Texas Fred just posted a MUST-read concerning the murder of Tiller the Baby Killer. Never one to mince words, Fred lays it on the line about the late-term abortion doctor who slaughtered 60,000 in his career.
Tiller was one of only THREE abortion doctors in the entire United States who perform these types of late-term procedures. THREE.
There is a reason for that. Doctors won't do them, not even the most rabid of pro-abortion physicians.
Be sure to read Texas Fred's report and commentary.
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Monday, June 01, 2009
The Murder of Tiller the Baby Killer
The infamous abortion doctor in Kansas, 'Tiller the Baby Killer,' was murdered in cold blood at his church on Sunday.
Let me be perfectly clear about this display of deadly violence. It is to be harshly condemned.
How can a human being who is so concerned about the sanctity of human life turn around and do the very thing he/she is accusing the abortion doctors of doing?
This is nothing more than an example of twisted thinking on the part of such perpetrators. And pro-life citizens should be quick to disavow such acts. The murderer who took Tiller's life in no way represents the pro-life movement. As with all movements and institutions, the crazies make up a small percentage of those who belong to them.
Barack Obama stated he was 'outraged' at Tiller's murder. So am I. But what I want to hear from Obama is that he is just as outraged by the barbaric slaughter of innocent unborn babies
Let me be perfectly clear about this display of deadly violence. It is to be harshly condemned.
How can a human being who is so concerned about the sanctity of human life turn around and do the very thing he/she is accusing the abortion doctors of doing?
This is nothing more than an example of twisted thinking on the part of such perpetrators. And pro-life citizens should be quick to disavow such acts. The murderer who took Tiller's life in no way represents the pro-life movement. As with all movements and institutions, the crazies make up a small percentage of those who belong to them.
Barack Obama stated he was 'outraged' at Tiller's murder. So am I. But what I want to hear from Obama is that he is just as outraged by the barbaric slaughter of innocent unborn babies
Monday, May 18, 2009
Second Amendment News Roundup for 5/18/09
Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
David Codrea alerts us to a Mexican prison break that shows their problems go much deeper than U.S. guns.
Kurt Hofmann provides excellent analysis of the Montana challenge to federal gun laws.
21 Guns Salute takes a look at the various causes of child death in the U.S. and notes that guns rank at the bottom of the list.
Dark Blog points to an excellent article that he entitles, 'The Enemy of My Enemy is Not My Friend.'
From Free in Idaho: 'A Rifle, A Laptop, and some Comments.'
John Jacob H notes that the AARP is just another gun-grabbing organization. This is one of the reasons I hate these so-called 'advocacy groups' and most unions. They are nothing more than leftwing political organizations posing as helping their members. The NEA is perfect example.
Every Blade of Grass says he got rattled a bit in Sunday's earthquake in California. Glad to hear he's ok.
Mindful Musings provides evidence that disputes the notion we are 'beginning to pull out' of the economic crisis.
Western Rifle Shooters Association reports the bad news about the cancellation of the upcoming Oath Keepers rally.
Mike Vanderboegh has some rather stark observations concerning the NRA convention. As always, a very thought-provoking read...
Nicki blogs on her day at the range.
Say Uncle comments on Mitt Romney's appearance at the NRA Convention. Favorite son, huh. Yeah, right...
Robb Allen posts some gun slogans that should give you a chuckle this afternoon.
A FOUR-YEAR ISLAMIC COLLEGE IN THE U.S.??? Give me a freakin' break. Texas Fred has the story.
Tam has the quote of the day on San Fran Nan's tactic of remaining mum over the weekend.
Days of our Trailers rolled out the new 'Unorganized Militia' patches at the NRA Convention in Phoenix. Take a look!
It seems that 2A Musing had an encounter with Barney Fife incarnate while traveling on a 2-lane road late at night.
Alphecca opines on a absolutely horrible bill introduced by New York Congressman Peter King.
Rev. Karma explains his objection to Obama's speech at Notre Dame. Good reading!
Pax Parabellum has a must-read on McCain centrist philosophy vs. small government conservatism.
David Codrea alerts us to a Mexican prison break that shows their problems go much deeper than U.S. guns.
Kurt Hofmann provides excellent analysis of the Montana challenge to federal gun laws.
21 Guns Salute takes a look at the various causes of child death in the U.S. and notes that guns rank at the bottom of the list.
Dark Blog points to an excellent article that he entitles, 'The Enemy of My Enemy is Not My Friend.'
From Free in Idaho: 'A Rifle, A Laptop, and some Comments.'
John Jacob H notes that the AARP is just another gun-grabbing organization. This is one of the reasons I hate these so-called 'advocacy groups' and most unions. They are nothing more than leftwing political organizations posing as helping their members. The NEA is perfect example.
Every Blade of Grass says he got rattled a bit in Sunday's earthquake in California. Glad to hear he's ok.
Mindful Musings provides evidence that disputes the notion we are 'beginning to pull out' of the economic crisis.
Western Rifle Shooters Association reports the bad news about the cancellation of the upcoming Oath Keepers rally.
Mike Vanderboegh has some rather stark observations concerning the NRA convention. As always, a very thought-provoking read...
Nicki blogs on her day at the range.
Say Uncle comments on Mitt Romney's appearance at the NRA Convention. Favorite son, huh. Yeah, right...
Robb Allen posts some gun slogans that should give you a chuckle this afternoon.
A FOUR-YEAR ISLAMIC COLLEGE IN THE U.S.??? Give me a freakin' break. Texas Fred has the story.
Tam has the quote of the day on San Fran Nan's tactic of remaining mum over the weekend.
Days of our Trailers rolled out the new 'Unorganized Militia' patches at the NRA Convention in Phoenix. Take a look!
It seems that 2A Musing had an encounter with Barney Fife incarnate while traveling on a 2-lane road late at night.
Alphecca opines on a absolutely horrible bill introduced by New York Congressman Peter King.
Rev. Karma explains his objection to Obama's speech at Notre Dame. Good reading!
Pax Parabellum has a must-read on McCain centrist philosophy vs. small government conservatism.
Monday, April 13, 2009
"Economics, Population, and Abortion"
Our guest blogger today is Rev. Kharma of Kharma Futures.This is a thought-provoking read that deserves your consideration.
Economics, Population, and Abortion
by Rev. Kharma
I have read many different articles over the last few years addressing economic trends. In the last year they have focused on the housing bubble and it’s relevance to our current economic crisis. Inflated housing prices spiraled out of control, and eventually collapsed which created a chain reaction throughout the economy of the US and the world. Often we are told that the economic problems we face will not settle out until the housing market rebounds. When we begin to buy houses again, at re-inflated prices the US economy will re-inflate and we will back at our old pace once more, spending money we don’t have.
