The Sarah Surprise
Why John McCain’s running mate has changed the game
While watching Barack Obama’s speech at the Democratic National Convention on Thursday night, my conservative-leaning heart sank a little. “There’s no way,” I thought, “McCain will ever out-charisma this guy. And who’s he going to pick for V.P. that would garner any real coverage or excitement? Pawlenty? Romney? Capable politicians yes, but…(yawn).”
The next day, when Senator McCain named Gov. Sarah Palin as his choice for Vice President I felt kind of giddy.
Real surprises in political campaigns are a rarity. But Sarah Palin is the unexpected plot twist in a movie where you thought you knew everything that was going to happen.
As someone who’s gotten tired of the media’s love affair with Obama (a fact that even Jon Stewart consistently mocks), I loved seeing reporters completely thrown for a loop by this choice. I also appreciated the irony in the Obama campaign’s first reaction being insult and derision. They’re all about healing the politics of division in this country, ya know.
Good Choice
Why do I think Gov. Palin is a good choice? First, she’s solidly pro-life. I’ve read some writers who say that abortion doesn’t matter in this election, but I beg to differ. It’s the first factor I look at in a candidate, and I think many Christians of all denominations feel the same way. I understand we’re not supposed to be one-issue voters, but this is still an important issue especially in light of Obama’s statement at a 2007 Planned Parenthood meeting that he would enact a federal law removing any and all restrictions on abortion when he becomes President.
Gov. Palin’s pro-life beliefs are more than a political ideal. She chose to give birth to her son despite a pre-natal diagnosis of Down Syndrome. According to a 2007 study in The New York Times, “About 90 percent of pregnant women who are given a Down syndrome diagnosis have chosen to have an abortion.” So Palin walks the walk.
And now faced with the pregnancy of her unwed 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, Sarah Palin and her whole family are sticking to their principles and supporting the teen in her decision to have her baby. The Looney Lefty blogosphere has already been tossing around vicious lies and innuendoes about the Palins, and will undoubtedly laugh at the imperfection in this Christian family—as if Christians consider themselves perfect.
On the contrary, Christians know—or at least they should know—that people are fallible. When we inevitably fail to live up to the standards we profess, we have God’s mercy, grace and forgiveness to help us move forward with courage and hope. Based on their past actions, I think the Palins will be models of that courage and hope, and help their daughter face the future with the best possible support.
Then there’s the other life issue: the War in Iraq. McCain has been accused of wanting to continue the war indefinitely. But both he and Gov. Palin have a personal investment in Iraq. Gov. Palin’s son will be deploying there in September. And Sen. McCain’s son served in Iraq recently himself, a fact the Senator never exploited for political gain. It’s illogical that these two will take the issue of war lightly.
Inexperienced but Impressive
Gov. Palin also has a history of taking on corrupt elements in her own party and sounds well-educated on energy issues. Though her experience is minimal, her accomplishments during her political career are impressive. Unintelligent, weak-willed pushovers do not take on their own party and come out the victors.
Now Gov. Palin needs to prove herself on the national stage to a hostile media and opposition. It won’t be easy. On Saturday morning, I was reminded of Hillary Clinton’s accusations of sexism against the press and Obama campaign. I wrote it off as sour grapes at the time, but now wonder if Sen. Clinton had a point. Two male reporters on a network news show snarkily commented that they can hardly wait to see the Palin-Biden Vice Presidential debate. The condescending connotation was, “I can hardly wait to see Joe Biden wipe the floor with this chick.”
Being that not a lot is known about Sarah Palin yet, it’s possible she will be a lightweight. But being that not a lot is known about Sarah Palin, she may also be smart, dynamic and articulate. Underestimate her at your own risk.
Considering how sick I was a few days ago of this already long political campaign, I’m surprised to find myself excited at seeing how things go down in the next couple of months. Gov. Sarah Palin is responsible for that excitement. Yes, there’s a chance she’ll cause the McCain campaign to crash and burn. She may also be just what he needs to turn this into a real race. Let the games begin.
It is so depressing to see an adult fawn all over this hypocrite/politician.
Thank you Tony..you were able to express the many thoughts I have had over the past few days. A perfect example of those “leftist” opinions, was Cokie Roberts’ comment….”Palin will relate to those who express sympathy over the situation with her daughter”. What an absolutely horrible comment and it certainly smacks of Roberts’ pro-abortion agenda!
