Life of the Party

Michael Steele: Breath of Fresh Air?

By now, you probably know about the dust up between new RNC Chairman, Michael Steele and conservative talk show host, Rush Limbaugh.  If not, Michelle Malkin has a summary for you. 

But what few conservatives probably know about is the enthusiam, for the election of Michael Steele as Chairman, from the pro-aborts at Republicans for Choice (no emphasis added):

Republicans For Choice (RFC) is ecstatic over the election of both Michael Steele as Chair and Jan Larimer as Co-Chair of the Republican Party.  Our heartfelt congratulations to them both.

 

Mike and Jan are open-minded, moderate conservatives who believe in working with everyone in the Republican Party.  Litmus tests are NOT a part of who they are.  This is truly a new day for the GOP that holds real promise for the future.

It's one thing to be able to work with others, but quite another to be considered such an ally to folks who are interested in nothing more than weakening the pro-life position of the Republican Party (through the RNC platform and increasing the number of elected pro-abortion-choice Republicans and decreasing the number of elected pro-life Republicans) and to be greeted with so much enthusasm from this group.   

Michael Steele's Negative Associations

The race for the RNC chairman is heating up and many are touting Michael Steele.  Republican National Coalition for Life urges caution. 

Pro-Life Republicans and Battered Wife Syndrome

Popular Catholic author, Mark Shea offers some insight for pro-life Republicans who loyally vote for the Republican, regardless of where they truly stand on pro-life issues (abortion in rape and incest cases, embryonic stem-cell research, etc.).  His comments are definitely worth some thought.  In reply to some of the commenters on his blog, Mark writes:

I wouldn't go so far as to say Bush was never prolife. Like most GOP pols, he is prolife--sort of, when it's convenient and if it's not too much trouble. But it's nothing like a priority for the GOP. Never has been and never will be. It's first and foremost a vote-getting device, not a matter of conviction.

And the most pathetic proof of this is the Abused Spouse Syndrome I am seeing in the comboxes from people who write stuff like:

[M]ark my words, when the GOP loses, they will dramatically liberalize their platform to win the next go-around. They will kick the pro-life movement off like a flee.

If the GOP loses, they will conclude that it was because they were pro-life and such, and will adjust accordingly to attain victory.

This will happen.

Don't make hubby angry or he'll slow the car down to 35 and shove you out the door--cuz he really loves you and it's for your own good. Just be a good little wife and don't rock the boat with too many demands. He really loves you down deep. You have to believe that. It's just that he's got so much on his mind and all. You'd deserve it if he hauled off and beat you and then got himself a new girlfriend. You've got to do better at pleasing your man!

The first virtue is prudence: having a clear understanding of what *is*. Stop kidding yourself that the GOP is run by pols who actually care about the prolife movement. It isn't. It's run by people who find the prolife movement useful. Prolifers need to be more aggressive in turning their usefulness into something the party can ill-afford to lose, not living in a fantasy world where, every four years, they convince themselves that the GOP candidate is a champion who cares for them and the unborn.

 "Stop kidding yourself that the GOP is run by pols who actually care about the prolife movement."  I agree with Mark in general.  He's got part of the answer correct.  We really do need to turn our "usefulness" or "clout" into something the party can ill-afford.  In the short term, this will set us back some, but long term, we will be in a position to be assertive and make demands.  In other words, be the kind of prospective wife an abuser wouldn't go near.  But the rest of that answer is that we need to be the ones running the party.  When we elect party leadership, they need to know that they work for us, not the other way around.       

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.

GOP Leadership Out of Touch with Pro-Life Base

More examples of it in Colorado.

"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. 

Sometimes a Pro-Life Republican Just HAS to Vote Third Party

I have no intentions of joining a third party.  In fact, I don't like when my conservative friends do.  I've tried talking them out of it.  It creates a release valve for the pressure that builds among grassroots conservatives, and the Party Establishment is relieved when we leave as they smile and say "Buh-bye". 

The best way to defeat a pro-abortion or liberal Republican is to run a serious campaign as a Republican primary challenger.  Of course, it is rarely successful when the opponent is an incumbent, but it can be done.  Even more rare, are third party victories. 

Nonetheless, there are times when there is just no choice for a pro-life Republican but to vote third party. Like for instance, when the local chapter of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the world, endorses the Republican candidate, and when the Republican Party makes it impossible to challenge the candidate. 

My friend, and popular Catholic blogger, Paul Mitchell (AKA: Regular Guy, Paul) threw his hat in the ring for just such a legislative race in the state of Illinois.  He declared himself an "independent" candidate and then a few days later, joined the Constitution Party.  I can't really say that I blame him.  I don't agree with the move, but I support his candidacy, and if I lived in Illinois, I would definitely vote for him.  In fact, I endorse him and encourage you to support him.  Especially, if you live in Illinois.  Although this is a small local race, I think he can make a serious impact on the pro-life movement.  He is talking straight about abortion, and proposing that the state level is where the battle for Life must be fought and he is ready to fight it. 

All that said, I do hope he returns to the Republican Party.  And I hope that grassroots Republicans start realizing that we are losing more and more of our members because we tolerate politicians who don't stand for our principles just because they have an "R" next to their name.  OPEN YOUR EYES!  And I hope that conservatives who are tempted to go and join a third party will think better of it. 

This is OUR Party.  Take it Back!   

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.