People,

Please let's look at how HYPOCRITICAL the BUSH ADMINISTRATION has made the REPUBLICAN party!

http://www.issues2000.org/Celeb/George_W__Bush_Abortion.htm

When ELECTION TIME IS NEAR, all the SUDDEN GEORGE W. BUSH is ANTI-ABORTION!!!!!!?????????

Please can we get our facts straight that HE WAS CLEARLY LOOKING FOR THE EVANGELICAL VOTE!

positive:

he did a little against embryo stem cell research,,,,,,,,,strengthening SANCTITY OF LIFE

and
he did a little bit against PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION,,,,,,,,,but the Pro-choice folks challenged that in court

************

negative:

he continues to preach evolution to our schoolchildren,,,,,,,,to turn them away from Christ and Bible

he supports AND ENLARGES the bankrupting entitlements (SS, Medicare, food stamps, unemployment benefits, etc), which have destroyed our nation

he refuses to defend our PROPERTY RIGHTS............stealing is legalized

he does tremendous VOTE-BUYING............(vote for me, and i'll send you a bigger medicare check)

he does nothing for energy-independence from foreign oil

a month ago, he repealed his own ORDER against off-shore drilling for oil,,,,,,,,,,,after a near-riot from the voters

he visited his beloved pope 4 times during his presidency

he loves RCC and hates bible-believers

his policies are more friendly toward RCC than Bible-believers

his ROADMAP TO PEACE is designed to destroy God's ELECT NATION ISRAEL........by making Israel so tiny, that it's impossible to defend from the neighbor's rockets and bombs

every time that Bush, condi, cheney pressure Israel to give away the PROMISED LAND,,,,,,,,,a Great Disaster happens in the USA

he doesn't believe that God promised the PROMISED LAND TO ISRAEL FOREVER.

he is trying to destroy the Christian Church with evolution-preaching,,,,,,,,and Israel with the ROADMAP TO PEACE

he pretends to be a bible-believer,,,,,,,,so, he's a hypocrite................he is the opposite of what he claims to be

he is not helping to gather people towards Christ,,,,,,,,,so, he is scattering

Mat 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

He can't do anything to stop abortion other than to appoint Pro-Life justices to the supreme court with the end goal of tilting the court to the right in favor of overturning roe v wade. So in that regard Bush has done exactly what was expected of him. However having only had to fill 2 vacancies he won't have been able to fully tilt the court.

During the next Presidency there will be at least 2 if not 3 justices retiring needing replacements and it is in this light that makes this election so important.

Obama has flat out said that he would install ACTIVIST judges to the bench. McCain has promised strict constitutionalist judges.

McCain/Palin have the pro-life record, Obama has THE worst.

I would say those negatives out way the positives........

I put this on another topic for the same question

I believe the Supreme Court is the branch that deemed abortion constitutional. In order for the President, or, the Legislative branch to overturn the court, they would need a Constitutional amendment with 2/3's of the states ratifying. With polls showing that the majority of citizens want abortion legal in some form, any attempt to overturn the court with an amendment would most likely fail miserably as the representatives would not vote against their constituents and run the risk of losing their seats in the House or Senate.

I think Bush did what he could politically. He appointed two conservatives to the court, and pushed for abstinence only programs etc. With one more conservative, the court would most likely have enough pro-life members to overturn R-v-Wade. I believe they halted the Federal government from paying for federal employee's abortions also.

There's only so much a President can do in these cases. It's the way the system was set up with its checks and balances.

Bush-appointed Judges Most Conservative On Record, New UH Study Finds
Article Date: 07 Feb 2006 - 23:00 PDT


Judges appointed by President George W. Bush are the most conservative on record when it comes to civil rights and liberties, according to a new study by a political science professor at the University of Houston.

Bush judicial appointees are significantly more conservative than even the very conservative voting record of jurists appointed by Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bush Sr. in the realm of civil rights and liberties, said Robert Carp, professor of political science at UH. When it comes to these decisions, the Bush team is a full 5 percentage points more conservative than even the trial judges appointed by Presidents Reagan and Bush Sr.