One news commentator called Sen. McCain’s choice of Gov. Palin a “political gimmick.” Maybe so, but it was a brilliant one! Give this woman a chance, she has certainly spiced up the race and may yet surprise us all. I am impressed with her.
I don’t understand how right-wingers like Shelly can bash any statement that doesn’t follow her own (or, more correctly, the bible’s) as a “leftist” opinion. It is what the extreme wingers (right and left) do to defend a weak opinion, there is no thought to it just a knee-jerk ignorant reaction.
Shelly, I’m neither right nor left, I have my own opinion and I don’t hide behind idiotic statements like labeling pro-choice as “pro-abortion.” If I was, I would label you as a pro-fascist.
Wow, there’s some not very nice comments on here for being a Catholic Christian website!
Tony, thanks for a beautifully well-written article…one of the best I’ve read on Busted Halo in a while. True to the Church’s teachings, yet kind and mild at the same time. Thanks!
Wait, Julie, does everything on this website have to be in line with the church’s teachings? I thought this site was for people of all religious backgrounds, and political views? For spiritual seekers in their 20’s and 30’s.
Thanks for a really good article. The press isn’t even giving her a chance! Any I also was getting really tired of the Obama love affair. Quit listening to the election crap long ago. Back at it now though!
I am catholic, and I been supportive of obama. He chose biden, who is a catholic, to be his vp. I am not surprised that mccain chose a female vp. I am surprised it was someone nobody had heard of. I believe he wants to appeal to the pro hillary democrats with this choice. And I too do not believe one issue makes a candidate. McCain is pro-war, while Obama is pro-choice. But his vp is a catholic, so hopefully they will balance each other out on abortion issues. Bush sent many men and women to their death in iraq, and killed many people of iraq, and did it all without the support of the united nations. Starting wars that are not supported by the global community is irresponsible leadership. You dont just start wars for the heck of it. Or make up reasons for starting wars like the weapons of destruction that were never found. I believe the war was a kneejerk reaction to 9/11. Someone hurt us, so we had to get revenge and hurt someone else. What happened to turn the other cheek. No Bush and McCain were all about an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I am tired of these republican leaders who have demolished our budget, cost us millions of jobs, and lowered the average salary, and home values all across the country. All the while making the bush oil business rake in tons of money.
What is Palin’s view on the death penalty? When that question is answered then we can truly know whether or not she is pro-life.
And I disagree with Tony. I don’t even think abortion should be such a huge political issue, and I say this as a devout Catholic. The Iraq War has killed thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Middle Eastern people. Why is that not viewed as an atrocity?
Sarah Palin admitted that she hadn’t paid much attention to the war in Iraq, but she knew enough to rightly call it a “task from God.” This is someone who’s not afraid to preach abstinence for your daughter, even though her own unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.
Blind faith, it comes in all shapes and sizes.
Thanks, Tony, for your article; I, too, am pleased to see a pro-life feminist in line for the White House… I just wish that she was a pro-life feminist who was willing to “walk the talk” about ALL life issues and not just abortion.
I am NOT impressed with politicians who claim to be “pro-life” but also start illegal and immoral wars, slaughter civilians indiscriminately (and refuse to count them), support state-sponsored murder and torture of incarcerated people. When the Republican party starts talking about all of THESE as “life issues” with the same moral seriousness that they use when discussing abortion, then I might believe that they care about the lives of the most vulnerable people on this planet. For now, I have serious doubts about their integrity on any life issue at all.
Until I believe that the Republicans are TRULY pro-life, this Catholic is voting for whoever is most likely to put a stop to the bloodshed EVERYWHERE – in our prisons, in the nations of the world, on our city streets, in our forests and oceans, and in the womb.
Well put Megan! I wholeheartedly agree with you and hope many others do as well!
I totally agree with you Tony. I am impressed with what I’ve seen of Gov. Palin to this point. I am going to Co Springs on Saturday to see McCain and Palin, and look forward to learning more in the future.
As far as the life issue goes, many people I have spoken to, some in my own family, have said to be pro-life you need to oppose the death penalty and abortion. While I do oppose both, they are not equal, even in the Church’s teachings. In abortion, the person being killed has no chance of defending themself in any way, which makes this a more serious offense. In other areas such as war, and the death penalty, the person does have choices to make and ways to defend themselves. These run the gammit, from leaving the war torn area to fighting.
