Life of the Party

Who Does He Think He's Foolin'?

Scroll down for updates.

From Rich Lowry at The Corner:

NR has learned that the McCain campaign has been calling key state GOP officials around the country the last couple of days and sounding them out about the consequences of a pro-choice VP pick. The campaign is asking about the reaction of conservative grass-roots activists to such a pick and whether a pro-choicer can be sold to them. This is an indication that the McCain campaign is serious about the possibility of a pro-choice VP nominee and that McCain leaving the door open to Tom Ridge last week may not have been merely a friendly nod to a longtime supporter. In this scenario, McCain's emphatic pro-life statements Saturday night and his pledge that he'll run a "pro-life administration" would have been partly an attempt to reassure conservatives in the event of a pro-choice pick. Here is NR's take today on why going with a pro-choicer would be a mistake for McCain.

H/T: Save the GOP

Let's see.  Here's a sampling since he first floated the idea:

A Catholic guy from swing state Ohio and his blogging friends.

Michelle Malkin

Phyllis Schlafly

Free Republic

Creative Minority Report

Regular Guy, Paul

Feddie at Southern Appeal, and founder of Catholics Against Rudy,  where that "Mission Accomplished" Sign really bugs me.

And finally, someone who gets the whole picture and doesn't have such a short memory.  It's worth quoting:

Maybe if McCain had not been pushed on us in the first place, and maybe if pro-lifers had not been urged to support McCain in the primaries, we would not be in this situation.

Compare -- "John McCain's character, courage, record, and life experience make him the best candidate of either party to meet today's challenges . . . Senator John McCain has a long-standing pro-life record. What’s more, he has the ability to secure the Republican nomination and to prevail against any Democrat nominee, each of which is strongly pro-abortion . . . Here is the way we thought about our decision. It was made at the intersection of three issues: defense of the unborn, defense of our nation from the Islamic terrorists, and electability. When these issues are taken into consideration together, we believe there is no candidate who is better than John McCain. We urge all pro-lifers to consider John McCain in precisely this way."
--Two Catholic Pro-Life Advocates Endorse John McCain's GOP Presidential Bid

With -- "Right now McCain is skating on the thinnest of ice. At best, the election is tied. In many polls, he is 4-5 points down. He has yet to crack 45 percent in any national poll and is behind in key states. At worst, he is facing a blowout. Now is not the time to pussyfoot around with a guy like Tom Ridge. . . . McCain is already suspect among social conservatives. And picking a pro-choicer will have the further effect of cooling whatever ardor he has been able to gin up among them mostly because of the fear of Obama. Social conservatives are largely not for McCain, they are against Obama. A lack of enthusiasm among McCain supporters could spell disaster for him come Election Day. . . . At the moment, McCain can expect at least tepid support among faithful Catholics, those who go to Mass at least once a week and who support the teachings of the Church on core issues like abortion. He needs this group to win the election. He is putting them in an untenable position if he decides to pick Ridge . . ."
--Defeat and Disaster if McCain Picks a Pro-Choice Catholic

We are in the situation that the second writer describes largely because of what the first writer and others like him were enthusiastically saying about McCain in the primaries, even though most other pro-lifers were very suspicious of McCain.

But guess what, the second writer and first writer are the exact same person.

This annoys me to no end. If John "most electable" McCain had not been kept afloat by such endorsements when his campaign was floundering, we might have a different nominee. A better nominee. A truly authentic and enthusiastically pro-life nominee, and not merely some guy who has happened to cast a few Senate votes on the pro-life side.

UPDATE: Could it be McCain-Giuliani?!?!?!  I wouldn't put it past him, would you?  Some believe, this might be the campaign floating his name out there to make the real veep choice seem more palatable to pro-lifers.  That's possible.  On the other hand, the campaign has already hired Rudy's staffer as the unnamed veep's communication director. 