This afternoon I opened my newest issue of First Things. It sat on my desk for several days, I have been apprehensive about reading it. The original editor and driving force, Fr. Richard Neuhaus died earlier this year. The journal has inspired and educated me for more than a decade since I read the first issue I encountered. His passing has made me wonder just who is capable of picking up the banner he so ably carried during his tenure.
In this issue there is an essay, dealing with economics and families. I have seen bits and pieces and hints about this, but Daniel Goldman had fleshed out and given life to the ideas as no one has ever done. He describes the theory that it is the distribution of young and old that has continued to refresh and renew our economy for generations. The young families have need of houses and all the accessories which would accompany that. The older members of our population have need of investment and growth of financial security. This has worked for generations, providing a continuous cycle of growth and expansion, opportunity and advantage for all concerned.
The demographics since the late 1960’s have begun to erode this model. Increasingly families are smaller, fewer children means fewer and smaller houses. As happens more and more often, there are single parent homes and homes with no children at all.
Make no mistake here, I am not, and never will criticize someone who has a small family, or even no children at all. Not everyone is cut out to raise a family.
The problem here is not the occasional small family or childless couple. The problem is a society that has devalued the family entirely. We have created a new ethos where having a family and raising children is not only removed from the primary role of a society, it is now frowned upon. Those who have a family are regarded as outlaws, and the green movement had demonized them. We are no longer sustaining our population. Societies are aging. We hear over and over that the US Social Security program will be bankrupt due to a lack of wage earners paying to support those receiving benefits. Virtually every Western nation is moving toward demographic extinction. In his article, Mr. Goldman displays a chart which shows the age of ‘Advanced Nations”. In 1965 the population aged older than 65 was approximately 10% of the general population. Those under age 4 made up about 8%. Projected for the year 2050, the trend shows a remarkable shift. Over aged 65 is projected to be more than 30%, while those under age 4 show less than 5%. Clearly this presents an unsustainable strain on the traditional economic cycle.
What is it that could account for this? Mr. Goldman’s article is not meant to address this.
However, as I read it a number kept presenting itself to my mind. I kept thinking of a number I have heard over and over. That number is in the range of 50 million.
That number is the estimated number of humans who would be current Americans had they not been aborted. Our culture of death has wiped out the hope of our generation.
All the economics lectures, and demographic analysis ever written cannot erase that fact. The Culture of Death that has enveloped our society has caused a devastating erosion to our ability to fund our own nation.
We can debate deficit spending, socialism, and capitalism, democrats and republicans in government, but we face a stark reality.
America is rapidly aging. We are aging as a nation because we have become essentially self-centered. The inconvenience of bearing and raising children has been alleviated by the simple answer of eliminating the children considered such a burden.
This is certainly one of a panoply of factors which include delaying marriage, reduced size of families, and many other fractured and altered family structures. However the fact remains, that had fifty million children not been murdered before they were born, we would be facing an entirely different demographic today. Perhaps individual wealth would not have grown so fast. Individual self fulfillment might not be such a sought after goal. We surely would not have a society which faces extinction simply because we are growing older and are not able to fund our expansion. One may debate the morality of the issue, and many do. The straight economics are simply numbers. We are dying, and we are not replacing our dying members. There are many ways to look at it, but there is simply no way to see it differently. We are paying the price of convenience. We are paying now for the elimination of a generation which we never permitted to exist.
The culture of death has created a wound in our society and the infection continues to weaken us. Combined with the unlimited demand for government payment for individual needs we are facing a bankrupt nation. America, we are paying for our choices, no matter if we decide to face it or ignore it.
We can look at so many of the dangers we face as a society and point back to the devaluation of live embodied by the abortion culture. The devaluation of life spreads and creates an ethos of total selfishness which infests and debases every aspect of our world today. The total self absorption, the movement toward the importance of the self and the instant gratification which has been exalted as the pinnacle of achievement all flow logically from the mindset which decides that one individuals life is more important than any other consideration. We are no longer looking toward self reliance, but rather to self preservation.
The nation which was formed with a minimal government to protect basic rights is now a nation which wants a strong government to provide everything at the expense of others. Instead of a generation willing to go to war to save the world, we have a generation which seems to want to beg the world to save them. Instead of raising children and providing for the future, we want to have the government raise and provide for us.
We have taken the dream of the founders and turned it on its ear. We have perverted the original republic and corrupted it to a democracy which feeds off its children instead of protecting them.
That cliff is getting closer and closer and the nation is sliding faster and faster into the abyss.
Economics, Population, and Abortion
by Rev. Kharma
I have read many different articles over the last few years addressing economic trends. In the last year they have focused on the housing bubble and it’s relevance to our current economic crisis. Inflated housing prices spiraled out of control, and eventually collapsed which created a chain reaction throughout the economy of the US and the world. Often we are told that the economic problems we face will not settle out until the housing market rebounds. When we begin to buy houses again, at re-inflated prices the US economy will re-inflate and we will back at our old pace once more, spending money we don’t have.
This afternoon I opened my newest issue of First Things. It sat on my desk for several days, I have been apprehensive about reading it. The original editor and driving force, Fr. Richard Neuhaus died earlier this year. The journal has inspired and educated me for more than a decade since I read the first issue I encountered. His passing has made me wonder just who is capable of picking up the banner he so ably carried during his tenure.
In this issue there is an essay, dealing with economics and families. I have seen bits and pieces and hints about this, but Daniel Goldman had fleshed out and given life to the ideas as no one has ever done. He describes the theory that it is the distribution of young and old that has continued to refresh and renew our economy for generations. The young families have need of houses and all the accessories which would accompany that. The older members of our population have need of investment and growth of financial security. This has worked for generations, providing a continuous cycle of growth and expansion, opportunity and advantage for all concerned.
The demographics since the late 1960’s have begun to erode this model. Increasingly families are smaller, fewer children means fewer and smaller houses. As happens more and more often, there are single parent homes and homes with no children at all.
Make no mistake here, I am not, and never will criticize someone who has a small family, or even no children at all. Not everyone is cut out to raise a family.