Please do not confuse my comment with being cold toward the death penalty or victims of war. I just don’t think they can be treated as equal.
You can’t pick and choose which life is more important Bill. Just because a muslim gets killed doesn’t make him/her any less valuable in the eyes of God than an unborn baby. God teaches us that ALL life is precious, not just white christians.
9/4/08 This morning’s news is that 5000 more people will loose their jobs – this time with GMAC.
Tony Rossi – don’t you get it?
This election is about economics – unemployment – loosing one’s home – health care – good education for our young population – hunger – NOT ABOUT Abortion
and should not ride on that alone.
We need LEADERS LIKE OBAMA AND BIDEN – who care about life as well as Palin does and even moreso!
She sounded ‘nasty’ last night. Did she talk about healthcare – houses – education, employment -etc….NO!
All of the above have to do with LIFE AND ITS CONTINUENCE.
I hope you and others will understand the issues and look for some SERIOUS solutions to the myriad troubles that lie ahead if we don’t face these societal, social, foreign (you know we are not an isolated island anymore)
issues HEAD ON.
Corinne
All of those
I have to admit that as a skeptic I was surprised and impressed. We will learn much more when she is not reading a speech written by others in front of a friendly audience. Such as during the vice presidential debate and in interviews with less than friendly reporters.
Why is everyone in love with this nutter? Is goes to show that a pretty face can mask a lot of flaws. Joe Biden is going to clean her clock at the debate.
I, too, was impressed at first with Gov. Palin. It only took a couple of days for me to come to the conclusion that she’s a fraud. In the first place, it ought to go without saying that your “yawn” over the fact that other canditates are ‘merely’ competent politicians is irresponsible and just plain silly. Your comment about the media “love affair” with Obama is uninformed–studies and polls are showing that the media is demonstrably harder on Obama than on McCain. Palin’s claims that she is against earmarks are fraudulent; under her administration, AK received more “earmarks” per capita than most other–maybe any other–state. She “took on” Stevens and the establishment when it became politically convenient to do so; the same goes for her opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere: she was in favor of the project at first, and only came out against it when it became politically expedient to do so. Finally, the claim that she is pro-life is false. She is not “pro-life”; she is anti-abortion. Her support for the US invasion of Iraq indicates that she believes in killing people–even innocent people–if they threaten her idea of freedom, which is the same kind of reason a woman seeking an abortion would us–she is protecting her freedom. This, of course, holds true also for the entire “pro-life” agenda.
There is much ignorance posted in many of these comments. For one, although McCain may share some viewpoints with Bush, he definitely will not be “more of the same”. Just go to McCain’s website and read his policies to see what he really stands for. Pro-choice IS pro-abortion because you are not giving the child a choice so it can in no way be pro-choice. Whoa, are we saying just because Biden calls himself Catholic that he is, that’s like believing that Kerry was in full alignment with the Catholic church. Palin is tired of the political elites too and that’s why she wants to make a change and has already done that in Alaska. I’m sure she preached abstinence to her own daughter too but you can’t control another person’s actions 24/7. This election IS about economics – unemployment – loosing one’s home – health care – & good education for our young population and if you don’t think McCain/Palin want to revamp those things, you are sadly mistaken my friend. Again, I refer you to McCain’s site. Someone doesn’t know the definition of fraud and if the media wasn’t in a love-affair with Obama, why did Newt have to lock & load on the reporter the other night when Sarah’s credentials were being questioned. Please take the time to read the candidates’ actual websites to see what they really stand for instead of what your feelings are telling you they stand for.
A recent LA Times Report shows that a study of media done at Geoge Mason University shows that NBC, CBS, and ABC were all, in fact, harder on Obama than on McCain. That is documented fact, not “feelings.” You have no right whatsoever to decide–based on your “feelings,” no doubt–who is a real Catholic and who isn’t. “Pro-choice IS Pro-abortion” is not a fact, it is your opinion, based on your own prejudices. If you support the war in Iraq, or any war, for that matter, you support the killing of innocents to protect your freedom, and are no more “pro-life” than the head of an abortion clinic–that, too, is fact, not feeling. Offer your opinions all you want, but your opinions are not any better than anyone else’s, and you are just as swayed by your own feelings as anyone is.