Conservatives Ready To Battle McCain on Convention Platform

Conservative activists are preparing to do battle with allies of Sen. John McCain in advance of September's Republican National Convention, hoping to prevent his views on global warming, immigration, stem cell research and campaign finance from becoming enshrined in the party's official declaration of principles.  Full story.

If the Washington State Convention is a precursor, conservatives will have their work cut out of them.  The list of issues will most likely include abortion as well.

Pro-Life Surrender Politics

At least someone else is challenging the status quo.  Thank you RNC for Life:   

QUESTION: How can John McCain defeat Barack Obama?

ANSWER: John McCain can win in November if he energizes the pro-life, pro-family conservative base of the Republican Party so they will work hard and beat the bushes to get him elected.

LifeNews.com (6/13/08) reported that John McCain and assorted Catholic pro-life leaders met at Philadelphia’s Union League Club on Friday, June 13 to talk about establishing "outreach" to Catholic voters. Catholic columnist Deal Hudson, former Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, former Vatican Ambassador and RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson, and Kansas Senator Sam Brownback were there, along with Priests for Life director Rev. Frank Pavone.

McCain cited the "stark contrast" between himself and Barack Obama on pro-life issues, according to Life News. He talked about his differences with Obama on taxpayer-funded abortions and the ban on partial-birth abortion.

Nowhere in the LifeNews report does it say that the Catholic pro-life leaders present at the meeting asked John McCain to make a public commitment that he would, as President, veto the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) if it makes its way to his desk. Nowhere does it say that the Catholic pro-life leaders present asked John McCain to reverse his long-held support for the killing of human embryos for scientific research, and for the taxpayer funding of such research. Nowhere does it say that the Catholic pro-life leaders present asked John McCain to reverse his position in support of legal abortion for babies conceived through rape or incest.

Catholic pro-life voters specifically, and pro-life voters in general, are waiting for real pro-life commitments from John McCain. Catholic pro-life leaders have an obligation to make him aware that firing up grassroots pro-lifers to do more than simply vote against Barack Obama on Election Day requires his promise to work for protection of all the babies, embryos included, and his promise to veto FOCA. Were these matters discussed at the Philadelphia meeting? If not, why not?

Thank God a new generation of pro-life leadership is emerging! 

Full Report of Washington GOP Convention

Coming Soon!

Highlights include:

Allocated National Delegate Ballots with only one candidate (pre-screened by John McCain staffer), and no option for write-ins or nomiations from the floor.

Ron Paul takes 4 unallocated national delegates from the state of Washington. 

McCain & Party Leadership led a March Out in Exodus, in order to pull quorum, to avoid debate on the issues. 

When the March Out backfired due to the hefty quorum remaining, the McCain & Party Leadership Marched back in to fillibuster and obstruct the body from completing any other business.

Still, the body managed to pass three pro-life resolutions including: support for a Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, opposition to the WA state Assisted Suicide Initiative I-1000, and support for the freedom of conscience for pharmacists to not despense abortion drugs.  In addition, the body passed a resolution opposing any military action on a nation without the U.S. Congress declaring war, which is in keeping with our Constitution.

The spontaneous Ron Paul March and Rally immediately following the convention, signalling this movement has just begun. 

Please stay tuned for the full report.  I need to get reacquainted with my family and then find an opportunity to write a blow by blow.  Meanwhile, TVW has full coverage of the convention business.  Note: there are three segments and they are long.  Most interesting are segments B and C.  More details can be found here, here and here. 

My apologies to Geri Modrell (Snohomish Co. Republican Chair), who appears to have stayed during the "march out".  It was reported to me otherwise, and I am sorry for repeating that misinformation.

"Pro-Choice Republicans Starting Trouble for John McCain"

Or is it John McCain starting trouble for himself?