The problem here is not the occasional small family or childless couple. The problem is a society that has devalued the family entirely. We have created a new ethos where having a family and raising children is not only removed from the primary role of a society, it is now frowned upon. Those who have a family are regarded as outlaws, and the green movement had demonized them. We are no longer sustaining our population. Societies are aging. We hear over and over that the US Social Security program will be bankrupt due to a lack of wage earners paying to support those receiving benefits. Virtually every Western nation is moving toward demographic extinction. In his article, Mr. Goldman displays a chart which shows the age of ‘Advanced Nations”. In 1965 the population aged older than 65 was approximately 10% of the general population. Those under age 4 made up about 8%. Projected for the year 2050, the trend shows a remarkable shift. Over aged 65 is projected to be more than 30%, while those under age 4 show less than 5%. Clearly this presents an unsustainable strain on the traditional economic cycle.
What is it that could account for this? Mr. Goldman’s article is not meant to address this.
However, as I read it a number kept presenting itself to my mind. I kept thinking of a number I have heard over and over. That number is in the range of 50 million.
That number is the estimated number of humans who would be current Americans had they not been aborted. Our culture of death has wiped out the hope of our generation.
All the economics lectures, and demographic analysis ever written cannot erase that fact. The Culture of Death that has enveloped our society has caused a devastating erosion to our ability to fund our own nation.
We can debate deficit spending, socialism, and capitalism, democrats and republicans in government, but we face a stark reality.
America is rapidly aging. We are aging as a nation because we have become essentially self-centered. The inconvenience of bearing and raising children has been alleviated by the simple answer of eliminating the children considered such a burden.
This is certainly one of a panoply of factors which include delaying marriage, reduced size of families, and many other fractured and altered family structures. However the fact remains, that had fifty million children not been murdered before they were born, we would be facing an entirely different demographic today. Perhaps individual wealth would not have grown so fast. Individual self fulfillment might not be such a sought after goal. We surely would not have a society which faces extinction simply because we are growing older and are not able to fund our expansion. One may debate the morality of the issue, and many do. The straight economics are simply numbers. We are dying, and we are not replacing our dying members. There are many ways to look at it, but there is simply no way to see it differently. We are paying the price of convenience. We are paying now for the elimination of a generation which we never permitted to exist.
The culture of death has created a wound in our society and the infection continues to weaken us. Combined with the unlimited demand for government payment for individual needs we are facing a bankrupt nation. America, we are paying for our choices, no matter if we decide to face it or ignore it.
We can look at so many of the dangers we face as a society and point back to the devaluation of live embodied by the abortion culture. The devaluation of life spreads and creates an ethos of total selfishness which infests and debases every aspect of our world today. The total self absorption, the movement toward the importance of the self and the instant gratification which has been exalted as the pinnacle of achievement all flow logically from the mindset which decides that one individuals life is more important than any other consideration. We are no longer looking toward self reliance, but rather to self preservation.
The nation which was formed with a minimal government to protect basic rights is now a nation which wants a strong government to provide everything at the expense of others. Instead of a generation willing to go to war to save the world, we have a generation which seems to want to beg the world to save them. Instead of raising children and providing for the future, we want to have the government raise and provide for us.
We have taken the dream of the founders and turned it on its ear. We have perverted the original republic and corrupted it to a democracy which feeds off its children instead of protecting them.
That cliff is getting closer and closer and the nation is sliding faster and faster into the abyss.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Barack Obama--Pro-Abortion, Anti-Freedom
The title says it all. Obama will in all likelihood rescind Bush's 'conscience' clause provision for doctors, nurses, and pharmacists who wish to opt out of abortions due to their moral and ethical principles.
Today's column at Columbia Conservative Examiner hits this issue at the jugular, but it's darn well time somebody tells it like it is concerning infanticide, abortion, and the support of baby-killing on the part of the one who sits in the White House.
Today's column at Columbia Conservative Examiner hits this issue at the jugular, but it's darn well time somebody tells it like it is concerning infanticide, abortion, and the support of baby-killing on the part of the one who sits in the White House.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Obama Will Provide Funding for Overseas Abortions
Today it was announced that Obama will fund foreign abortions.
FOX News reported:
President Obama will issue an executive order on Thursday reversing the Bush administration policy that bans the use of federal dollars by non-governmental organizations that discuss or provide abortions outside of the United States.
As we reported in our 'Political Buzz' segment yesterday, this was one of Barack Obama's top priorities after becoming President, in keeping with his background in Illinois as being one of the most rabid supporters of infanticide/abortion in the nation.
Now, by executive order, our tax dollars will fund abortions overseas.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Arsonist Strikes Sarah Palin's Church in Alaska
Sarah Palin's home church in Wasilla, Alaska, the Wasilla Bible Church, has been damaged by arson, according to a news report at Townhall.com.
Investigators have concluded that the fire was definitely caused by arson, but they declined to say if there is any connection between the arsonist's motive and Palin.
The church's Pastor also declined to comment on whether or not the church has received any threats related to Palin's connection to the church.
For her part, Governor Palin contacted the Pastor expressing her regrets if the negative attention she received during the campaign led to criminal activity against the church.
Palin had received heavy criticism on the campaign trail for her religious views concerning abortion, homosexuality, and a host of other issues. And activists of late, particularly with regard to the homosexual issue, have turned violent.
The fire caused over $1 million dollars' worth of damage to the church. A few church members, including children, were inside the church when the fire was set, but no one was injured.
Investigators have concluded that the fire was definitely caused by arson, but they declined to say if there is any connection between the arsonist's motive and Palin.
The church's Pastor also declined to comment on whether or not the church has received any threats related to Palin's connection to the church.
For her part, Governor Palin contacted the Pastor expressing her regrets if the negative attention she received during the campaign led to criminal activity against the church.
Palin had received heavy criticism on the campaign trail for her religious views concerning abortion, homosexuality, and a host of other issues. And activists of late, particularly with regard to the homosexual issue, have turned violent.
The fire caused over $1 million dollars' worth of damage to the church. A few church members, including children, were inside the church when the fire was set, but no one was injured.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Faith-Based Hospitals in Danger Under Obama
Barack Obama, along with his liberal Democrat colleagues, will pose a serious threat to faith-based hospitals.
Obama is set to sign a bill into law that is known as the 'Freedom of Choice Act,' which would force hospitals to perform abortions or risk losing federal funds.
This sweeping piece of legislation is the darling of the Left, abortion-rights activists, infanticide-proponents, and other extremist groups in America.
The Act would have the effect of overriding almost all state laws imposing sensible limits on abortion, clearing the way for a nation-wide policy of abortion-on-demand.
And hospitals that are owned and operated by faith groups would be forced to begin performing abortions or lose federal dollars for healthcare.
The Catholic Bishop of Arlington, Virginia has stated that he will defy the new Act if it becomes law.
Good for him.
