for a "third party candidate", Huckabee and Paul are both Repubs, so why give up on them? Because we fear that a Dem would get in? No. We vote on them because by far, they are the better candidates for the Repub nomination on the pro life side.
When speaking about "third party candidates", we are speaking about the General Election. Since there are no third party candidates in the primaries, when you said "As for a third party candidate" I assumed you were speaking of the General Election for that very reason, even though I asked you for clarification.
quote:
All I can say is if people don't vote for them because they are worried about the power and charisma of McCain, then they can't garner any nomination, can they?
Power and charisma of McCain? Who thinks he has power and charisma? The more I hear from him, the more convinced I become that he has somewhat of a problem articulating his positions.
quote:
Is your entire arguement with me based on the general elections only, or can we still try for something much better?
That's not all we've been arguing. Part of it has to do with McCain and his prolife position or lack of. As for the primary, we can agree because I did not vote for McCain in my state's primary and I have conceded a number of times that Huckabee and Paul are much better prolife candidates than McCain.
quote:
Once again we aren't there yet, and before he said that, he was asking for people to vote for him in the primaries in the hopes of deadlocking any nomination for the Repubs.
Yes, but when speaking about third party candidates, we are speaking about the General Election, not the primaries. Of course Huckabee still wants people to vote for him in the primary as long as he hasn't left the race. But that doesn't negate the fact that even he acknowledges that if he doesn't secure the GOP nomination, it does the prolife cause no good for him to run as a third party candidate.
quote:
My reality is that you are arguing a general election view point with someone who has not yet voted in a primary.
My reality of what has transpired in this discussion/argument is that there have been a number of issues that we been talking about.
Here are the points I've been arguing in this thread:
quote:
1. McCain trumps Obama in the General Election. There are proportionate reasons to vote for McCain. There are no proportionate reasons to vote for Obama that I have discovered because he seems to be in favor of every intrinsic evil that we must oppose.
2. While not 100% prolife because of his exceptions to abortion (rape, incest, and the life of the mother being in danger) as well as his support for embryonic stem-cell research, McCain is more prolife than Obama. Whatever issues Obama is more conservative on than others, intrinsic evils trump other issues. Obama stands for every intrinsic evil we are against so there are no proportionate reasons to vote for him.
3. McCain has always been against abortion except in the circumstances noted above and he has a long voting record to show for it. He has also spoken out both on national television and in print, prior to this election that he is against abortion on demand.
4. With regard to the primary elections, It is highly likely than when all of them are over, McCain will be the GOP nominee for President of the United States. He is so far ahead of his competitors in the delegate count at this point, that Huckabee will have to win every single remaining delegate that is still up for grabs and then somehow secure all of Romney's delegates as well, in order to overtake McCain and become the Republican candidate. While I believe in miracles, I tend also to be a realist.
5. Huckabee and Paul are both better prolife candidates than McCain. I did not vote for McCain in my state's primary, so I certainly do not expect others to do so.
6. If McCain is the Republican nominee he will get my vote in the General Election. If Huckabee is the nominee, he will get my vote. I will not vote for any third party candidate, either as a write in or as an independent, because to do that is tantamount to voting for Clinton or Obama and makes a democratic victory much more likely.
quote:
This is not quite yet worth the time to argue for me.
Okay. If you are finished responding in this thread that is fine with me.
I hope I've cleared up my position and anything that might have been misunderstood.
From my perspective, you only offered a personal opinion based on personal experience that McCain has not spoken out against abortion prior to this election.
I posted one more thing aside from that. He also doesn't speak out the same way those who are fervent in the belief of being pro-life. I don't keep up with voting habits. Maybe that is my fault. But I do tend to listen over the long term who speaks out for what when it come around me. He didn't speak out.
To vote quietly is one thing. I don't want a quiet president. That is my choice. I want to hear him ride the platform for as long as he has been voting for it. He has not.
He was a valiant man who was a prisoner of war. He spoke out on wars and battles and even peace negotiations and tactics. His face was all over back then in 2000 about any number of things. I don't once remember seeing him frequenting the tv on pro life issues in the same way.
quote:
As for the topic of this thread, it's Why did Mike Huckabee take stem-cell money? This thread changed topics after the first few posts.
You and then I stepped in when the topic changed. Since then it has been a topic of McCain and pro-life along with a comment made by me about Obama, which would have then changed it again. That is adding more to this than need be, and quite frankly, a lot about how I truly feel about all the candidates are not for open discussion. That is why many of us consider voting a private issue. I would have expected a quiet understanding of that and no I dont think I should have to say it outright. I don't feel a need to constantly spell it out. If I didnt answer the question by the second time, maybe I had a reason?
If you want to know the reason I can put it into the admin forum.
quote:
From my perspective, you only offered a personal opinion based on personal experience that McCain has not spoken out against abortion prior to this election.
It does look personal, and for the most matter it is. Another thing that is not let out in public for certain reasons.
But I did give you a reason...
quote:
I don't know who "no one" is. I don't understand not voting at all, voting for a third party candidate, or voting for a democrat over McCain, in the General Election. No matter how much one dislikes him, he is still more prolife than Clinton or Obama, who would only cement a victory if the conservative vote gets split in a three way race in the General Election.
Not voting at all is fairly understandable when you come to a decision that has no winners in any format. Third party candidates are already being spoken of and some are trying to campaign down here, not that they are worth much. Remember Ross Perot and all the arguements about how his joining in could screw it up for the republicans or democrats and send us scurrying for tie breakers? It is becoming an instant replay all over again... at least I hope it truly doesnt.
quote:
When speaking about "third party candidates", we are speaking about the General Election. Since there are no third party candidates in the primaries, when you said "As for a third party candidate"
True, but a third party candidate erupting now before certain primaries are done, can shift a primary due to General election expectations. That HAS happened down here. Some of them are not waiting till after the primaries are done, they are speaking out now...
quote:
quote:
This is not quite yet worth the time to argue for me.
Okay. If you are finished responding in this thread that is fine with me.
I hope I've cleared up my position and anything that might have been misunderstood.
Note the word argue, Portia. I dont mind discussions. I understand you are very much for your choices. I mind having to deal with an arugment based on an opinion I have. I did not necessarily come into this with the idea of arguing. I have a different experience in dealing with it than you do, and those experiences are not easily changed, for reasons I choose not to discuss here. You have not been misunderstood, but I will say that I am not happy with how I have read this thread... once again opinion on my part.
I will say that I cannot go much farther into this topic than at this point. If it cannot be accepted based on this, it cannot be helped? Cryptic? You bet. Words don't explain it better than that.
