http://articulatingideas.blogspot.com/2015/06/carly-fiorina-floors-katie-couric-on.html

The truth is, most Americans, most women, most young people, most most Americans, have now come to a point of view that an abortion for any reason at all after five months is a problem. So lets take that common ground. I think our tone matters. We can't be judgemental. We can't be angry. But I also think we have to make sure people understand the extremity on the other side.

COURIC: But you say after five months and you oppose abortion, except in the cases of rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger.

FIORINA I'm pro-life.

COURIC: So – But what you're saying is that most Americans support it –

FIORINA: Right. So, let's find common ground.

COURIC: So, what is the common ground?

FIORINA: Well, the common ground, clearly, now, if you look at the polls, the common ground is that people believe abortion after five months for any reason at all is wrong. So, good. Let's take the common ground:

So Carly lets the polls decide what her stance on abortion is, and her stance is, a good common ground is to allow abortion up to 5 months of a pregnancy.

Ah-Oh...!



What a strong 'leader' she'd be...!

There's no way she can get elected with that stance. Especially after all of the Planned Parenthood videos going around these days.

Abortion isn't an issue that a GOP candidate can straddle the fence on.

Fiorina, like most politicians is in favor of saying what ever the audience at the time wants to hear. How good at side-stepping an issue when it comes up and bites them in the ass will determine whether they are electable!


Phil

A huge number of Republican evangelicals are her audience and they don't want to hear that she's okay with abortions up to 5 months.

Major blunder on her part.

With her stance, she is NOT pro life. Time for her to go back to California. Real colors showing now.

She wants to find common goal with everything.

She is a middle of the road type person. Pandering to each.

Sometimes the enemy of good is better. It is good to have an abortion bill that prohibits abortions after 5 months (after that point where the fetus can feel pain) with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother, than to have no abortion ban at all (which is really what we have now). Secondly, a candidate who wants to ban all abortions has no chance of being elected nationally. So, the effect of taking the extreme position (no abortions, no exceptions) is that the status quo will be maintained ergo, that there will be no restrictions on abortions. Fiorina is not saying early abortions are good; she is saying there is a common ground in the electorate for restrictions on wholesale abortion and we should pursue that common ground by passing legislation that will protect fetuses who can feel pain at abortion. That will result in a substantial reduction in the number of abortions.

Her position then results in fewer abortions, whereas adopting the extreme position (no abortions, no exceptions) results in more abortions because it has zero chance of enactment.


Jordan

Bottom line, she can't get the GOP nomination with that position. It's going to blow up in her face when the word gets out.

The bottom line is more her continual pandering and fence sitting. You can't be pro abortion for up to 5 months and then pro life thereafter.

You're either pro-life or you're not. Pro lifers don't get to define life at 5 months or later. Is she now going to have to agree to permit funding for Planned Parenthood for up to 5 months of pregnancy?

That's the way I read it as well.

I don't see leadership here.

In this case I agree with Rob , we have to use the inch at at a time approached this year no abortion after 5 months, next year we go for none after 3 months you all get the picture .
cheers NC

You can't get rid of a SCOTUS ruling incrementally. Either Roe vs. Wade get's overturned or it doesn't. A pro abortion candidate like Fiorina isn't going to do anything to challenge Roe vs. Wade.

Fiorina on Friday:


"At the forum Friday, Fiorina also returned to another strong moment from Wednesday’s debate, demanding that Congress defund Planned Parenthood in the wake of the string of undercover videos that have surfaced showing officials negotiating the price of fetal tissue to be used for research purposes.


“If we will not fight for this, faced with proof positive of the butchery going on at Planned Parenthood, faced with an assault on the character of this nation - it is not actually about whether you’re pro choice or pro life - we cannot be a nation that funds this kind of barbarity, and that’s what it is,” Fiorina said.


She reiterated her call to shut down the government over federal funding for the group.


“With record majorities in the House of Representatives, and a majority in the U.S. Senate, if we do not have the courage to stand up and say, ‘President Obama, if you’re prepared to shut down the government to defend this kind of barbarity, have at it, and explain it to the American people,’ ” Fiorina said.

She's not going to be able to get away with that much of a flip flop.