This should be the stance of all conservative faith-based hospitals including the scores of Baptist, Catholic, and Seventh-Day Adventist medical facilities around the country.
In this one act alone, the Obama administration is proving to be the single most pro-abortion administration this country has ever seen--a sobering fact that should give serious pause to those Christians who went into the voting booth and pulled the lever for Obama.
This is yet another example of the statement of one of the Founding Fathers, 'The citizens get the government they deserve.'
This is the consequence of electing this man to office. And there is much more to come.
Obama is set to sign a bill into law that is known as the 'Freedom of Choice Act,' which would force hospitals to perform abortions or risk losing federal funds.
This sweeping piece of legislation is the darling of the Left, abortion-rights activists, infanticide-proponents, and other extremist groups in America.
The Act would have the effect of overriding almost all state laws imposing sensible limits on abortion, clearing the way for a nation-wide policy of abortion-on-demand.
And hospitals that are owned and operated by faith groups would be forced to begin performing abortions or lose federal dollars for healthcare.
The Catholic Bishop of Arlington, Virginia has stated that he will defy the new Act if it becomes law.
Good for him.
This should be the stance of all conservative faith-based hospitals including the scores of Baptist, Catholic, and Seventh-Day Adventist medical facilities around the country.
In this one act alone, the Obama administration is proving to be the single most pro-abortion administration this country has ever seen--a sobering fact that should give serious pause to those Christians who went into the voting booth and pulled the lever for Obama.
This is yet another example of the statement of one of the Founding Fathers, 'The citizens get the government they deserve.'
This is the consequence of electing this man to office. And there is much more to come.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Obama-Barbaric Attack on Abortion Survivor
In response to a McCain-Palin ad that highlights Barack Obama's proven support for infanticide while a legislator in Illinois, Obama went barbaric in his attack on the abortion survivor who is featured in an independent ad that was not produced by the McCain campaign but was aired to allow the woman to tell her story.
Barbarism seems to be the standard response of Obama to infants who survive abortion, even when they become adults!
Many of a libertarian bent in today's society seem to think that laws against abortion are some sort of infringement on an inherent human right. Funny they don't think fathers and mothers who murder their 3-year-old children are simply exercising an inherent human right.
In a civil society we have laws against taking human lives, and rightly so. Abortion and infanticide are two hideous crimes against humanity. Being a staunch libertarian and a staunch opponent of these acts of barbarism are not mutually exclusive.
The case at issue is an Illinois baby that was aborted but survived the procedure and placed in a dark closet to die, without food or water. Barack Obama voted to disallow medical care to be given to such babies who survive abortion attempts.
Obama defends himself by pulling some kind of legal, local-federal mumbo-jumbo to make it seem as though he didn't really support withholding medical care from that infant. The tactic is a red herring. The bottom line is that he believes babies who survive abortion attempts should be killed.
Hence, his barbaric attacks against the woman who survived an abortion attempt. In the video and commentary you will find at Gateway Pundit, you will see first-hand that the sleazy Obama has been caught red-handed in a barefaced lie about the most basic of human rights--the right to life.
Barbarism seems to be the standard response of Obama to infants who survive abortion, even when they become adults!
Many of a libertarian bent in today's society seem to think that laws against abortion are some sort of infringement on an inherent human right. Funny they don't think fathers and mothers who murder their 3-year-old children are simply exercising an inherent human right.
In a civil society we have laws against taking human lives, and rightly so. Abortion and infanticide are two hideous crimes against humanity. Being a staunch libertarian and a staunch opponent of these acts of barbarism are not mutually exclusive.
The case at issue is an Illinois baby that was aborted but survived the procedure and placed in a dark closet to die, without food or water. Barack Obama voted to disallow medical care to be given to such babies who survive abortion attempts.
Obama defends himself by pulling some kind of legal, local-federal mumbo-jumbo to make it seem as though he didn't really support withholding medical care from that infant. The tactic is a red herring. The bottom line is that he believes babies who survive abortion attempts should be killed.
Hence, his barbaric attacks against the woman who survived an abortion attempt. In the video and commentary you will find at Gateway Pundit, you will see first-hand that the sleazy Obama has been caught red-handed in a barefaced lie about the most basic of human rights--the right to life.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
South Carolina Democratic Chair Smears Palin
In an obvious attempt to smear GOP VP candidate Sarah Palin, South Carolina Democratic Party chair Carol Fowler stated that Palin's only qualification for office is that 'she hasn't had an abortion.'
Where does our state get these loony 'toons Democrats from?
Donald Fowler, South Carolina native and former Democratic Party chairman both on the state level and the national level recently joked that the hurricane that hit the Gulf Coast on the opening day of the GOP convention was a 'sign from heaven that God favors Democrats.'
And then he insulted the blogger who first reported the story, referring to him as a 'right-wing kook.'
Sorry, Mr. Fowler, but the kooks seem to be occupying the offices of the Democratic Party, such as yourself and Carol Fowler.
Oh, and by the way, Ms. Fowler, if Palin's only qualification is the fact that she hasn't had an abortion, then the only qualifications for Democrat females is that they have slept with at least 100 men, had three abortions, and are currently being treated for genital herpes.
That's a joke, in case you missed it.
Actually, Ms. Fowler, you paid Sarah Palin a great compliment by saying she hasn't had an abortion. I personally wish there were a lot more women who were among that number.
Here is the original story.
Where does our state get these loony 'toons Democrats from?
Donald Fowler, South Carolina native and former Democratic Party chairman both on the state level and the national level recently joked that the hurricane that hit the Gulf Coast on the opening day of the GOP convention was a 'sign from heaven that God favors Democrats.'
And then he insulted the blogger who first reported the story, referring to him as a 'right-wing kook.'
Sorry, Mr. Fowler, but the kooks seem to be occupying the offices of the Democratic Party, such as yourself and Carol Fowler.
Oh, and by the way, Ms. Fowler, if Palin's only qualification is the fact that she hasn't had an abortion, then the only qualifications for Democrat females is that they have slept with at least 100 men, had three abortions, and are currently being treated for genital herpes.
That's a joke, in case you missed it.
Actually, Ms. Fowler, you paid Sarah Palin a great compliment by saying she hasn't had an abortion. I personally wish there were a lot more women who were among that number.
Here is the original story.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Biden's Hypocrisy
In a rather surprising moment of candor, Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden stated that human life begins at the moment of conception, and then added, 'That makes me a murderer.'
The attempt at humor aside, the Biden contradiction highlights the problem for those liberal politicians whose religious faith directly conflicts with public policy issues.