Wow Monica, You sure jumped off the deep end with that post. I simply stated the Catholic position, that some lives can defend themselves and others cannot. The lives that cannot defend themselves deserve more protection from those people that can defend them.
I don’t know why you felt it was necessary to add the remark about Muslims versus White Christians. I did not mention either group in my post. Maybe you should read the whole post before you reply. Just a thought.
Ken, I had to look into your claim by the LA Times and George Mason Universtiy. First the Times endorsed Obama in February; and Obama gave his first speech to George Mason University. I took the following quote from Obama’s website, right next tot he George Mason Universtiy Logo. “Senator Barack Obama held his first candidacy speech to students at our university. Lets repay his faith in us by getting to work and spreading the word about what a formidable candidate he is.”
I don’t know about you, but this “study” stinks of “repayment”.
Bill, you can be as smarmy as you like but it still doesn’t change the fact that you are cherrypicking what to believe and distorting what the Church says to justify that belief.
All human life is valuable, if you are going to vote solely on abortion than you need to find another website choir to preach to. This one is about open discussion so if you are going to stick around don’t get your feelings hurt too much.
Well I have to hand it to you “smarmy” was a new word to me. However, it doesn’t change the Church’s teaching on abortion versus other deaths. Please don’t take my word for open a Catechism.
Following your line of thought Adolph Eichmann did not deserve to pay for his crimes with his life. I guess they should have hired you to defend him. Now that’s smarmy.
I find the willingness to endorse a candidate based solely on his or her views of abortion to be absurd. Ms.Palin has captured everyone’s imagination, but she really needs to be scrutinized beyond her stand on abortion. What would she look like to us if her family excersize reproductive responsibility by abstaining? I see someone as mean as Dick Cheney, wearing a different costume, and having very little other experience.
Bill, your support of Adolph Eichmann has nothing to do with this article or it’s comments. And I don’t even know what “Please don’t take my word for open a Catechism.” means. Whatever that is, it’s not smarmy, nice try kid.
Bill, your comment regarding the LA Times endorsement of Obama proves nothing. Your prejudices lead you to believe that this is “repayment,” but the numbers don’t lie: the George Mason University study finds that the media are in fact harder on Obama than on McCain. The supposed “media love affair” with Obama demonstrably does not exist; your post is one more instance of refusal to deal with that reality.
Ken – you wrote “your “yawn” over the fact that other canditates are ‘merely’ competent politicians is irresponsible and just plain silly.” It’s not irresponsible and silly, Ken; it’s modern politics. How a candidate comes across to voters is a part of the decision-making process. You can argue that it’s wrong to judge that way, but it’s not wrong to say that it IS a factor in how voters make decisions. Though he’s gotten more policy specific lately, the majority of Obama’s campaign has been about style over substance, about personal charisma. He would not be where he is if it weren’t for those factors you call irresponsible and silly. For McCain to take the charisma factor into account when choosing a V.P. is not silly or irresponsible. It’s smart politics. If the most competent, experienced Democrat were running for office, Obama would not be at the top of the ticket.
In terms of the media being harder on Obama – yes, they were harder on him when it came to the Jeremiah Wright incident for instance. But the press was hard on Obama when it had something to do with his work or philosophy of government. They didn’t, however, question whether his daughters would be emotionally damaged if he became president because he wouldn’t be able to spend as much time with them. The press also didn’t start reporting completely unsubstantiated rumors about the parentage of his children. Those kinds of attacks are just mean-spirited and wrong. I have no delusions that Republicans don’t engage in these types of attacks too. In fact, it was exactly that type of slander by the Bush team in 2000 that forced McCain out of the race. Those are the kinds of attacks Sarah Palin faced this week. It was simply wrong.
Finally, you claim that Sarah Palin is fraudulent. No, Ken. She’s not fraudulent; she’s a politician. They put a positive spin on their records. If you think Obama hasn’t spun the truth to make himself sound good, you are sadly mistaken. For instance, during his acceptance speech, he tried to establish himself as a bipartisan agent of change by saying that John McCain has voted with the Republicans 90% of the time. What Obama failed to mention – which was reported on CNN the next day – was that Obama voted with the Democrats 97% of the time. That’s certainly twisting the facts to make yourself look good. I am well aware that I need to take everything told to me by the people running for office with a grain of salt, and I’m fairly good at seeing through spin. But spin comes from both parties. That’s a fact of political life.