Bristoe:

How do you propose we challenge Roe v. Wade? The only (reasonbly possible) way to do so is to win enough presidential elections that we can appoint enough conservatives justices than when the right case comes up, can result in a reversal of Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court. We can't reach that result however if we take a position now which cannot possibly result in our winning a national election. You obviously do not comprehend this. BTW, I did not know abortions were such an important issue to you Libertarians.

More is coming out about Fiorina's pro abortion stance.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/14/fiorina-backed-website-touted-planned-parenthood/

So, she invested in a company which had an investment in another company which had a web site that advertised abortion as safe? Is that all you've got Bristoe! Your desperation practically screams out. The real proponent of abortion here is the one who insist on taking a position so extreme that it will never result in a change in the status quo. That's you Bristoe.

She was a board member. Not just a casual investor.

I agree. However, there's a bigger picture.

I don't believe any candidate far enough to right fringe to win the Republican nomination right now can win the general election.

What we get is Hillary or Joe ... thanks for most part to the Tea Party extremists.

No desperation here. In fact, I've not met anyone outside of the Californians on here who support Fiorina.

Her past "accomplishments" pretty much suck and all she can answer in defense is, "They picked on me because I'm a woman". Now, her pro abortion stance has hit the news.

She's not going to make the cut.

But of course the practical result of the two competing positions is that your's is the pro-abortion stance because it is the one stance which will guarantee the perpetuation of the status quo into perpetuity. You are very much like the abolitionists Lincoln had to contend with during the fight over slavery. Had Lincoln adopted the abolitionist position, he would never have been elected and slavery would have become the law of the land. Effectively then, in their extremism, the abolitionists were actually working on the side of the preservation of slavery. Likewise, in adopting a position at the outset which can never result in the election of a candidate willing to appoint conservative, anti-Roe judges, you guarantee that Roe will go unchallenged into perpetuity.

You should study up on the concept of Aristotelian prudence.

Ahh, Blumpkin. You're on retard-fire this morning!

Pro-abortionists love it when ya' 'compromise' with em'.

Illegal immigrants love it when ya' 'compromise' with em'.

Radical Muslims love it when ya' 'compromise' with em'.



When a camel gets his nose in the tent...he's comin' in...!

From Wiki:


Abortion[edit]

Fiorina describes herself as pro-life.[223] She has expressed support for legislation to ban abortions 20 weeks after fertilization, with an exception for cases of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother.[224] Fiorina supports overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling by the Supreme Court which legalized abortion in the United States.[224]

The National Right to Life Committee, the Susan B. Anthony List and the California ProLife Council all endorsed Fiorina's 2010 U.S. Senate campaign in California.[225]

Fiorina supports eliminating federal funding for Planned Parenthood,[223][226] The use of federal funds for abortions is mostly banned under current law.[226]

In a September 2015 Republican presidential candidates' debate on CNN, Fiorina attacked Planned Parenthood, referencing secret recordings made by the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress group, stating "I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes. Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says, 'We have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.'"[227] The New York Times reported that "while the authenticity of the videos remains a subject of debate, Mrs. Fiorina appears to have exaggerated their contents,"[228] while PolitiFact rated Fiorina's statement "mostly false," noting that the video contains stock footage of a fetus added for dramatic effect.[227] Fiorina made it sound as if there is actual footage of Planned Parenthood examining an aborted fetus whose heart is still beating, which there wasn't.[227] The Annenberg Public Policy Center's FactCheck.org also noted that the scene that Fiorina urged others to watch is not present in any of the videos.[228][229] PolitiFact found that Fiorina's reference was likely to "grisly stock footage of a fetus outside the womb" paired for dramatic purposes interview with a woman who describes a scene "similar to the one Fiorina describes."[227] Politifact added that there is "nothing else in the video to corroborate" the woman's story and that the supervisor in the woman's account "does not say anything about keeping the fetus alive specifically for the purpose of harvesting the brain."[227] As for the stock footage, "We don't know the circumstances behind this video: where it came from, under what conditions it was obtained, or even if this fetus was actually aborted (as opposed to a premature birth or miscarriage)."[227]

Antlers:

The camel's nose is already in the tent on abortion. Did you not know that? The question is how best to get it out. You want to use the word "compromise" to disparage any political position which will result in fewer abortions. (You are exactly like the slavery abolitionists whose position, had it prevailed, would have guaranteed the indefinite extension and perpetuation of slavery!) But what if your preferred position (ban all abortionsn, on exceptions) has zero public support, and then zero chance of enactment, whereas the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act has broad, bi-partisan consensus, had broad public support and therefore has an excellent chance of passing? Does that mean all the pro-life groups who support it are actually pro-abortion too?! Is it not far better to get passage of that bill, than to take a position that will result in no reductions in abortions? Who then is actually pro-abortion? Its not your statements that matter, its the results!!