As for Biden, his manner of dealing with the issue is to cling to the traditional teachings of his Catholic faith while allowing others who disagree to continue practicing abortion-on-demand.
Such a manner of dealing with such an important issue concerning the nature of human life is, in a word, frightening. One could make a case, for example, in the days of slavery, that although one believes murder to be wrong, one can allow for the wholesale lynching of blacks because not everyone agrees that black people have souls.
Yes, at one time some believed that people of African descent were not fully human.
One could also make a case for the wholesale killing of nursing home patients who do nothing but lay in bed day after day, totally unaware of their surroundings. If, for example, some sociologists and liberal ethicists believe that such persons no longer meet the criteria for being 'human,' then it would be totally acceptable to kill them.
And yes, there have been numerous medical ethicists through the years who have advocated that very thing.
Yet so far, such an outlandishly ghoulish idea has never been allowed to become public policy.
The Biden philosophy seems to be that abortion is a hideous and repulsive act but if someone else does it, then it is ok for them to commit hideous and repulsive acts.
If we don't know for certain all of the ins and outs of human life, doesn't it make more sense to err on the side of life rather than to allow killing until we get more information?
It is for this reason that Biden's contention simply doesn't fly. And the fact that a man can be so flippant concerning his own personal convictions is very telling.
The attempt at humor aside, the Biden contradiction highlights the problem for those liberal politicians whose religious faith directly conflicts with public policy issues.
As for Biden, his manner of dealing with the issue is to cling to the traditional teachings of his Catholic faith while allowing others who disagree to continue practicing abortion-on-demand.
Such a manner of dealing with such an important issue concerning the nature of human life is, in a word, frightening. One could make a case, for example, in the days of slavery, that although one believes murder to be wrong, one can allow for the wholesale lynching of blacks because not everyone agrees that black people have souls.
Yes, at one time some believed that people of African descent were not fully human.
One could also make a case for the wholesale killing of nursing home patients who do nothing but lay in bed day after day, totally unaware of their surroundings. If, for example, some sociologists and liberal ethicists believe that such persons no longer meet the criteria for being 'human,' then it would be totally acceptable to kill them.
And yes, there have been numerous medical ethicists through the years who have advocated that very thing.
Yet so far, such an outlandishly ghoulish idea has never been allowed to become public policy.
The Biden philosophy seems to be that abortion is a hideous and repulsive act but if someone else does it, then it is ok for them to commit hideous and repulsive acts.
If we don't know for certain all of the ins and outs of human life, doesn't it make more sense to err on the side of life rather than to allow killing until we get more information?
It is for this reason that Biden's contention simply doesn't fly. And the fact that a man can be so flippant concerning his own personal convictions is very telling.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
Baby-Killers at Forefront of New Palin Attacks
By now everyone should know that Barack Obama's support for infanticide, as well as abortion-on-demand, is well-documented.
Apparently the latest tactic of the Obama campaign and its lapdogs in the mainstream media is to roll out its baby-killers to attack Sarah Palin on her pro-life stance.
So, it really does boil down to one issue, doesn't it, despite what the Leftists say about 'the other issues.'
If you are pro-life, you are automatically extremist. If you are a baby-killer, you are 'mainstream,' according to the Einsteins of the Democratic Party and their Leftist mouthpieces in the mainstream media.
If these people had their way, anyone who is pro-life would be automatically disqualified from serving in public office. In actuality, it should be the other way around. Baby killers, who support murder, should be disqualified.
And anyone who participates in infanticide by refusing to give medical treatment to a baby that survives a botched abortion attempt should be thrown in jail.
Obama is actually no better than Nazi butcher-doctors who performed painful and devastating 'medical experiments' on babies and adults during the Third Reich.
It is actually frightening that he and his kind have as much popularity in this country as they do.
Apparently the latest tactic of the Obama campaign and its lapdogs in the mainstream media is to roll out its baby-killers to attack Sarah Palin on her pro-life stance.
So, it really does boil down to one issue, doesn't it, despite what the Leftists say about 'the other issues.'
If you are pro-life, you are automatically extremist. If you are a baby-killer, you are 'mainstream,' according to the Einsteins of the Democratic Party and their Leftist mouthpieces in the mainstream media.
If these people had their way, anyone who is pro-life would be automatically disqualified from serving in public office. In actuality, it should be the other way around. Baby killers, who support murder, should be disqualified.
And anyone who participates in infanticide by refusing to give medical treatment to a baby that survives a botched abortion attempt should be thrown in jail.
Obama is actually no better than Nazi butcher-doctors who performed painful and devastating 'medical experiments' on babies and adults during the Third Reich.
It is actually frightening that he and his kind have as much popularity in this country as they do.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Regarding the Pregnancy of Palin's Daughter
The news came today that Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin's 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. This should not be fodder for the news media or bloggers. But here I am talking about it, mainly in response to Leftwing bloggers who have already blasted the candidate.
Thus, I will make a few comments and then leave the issue alone. She's 17-years-old, for heaven's sake. She and her family need privacy at this time.
Frankly, I am proud of the Palins for the manner in which they have handled this situation. As loving parents, they have embraced their daughter, and they support her decision to have the baby.
Had this been 75% of Democrats, if we take seriously their views of abortion-on-demand, they would have encouraged the young woman to just go and get it 'taken care of' so that she can 'move on with her life.'
Thank goodness a good number of these are hypocrites who would clearly NOT encourage their daughters to do such a hideous thing. Yet they support a Party platform that essentially gives abortion a free pass, not to mention the fact that their Presidential candidate supports infanticide.
The fact that Leftwing Democrat bloggers have been all over this issue all day long only proves that the entire lot is nothing but sleaze. Heaven help us if this crowd gets their candidates in the White House and the Congress.
Thus, I will make a few comments and then leave the issue alone. She's 17-years-old, for heaven's sake. She and her family need privacy at this time.
Frankly, I am proud of the Palins for the manner in which they have handled this situation. As loving parents, they have embraced their daughter, and they support her decision to have the baby.
Had this been 75% of Democrats, if we take seriously their views of abortion-on-demand, they would have encouraged the young woman to just go and get it 'taken care of' so that she can 'move on with her life.'
Thank goodness a good number of these are hypocrites who would clearly NOT encourage their daughters to do such a hideous thing. Yet they support a Party platform that essentially gives abortion a free pass, not to mention the fact that their Presidential candidate supports infanticide.
