Family Research Council Faults Brownback For Pro-Rudy Comments

Comments (31)

Jake D. wrote on October 26, 2007 7:09 PM:

ONE better way to demoralize the GOP base would be for Hillary to appoint Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court.

sue g wrote on October 26, 2007 7:11 PM:

why not embrace him, despite his pro-choice statements for the larger public, he promises to appoint only Roberts-like judges who will eviscerate privacy rights so he is effectively just as anti-choice as Brownback

Jake D. wrote on October 26, 2007 7:17 PM:

GO CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS!!!

Billy P wrote on October 26, 2007 7:22 PM:

"Go CJ ROberts" ...and please take Alito, Scalia, and Thomas with you...

Ebu wrote on October 26, 2007 7:23 PM:

There is also another word I heard floating around ... troll.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_Internet

Anonymous wrote on October 26, 2007 7:27 PM:

These are the crucial words:

"more comfortable" with Rudy's abortion views after meeting with him face to face

Translation: (1) What sue g wrote is exactly right and (2) Rudy will say that to whoever wants to hear it, in private; and (3) he will 'weasel language' his way through the rest of the campaign, with the religious right and the media letting him get away with it.

dasher wrote on October 26, 2007 7:31 PM:

These are the crucial words:

he'd grown "more comfortable" with Rudy's abortion views after meeting with him face to face.

Translation: (1) what sue g wrote is exactly correct; (2) Rudy will repeat that, in private, to anyone on the religious right; and (3) he will "weasel language" his way through the rest of the campaign on this issue, with the religious right and the media letting him get away with it.

dasher wrote on October 26, 2007 7:32 PM:

Apologies for the double post.

Jake D. wrote on October 26, 2007 7:34 PM:

Ouch, Ebu -- you don't have to post to me at all if you don't want to -- for the record, I was actually disagreeing with FRC veep Yoest, who claimed "There would be no better way to demoralize the GOP base than to nominate Giuliani."

phil james wrote on October 26, 2007 9:23 PM:

Jake D

Your point about Hill appointing Bill to the SCOTUS is actually a good one. We need to get a Dem in the WH to appoint the next SC judge to counteract the court's continued drift to the wingnut right. That may be the most important fallout of the 2008 election.

Jake D. wrote on October 26, 2007 9:35 PM:

Thank, phil james -- ALL my points are actually good ones -- here's another one: the country doesn't need a Dem (at least, not any currently running) in the White House.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on October 26, 2007 9:43 PM:

I just think the Inbreeding Research Council did not understand what Browback was really saying . . . Almost everyone who meets Rude-ee the Gnome thinks to themselves that at least one retroactive abortion is required to set the world right with man and god.

urbino wrote on October 26, 2007 11:29 PM:

life is a deal-breaker

Darn that wacky life.

benjoya wrote on October 27, 2007 10:23 AM:

brownback knows his position on abortion is held by a small minority. he loves power, so will suck up to any baby-killer who has it.

sj dowling wrote on October 27, 2007 11:52 AM:

Is Rudy offering Brownback the VP spot? He'll need the religious right in the general election, and Brownback would keep them on board.

footsore wrote on October 27, 2007 12:42 PM:

Of course those turds at the Family Research Center, Focus on the Family et al will stand against Rudy for his Pro-choice record. Just like Hagel, McCain and Lindsy stood up against Bush on his torturing of prisoners. Power trumps decency.
footsore

mouse wrote on October 27, 2007 2:19 PM:

I see Jake's Derangement Syndrome is in fine form today.

Brianm0122 wrote on October 27, 2007 3:10 PM:

Rudi is playing to the base, as he should for the primaries. He needs these people, the evangelicals, wing-nuts, whatever you want to call them, to get the nomination. But in the general election, he will have to moderate his views. He will be asked every day, about his abortion stance.