Tony, I am sure you are a sophisticated journalist, and I gladly acknowledge that you are not necessarily the one doing the yawning, but I insist that “Yawning” over candidates who are “merely” competent is not spin, it is trite and silly and shallow–not to mention ageist, sexist, mean-spirited and wrong. It is the same thing as saying that Gov. Palin is just another pretty face, and it is a sign that what was deeply wrong with this country in the past is getting worse and not better.
The Associated Press reports that Gov. Palin claims she is against earmarks and wasteful spending, when in fact as mayor and governor both she requested more in special federal spending per capita than any other state. This is not “spin,” it is outright distortion of fact. The comparison you make with Obama’s “spin” of his voting record is not a valid comparison.
In your token admission that Republicans also engage in mean-spirited attacks, you only refer to Bush’s slander of McCain in 2000; you forgot to mention the “swift-boat” slanders of John Kerry, who is arguably as much of a war hero (whatever that is) as John McCain.
Finally, your allusion to “family values” rhetoric points up hypocrisy almost, but not quite as egregious as the truly frightening “pro-life” rhetoric. Gov. Palin presents herself as a “pro-family” conservative, yet she plainly puts her career ahead of her family and demands that her family get in line behind her. Is this what conservatives mean by “Pro-family” and “family values”? Or is putting career ahead of family only wrong when men do it?
Ken: I’m not a sophisticated journalist nor did I ever imply I was. I was however the one doing the yawning. I never said that yawning over merely competent candidates was spin; I said it was reality. The reason Obama is where he is can be largely credited to the fact that he made people sit up and take notice instead of yawn. The cult of personality plays a role in politics. That’s our culture, not me, doing that. At no time has it been more obvious than recently. If you can’t see that, I don’t know how else to convince you.
I also find it ironic that you accuse me of being ageist, sexist, mean-spirited and wrong. Then you go on to question Sarah Palin’s commitment to her family, something you would never do to a male candidate. The ageist accusation is also comical since I’m likely voting for the 72-year-old candidate in this election.
I would respond further but when I read your comment “…a war hero (whatever that is),” I knew you were coming from a place I simply couldn’t relate to. So I’m ending it there.
I think the rating your article got speaks for itself.
Monica, What I meant by read the Catechism is pick up the book and read it. Starting specifically with paragraph 2261, which states “The deliberate murder of an innocent person is gravely contrary to the dignity of the human being, to the golden rule and to the holiness of the creator.” I don’t believe that we are deliberately targeting innocent Muslims as you contend. And yes God is hurt when any innocent person is killed, but the Catechism specifically uses the word deliberate, and that cannot be denied.
Paragraph 2263 deals with our soldiers at war. You will find “The act of self defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor….The one is intended the other is not.”
This theme continues in paragraph 2265, which says “Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.” This would cover the President, Congress, Soldiers Police Officers and any other legitimate authority.
Paragraphs 2270 through 2275 cover abortion, and even stronger language is used. As a matter of fact, in paragraph 2272 it says “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime.” Now, if that doesn’t say that God values the unborn life a little more, then I don’t know what you need.
Also, I do not support criminals like Adolph Eichmann. I do not believe that God holds a criminals life at the same level of a inoocent person. Whether that person is a Christian, Muslim, or unborn child.
Finally, I’m not a “kid” and I don’t appreciate being called one. I’m 38 and have been a Police Officer for 16 years. In that time I have accumlated real life experience. Some have been good, others haunting. In your first response you made a personal attack on me, which was uncalled for, and I responded in like. For that I’m sorry, but if this debate is going to continue it needs to be above board.
You spent all that time researching to respond to my comment? I’m sorry you have such thin skin Bill but I don’t see how you being a police office is relevant to anything. Everyone here has accumulated real life experience but we are all focused on the issue at hand.
Tony, Thanks again for your arcticle, I thought it was a good piece and I agree with you. I was going to respond to Ken, but you said it much better than I could have. Right on!
It’s great to see such passionate debate concerning the article.
Th research was no big deal, I know where to locate topics in the Catechism. I provided the refferences so that people can find them later if they wish, and to elevate this debate above opinion.