The fact that Leftwing Democrat bloggers have been all over this issue all day long only proves that the entire lot is nothing but sleaze. Heaven help us if this crowd gets their candidates in the White House and the Congress.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Barack-abortion
A new term that I coined can now be dropped into the modern vernacular:
'Barackabortion'--a type of abortion wherein a baby that survives the initial abortion procedure is killed or allowed to die outside the womb by being placed in a darkened closet with no food or water.
(Named after the man who supported legislation that would allow this type of abortion, Barack Obama--advocate for infanticide).
'Barackabortion'--a type of abortion wherein a baby that survives the initial abortion procedure is killed or allowed to die outside the womb by being placed in a darkened closet with no food or water.
(Named after the man who supported legislation that would allow this type of abortion, Barack Obama--advocate for infanticide).
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Second Amendment News Roundup for 8/19/08
Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
From Codrea's War on Guns:
*'Fingers Point South of the Border'
*'Fingers Point North of the Border'
*'Worth 10,000 Words'
*'Women on Frau..uh..Guard'--women and guns--a MUST-read!
*'Grand Opening'--an update on the grand opening of the new Red's Trading Post
Armed and Safe comments on the upcoming election and has no regard for either choice. I basically agree with the exception that with McCain we will probably get much better judges in the courts--not to mention that in terms of foreign policy he is the Ph.D. while Obama is still in kindergarten.
Notice! For the second day in a row I have not been able to open Sebastian's blog at Snow Flakes in Hell. Don't know whether the problem is on my end or his, but I'm not having the same problem with other blogs. Sebastian?
The Bitch Girls provide a good read on McCain-Feingold and corruption in politics.
JR at A Keyboard and a .45 has Governor Rick Perry's response to the school district in Texas that's allowing school personnel to carry guns.
Nicki found some VERY pointed advice for Barack Obama. A good read!
Mike McCarville has a late-breaking update on the Oklahoma D.A. who is harassing a blogger because of negative comments on the blog about the D.A. Perhaps the term 'D.A.' in this case stands for 'Dumb A**'? Naaaaa...I don't want to get harassed.
Alphecca comments on the anti-gun billboard campaign in Massachusetts.
Ahab has a reminder about tonight's show 'Gun Nuts--The Next Generation.' He and Squeaky will have Robb Allen and Joe Huffman as guests.
Syd at Front Sight, Press issues a warning to those who would attempt to take their guns into Canada.
Breda has some examples of the condescending, arrogant Barack Obama toward women!
Traction Control cites an article in the Washington Post on Dick Heller getting his gun registration.
Dr. John Lott indicates that the major media is finally picking up the story on Obama's extremist position on abortion (he actually supports infanticide), and the lies he has told to hide his record on the subject in Illinois.
Western Rifle Shooters Association has an excellent piece on 'Living in an Imperial World.'
The Rustmeister points to an anti who is about as honest as a snake-oil salesman.
The Smallest Minority has the quote of the day. Don't miss THIS one!
Walls of the City has breaking news on reciprocal handgun carry permits. Read it all.
From Codrea's War on Guns:
*'Fingers Point South of the Border'
*'Fingers Point North of the Border'
*'Worth 10,000 Words'
*'Women on Frau..uh..Guard'--women and guns--a MUST-read!
*'Grand Opening'--an update on the grand opening of the new Red's Trading Post
Armed and Safe comments on the upcoming election and has no regard for either choice. I basically agree with the exception that with McCain we will probably get much better judges in the courts--not to mention that in terms of foreign policy he is the Ph.D. while Obama is still in kindergarten.
Notice! For the second day in a row I have not been able to open Sebastian's blog at Snow Flakes in Hell. Don't know whether the problem is on my end or his, but I'm not having the same problem with other blogs. Sebastian?
The Bitch Girls provide a good read on McCain-Feingold and corruption in politics.
JR at A Keyboard and a .45 has Governor Rick Perry's response to the school district in Texas that's allowing school personnel to carry guns.
Nicki found some VERY pointed advice for Barack Obama. A good read!
Mike McCarville has a late-breaking update on the Oklahoma D.A. who is harassing a blogger because of negative comments on the blog about the D.A. Perhaps the term 'D.A.' in this case stands for 'Dumb A**'? Naaaaa...I don't want to get harassed.
Alphecca comments on the anti-gun billboard campaign in Massachusetts.
Ahab has a reminder about tonight's show 'Gun Nuts--The Next Generation.' He and Squeaky will have Robb Allen and Joe Huffman as guests.
Syd at Front Sight, Press issues a warning to those who would attempt to take their guns into Canada.
Breda has some examples of the condescending, arrogant Barack Obama toward women!
Traction Control cites an article in the Washington Post on Dick Heller getting his gun registration.
Dr. John Lott indicates that the major media is finally picking up the story on Obama's extremist position on abortion (he actually supports infanticide), and the lies he has told to hide his record on the subject in Illinois.
Western Rifle Shooters Association has an excellent piece on 'Living in an Imperial World.'
The Rustmeister points to an anti who is about as honest as a snake-oil salesman.
The Smallest Minority has the quote of the day. Don't miss THIS one!
Walls of the City has breaking news on reciprocal handgun carry permits. Read it all.
Monday, July 07, 2008
Second Amendment News Roundup for 7/7/08
Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
Armed and Safe has a major announcement about the pro-Second Amendment Rally in Chicago this week. He also alerts us to the new motto of the gun grabbers.
JR at A Keyboard and a .45 has news concerning concealed carry on college campuses in Texas.
Alphecca scopes out two idiots who comment on the Heller decision.
Mike McCarville reports that gun shop owners in the OKC area have made a political endorsement.
John Lott says that Students for Concealed Carry are planning their very first national convention. Lott also reports that Barack 'I Have Four Different Opinions on Every Issue' Obama has moved to the right on abortion, in spite of the fact that in Illinois he supported in infanticide. It seems Barack is gaining a reputation for saying anything to get elected.
Speaking of abortion, Gateway Pundit reports that evangelical Christians are going after Barack Obama's hideous record on abortion. Good. It's time people in the churches knew the truth about the baby-killer. In addition, Gateway has THIS SHOCKER that Nancy Pelosi was sending messages to terrorists while undermining the Colombian government!
Gunservatively has an update on the Flight 93 memorial debacle in Pennsylvania.
Snow Flakes in Hell points to a piece entitled, 'Six Views of the Second Amendment.'
Nicki at The Liberty Zone provides good reading on foot-dragging in D.C.
Say Uncle has a new revelation about Obama's position on gun control.
Brigid at Home on the Range has some neat gun porn today.
Armed and Safe has a major announcement about the pro-Second Amendment Rally in Chicago this week. He also alerts us to the new motto of the gun grabbers.