Fiorina is every bit as strong as Trump on immigration. The difference is, she was proposing sealing the border while Trump was a registered Democrat clamoring for amnesty grants (when he was pro-illegal immigration before he was against illegal immigration).

Billy-Goat (aka "Blumpkin lover" ):

As near as I can tell, no one on this site had a clue there was any such thing as "blumpkin" until you educated us. (The term "Trumpkin" was coined by a political commentator a few months ago. You'll have to ask him if he knew what a "blumpkin" was when he coined the term. Personally, I don't see the connection, it appears to be to combine "Pumpkin" and "Trump" for obvious reasons, but perhaps for someone such as yourself, someone with "blumpkin" on the brain", every alliteration speaks "blumpkin".

If you want to spend your time on the web learning about fecal-sexual activity (or perhaps is something you practice in real life), knock yourself out! But don't project your perverse fecal-sexual fixations onto others by calling them the name of the very sick act about which you appear to know more than anyone on this site and in which you appear to have an abiding interest in.!

Yet she had her emotional outburst on Planned Parenthood. Oh My

Wiki isn't a reliable source of info. Anybody can put anything they want on wiki.

Uh, no they can't (the site is edited). But, conceding that all sources of information are potentially unreliable: which information from Wiki, regarding her position on abortion (and the numerous pro-life affiliations and previous pro-life endorsements) is not accurate? What, if any of the information listed (re abortion), is false? Please, do tell!

Trump 2011: I am now pro-life; after years of being pro-choice
Donald Trump shocked attendees at the conservative CPAC conference in February when he declared himself pro-life after years of supporting the pro-abortion position. Several months ago, when questioned about his position, Trump responded by saying the public "would be surprised" by his stance and, in an interview with Laura Ingraham from Fox News leading up to the conference, Trump characterized himself as "pro-life" and he repeated that apparent reversal when he told the audience at CPAC, "I am pro-life" and pledged to fight for the reversal of ObamaCare, which contains abortion funding loopholes.

Mr. Trump, 1999 Meet the Press:
Well, I'm very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debate the subject. But, you still, I just believe in choice.

I've never heard of a man changing his position on life issues after 16 years. Simply not possible.

He's starting to sound like Romney. Guess I'll have to support him.

As a christian conservative, I DO NOT support her stance!

This is a MAJOR obstacle for her to gain my support.

I still firmly support Ted Cruz!

Trump is smart enough to know he can't be elected.

Fiorina ain't.

Dixie Rebel, re-read the thread. In the first place, she does not support abortions before 5 months. What she said on Couric's program is (in so many words) when Couric tried to paint her into an extreme corner, she countered with the Dem's extremism (it isn't a life until it leaves the hospital) and then pointed out that the large majority of Americans agree that abortion beyond 5 months is wrong (except in cases of rape or incest). So her point was, let's pass the pain-capable fetus act to stop these mid- to later term abortions.

If you re-read the thread, the argument is unassailable: a position on abortion that insists on a complete ban or nothing, will result in more abortions, not less... So then, who really is "pro-abortion"?

Anybody can read the transcript and see what she said. The link is posted.

Basically, it's painful to read, because it's made obvious that Fiorina is too chickenshit to be anti abortion. She keeps talking, "common ground,...common ground".

There is no common ground on abortion.

And keep in mind. This wasn't an interview from a long time ago. It was just a few weeks ago.

You know.... Bowsinger managed to be in love with Palin without hatin' everbody else.

Now Rob Jordon is different.. His love for Carly is exceeded only by his hatred of Trump.

That qualifies him as a Double Barreled Idiot.

Ummm ... not exactly: if you hadn't noticed, the camel already has possession of the tent. Ignoring that is not going to lead to success. You can't get the tent back on your terms. You either abandon the tent or hold your nose and negotiate with enough people to retake it. You can't have the high ground and the tent. That's how the camel got the tent in the first place. One definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing expecting the results to change. It's happening AGAIN and the knuckleheads are either too stupid or too deep in denial to see it.

