Romney vs Perry

[jasmin]

I think it is clear I've been undecided between Romney and Perry. In reality, we don't really choose the ultimate candidate but it is worthwhile to examine each in detail.

I don't think anyone other than Romney or Perry will move forward to win the nomination, so with that assumption, I've been trying to read and learn more about each of them.

I previously referenced Romney's website as showing position changes. That was incorrect. It was an independent website.

Take some time to really review these:
http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/09/believe-america-day-one-job-one

http://www.rickperry.org/about/

I have grown tired of the endless speeches and empty promises or pledges from the white house. The jobs speech is nothing but noise, with no detailed policy plan behind it. Obama has been in office for 3 years and we are supposed to believe that all of a sudden, he has a plan. Further, that he had to go on vacation to prepare this plan. Too bad there is nothing but a speech with details to be shared 'later'. Maybe he'll come up with it if he goes on another vacation.

Along with Perry's coarse approach that I find a major turn off, his website is very obama-ish. He talks about what he has done but not how this would translate to the national stage. He speaks boldly and often overstates, such as SS being a ponzi scheme or being unconsitutional, but has not shared his plan for a better solution. And like obama, it is me, me, me. It's great to identify the problems, but what are you going to do about them?

In contrast, Romney has been criticized for being too detailed, like his 59 step jobs plan. But look at his policy plans. There is thought, analysis, as well as detailed proposals here. Some are over aggressive, such as saying he would get congressional action within 30 days. But he shows he has studied the situation, understands it, and has a proposed solution. This isn't just noise and rhetoric. He closes the deal by fully endorsing the greatness of America. This guy is no apologist and has never suggested succeeding from the union.

We'll all make our individual decisions but I want substance over flash, rational leadership over bullying and forcing your opinion, and informed decision making over the most impactful one-liners. Romney leads for me.

 

[I Love America]

I think it is clear I've been undecided between Romney and Perry. In reality, we don't really choose the ultimate candidate but it is worthwhile to examine each in detail.

I don't think anyone other than Romney or Perry will move forward to win the nomination, so with that assumption, I've been trying to read and learn more about each of them.

I previously referenced Romney's website as showing position changes. That was incorrect. It was an independent website.

Take some time to really review these:
http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/09/believe-america-day-one-job-one

http://www.rickperry.org/about/

I have grown tired of the endless speeches and empty promises or pledges from the white house. The jobs speech is nothing but noise, with no detailed policy plan behind it. Obama has been in office for 3 years and we are supposed to believe that all of a sudden, he has a plan. Further, that he had to go on vacation to prepare this plan. Too bad there is nothing but a speech with details to be shared 'later'. Maybe he'll come up with it if he goes on another vacation.

Along with Perry's coarse approach that I find a major turn off, his website is very obama-ish. He talks about what he has done but not how this would translate to the national stage. He speaks boldly and often overstates, such as SS being a ponzi scheme or being unconsitutional, but has not shared his plan for a better solution. And like obama, it is me, me, me. It's great to identify the problems, but what are you going to do about them?

In contrast, Romney has been criticized for being too detailed, like his 59 step jobs plan. But look at his policy plans. There is thought, analysis, as well as detailed proposals here. Some are over aggressive, such as saying he would get congressional action within 30 days. But he shows he has studied the situation, understands it, and has a proposed solution. This isn't just noise and rhetoric. He closes the deal by fully endorsing the greatness of America. This guy is no apologist and has never suggested succeeding from the union.

We'll all make our individual decisions but I want substance over flash, rational leadership over bullying and forcing your opinion, and informed decision making over the most impactful one-liners. Romney leads for me.

It is clear that you are a Romney fan and that is fine and I am not going to try to change your mind about it.

But, please don't be dishonest about your portrayal of the two. You link to Romney's issues section of his website and then only link to Perry's "About" page. This is the kind of partisan hack trick Odummy would do.