JR at A Keyboard and a .45 has news concerning concealed carry on college campuses in Texas.
Alphecca scopes out two idiots who comment on the Heller decision.
Mike McCarville reports that gun shop owners in the OKC area have made a political endorsement.
John Lott says that Students for Concealed Carry are planning their very first national convention. Lott also reports that Barack 'I Have Four Different Opinions on Every Issue' Obama has moved to the right on abortion, in spite of the fact that in Illinois he supported in infanticide. It seems Barack is gaining a reputation for saying anything to get elected.
Speaking of abortion, Gateway Pundit reports that evangelical Christians are going after Barack Obama's hideous record on abortion. Good. It's time people in the churches knew the truth about the baby-killer. In addition, Gateway has THIS SHOCKER that Nancy Pelosi was sending messages to terrorists while undermining the Colombian government!
Gunservatively has an update on the Flight 93 memorial debacle in Pennsylvania.
Snow Flakes in Hell points to a piece entitled, 'Six Views of the Second Amendment.'
Nicki at The Liberty Zone provides good reading on foot-dragging in D.C.
Say Uncle has a new revelation about Obama's position on gun control.
Brigid at Home on the Range has some neat gun porn today.
Monday, November 19, 2007
If We Have Right to Privacy As the Dems Say...
Without exception, each of the Democrats who are contending for their Party's Presidential nomination stated during Thursday night's debate that they believe the U.S. Constitution affirms and protects the citizens' 'right to privacy.'
The term 'right to privacy' has become code language for those who support abortion rights. That is most unfortunate. This implies that those who are pro-life see no right to privacy in the Constitution.
Such thinking is exceedingly flawed.
For example, personally I am pro-life. I do not believe that a living human being growing inside of a woman's body is just 'another part of her body' like an appendage. While the life growing inside her is connected to her body, that life itself is separate with its own genes and chromosomes.
I do not believe that it is right to tamper with that life unless there is an overriding medical reason for doing so.
This medical reason would be determined by the woman's physician. And in that regard there is a right to privacy, due to the fact that medical information is considered private and protected by law.
Thus, if the woman in question decides to have an abortion upon the advice of her physician, it is really none of my business. Medical records are private, and as each of the Democratic candidates stated, we all have the 'right to privacy.'
Alrighty then. Let's see just how far these legal scholars are willing to go with their supposed affirmation of the Constitutional 'right to privacy,' shall we?
If it is none of my business nor the government's as to whether or not the young woman living beside me decides to have an abortion due to medical reasons, which are considered a matter of privacy, although I happen to believe that such an act may be unethical, immoral, and displaying a shocking lack of regard for the sacredness of human life, then why is it any of government's business when and where or how often I buy a gun?
The right to privacy in the Constitution protects a woman's right to end a human life but does not protect MY right to privacy when it comes to the Second Amendment, which is explicitly affirmed as an inherent right.
It is actually much easier in this country to end a baby's life than it is to buy a gun.
When I go to the gun shop to purchase a handgun or a long gun, I am required to fill out paperwork, complete with my name, address, phone number, driver's license number, and Social Security Number, and in some states I have to wait a week to 14 days before I can take possession of the firearm.
How long will it be before I have to drop 'em, bend over, and grab 'em so that they can examine my lower colon with a proctoscope before I can purchase a firearm?
Further, the right to privacy doesn't seem to bother the Dems in the least when it comes to airline safeguards, national databases, national I.D. cards, cameras on street corners, eye-I.D., and the like.
Our privacy has been flying out the window faster than a bat out of hell over the last ten years or so, under both Democratic AND Republican politicians in the Congress and White House.
Yet the Dems claim we have a Constitutional right to privacy.
Apparently, that claim only pertains to abortion rights. I am waiting for one of them to correctly extend that right to the Second Amendment and other privacy violations as well.
I won't be holding my breath...
The term 'right to privacy' has become code language for those who support abortion rights. That is most unfortunate. This implies that those who are pro-life see no right to privacy in the Constitution.
Such thinking is exceedingly flawed.
For example, personally I am pro-life. I do not believe that a living human being growing inside of a woman's body is just 'another part of her body' like an appendage. While the life growing inside her is connected to her body, that life itself is separate with its own genes and chromosomes.
I do not believe that it is right to tamper with that life unless there is an overriding medical reason for doing so.
This medical reason would be determined by the woman's physician. And in that regard there is a right to privacy, due to the fact that medical information is considered private and protected by law.
Thus, if the woman in question decides to have an abortion upon the advice of her physician, it is really none of my business. Medical records are private, and as each of the Democratic candidates stated, we all have the 'right to privacy.'
Alrighty then. Let's see just how far these legal scholars are willing to go with their supposed affirmation of the Constitutional 'right to privacy,' shall we?
If it is none of my business nor the government's as to whether or not the young woman living beside me decides to have an abortion due to medical reasons, which are considered a matter of privacy, although I happen to believe that such an act may be unethical, immoral, and displaying a shocking lack of regard for the sacredness of human life, then why is it any of government's business when and where or how often I buy a gun?
The right to privacy in the Constitution protects a woman's right to end a human life but does not protect MY right to privacy when it comes to the Second Amendment, which is explicitly affirmed as an inherent right.
It is actually much easier in this country to end a baby's life than it is to buy a gun.
When I go to the gun shop to purchase a handgun or a long gun, I am required to fill out paperwork, complete with my name, address, phone number, driver's license number, and Social Security Number, and in some states I have to wait a week to 14 days before I can take possession of the firearm.
How long will it be before I have to drop 'em, bend over, and grab 'em so that they can examine my lower colon with a proctoscope before I can purchase a firearm?
Further, the right to privacy doesn't seem to bother the Dems in the least when it comes to airline safeguards, national databases, national I.D. cards, cameras on street corners, eye-I.D., and the like.
Our privacy has been flying out the window faster than a bat out of hell over the last ten years or so, under both Democratic AND Republican politicians in the Congress and White House.
Yet the Dems claim we have a Constitutional right to privacy.
Apparently, that claim only pertains to abortion rights. I am waiting for one of them to correctly extend that right to the Second Amendment and other privacy violations as well.
I won't be holding my breath...
Monday, October 01, 2007
Can Dobson Doom the Giuliani Candidacy?
Gentlemen, it is time for a reasonable compromise.
These words form the basis of my message to Dr. James Dobson, the pediatrician and director of radio's Focus on the Family, who stated in no uncertain terms over the weekend that evangelical Christians would never under any circumstance support Rudy Giuliani for President.