From RNC for Life:

"If he doesn't change the platform, then he's being the same kind of hypocrite that he accused Bush of being in 2000," said Jennifer Blei Stockman, the co Chairwoman of Republican Majority for Choice in an interview with ABC News. Her reference was to a 2000 debate in South Carolina, moderated by Larry King, during which McCain attacked George Bush for his refusal to support a change in the pro-life platform plank that would make an exception for killing babies conceived through rape or incest. As late as 2007, John McCain reaffirmed his desire to weaken the plank. We fully expect that there will be a move on the part of pro-abortion Platform Committee members to weaken the pro-life plank. They have been trying to do that since 1990 and we have been able to defeat them. This time, although he has said he has no intention of changing the plank, we have no public assurance from him that he would oppose their efforts and instruct the committee to leave the pro-life plank as it is:

"Promoting a Culture of Life (2004 Republican National Platform)
As a country, we must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence.
That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to
life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution
and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections
apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that
right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion
and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges
who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life."

Brain Teaser: "United" Against Purpose

National Right to Life, whose expressed and presumed purpose is "the right to life" has endorsed the same presidential candidate that has the support of Republicans for Choice, whose expressed purpose is "choice", a euphemism to cover up abortion, which violates the right to life.  How can these two purposes be united by one candidate? 

Dear Clinton, Obama, McCain: Is This What You Mean?

Father Frank Pavone recently recorded You Tube videos, which were posted here, demonstrating the two most commonly used abortion techniques.  Priests for Life and Gospel of Life Ministries have just announced that these videos will be used as part of the "Is this what you mean?" project.  Father Pavone explains:

We in the pro-life community have been fed up for a long time with "public servants" who can't seem to tell the difference between serving the public and killing the public. They mask the violence of abortion with the smooth language of "choice," and refuse to protect the victims.

These politicians are found in both major political parties; some hold public office and others seek it. And many Church leaders have been hesitant to discipline such individuals, even though many of them claim to practice their faith.

These abortion supporting politicians get away with what they are doing in large measure because they refuse to talk about what the "choice" actually is. They try to avoid the word "abortion" altogether; but even when they use it, the word has lost practically all its meaning. Voters hear the word but are left with little or no awareness of the gruesome horror it represents.

This election season, it's time for that to change. No matter what politicians or voters or Church officials are or are not going to do, it's time that we who know what abortion is draw a line in the sand and give candidates and office-holders alike this challenge:

If you're going to take a position on abortion, then you're going to have to come clean about what it is. We are no longer going to let you obscure or trivialize the issue. Whether people agree with you or not, you owe it to them to be honest about what you’re talking about.

Therefore we issue this simple call to honesty: We will describe abortion to you, and you tell us if that’s what you’re talking about.

That's it, pure and simple. This is not a debate, nor a threat. It's a call to clarity, a demand for honesty. That is not partisan, nor is it unreasonable; it is not fanatical or inappropriate in any way. Nor is this about religion or morality.

We just want to make sure that we're hearing you. When you say "abortion," we just want to make sure we're both talking about the same thing.

Visit the Priests for Life website. 

Why am I directing this at McCain?  He supports killing some babies this way. 

Vietnam Veterans Against McCain

FYI: Interesting material, ala "Swiftboat Veterans for Truth" style.

John McCain and Republicans for Choice Must Be Defeated

Update: Republicans for Choice President, Ann Stone pays Life of the Party a visit in the comments.  Gotta love this gem from Ann,  "It is following the advice of folks like you that has taken the GOP to the brink of anihilation."  Does anyone have anything to say to her?  Since the "Republicans for Choice" website is not open for comments, here  is your chance. 

While the McCain scandals are just now breaking out in the mainstream media, and as Michelle Malkin points out, "if you lie down with MSM dogs, you wake up with stories like these," conservative Republicans still have their own beefs with McCain.  The MSM scandals and the conservative beefs are sure to keep coming from many directions. 