Also, Perry never suggested "seceding" from the Union. Seriously, why can't people get that word right? You aren't the only one. I guess you also think Palin said "I can see Russia from my house"?

I have known for a long time that you aren't a true conservative. I am sure you will be insulted and say that I am wrong, but your stance on issues belies your soon to be protestations.

Yes, you endlessly bitch about taxation, but that alone does not make one a Conservative in my book. You like all of the things gobblement does, you just don't want to have to pay for it.

 

[~T~]

ouch..thems fighting words...grabbing popcorn

 

[jasmin]

It is clear that you are a Romney fan and that is fine and I am not going to try to change your mind about it.

But, please don't be dishonest about your portrayal of the two. You link to Romney's issues section of his website and then only link to Perry's "About" page. This is the kind of partisan hack trick Odummy would do.

Also, Perry never suggested "seceding" from the Union. Seriously, why can't people get that word right? You aren't the only one. I guess you also think Palin said "I can see Russia from my house"?

I have known for a long time that you aren't a true conservative. I am sure you will be insulted and say that I am wrong, but your stance on issues belies your soon to be protestations.

Yes, you endlessly bitch about taxation, but that alone does not make one a Conservative in my book. You like all of the things gobblement does, you just don't want to have to pay for it.

As I posted on the other thread where you are all concerned about where the link goes to first, how hard it is to navigate the websites? Really? The links are just where I ended reading for the day and you are really reaching to try to read something into it. I suspect you know how to navigate a website. Go read Perry's issues information. It doesn't have one word of a plan forward.

No, I am not your version of a conservative because we disagree on some social issues, most notably that I would never legislate against abortion and support stem cell research wholeheartedly. So tell me what it is you think I like so much that is provided by the government? Health care? Nope. SS? Nope. Medicare? Nope. Food stamps? Nope. Bailouts for irresponsible homeowners? Nope.

Santorum? Anyone who forces a mother to go through what they did with one of their sons, knowing the child would die soon after birth is heartless? Even after his wife almost dies due to an infection caused by the baby and they induce labor at about 20 weeks, too soon for viability so forcing the imminent death of the child to save the mom, he still claims abortion in cases to save the life of the mother are not real? And who brings home a dead child to meet the family? And he posts this like it is something great that they did? No way, no how. Or that social security is in trouble because there aren't enough kids due to abortion? Or making up statistics to try to make statements about abortion that are untrue over and over again? He doesn't even think married couples should have sexual privacy rights within their own home. He excuses priest's abuse of kids as due to our culture, so excuses their behavior. But my favorite are his statements about working women implying women should not desire career fullfillment and should give up careers to have kids (I think he has mommy issues since his mom worked and made more money than his dad). Or maybe his stupid comments that birth control hurts women. No way this guy is winning anything, unless he manages to return us to a time when women and minorities didn't have voting rights.

Believe whatever you want about me ILA. I don't need to fit your mold of conservatism to know who I am.

 

[I Love America]

As I posted on the other thread where you are all concerned about where the link goes to first, how hard it is to navigate the websites? Really? The links are just where I ended reading for the day and you are really reaching to try to read something into it. I suspect you know how to navigate a website. Go read Perry's issues information. It doesn't have one word of a plan forward.

No, I am not your version of a conservative because we disagree on some social issues, most notably that I would never legislate against abortion and support stem cell research wholeheartedly. So tell me what it is you think I like so much that is provided by the government? Health care? Nope. SS? Nope. Medicare? Nope. Food stamps? Nope. Bailouts for irresponsible homeowners? Nope.