Dobson's comments came as a result of several days of meetings with other powerful Christian conservative voices--persons of enormous influence in the heartland of America.
Focus on the Family is one of the most popular and influential radio broadcasts in the nation today, boasting tens of millions of listeners. This puts Dobson in an elite category of king-makers in this nation, given that he can deliver over 10 million voters for a political candidate.
The movers and shakers within the Republican Party ignore Dobson to their peril. Ever since 1980 when Ronald Reagan was able to form a powerful coalition of religious and social conservatives, blue-collar conservative Democrats, as well as traditional Republicans, Christian evangelicals have been considered a valuable part of the decision-making process within the Republican Party.
While there are many who look askance at Dobson's claim to wielding that much power over policy makers, even to the point of choosing a Presidential candidate, it is still of vital importance that his voice be heard and that his views be taken seriously.
The crux of Dobson's disdain for Rudy Giuliani centers on one issue--abortion. Christian conservatives abhor abortion as a blight on the nation's conscience. Giuliani has made it clear he will not back down on his lifelong support of a woman's right to an abortion.
Dobson's response? If Giuliani is the nominee, he and his army of millions will stay home on election day or find a different candidate to support outside the two Parties.
The threat is dangerous. Should Dobson and his supporters sit out election day in 2008, it could be enough to tip the scales in favor of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or whoever the Democrat may be. And should the Dobson coalition back a different candidate, too many voters would be drawn away from the GOP, which would also throw the election to the Democrats.
In essence Dobson has delivered an ultimatum to the Republican Party. If the GOP chooses a social liberal, Dobson and company will either stay home or support a third Party candidate, which will mean the election of the nation's worst nightmare in the form of Hillary Clinton or one of the other Democrats.
Further, Dobson has indicated that he has serious problems with John McCain and Mitt Romney. He has also stated he doesn't like Fred Thompson. But the ultimatum centers squarely upon no one other than Rudy Giuliani. Perhaps he could be persuaded about the others.
And this brings us back to my original message to Dr. Dobson and his colleagues. Gentlemen, we hear you. We need your support to elect someone who takes the Constitution and our nation's history seriously rather than a liberal who simply doesn't care.
Thus, it is time for a reasonable compromise. Many of us out here who have not yet had the chance to cast a vote in a primary have major problems with Giuliani for various reasons. Say we agree with you that Giuliani should not be the nominee. What are you willing to give us in return?
If we give a decisive thumbs-down to Giuliani and choose one of the other GOP candidates, will you then support that person?
For example, Fred Thompson may not be your favorite person. But we like what we hear when he speaks. He has been straight as an arrow in his support for gun rights, the war on terror, complete freedom of religious expression and speech, and he has stated repeatedly that Roe v. Wade is a terrible ruling.
What more could you want? The man is in your corner.
But Thompson isn't the only one. There are several more GOP candidates about whom the very same things could be said.
And so, Dr. Dobson, if we deliver on your ultimatum that Giuliani be denied the nomination, what are you willing to do for us in return? Many of us believe that at the very least you should lend your support to the person we choose, even if it is Thompson, McCain, or Romney.
I strongly believe that such a reasonable compromise will be for the ultimate good of the country.
These words form the basis of my message to Dr. James Dobson, the pediatrician and director of radio's Focus on the Family, who stated in no uncertain terms over the weekend that evangelical Christians would never under any circumstance support Rudy Giuliani for President.
Dobson's comments came as a result of several days of meetings with other powerful Christian conservative voices--persons of enormous influence in the heartland of America.
Focus on the Family is one of the most popular and influential radio broadcasts in the nation today, boasting tens of millions of listeners. This puts Dobson in an elite category of king-makers in this nation, given that he can deliver over 10 million voters for a political candidate.
The movers and shakers within the Republican Party ignore Dobson to their peril. Ever since 1980 when Ronald Reagan was able to form a powerful coalition of religious and social conservatives, blue-collar conservative Democrats, as well as traditional Republicans, Christian evangelicals have been considered a valuable part of the decision-making process within the Republican Party.
While there are many who look askance at Dobson's claim to wielding that much power over policy makers, even to the point of choosing a Presidential candidate, it is still of vital importance that his voice be heard and that his views be taken seriously.
The crux of Dobson's disdain for Rudy Giuliani centers on one issue--abortion. Christian conservatives abhor abortion as a blight on the nation's conscience. Giuliani has made it clear he will not back down on his lifelong support of a woman's right to an abortion.
Dobson's response? If Giuliani is the nominee, he and his army of millions will stay home on election day or find a different candidate to support outside the two Parties.
The threat is dangerous. Should Dobson and his supporters sit out election day in 2008, it could be enough to tip the scales in favor of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or whoever the Democrat may be. And should the Dobson coalition back a different candidate, too many voters would be drawn away from the GOP, which would also throw the election to the Democrats.
In essence Dobson has delivered an ultimatum to the Republican Party. If the GOP chooses a social liberal, Dobson and company will either stay home or support a third Party candidate, which will mean the election of the nation's worst nightmare in the form of Hillary Clinton or one of the other Democrats.
Further, Dobson has indicated that he has serious problems with John McCain and Mitt Romney. He has also stated he doesn't like Fred Thompson. But the ultimatum centers squarely upon no one other than Rudy Giuliani. Perhaps he could be persuaded about the others.
And this brings us back to my original message to Dr. Dobson and his colleagues. Gentlemen, we hear you. We need your support to elect someone who takes the Constitution and our nation's history seriously rather than a liberal who simply doesn't care.
Thus, it is time for a reasonable compromise. Many of us out here who have not yet had the chance to cast a vote in a primary have major problems with Giuliani for various reasons. Say we agree with you that Giuliani should not be the nominee. What are you willing to give us in return?
If we give a decisive thumbs-down to Giuliani and choose one of the other GOP candidates, will you then support that person?
For example, Fred Thompson may not be your favorite person. But we like what we hear when he speaks. He has been straight as an arrow in his support for gun rights, the war on terror, complete freedom of religious expression and speech, and he has stated repeatedly that Roe v. Wade is a terrible ruling.
What more could you want? The man is in your corner.
But Thompson isn't the only one. There are several more GOP candidates about whom the very same things could be said.
And so, Dr. Dobson, if we deliver on your ultimatum that Giuliani be denied the nomination, what are you willing to do for us in return? Many of us believe that at the very least you should lend your support to the person we choose, even if it is Thompson, McCain, or Romney.
I strongly believe that such a reasonable compromise will be for the ultimate good of the country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)