For instance, from Republican National Coalition for Life (RNC for Life):

Some prominent pro-life Republicans have endorsed John McCain for the Republican presidential nomination. Visit the McCain for President web site — you will see some names that may surprise you http://www.johnmccain.com/supporters/. They will surprise you because, while John McCain claims a pro-life record, he supports research that involves the killing of human embryos and he justifies abortion for babies conceived through rape or incest. Those are not pro-life positions. He voted to expand taxpayer funding of embryo-killing research, and he joined other Senators in signing a letter to President Bush asking him to expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines to be used for research.

The pro-life Republicans who endorsed John McCain should be embarrassed to find themselves on the same side as Republicans for Choice, the organization created in 1990 by Washington, D.C. fundraiser Ann Stone with the stated purpose of removing the pro-life plank from the Republican National Platform. They support Roe v. Wade and oppose a human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ann Stone and her supporters also understand that abortion will remain legal in this country as long as the human embryo is denied respect and protection under the law. Many pro-lifers don't "get it," but you can be sure that Republicans for Choice supporters do.

While their "first choice" Rudy Giuliani did not win, their second choice is John McCain. In asking their supporters to consider McCain in a message posted on the Republicans for Choice web site (http://www.republicansforchoice.com/) they say: "We know we can work with him to create common ground that will allow moderates and conservatives to come together to rebuild the GOP." That is code-language meaning that they think John McCain will work with them to rewrite the Republican National Platform to remove the principles that we have worked so hard to maintain since 1980.

The Republican National Coalition for Life came into existence in order to defeat the efforts of Republicans for Choice. We have done so successfully at every Republican National Convention since 1992 and we plan to do it again. If John McCain becomes the Republican nominee, he will exert tremendous pressure on the Platform Committee to bend to his will on many issues. John McCain has poked his finger in the collective eye of conservatives throughout his career. His campaign for the presidency has not been supported by social conservatives but rather, it has been buoyed by the entrance of Independents and Democrats in open primaries. If he gets the nomination, to whom will he listen? Will it be the smattering of pro-lifers who endorsed him, whatever their reasons? Or will it be to Republicans for Choice and Rudy Giuliani, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lew Eisenberg, and the rest of the Eastern seaboard establishment who are bankrolling his campaign?

Life of the Party came into existance, largely inspired by RNC for Life, to do what they do on a state level, but as a private citizen and blogger.  While there is no "out" Republicans for Choice in the State of Washington, the pro-abortion-choice forces are alive and well within the state GOP, and are constantly pressuring the party to weaken the platform on life, and even to pressure pro-life candidates to not campaign on the life issues.  This way, they figure, the argument can never be made that it's a "winning issue".  Instead, pro-life Republican candidates constantly get killed on the life issues when the Democrats attack their "anti-choice" position, and the candidate is handicapped to respond for fear of losing the support of party leadershp.  For these and other similiar reasons, the Washington State Republican Party is in the tiny minority with almost no end in sight.  The candidates do not defend Republican Principles.

As the campaigns get rolling here for local offices, I will try to report to you where the candidates stand, but meanwhile, the focus is still on the presidential race. 

As the media and the GOP Establishment are closing in, and calling the nomination "sewn up" for McCain, grassroots Republicans, need to give a close look, and determine whether or not we have it in us to defeat the "inevitable".  Remember that it was a "done deal" when President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.  Remember that it was "inevitable" that Rudy Giulianin would be our nominee.  But the determination of the grassroots defeated those two "inevitables". 

Can we do it again?  Yes, if we unite the coalition.

Huckabee is not the answer.  While he says all the right stuff on the life issues, he cannot win the nomination or the presidency by being pro-life alone.  Grassroots conservatives who come to the GOP because they are activists for other good causes like fiscal conservatism or fighting illegal immigration, will not rally behind Mike Huckabee (much like they won't rally behind McCain), because they know his record.  Further, Huckabee has publicly stated that he could support McCain and that anyone who says they can't "is not a conservative".  That's an insult.