Santorum? Anyone who forces a mother to go through what they did with one of their sons, knowing the child would die soon after birth is heartless? Even after his wife almost dies due to an infection caused by the baby and they induce labor at about 20 weeks, too soon for viability so forcing the imminent death of the child to save the mom, he still claims abortion in cases to save the life of the mother are not real? And who brings home a dead child to meet the family? And he posts this like it is something great that they did? No way, no how. Or that social security is in trouble because there aren't enough kids due to abortion? Or making up statistics to try to make statements about abortion that are untrue over and over again? He doesn't even think married couples should have sexual privacy rights within their own home. He excuses priest's abuse of kids as due to our culture, so excuses their behavior. But my favorite are his statements about working women implying women should not desire career fullfillment and should give up careers to have kids (I think he has mommy issues since his mom worked and made more money than his dad). Or maybe his stupid comments that birth control hurts women. No way this guy is winning anything, unless he manages to return us to a time when women and minorities didn't have voting rights.

Believe whatever you want about me ILA. I don't need to fit your mold of conservatism to know who I am.

I will believe whatever I want. As I have said before. The truth is the truth. You don't have to like it. I am sure that you "think" you are a conservative. But, hating Odummy isn't enough. Hating taxes isn't enough.

In this post you imply that you don't like Social Security, but you don't like the guy who calls it for what it is. You find that too "harsh". Instead you go for the guy who wants to "fix" it. There should be nothing to fix. Perry is right. It is unconstitutional.

As for abortion, you apparently think that 30 million murders has been a good thing for our society. I do not.

BTW, you do know that Romney claims to be pro life right? Just thought ya might wanna know.

Of course you probably believe him when he says he isn't a career politician even though he has been running for some kind of higher office since 1994.

Like I said, if he is the nominee, I am voting for Obama in protest

 

[jasmin]

Like I said, if he is the nominee, I am voting for Obama in protest

Right. Your hand would fall off first.

 

[jasmin]

Oh, and despite the rhetoric, Perry knows he won't end social security either. Here's his statement about "fixing" it.

"For too long, politicians have been afraid to speak honestly about Social Security. We must have the guts to talk about its financial condition if we are to fix Social Security and make it financially viable for generations to come."

Read more on Newsmax.com: Perry Op-Ed: I'm 'Honest' About Social Security

 

[Man For All Seasons]

As I posted on the other thread where you are all concerned about where the link goes to first, how hard it is to navigate the websites? Really? The links are just where I ended reading for the day and you are really reaching to try to read something into it. I suspect you know how to navigate a website. Go read Perry's issues information. It doesn't have one word of a plan forward.

No, I am not your version of a conservative because we disagree on some social issues, most notably that I would never legislate against abortion and support stem cell research wholeheartedly. So tell me what it is you think I like so much that is provided by the government? Health care? Nope. SS? Nope. Medicare? Nope. Food stamps? Nope. Bailouts for irresponsible homeowners? Nope.

Santorum? Anyone who forces a mother to go through what they did with one of their sons, knowing the child would die soon after birth is heartless? No, they are moral and principled. And how do you know he "forced" his wife to do anything.Even after his wife almost dies due to an infection caused by the baby and they induce labor at about 20 weeks, too soon for viability so forcing the imminent death of the child to save the mom, he still claims abortion in cases to save the life of the mother are not real? Don't believe he thinks they aren't real, just extremely rare. And "life of the mother" is far too frequently used to inappropriate "protect" abortion.And who brings home a dead child to meet the family? And he posts this like it is something great that they did? No way, no how.Yes, way. Yes, how. I can guarantee you that his kids will be at least as well adjusted as yours. What? Are we supposed to live in denial of death? Part of our problem as a culture is that we have been able to artificially insulate ourselves from lots of the realities of life. Or that social security is in trouble because there aren't enough kids due to abortion? Yep, makes perfect sense, sad you can't follow it.Or making up statistics to try to make statements about abortion that are untrue over and over again? He doesn't do that. You are wrong as usual when it comes to statistics and social issues. You lose all judgement.He doesn't even think married couples should have sexual privacy rights within their own home. He excuses priest's abuse of kids as due to our culture, so excuses their behavior.No, he didn't excuse their behavior, he was making a larger and valid point, which you missed. But my favorite are his statements about working women implying women should not desire career fullfillment and should give up careers to have kids (I think he has mommy issues since his mom worked and made more money than his dad). Santorum is right again. You are clueless. You are the one with "mommy" issues. Another cheap shot of which you should be ashamed.Or maybe his stupid comments that birth control hurts women. No way this guy is winning anything, unless he manages to return us to a time when women and minorities didn't have voting rights. Ridiculous, hysterical and untrue. Noting but a blatant smear on your part. You should be ashamed.

