Gary, let's return to honesty and perhaps also some objectivity ?
I think this was a bonehead move by the President but for you to turn this into a pro-abortion stance is just ridiculous.
Supporting a pro-choice candidate over a pro-life candidate is hardly a vote for life, and your response indicates who is embarassed. You said it, not me.
Any attempt at justification dissolves into some kind of Macchevelian or relativistic argument. If something is a greater good, why is it not objectively supported and triumphed?
Objectively, when one supports a pro-choice candidate over a clearly pro-life candidate, the commitment to life is obvious. I am only pointing out what is the objective reality, and not "turning" anything. Read for yourself at http://www.pattoomey.org/Comp_Social.pdf
and remember Bush did not support Toomey. I also submit this article from National Review Online for your perusal: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/smith200404261204.asp
I posit rather that you are turning the completely hypothetical issue of judicial nominations away from the hard reality of where the two stood on life, and who Bush backed in the end. That case is closed.
You apparently didn't hear the President in the debate when he clearly said he authorized "the destruction of life" (his words, not mine) and further clarified he was the first president to do so. And last time I checked there was still a Republican majority in Congress with a Republican president.
What have you done to make change your beloved Democrats to a pro-life party?
Although I don't have to respond to your pointed personal questions, I am not now nor have never been a member of the Democratic party. I was a member of the Republican party for all of my voting life until this administration, and am now a happily registered independent.
Your presumption about my political affiliation and your add-on personal comments are quite telling and predictable, and detract from the focus on the issues.
You should be embarrassed for supporting abortion with your vote. What you are doing is sinful.
On the contrary, I support the only 100% pro-life candidate. Neither of the major party candidates can boast anything of the sort. I will vote my conscience as should all Americans and have consulted with my spiritual father regarding my choice.
The facts of this presidency stand, i.e. he is on record as saying America is not ready for overturning Roe v. Wade; he has signed appropriation bills providing more federal funding for Planned Parenthood (a notorious abortion provider) and international "family planning" than any other President, including Clinton, and he has supported pro-choice candidates over pro-life candidates.
The "partial birth abortion ban" has not prevented one Federally-funded abortion from being performed and was a useless piece of legislation. And please spare me with the philosophically bankrupt idea of "proportionality" which did not exist before the Enlightenment.