Most people here probably do have life experience, but when we are on a site for 20’s and 30’s it is reasonable to believe that some people do not have life experience, other than school.
I brought up my background, becasue I believe that may shed some light on why I think the way I do. It has nothing to do with thin skin.
Jarrad, Is that a Shiba Inu in the picture next to your name?
No Bill, that’s a corgi puppy. I would like to encourage everyone to post a picture with their comments. You simply need to got to
http://en.gravatar.com/
and post a picture to your email address.
My apologies for my lack of clarity regarding the “war hero” comment. I’m not sure I know what I meant by that myself. I was a grunt for nine months with the 173rd Airborne Brigade in Vietnam. Based, I suppose loosely, on that experience, I get frankly tired of all the hero talk. Was I a hero? I don’t know. I don’t feel particularly heroic. Some guys I was with did stuff I think was “heroic”; this was over 40 years ago and I still remember their names and I still can see in my mind what they did. Other stuff that went on was not heroic in any way shape or form, it was shameful and sickening in a way that you can’t understand if you weren’t there. We mostly put one foot in front of the other, one day at a time. We were not interested in being “heroes,” we were concerned with not letting each other down and getting our selves home alive and in one piece. I’m one of the lucky ones–better soldiers than I ever was didn’t make it back. John McCain was one of the lucky ones, too. I was luckier than he was. I am not ashamed of any of it, I am not proud of any of it, I am not bragging. I did what I thought was the right thing at the time. So what is a “war hero”? You tell me–or don’t tell me, whatever–I guess I’m the one that brought up the whole ‘war hero’ business in the first place. I am really sorry that Sen. McCain endured what he did. What happened to him should not happen to anybody. But in my view anyway what happened to him does not make him a “war hero” (whatever that is–sorry). It certainly does not in and of itself qualify him to be president. If you are going to give me a “war hero” to vote for, on the strength of the argument that such a person is most likely to protect us from terrorists and other kinds of enemies, then please give me someone who flew a hundred missions without getting shot down and without getting taken prisoner. As long as we are on the subject of “war heroes,” was John Kerry a war hero? You tell me. Why or why not?
And, given your latest qualifiers, I am going to have to stand by my original comment. Calling “mere” political qualification a “yawn” is a shallow and irresponsible way to evaluate candidates–seems to me you’re saying that they’re not “Miss America,” so their enormous qualifications mean nothing. And if that is what you are in fact saying, that is sad. There you all have it. Vote for whomever you wish, I don’t care. This country is going to go where it’s going to go.
Ken, Thanks for your service. I think your right on the war hero stuff. People do what they do in situations, it’s usually not planned and when it’s done they then there is time to relect. It’s nothing more than survival in my mind. Personally I believe that both Jon Kerry and John McCain were heroic in their actions. I don’t know if I could have done what either of them did. For that matter, all of you guys that fought in Viet Nam have a special place in my heart. My uncle fought there and suffered from untreated PTSD, and eventually killed himself. It must be difficult to come home from a war that is unpopular and not have the support necessary. I sincerely hope that we have progressed beyond that as a nation. Again thanks for your service.
Boo hiss! This member of the “loony left” doesn’t come to this site for partisan crap. Like PitBull Palin if you like (I thought her speech was mean-spirited and divisive), but why misrepresent Obama’s initial response to Palin? Both he and Biden were positive about her speech in everything I’ve read.
Conservatives have had a lot of time to try to reduce the number of abortions in the country while they’ve been in power and guess what? Hear those crickets chirping? They use that to turn out your vote, then put it back in the box until the next election.
How bout supporting policies that truly respect the dignity of all persons, and see if that doesn’t create a fuller culture of life than this “cosmopolitan elites look down at us small town folk” BS. Coming from Mr. 10-houses, that’s pretty rich!!
Shaun – the initial response of Obama campaign spokesperson Bill Burton to the choice of Palin was,
“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies — that’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same.” Realizing how harsh that sounded, Sen. Obama and Sen. Biden then issued a more gracious congratulatory message themselves. I didn’t therefore misrepresent what I stated to be the “campaign’s” initial response.
The Looney Left comment was in regard to the bloggers who spread unsubstantiated lies about Gov. Palin and her daughter. I didn’t intend to include all Democrats or liberals in that description. My political party has its share of Right Wing Wackadoos so I have no delusions that they’re perfect either.