Believe whatever you want about me ILA. I don't need to fit your mold of conservatism to know who I am.

Once again, you prove yourself to be absolutely unhinged on social issues. The qualities of judgement you display in other areas seem to evaporate anytime you get near social issues.

The bottom line is that Santorum is an excellent candidate and it is to our detriment as a nation that his campaign isn't getting more traction, but that's just the way it is. It's not because of his social conservatism which drives you over the edge either. Perry is a major player and holds basically the same beliefs.

Your intellectually dishonest smear job of Santorum is worthy of the NY Times or some other mainstream media sewer.

 

[Breakingnews]

Once again, you prove yourself to be absolutely unhinged on social issues. The qualities of judgement you display in other areas seem to evaporate anytime you get near social issues.

The bottom line is that Santorum is an excellent candidate and it is to our detriment as a nation that his campaign isn't getting more traction, but that's just the way it is. It's not because of his social conservatism which drives you over the edge either. Perry is a major player and holds basically the same beliefs.

Your intellectually dishonest smear job of Santorum is worthy of the NY Times or some other mainstream media sewer.

First you say that Michelle Bachmann with her 6% support is still a 'viable' candidate. Now you claim that 'Man on Dog' Santorum, who got beat like a rented mule the last time he ran for office in his home state, is an excellent candidate.

Just the fact that you think either Bachmann or Santorum are 'excellent' candidates should lamd you in some sort of perma modmo here on CP.

I may disagree with SPN on 90% of the issues, but she is way more hinged than you can ever hope to be.

Thanks for the continued laughs.

 

[jasmin]

Santorum has stated that cases of abortion to save the life of the mother are phony. He is an extremely and vocally anti-abortion. That is, until it is his own wife. So, while she has a fever and infection and will lose her life unlesss they take action, they decided to induce labor to save her life. The baby was 20 weeks along, too soon to be viable, especially with the known birth defects he carried. I guess early inducement of labor to save mom isn't the same as an abortion. Funny he didn't think their doctor should face criminal charges.

He would not allow abortion in cases of rape. I suspect he would change views on this too if it was one of his daughters.

So, it is OK if you are Santorum but not OK for anyone else. He is a sanctimonious prick. He says Paul is disconnected from reality? He should look in a mirror.

 

[Man For All Seasons]

First you say that Michelle Bachmann with her 6% support is still a 'viable' candidate. Now you claim that 'Man on Dog' Santorum, who got beat like a rented mule the last time he ran for office in his home state, is an excellent candidate.

Just the fact that you think either Bachmann or Santorum are 'excellent' candidates should lamd you in some sort of perma modmo here on CP.

I may disagree with SPN on 90% of the issues, but she is way more hinged than you can ever hope to be.

Thanks for the continued laughs.

Oh, thank you. For you provide me with the last laugh.

And just how is Huntsman doing in the polls?

What national office has he held?

What primary process event has he won?

And who was it that beat Santorum? Oh, it was that rarest and most suspect of species, the PRO-LIFE Democrat. Yep, you walked into the buzz saw on that one, buddy!

Yep, that's right. Once again I have thoroughly embarrassed you!

 

[Man For All Seasons]

Santorum has stated that cases of abortion to save the life of the mother are phony. He is an extremely and vocally anti-abortion. That is, until it is his own wife. So, while she has a fever and infection and will lose her life unlesss they take action, they decided to induce labor to save her life. The baby was 20 weeks along, too soon to be viable, especially with the known birth defects he carried. I guess early inducement of labor to save mom isn't the same as an abortion. Funny he didn't think their doctor should face criminal charges.

