John McCain is not pro-life !!!

Tis' the season for for liars, otherwise known as a presidential campaign.
"I'm the next Ronald Reagan... I'm the true conservative... I'm pro-life... in fact I have a 100% pro-life voting record!".
One Republican after another continues to make these claims, while hoping that no one checks to see what is really behind the curtain and discovers that the wizard is not what he seems.
John McCain is now the front runner for the Republican nomination and he is making the same claims.

Let's check that pro-life record...

McCain said, “I’d love to see a point where Roe vs. Wade is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.” A spokesman said that McCain “has a 17-year voting record of supporting efforts to overturn Roe vs. Wade. He does that currently, and will continue to do that as president.” Source: Ron Fournier, Associated Press Aug 24, 1999
The repeal of Roe vs Wade would force women to have abortions? How exactly would that work?

Q: In 1999, you said, "In the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in American to undergo illegal and dangerous operations."

A: That was in the context of conversation about having to change the culture of America as regards to this issue. I have stated time after time after time that Roe v. Wade was a bad decision, that I support the rights of the unborn.

Q: If Roe v. Wade was overturned during a McCain presidency, and individual states chose to ban abortion, would you be concerned that, as you said, X number of women in America would undergo illegal and dangerous operations?

A: No, I would hope that X women in America would bring those children into life in this world, and that I could do whatever I could to assist them. Again, that conversation from 1999, so often quoted, was in the context of my concerns about changing the culture in America to understand the importance of the rights of the unborn.

Source: Meet the Press: 2007 "Meet the Candidates" series May 13, 2007
Since McCain is not claiming to have changed his position. The context under which abortion happens in America hasn't changed since his first statement. Is he saying he no longer has concerns about changing the culture in America to understand the importance of the rights of the unborn? No, he is simply obfuscating the facts by speaking nonsense.

Q: Would you expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research?

A: I believe that we need to fund this. This is a tough issue for those of us in the pro-life community. I would remind you that these stem cells are either going to be discarded or perpetually frozen. We need to do what we can to relieve human suffering. It's a tough issue. I support federal funding.

Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC May 3, 2007


Apparently the issue is not so tough for him, since he isn't really one of us in the pro-life community. He can't see the immorality of experimenting of the bodies of murdered embryos. He also fails to acknowledge that if a cure for a disease ever did come from these experiments, that mass quantities of embryos would need to be produced to manufacture the cure in any realistic quantity to satisfy the demand of those seeking the cure.

ALAN KEYES [to McCain]: What you would say if your daughter was ever in a position where she might need an abortion? You answered [earlier today] that the choice would be up to her and then that you’d have a family conference. That displayed a profound lack of understanding of the basic issue of principle involved in abortion. After all, if your daughter said she was contemplating killing her grandmother for the inheritance, you wouldn’t say, “Let’s have a family conference.” You’d look at her and say “Just Say No,“ because that is morally wrong. It is God’s choice that that child is in the womb. And for us to usurp that choice in contradiction of our declaration of principles is just as wrong.

McCAIN: I am proud of my pro-life record in public life, and I will continue to maintain it. I will not draw my children into this discussion. As a leader of a pro-life party with a pro-life position, I will persuade young Americans [to] understand the importance of the preservation of the rights of the unborn.

Source: (X-ref from Keyes) GOP Debate in Manchester NH Jan 26, 2000
A reasonable question might be, "What pro-life record?"

McCain was asked whether he would reinstate the Reagan era rule that prevents international family planning clinics that receive federal funds from discussing abortion. “I don’t believe they should advocate abortion with my tax dollars,” McCain said, adding that he opposed abortion except in cases of rape and incest. He was then asked how he would determine whether someone had in fact been raped. McCain responded, “I think that I would give the benefit of the doubt to the person who alleges that.” Source: New York Times, p. A17 Jan 25, 2000
Not only does he think it's OK to murder the unborn children of rapists, all any woman would have to do is say they were raped... and he'll just take their word for it. Let's see... 1.5 million rapes and not a single arrest. What a coincidence!

Who Are The Leaders Running For President In 2008?