If you investigate Sen. Obama’s actual record on abortion instead of the conciliatory things he says, you will find a radical. That’s not my partisan opinion. Those are documented facts.
John McCain and Sarah Palin are not “pro-life.” In supporting the invasion of Iraq, and any war, for that matter, they show that their actual position toward life is to kill anyone–guilty or innocent–that they see as a threat to freedom as they define it. Their actual attitude toward the sanctity of life is no different than that of women having abortions. It is self-serving hypocrisy for them to claim some “pro-life” moral high ground.
You know, when our government says “we are keeping collateral damage to a minimum,” what we are actually saying is, “We are ‘only’ going to kill as many innocent people as we have to in order to get what we want.” You cannot with any integrity call yourself “pro-life” and at the same time be ready to drop bombs to get your way in the world. And spare me any “self-defense” self-justifications, or appeals to the “smartness” of our bombs. A bomb blows away everybody within its bursting radius, and when we drop a bomb we are, whether we deign to admit it or not, deliberately aiming at everyone within the bursting radius of the bomb, be they young, old, innocent, guilty, whatever. The “pro-life” position is sheer, self-serving hypocrisy–those who say they are “pro-life” are not, and they have no intention of being so; their professed respect for the “sanctity of life” is no greater than that of a person seeking abortion. The judgment you pronounce on Obama falls just as hard on you.
I know this will probalby start a storm again, but Tony I couldn’t agree with you more. In an earlier post I listed exactly what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says about killing. According to the church it comes down to intent. Now, not intending a person to be killed does not relieve a person from the responsibility of the innocent persons death, but it does lessen it. The Church’s teaching on abortion is a much stronger statement, and again I quoted it in an earlier post. It includes a statemetn that a person who is an active participant in an abortion is excommunicated. Not my words, it’s in the Catechism.
Shaun, the number of abortions in the country have dropped significanlty from 1.6 million in 1990 to 1.3 Million for 2004-2006 according to Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI).
The thing with Obama’s position on abortion rights is that it doesn’t just uphold the status quo; it expands these rights greatly. He supports the Freedom of Choice Act which removes any and all restrictions that the states have put on getting an abortion (parental notification, partial birth abortion, etc.). There are also ongoing attempts by Democratic legislators to make it illegal for doctors to refuse to perform abortions because of their consciences. In addition, when Obama was in the State Senate, he voted against a law that would provide medical care to babies born alive during botched abortions. He claimed the bill needed a provision that it wouldn’t affect Roe vs. Wade. When the bill added that provision, he voted against it anyway. When confronted with a question about this a few weeks ago, he called the people who made this accusation liars. The “liars” however had the paperwork to prove what they were saying, thereby making Obama the real liar in this situation. Even the most pro-choice members of Congress didn’t vote against the federal version of this bill. Obama did.
I also don’t think the Catholic Church takes the war in Iraq lightly. After all, both Popes have spoken against it. And yes, it is a life issue. But being that neither party is consistent on the life issue, there is a lesser-of-two-evils choice to make.
If someone has thoroughly thought through their reasons for voting for a particular candidate in this election – even if it’s not the candidate I support, I don’t judge them for that. I would hope to receive the same respect in return.
“Lesser of the two evils?” So you kill a “lesser” amount of innocent people, and this is supposed to put you on some higher moral plane than those of us who say that women are perfectly capable of making their own moral decisions?
The Catholic Church does in fact take the war in Iraq lightly. Its clerics excommunicate politicans who support a woman’s right to choose; they take no action against politicians who vote to blow up innocent people with bombs. If this is not a blatantly hypocritical double standard, I don’t know what is.
You say you don’t pass judgment, but you have been doing nothing but pass judgment on Obama because he doesn’t buy into Catholic clerics’ assumptions about ‘where life begins.’ Obama is not a Catholic. He is under no obligation whatsoever to be a Catholic, and to write Catholic dogma into US law.
Regarding the number of abortions:
It’s true that they decreased, mainly under the Clinton years and the last few years of Bush 41 (who was “pro-choice,” if you like that term, though I don’t). That decline halted under the Bush 43 years. Then they started going back up, though you are right that the decreases under 2 pro-choice presidents made up for the increase under the pro-life president.