He would not allow abortion in cases of rape. I suspect he would change views on this too if it was one of his daughters.

So, it is OK if you are Santorum but not OK for anyone else. He is a sanctimonious prick. He says Paul is disconnected from reality? He should look in a mirror.

Santorum is a moral and principled individual. You are on the wrong side of this as you are with most social issues. I suspect that you have been misinformed as to what Santorum has done and said. The truth is out there, you just have to be willing to seek it and accept it.

Informed, moral and principled women support Santorum. That I know for a fact.

 

[jasmin]

Santorum is a moral and principled individual. You are on the wrong side of this as you are with most social issues. I suspect that you have been misinformed as to what Santorum has done and said. The truth is out there, you just have to be willing to seek it and accept it.

Informed, moral and principled women support Santorum. That I know for a fact.

Nope, he and his wife have spoken about it publically. Look into yourself.

His support by women is horrible and the huge gender gap is part of why he lost the last election.

 

[I Love America]

Santorum has stated that cases of abortion to save the life of the mother are phony. He is an extremely and vocally anti-abortion. That is, until it is his own wife. So, while she has a fever and infection and will lose her life unlesss they take action, they decided to induce labor to save her life. The baby was 20 weeks along, too soon to be viable, especially with the known birth defects he carried. I guess early inducement of labor to save mom isn't the same as an abortion. Funny he didn't think their doctor should face criminal charges.

He would not allow abortion in cases of rape. I suspect he would change views on this too if it was one of his daughters.

So, it is OK if you are Santorum but not OK for anyone else. He is a sanctimonious prick. He says Paul is disconnected from reality? He should look in a mirror.

OK, I will make a deal with ya. Abortion legal ONLY in instances of rape but illegal for everything else. Deal?

BTW, does killing an unborn baby make a woman forget about a rape? Does it make her feel better to kill a baby?

Just curious.

 

[Man For All Seasons]

Nope, he and his wife have spoken about it publically. Look into yourself.

His support by women is horrible and the huge gender gap is part of why he lost the last election.

Yes, he and his wife have spoken publicly about it. She has even written a book. That is how I know that once again you have been misled and duped.

The book had an introduction and forward by Dr. Laura and Mother Theresa.

Hmm? Whom to believe SPN or Mrs. Santorum, the mother of the child, Dr. Laura and Mother Theresa? For me the answer is easy.

He is supported by women of good moral character, principles and who know the truth concerning his positions on abortion and the true story of he and his wife's situation.

He lost the last election to a Democrat who essentially was a socially conservative and pro-life as he was in a state with a million more registered Democrats. Gender gap? Don't think so!

 

[Man For All Seasons]

I'm tempted to say, 'She has you by the balls,' but - as we all know, that would be impossible for obvious reasons. Is she (SPN) part of 'team Mojo' by any chance?

All she has is a hand full of misinformation and illogical thinking, as is generally the case when it comes to social issues.

Team Mojo? Oh, you mean that bunch I used to beat down continually!

 

[Vagitarian]

Yes, he and his wife have spoken publicly about it. She has even written a book. That is how I know that once again you have been misled and duped.

The book had an introduction and forward by Dr. Laura and Mother Theresa.

Hmm? Whom to believe SPN or Mrs. Santorum, the mother of the child, Dr. Laura and Mother Theresa? For me the answer is easy.

He is supported by women of good moral character, principles and who know the truth concerning his positions on abortion and the true story of he and his wife's situation.

He lost the last election to a Democrat who essentially was a socially conservative and pro-life as he was in a state with a million more registered Democrats. Gender gap? Don't think so!

Dr Laura of good, moral character? She was married and fucking a married guy and they took hundreds of nude photos. I'm surprised - while I have no problem with married people having extramarital sex, I thought you did. Wow! Good for you, you've loosened up.

http://www.bartcop.com/laura-naked13.htm

 

[jasmin]

OK, I will make a deal with ya. Abortion legal ONLY in instances of rape but illegal for everything else. Deal?