"Liberal" judges would generally seek in their rulings to extend the freedoms of abortion, gay rights, the rights of women and minorities and freedom of speech, Carp explained. "Conservative" jurists, by contrast, would prefer to limit such rights.

In a previous study that was released in August 2004, Carp and his team of researchers predicted that if Bush was re-elected that year, the federal judiciary could take on an even sharper conservative slant. At the time, Bush's judicial appointees delivered liberal decisions 27.9 percent of the time in cases involving civil liberties and rights. For this latest study, researchers analyzed more data, and the figure has dropped to 27.2 percent.

"Our findings are significant because the general consensus is that President Reagan is the most modern conservative president on record, and yet the judges appointed by George W. Bush are even more conservative than the Reagan judges," said Carp, the study's lead investigator.

The new study, "The Voting Behavior of George W. Bush's Judges: How Sharp a Turn to the Right?," also found that only 33 percent of decisions handed down by Bush jurists were liberal. Presidents Johnson, Carter, and Clinton, scored 52, 51, and 44 percent, respectively. His GOP predecessors, Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr., ranked 38, 43, 36, and 37 percent, respectively. The overall scores of the Bush judges are not "off the charts" in their level of conservatism, but they are sharply right of center.

"As the Supreme Court becomes somewhat more conservative with the appointment of Justice Alito and as more Bush judges are appointed to the policy-making appellate courts, the overall tone of the judiciary should be more conservative three years from now than it is today," he speculated.

Carp's research also found that the minorities and women whom Bush has appointed to the bench are somewhat more liberal in their voting patterns than the white males he has appointed to the bench.

In the earlier study, the voting record of the Bush judges in the area of Labor and Economic regulation was fairly moderate. The latest study that relies on a larger data set indicates that the Bush judges are very conservative in this issue area as well and could not be called "moderate" in their voting behavior.

The data on trial court decisions were taken from a database consisting of more than 75,0000 opinions published in the Federal Supplement by almost 1,800 judges from 1933 through the fall of 2005. Included in this overall data set were 795 decisions handed down by judges appointed by President George W. Bush.

The research findings appear in a chapter of the book "Principles and Practice of American Politics: Classic and Contemporary Readings, Third Edition" (forthcoming, July 2006) published by CQ Press. Analysis was conducted by Carp and political scientists Kenneth L. Manning, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, and Ronald Stidham, Appalachian State University.

CQ Press, a division of Congressional Quarterly Inc., is a private, independent publishing firm based in Washington, D.C., that produces college and reference works on government and politics.

For more information about the book, visit http://www.cqpress.com.

For Immediate Release April 18, 2007



STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH

I am pleased that the Supreme Court upheld a law that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial-birth abortion. Today's decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America. The partial-birth abortion ban, which an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress passed and I signed into law, represents a commitment to building a culture of life in America.

The Supreme Court's decision is an affirmation of the progress we have made over the past six years in protecting human dignity and upholding the sanctity of life. We will continue to work for the day when every child is welcomed in life and protected in law.

I read a survey mentionning the main reason 70% is because of lack of money to have a baby.

If Bush really wanted to, he could have laid out a plan for financial assistance to bring those numbers down...

But of course this would be seen as socialism right?

Obama is absolutely socialist, for the record. Its not secret. "Let's spread the wealth around." Sounds like socialism if there ever was any.

If Bush really wanted to? Bush is not a socialist democrat. The government could just financially provide for all the needs of every person theoretically. It is called Communism. See Cuba for an example.

Who in the world would vote for a bill that is a blank check bribing mothers to have children at taxpayer's expanse alone? There are other much wiser ways to combat abortion and build a culture of life.

Also, you ignore all the pro-life laws that Bush saw into law. There is the proof that pro-life is not just a bone for the Christians to chew for votes.