On another score, that “born alive” stuff from Jill Stanek and co. is a gross misrepresentation, and it drives me nuts. But people who are already inclined to dislike Obama have glommed onto it and spread it far and wide, so that it now has the ring of truth. Sad.
Shaun, I would be interested in looking at your statistics. Please cite them so I can see the info. The information I posted was the newest I have been able to find. Thanks in advance.
Bill: I have to concede to your statistics. As I was trying to find the most reliable source I found that the statistics I knew of had been corrected and replaced by the AGI. I was unable to find good statistics post 2004, however, and there was a small uptick in 2001.
I think my point holds, however: the sharpest decline in abortions was under Clinton. You can either interpret that to mean that his policies were good for reducing abortion (stronger economy leads to stronger families, etc.) or that you can’t derive much usable information about the effectiveness of so-called pro-life politicians from such statistics.
Either way, I don’t see good evidence that voting for McCain is going to reduce the number of abortions performed. The bad economy is more likely to increase them, and the culture of death promulgated by his pro-war stance does nothing to encourage us to value life.
I think my general
Shuan, Thanks for trying to find the info. I looked more this afternoon and the only info I could find was on factcheck.org. They indicated that there has been a general decline in abortions, but in the past couple years it seems to have stalled, but not increased.
On another note, there was a story on msn.com today saying that the decline in the housing market was causing a decrease in divorces. I guess some people will use that as a silver lining.
I still plan to vote for McCain, but I have enjoyed the give and take.
Ken–
The US Bishops have made several statements on the War in Iraq being an immoral one that does not fall under the conditions in the Just War theory.
You might not want to paint the three or four extemists bishops with the entire conference.
Also…if both Palin and Obama weren’t good looking we’d not be talking about either one.
Thank you, John–point well taken, at least with regard to the US Bishops. With regard to Palin and Obama, however: I am prettier than both of them, and no one is talking about ME!
Ahem. But seriously, folks–I think Shaun is taking the discussion in the direction it needs to go. We need to think in terms of keeping abortions to an unspecified “minimum,” just as we speak in terms of keeping “collateral damage” to an unspecified minimum. If the horror of “collateral damage” is something we just have to live with in a fallen world, then abortion is, too; if an unspecified “minimum” of “collateral damage” is legal and acceptable, then an unspecified minimum of abortions must also be legal and acceptable if not morally perfect. Americans in 2008 have no business calling ourselves “pro-life.” We are not–no, not one of us.
Ken, you harp on abortions too much. There are more important issues happening today than how much control you have over womens’ bodies. Obviously you don’t have any loved ones stationed in Afghanistan or Iraq.
How is it that I am “harping on abortions,” and not John, or Bill, or Shaun?
What does it mean that I don’t have loved ones in Afghanistan or Iraq? I don’t have loved ones in Iraq or Afghanistan–therefore my opinions don’t matter? Are you saying that the only parents who care about their children are those who have children in Iraq or Afghanistan? Are you saying that parents whose children are not in Afghanistan or Iraq have nothing to worry about? Are you saying the grief of parents who lose children in Iraq and Afghanistan is somehow more important and more worthy of concern than the grief of parents who lose children to accident or disease? Just what is your point, anyway?
I “harp on abortions” because Abortion is an issue that isn’t going to go away. I have no desire to exercise “control over women’s bodies”–everything I have been saying implies that women are perfectly capable of exercising control over their own bodies.
Sarah Pakin has changed the game it is true. She is so hopelessly unequiped to President she is helpint to take the McCain candidacy into political oblivion. Not only does she not read newspapers or magazines, she doesn’t even know the names of any of them. Her son didn’t graduate from high school. Her daughter is a teen mother. She has an expense account of $150,000.00 for clothes and grooming. This is the woman who is supposedly the candidate of “family values!?”
yc0b4z4jrscx7n3u
hi
o0e780yop5epjl81
good luck
The advent of portable sonogram machines has made a dramatic difference to women considering abortion. When you see that “your” body has someone else’s in it, things change.
GREAT article! Absolutely true. And…by the way… shame on the Catholics who insist on calling themselves Catholic but don’t put LIFE #1 on their issue concerns, especially the vunerable unborn — As Dr. Seuss put it so simply: “A person’s a person, no matter how small!”
Please note that the editorial staff reserves the right to not post comments it deems to be inappropriate and/or malicious in nature, as well as edit comments for length, clarity and fairness.