BTW, does killing an unborn baby make a woman forget about a rape? Does it make her feel better to kill a baby?

Just curious.

You obviously do not have any idea what it is like to carry a child. When conceived out of love, it is the best thing in the world. But I cannot imagine changing my eating habits, going to the doctor, spending the time and money, dealing with strangers patting my belly and shouting congratulations, not sleeping well, having permanent body changes, massive hormonal changes, effects to bones, teeth, and more and dealing with this for the 9 months of pregnancy and 3 months of post pregnancy. It would not make a woman forget about rape to avoid this, but would prevent her from having to explain the rape over and over and over again, to doctors, nurses, a future husband, and even total strangers.

So was it right for the Santorum's to induce labor at 20 weeks, knowing this meant the certain death of their child, to save the mother? Is this an abortion? How does this fly with his statments that cases of abortion to save the life of the mother are phony?

Legislating around abortion gets very complicated when applied to real life. In cases of murder, there is justifiable homicide and self defense allowed. With pregnancy, there is not time for a trial to determine the merits of the case. I'm sure there are women out there who take abortion lightly and without thought, obvious with the numbers of abortions performed. But I also know there are women who struggled with the decision or had to make a choice of their life or the child's. There's rape, incest, genetic disorders, birth defects severe enough to mean certain death when the child is born, pregnancy at very young or old ages with increased risks and more.

Current proposals to say the baby is a life from the moment of fertilization are also wrong IMO. The first three weeks post-fertilization are pre-embryonic stages.

My issue with Santorum is not so much that he is pro-life, because realistically, the laws are not going to be changed. The issue is that he states the laws must be a certain way but yet when real life hits him, he does not live by that law. He should publically admit this. He was faced with a horrible choice of which life was to be saved, his wife's or the baby's. Complicating it was the fact the baby had a severe birth defect and was expected to die soon after birth, and, if mom died at this point in her pregnancy, it would likely end the child's life too. They did the rational thing and saved one life. But then admit you were wrong, that you understand the horrible choice that women must make since they are the ones responsible for bringing new life into the world. Of course if he admitted he was wrong, that wouldn't be politically correct with the pro-life group.

And don't ever forget many in that group would also like birth control eliminated, something Santorum seems to have implied. Sex is a normal part of marriage and it is very freeing, even within marriage, to be able to enjoy each other without worries about pregnancy. I have a large family but this is not the choice of everyone and is often not financially or emotionally feasible. No one has the right to dictate to me how many kids I want, not China's way or Santorum's way. Of course he doesn't believe in privacy within your own home's bedroom either.

 

[Man For All Seasons]

Dr Laura of good, moral character? She was married and fucking a married guy and they took hundreds of nude photos. I'm surprised - while I have no problem with married people having extramarital sex, I thought you did. Wow! Good for you, you've loosened up.

http://www.bartcop.com/laura-naked13.htm

As usual Vag, you are your own worst enemy, especially when you try to be cute.

I'll bottom line it for you.

Unlike your girlfriend, Dr. Laura is a smart Jewish lady, who wised up, started taking her religion seriously, saw the error of her lifestyle and straightened her life out.

 

[Man For All Seasons]

You obviously do not have any idea what it is like to carry a child. When conceived out of love, it is the best thing in the world. But I cannot imagine changing my eating habits, going to the doctor, spending the time and money, dealing with strangers patting my belly and shouting congratulations, not sleeping well, having permanent body changes, massive hormonal changes, effects to bones, teeth, and more and dealing with this for the 9 months of pregnancy and 3 months of post pregnancy. It would not make a woman forget about rape to avoid this, but would prevent her from having to explain the rape over and over and over again, to doctors, nurses, a future husband, and even total strangers.
Nice speculation, but the reality is that many victims of rape who became mothers are now extremely glad they did and wouldn't have it any other way. Many children of rape are wonderful blessings to their families and the world. Having a beautiful baby to counterbalance the ugly act of rape, which isn't going away, can be very therapeutic.