That's yet to be proven. But one thing is for sure. If you can't have the tent on your terms, then the tent is worthless.

False as usual, I've actually defended Trump, as I did today when someone said he'd screwed up by not defending Obama. But whether I have or have not defended Trump, is wholly irrelevant to the policy questions at issue.

In favor up to 5 months...

Well ya know, good for her.

I'm in favor of retroactive abortion all the way up to....
Ummmm.....

How old is Nancy Pelosi again?
Someone remind me.

Actually, you're the chicken-[bleep], since you're the one espousing a position that will result in more abortions, not fewer.

BTW, Bristoe never ever read here that you had any interest at all in limiting abortions, until Fiorina became a very effective spokesperson against the practice. That's quite odd, to say the least. And your previous silence on the issue, coupled with the very fact that you espouse a position that will result in more abortions not fewer, gives us a very clear picture of where you are actually at on this issue----especially coupled with your support of a Democrat who was thoroughly pro-choice until just a few years ago (as he was thoroughly a Democrat until just a few years ago).

I'm not going to vote for anyone that allows baby killing at anytime and never for a women period. Thats me call me what you will i don't care.

You can forget about Roe V Wade being overturned, and as long as Republicans want to control what others do in their bedrooms and in their personal lives, they won't win elections.

No, Bristoe's personal stance on abortion doesn't matter. He's just laying a beating on you here like usual. You like to claim that no one will read the tripe that you post so you can argue with them. Bristoe gave the lie to that and then trounced your whole argument about Trump being wishy-washy with solid evidence of your hero being more so.

'Common ground' is just a term for letting the liberals have their way a little at a time.

Do you really think that it takes 5 months to realize that you have been raped, or that the baby daddy is your Father/Brother/Uncle/Cousin and so forth? miles

One good thing about 5 months along is there's nice big easily identifiable chunks being dragged out of there for a loving mother to see.

Oh look.
Here's a little arm.
Look how tiny the fingers.
Isn't that just the cutest thing ya ever saw?

What amazes me is all of the wild exaggerations and half-truths people are using to attack Fiorina.
She is clearly against abortion, and is the only candidate who has come up with a realistic position that would significantly reduce the number of abortions. Every other candidate is spouting the same old rhetoric that will get nowhere in the face of Roe v Wade.

List them.

Okay.
Between here and my sig line I will list them.

The name of this thread is clearly an out right lie

Yes. The thread title is an out-right lie. Here's Bristoe's illogic: Because Fiorina favors the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act (which would restrict abortions after five months) and because she argues that there is broad consensus that abortions after five months (except in cases of rape and incest) are wrong, and that we should avail ourselves of that consensus to enact restrictions on abortion that have broad support, the OP insists (and demands that we assume) she is therefore in favor of all other abortions.

So, yes the title of the post is an out-right lie. The other point that bears making is that we know Bristoe could care less about abortion because, heretofore, of all the political issues he's addressed, he's never said "word one" about abortion being a problem for him. And then we have the fact that his candidate (Trump) has been pro-choice his entire life until just a couple years ago, when he suddenly "switched"---sort of like when he switched from Repub, to Dem, to Indy and then back to Repub again.

The transcript is linked for anyone to read.

Carly said that common ground needed to be reached on abortion and that common ground was abortions up to 5 months of the pregnancy.

Where is the lie?

5 months is what the thread title says.

So where is the lie?

I have clearly pointed out the "Lie". Rob has pointed it out.
You should stop banging on Carley, and start running dirt on your 6th grade reading teacher, she is the one who did you wrong.

No.

Nobody has pointed out the lie. Carly says abortions up to 5 months.

Rob Jordan affirmed that in his post.

Amen to that! Thank God for liberals allowing people to do what they wish, so long as it matches their agenda.


Give me a fugging break.

Damn, that was a good one!! ROFLMAO!!

Actually, it was pretty weak.

It's also stupid to claim that I'm lying about something that Fiorina has said and is on record both via video and transcripts.

And the fact that you claimed that I'm lying and then in your post, confirmed what I said, is just weird.