And the religious right will stay home, en masse.

phil james wrote on October 27, 2007 3:19 PM:

Jake D
Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. I should have been clearer. The point that you made about the SCOTUS wasn't just a good point, but the only good point you've ever made on this blog, at least that I have read so far. Furthermore, you made the point totally unintentionally. I apologize if omitting those details gave you the impression that I give you any real credit at all for understanding what this country needs in 2008. As for me, I would take ANY Dem candidate now running, yes even Kucinich, over any thug party candidate, period.

Martin Washburn wrote on October 27, 2007 3:43 PM:

Actually Bill Clinton's committment to the
Constitution isn't entirely clear, given his fondness for the executive position as well as his playing fast and loose with time-honored positions on which the Democratic party was once based.

DrBB wrote on October 27, 2007 4:10 PM:

I've said all along that the 3rd-party threats are fluff. That's not how right-wing authoritarianism works. The principles are not meaningless but they're distinctly secondary in importance to allegiance to The Leader. Any principle no matter how firmly held can ultimately be revised or parsed to mean whatever it is The Leader wants it to mean, or not mean, this week. They haven't settled on Rudy as The Leader yet, but you can already see them trying out ways of retooling their "principles" to comport with the new alignment. Those little cognitive dissonance cogs are ticking over and shifting fundamental attitudes accordingly. Jake sounds like his eprom is already burned in already.

POed Lib wrote on October 27, 2007 6:05 PM:

Jake D is yet another fascist trying to keep the money coming in for the Repukeliscum military industrial complex. We need a law making war profiteering a capital crime. That would be big problems for the fascisti.

Rusty Scalf wrote on October 27, 2007 9:23 PM:

I don't know how anyone can doubt the party discipline of the Republicans. Witness their sticking with the present administration through political hell. I have a feeling that many Republican congressmen have grown to privately despise Bush and Cheney. Yet they still tow the line. When someone like Chuck Hagel becomes openly critical, the punishment is complete ostracism.

TJ wrote on October 28, 2007 2:38 AM:

So glad so much has come out on this site about Mr Rudi the fascist! But I also increasingly wonder how NYC could have ever elected him?! Guess the same way Mr Mit fascist was elected in Mass. Hope the dems will learn from that & not elect any more Fascists in places that have large dem populations - as if we'd ever see a dem gov elected in Utah!

TJ wrote on October 28, 2007 3:33 AM:

"demoralize" the GOP, jako?!

Is that possible? I thought Larry Craig & was leading ya'll neo-fascists on a new "moral" road to somewhere real special?

Anyway, thanks so much for more of your latest lil batch supurb "moral teachings" - please keep it up, as of course you can tell we are desperate to get up to your level.

woodguy wrote on October 28, 2007 4:26 AM:

I've always wanted to meet someone who was a member of the "Family Research Council"(not likely if I continue to run with my current crowd). My first question to them would be, "Say, what sort of research projects are you currently working on and when can we look forward to a published thesis on the results of this research?"

Groups with pompous, meaningless names like this are to real researchers as garage bands are to the Rolling Stones.

Theory wrote on October 28, 2007 10:13 AM:

Greg,

Just remember that "dessert" has two "s"es. Ecause you always want more than one. ;-)

Theory

Merryll wrote on October 28, 2007 11:16 AM:

Now we know how the Family Research Council feel. How about Move On, People for the American Way, 911 Truth?

green heron wrote on October 28, 2007 11:24 AM:

Rudy and Sam have clearly made a deal. Rudy heard Dobson and Co. loud and clear. His only solution is to make a bible thumper his running mate. Brownback fits the bill and agreed.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on October 28, 2007 11:52 PM:

If Rude-ee would just start beatin' infants and showering with his boys, he could return back to the Inbred Research Council's good graces.

jvill wrote on October 29, 2007 2:42 PM:

Looks like the FRC is going to play the chumps again. It's amazing how these people are like a gnat to the electrified bug lamp.

"Thus in 2004, President Bush basically ran as America’s defender against gay married terrorists. He waited until after the election to reveal that what he really wanted to do was privatize Social Security." -- Paul Kurgman

And thus the theocrats will be used again...

Like a battered, bigoted, homophobic housewife, they will return for more.

Post a comment

Name:
Email Address:
URL:
	Remember personal info?
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)