Huck's Army Forum :: Faith, Family & Freedom
http://www.forum.hucksarmy.com/

Uh-ohh, REDSTATE has some negative on Nathan Deal
http://www.forum.hucksarmy.com/viewtopic.php?f=144&t=23115
Page 1 of 1

Author:  VertiCon [ Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:49 am ]
Post subject:  Uh-ohh, REDSTATE has some negative on Nathan Deal

Quote:
Does Georgia Right to Life Now Support Embryonic Stem Cell Research?, Posted by Erick Erickson

I am guessing Dan Becker and Georgia Right to Life are just fine and dandy with embryonic stem cell research.

They don’t like Karen Handel funding cervical cancer screenings, but they love them some Nathan Deal despite his support for a Henry Waxman backed piece of legislation funneling $500 million to the abortion industry explicitly for abortions.

Well, Nathan Deal also signed on to NANCY PELOSI authored legislation that, in its own description, “allows for the use of fetal tissue in medical research and appropriates funds to the National Institutes of Health.”

More language from the legislation describing the legislation:

Quote:
The bill codifies the Clinton executive order lifting the ban on fetal tissue research from induced abortions.


Yes, yes, it happened in the past. Just like Karen Handel’s transgression. But Georgia Right to life is attacking Karen Handel and supporting Nathan Deal. Deal explicitly voted to fund abortions and explicitly voted to fund embryonic stem cell research.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Do Dan Becker and Georgia Right to Life agree?

Call and ask at (770) 339-6880.

Author:  Southern Doc [ Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Uh-ohh, REDSTATE has some negative on Nathan Deal

I really think this post from the Redstate thread sums up what's going on here:

Quote:
Erick, the difference between the vote cited in your latest opp dump and Karen Handel’s vote? Deal’s occurred roughly 20 years ago. Handel’s? 2005.

This is getting pathetic. Please let us know if you have something on Nathan that occurred within the last decade or so.

The facts are these: After joining the GOP in 1995, Nathan Deal has an unimpeachable pro-life voting record.

While Karen Handel was voting to send taxpayer dollars for “family planning services” to Planned Parenthood–in 2005–Nathan Deal was being honored by Concerned Women of America, Family Research Council, and National Right to Life for his pro-life record.

Regarding the provably false argument that Handel’s vote merely allowed money to flow to “cervical cancer screenings” (In fact, the vote before the County–featured in the minutes as “family planning services”), National Right to Life writes, “While federal money comes with restrictions prohibiting its use for abortion (some state money does not), every dollar Planned Parenthood receives from the government frees up other funds for the performance and promotion of abortion.”

Oh, and Nathan Deal voted for the Pence amendment, which prohibits–not sends unfettered–any funds from going to Planned Parenthood.

Erick, in yesterday’s AJC you said the Deal campaign would throw “social conservative dirt” at Handel during the runoff. I have no idea whether that’s true. But do you remember a few years back–before the tv show, the book, and your role as Palin’s puppeteer: you used to care about “social conservative dirt.”

You’re really pulling out all the stops in this race, Erick. And you seem have lost your soul along the way.


I think there are plenty of reasons to not support Deal, but abortion is not one of them.

This is further evidence of how low RedState has sunk into pragmatic politics when they are willing to throw GRTL under the bus just to get their prefered candidate.

Author:  Iowans Rock [ Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Uh-ohh, REDSTATE has some negative on Nathan Deal

Erik hasn't had much credibility with me ever since he gave Huckabee the "high noon" ultimatum to endorse Hoffman. It seems that Erik's quest for power is being done at the expense of his integrity.

If all of this is true about Nathan Deal and his apparent total pro-life conversion then he should be applauded and not tore down. It is pretty sad that a former Democrat is better on the life issue than many life-long Republicans. Mitt Romney should take some notes from Deal on how a "pro-life conversion" actually happens. Your record needs to demonstrate it!

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/