No, what's weird is that you can't understand simple logic or simple English. Anaconda is right, its your 6th grade reading teacher you need to be angry with. No where does Fiorina state or imply she is in favor of abortions before 5 months. If that were her position, I doubt all the anti-abortion groups would be backing her and having them chair her organizations.

You still haven't addressed Trump's flip on this issue.

FIORINA: Well, the common ground, clearly, now, if you look at the polls, the common ground is that people believe abortion after five months for any reason at all is wrong.So, good. Let's take the common ground:

Carley says it would be a functional comprmise that would reduce the number of abortions, something that would pass legal muster.
You say "Carly Fiorina is in favor of abortion up to 5 months", clearly a lie to anyone with 5th grade reading comprahention.

clearly a lie to anyone with 5th grade reading comprahention.
------------

Do you really want to go there, genius?

She's not against abortions before 5 months.

There's only one other option.

You and Rob are the liars.

Good book. It's only 5 bucks on a Kindle and it spells out the tactics of the left,...which I see on here on a regular basis.

".So, good. Let's take the common ground:"

Common ground equals "Abortions prior to five months are acceptable."

"Good" equals.... good.

"Let's take" equals.. Let us agree that abortions prior to five months are acceptable.

"Let us" equals... Carly and everyone else.

Sounds just like the thread title to me.

Look, mommy.
It's my little brother's leg!
When will the good Doctor drag the head out with his coat hanger so we can see what he looks like?

It's all for the children.
See?

Fiorinia isn't pro-abortion. She's wise. She approaches abortion the same way I look at gun Grabbers.

I don't suppot any gun control and want to get these silly mag limits, wait times, universal background checks, et al - GONE.

However, in many states we've already lost that battle. Now we're working on getting some liberties back. In states where there are mag limits, maybe we can get those raised to 30, because most people in the electorate think 30 is ok. BUT there are absolutists who say "Full repeal or nothing" They will get nothing.

Same thing with abortion. If we can get the term rolled back, we save babies lives. Later, we'll go for more.

^THIS^

While these pundits talks about full repeal of Roe v Wade, babies die. The legal limit is currently 26 weeks (6-1/2 months). Moving that to 5 will save babies. Do you want to demonize Fiorina while she works to save SOME of the babies because she can't save all of them?

What if Oscar Schindler did nothing because he couldn't save all the Jews?

Everybody wants to type a bunch of paragraphs about this that and the other thing.

But none of it changes the fact that Fiorina won't oppose any abortion up to 5 months of a pregnancy.

The only thing compromise gets you is more compromise.

The commies wrote the book on how to manipulate and Fiorina is agreeing to be manipulated.

She's weak.

She's never said that.

If I could get that limit moved from 26 weeks to 20 weeks I'd sign it yesterday.

You seem unable to understand Fiorinas position. We have a S.C. decision that makes abortion legal. Until the composition of the court changes no president can change that. What she is saying is there is common ground in the country to stop late term abortions so lets do that now and wait for court vacancies so that Roe v Wade can be overturned. She is also interested in turning the tables on the left by showing them to be the extremist.

I understand what's going on.

The GOP is afraid to take a stand on any damn thing.

Trump don't givva chit. He's got 10 billion dollars so he says whatever in the hell he wants to say.

If he doesn't get elected it just means that he goes back to being a guy with 10 billion dollars and a 757 to fly around the world any time he feels like it.

Nothing is ever going to change for the better in our society until conservative candidates slap the commie leftist bastards in the face and say what the people *want* them to say.

Trump has done that and the propaganda machine is beating on him 24/7 to try to get him out of the way.

On the other hand,..the propaganda machine is pushing Fiorina as hard as it can because she's obviously totally nutless and will be easily controlled.

That's what's happening.

If you *still* don't see it,...do America a favor and jump off of a tall building.

I think the thought of a strong conservative woman beating Trump has you going batschit crazy

No,...it's the idea of the GOP nominating a weak woman simply to appease the leftists that's got me irritated.

How 'bout 65 years? Nobody cares about Trump's stance on ANYTHING. People like him because they think he might do SOMETHING.

Yeah,...so what's your point?

That was my point. Trump has a history of making things happen. People are desperate and don't really care what happens, as long as it is different. "Hope and Change" redux.

Things need to happen.