Regarding the recent ruling of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court overturning Virginia's partial birth abortion ban, there can be little doubt where the Republican candidates stand.
Jim Gilmore:
Once again, we see Mark Warner, Professional Ducker, at work. There is no issue too big he won't avoid, no ruling too important that he can't instead run up to his home state of Connecticut for a quick weekend with the Fam. I've made my preference for US Senate clear, but there is no debate in my mind that both Republican candidates are running on the future and the issues that will effect that future, while Warner is running on the past and trying to tip-toe around thorny issues today so as not to offend anyone.
In a lot of ways, his campaign reminds me of George Allen circa 2006.
Jim Gilmore:
"This outcome shows how critical it is to have federal judges who will strictly interpret the Constitution," Gilmore said. "This unfortunate ruling by the 4th Circuit Tuesday was decided by two judges appointed by President Bill Clinton. If I am elected to the U.S. Senate I will support the selection of federal judges who do not try to rewrite laws that have been enacted by a duly elected legislature."Bob Marshall:
Marshall, who authored the 2003 bill, called the ruling "a corruption of law, and the procedure is the destruction of medicine."
"We can no longer accept soothing words from politicians who say they will appoint pro-life judges when they clearly have not done so since 1973. Abortion up to birth is currently justified by judges ratified by the United States Senate,'' he said.
"Members of Congress have to take responsibility. Any politicians who says he will appoint pro-life judges is simply telling us that he does not want to deal with the question of the definition of life. Congress can define all the terms of the 14th Amendment, including 'persons' and 'citizens' to include unborn children."Mark Warner:
>Crickets<Or, as the DCPost puts it: "Warner declined to comment on the court ruling"
Once again, we see Mark Warner, Professional Ducker, at work. There is no issue too big he won't avoid, no ruling too important that he can't instead run up to his home state of Connecticut for a quick weekend with the Fam. I've made my preference for US Senate clear, but there is no debate in my mind that both Republican candidates are running on the future and the issues that will effect that future, while Warner is running on the past and trying to tip-toe around thorny issues today so as not to offend anyone.
In a lot of ways, his campaign reminds me of George Allen circa 2006.
OMG! He knows!!
HE KNOWS ABOUT THE WARNERESE-ENGLISH TRANSLATOR!!
Posted by: D.J. McGuire | May 21, 2008 at 09:57 PM