So was it right for the Santorum's to induce labor at 20 weeks, knowing this meant the certain death of their child, to save the mother? No evidence that Santorum induced labor. Regardless the child was doomed. Makes perfect sense and is not a violation in these circumstances to save the mother. You are being very disengenious here.Is this an abortion? How does this fly with his statments that cases of abortion to save the life of the mother are phony?You are confused or careless. I think you are referring to statements concerning partial birth abortion and/or confusing health of the mother with life of the mother. Regardless, this was not a surgical abortion. That option was presented to them twice and they declined it.

Legislating around abortion gets very complicated when applied to real life. That's why life of the mother should be the only exception.In cases of murder, there is justifiable homicide and self defense allowed. With pregnancy, there is not time for a trial to determine the merits of the case. I'm sure there are women out there who take abortion lightly and without thought, obvious with the numbers of abortions performed. But I also know there are women who struggled with the decision or had to make a choice of their life or the child's. There's rape, incest, genetic disorders, birth defects severe enough to mean certain death when the child is born, pregnancy at very young or old ages with increased risks and more.

Current proposals to say the baby is a life from the moment of fertilization are also wrong IMO. The first three weeks post-fertilization are pre-embryonic stages.Not according to some definitions. Regardless, the only difference between you and the "pre-embryonic" stage child is point on the time line between conception and death.

My issue with Santorum is not so much that he is pro-life, because realistically, the laws are not going to be changed. The issue is that he states the laws must be a certain way but yet when real life hits him, he does not live by that law.Ah, yes. He did. You are smearing Santorum as a hypocrite and there is no evidence of this. Sorry, but mainstream media and lefty blogs don't count. He should publically admit this. He was faced with a horrible choice of which life was to be saved, his wife's or the baby's. More misinformation from you. The child was doomed. But an important distinction in their falsely termed "abortion" is that they had gone to the extreme measure of fetal surgery in an attempt to save the child. It is clear, the Santorum's were doing everything they could to SAVE, not kill their baby. This makes all on your posts on this topic particularly troubling.Complicating it was the fact the baby had a severe birth defect and was expected to die soon after birth, and, if mom died at this point in her pregnancy, it would likely end the child's life too. They did the rational thing and saved one life. But then admit you were wrong, that you understand the horrible choice that women must make since they are the ones responsible for bringing new life into the world. Of course if he admitted he was wrong, that wouldn't be politically correct with the pro-life group.No need to admit that you are wrong when you aren't wrong. The pro-life movement would have certainly understood life of the mother.

And don't ever forget many in that group would also like birth control eliminated, something Santorum seems to have implied.Seems, is all it is. He has not. Sex is a normal part of marriage and it is very freeing, even within marriage, to be able to enjoy each other without worries about pregnancy. I have a large family but this is not the choice of everyone and is often not financially or emotionally feasible. No one has the right to dictate to me how many kids I want, not China's way or Santorum's way. Of course he doesn't believe in privacy within your own home's bedroom either.

At best, you are being careless with the facts and letting your bias cause you to smear someone that you happen to disagree with.

The only people who really know what happened are Santorum, his wife and their medical team. If you want to know the truth, then I suggest you read what Santorum has written or said about the event or read his wife's book. You know the wife that you intimated as being the helpless victim of her bullying husband even though she is a nurse and a lawyer and her dad is a pediatrician. Yeah, that one. Read Letters to Gabriel if you want some insight.

Abortion is a volatile topic. Disagreements will be had, but your smear of Santorum is based upon half-truths and untruths and a pro-choice zealot's over-eager desire to catch one of the strongest and most eloquent pro-life voice's in hypocrisy, but there is no hypocrisy, just sound and moral positions and decisions by Santorum.