I call on my fellow pro-lifers and conservative Republicans to resist a McCain nomination, which will be a disaster for the Republican Party, not to mention, a loss to Barack Obama.  There is still time, and there is still a Republican alternative: Ron Paul, the ultimate non-McCain candidate. 

Ron Paul is solidly pro-life.  As a congressman, he has introduced legislation that would define life as beginning at conception and turn Roe vs. Wade on its ear.  His proposed bill has largely been ignored by the "cosmetically pro-life" politicians in D.C.  As president, this proposed legislation would be given much more publicity and suppport from the grassroots to pressure Congress to pass it.  To learn more, visit his Life and Liberty page. 

Ron Paul opposes amnesty for illegal immigration.  Further, he wants to restore the original intent of the 14th Amdendment and remove birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, and remove the welfare incentives that drive illegal immigration here.  It should also be noted, that Ron Paul is not interested in punishing churches or private charities who give aid to illegal immigrants.  Visit his Border Security and Immigration Reform page to learn more.   

Ron Paul has never voted for a tax increase or for an unbalanced budget.  He has much to say about inflation, run away spending and our fraudulant and unconstitutional monatary system.  No other current or previous candidate in this presidential race has addressed these issues the way Ron Paul has.  Visit his Debt and Taxes and Inflation Tax to find out more. 

Ron Paul supports our right to keep and bear arms.  He has offered legislation that would guard our second amendment rights, including repealing the Brady Bill and the "assault weapons" ban before its sunset in 2004.  You can read more on his Second Amendment page.   

Yes, Ron Paul voted against the war in Iraq.  Is this a deal breaker for you?  Perhaps you should have a look at his perspective, in his own words, on Iraq.  Despite his detractors calling him a pacifist, he is strong on defense, and his biggest contributors are active duty military from the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force.   If after reading his position on Iraq, you are still not won over, are you willing to give up all of the other Republican Principles (and give up restoring constitutional principles) to stay in Iraq? 

On just about every issue conservatives care about, Ron Paul is a champion.  (You can learn more on his issues page.)  It's a wonder the conservative movement as a whole, hasn't caught on yet.  Though he does already have a movement of supporters ready to carry on the fight, whether he gets the nomination or not, and mostly within the GOP. 

McCain is leading now for a few reasons: 1) The MSM media has given him help, 2) Democrats have been able to vote in our primaries, working to give us the weakest nominee, and 3) conservative opposition has been divided among the other candidates. 

I urge my fellow conservatives to join me in doing everything we can to defeat McCain with the real non-McCain candidate: Ron Paul.   

Last Chance to Save the GOP and Beat the Democrats

Calling all conservative Republicans!

Unhappy with a likely McCain nomination?

Discouraged that the guy you were backing (or the guy he was backing) has jumped on the McCain bandwagon? 

Tancredo endorsed Romney, now Romney is endorsing McCain.  Brownback endorsed McCain.  Thompson endorsed McCain.  Hunter endorsed Huckabee and Huckabee has no problem voting for McCain. 

His endorsers all want YOU to "fall in line", to "close ranks".

Should conservatives just throw in the towel?  Should we fall in line with a candidate who has the endorsement support and preference of Republicans for Choice, who is funded by George Soros, and who is the co-author and promoter of amnesty for illegal aliens? 

But isn't it a done deal?  Doesn't he already have the nomination sewn up? 

No.

He needs 1,191 delegates to vote for him at the national convention.  The delegate count right now is unclear, as the media calls states for McCain when the delegates haven't actually been chosen yet.  There is an overwhelming anti-McCain sentiment among the party faithful, and banded together, might be able to defeat the nomination of John McCain before or at the convention. 

Media darling McCain, has only gotten this far, because conservatives have been divided between the rest of the candidates in the previously crowded field.  Now that the field has narrowed, we need to unite the grassroots conservative movement, ala anti-Harriet Miers style, Catholics Against Rudy style.   

This ain't over.