As we approach the the 2008 elections, I thought it might be a good time to study the history of American presidential elections to see if there is a pattern to what kind of candidates have been elected.One distinct pattern did emerge. American tends to only elect leaders to the presidency.

What qualifies as a leader in the eyes of the people? Governors, Vice Presidents, Military Generals and Presidential cabinet members make up almost the entire list of American Presidents.

What doesn't qualify as a leader? U.S. Senators and Congressmen. In the entire history of the Republic only two U.S Senators and one Congressman who moved directly to the Presidency.

Two of those three had previously been a military General and the third, John Kennedy had earned the reputation as war hero as the Commander of a PT boat in WW2. We elected the congressman in 1880, one of the senators in 1888 and the last one in 1960. When we vote in 2008 it will have been 48 years since we elected a senator or congressman.

It is my theory that America tends to see leaders as those who at some point were in a position where as President Truman said, “The Buck Stops Here.”. Senators and Congressmen rarely are in that position as they occupy roles mostly defined by political compromise rather than actually leading. This doesn't seem to bode well for Senators Clinton, Obama, Edwards, McCain or Thompson.

Just taking a look at the leaders that are still in the race. We have Governor Huckabee, Governor Romney and Governor Richardson. Rudy Giuilani's position of authority was as mayor of New York, but a mayor has never stepped up to President.

Senator McCain was an officer in the military, but his greatest military fame came from getting captured by the enemy. Former Ambassador Keyes also served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs.

When you examine the field the pool of leaders gets quite small. Once we have established who the leaders are, then we can take the next step of evaluating which of these would be effective and wise leaders. The pool gets really small from there.

Figures Don't Lie, But Liars Figure

My Father taught me a saying that he learned from his father. "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."

Polls are almost daily cited in media sources to make one point or another. Rarely to these polls reflect the truth. Questions are asked and the answers are twisted in a way to try to point to a conclusion the is simply untrue.

Today on the Time Magazine website I read an article about the movement in Colorado that is proposing a recognition of personhood for human embryos from the point of fertilization.

Toward the end of the article the author stated...

"Nationally, pro-choice sentiments appear to remain predominant. The Center for Reproductive Rights in October released a poll results indicating that a majority of voters don't support government interference with "medically necessary procedures prescribed by health care professionals."

Have you ever seen an abortion protester with a sign that said "We are opposed to "medically necessary procedures prescribed by health care professionals."

That is not the pro-life message. Pro-lifers are in favor of removing a bad appendix or a tumor if it is medically necessary.

We are very much against killing and unborn child because he complicates your life.

There is NEVER a time when it is "medically necessary" to destroy or dismember an unborn child.

Thou Shall Not Covet! Thou Shall Not Steal!

Most of us recognize these commandments as part of the ten laws that God wrote in stone and Moses presented to the nation of Israel.
With these commandments God firmly confirmed that the the right of personal property is a fundamental right that is to be protected by the government.

The government only has a few proper functions. A good government should protect the rights of it people with military, police, etc. The government also needs to provide shared infrastructure (roads, highways, bridges, etc) for the common good of it's citizens.
This is why we are to pay taxes... to support these just functions.

Jesus told us to help the poor, but Jesus never advocated forcibly taking money from one person and giving it to another. It was Robin Hood, not the Son of God, who advocated that immoral philosophy. When government takes even one dollar from one person simply to give it to another... it is stealing.

When we make a personal choice to give money to the poor, it is love in action, charity.
But when you steal someone else's money to “do good”, it is not charity, it is theft.

What motivates citizens to advocate for the government to take money from Peter to give it to Paul? What motivates them to believe that the wealthy should pay a higher percentage tax they they themselves should pay? Envy!

They covet what belongs to those better off financially and want some for themselves.
When people begin to depend on the money taken from others, they begin to believe that somehow this money is owed to them. It is common for welfare receivers to refer to their check as their “paycheck” as though they had actually earned it.

In any free nation, the rich will always be in the minority. In a democratic society where the less wealthy are in the majority, the temptation of the less wealthy majority will be to steal from the more wealthy minority... and they will if they can get away with it.

The coveting of what belongs to others easily moves to the theft of what belongs to others. The only additional ingredient needed is opportunity.

Politicians feed this covetousness by promising to give them stuff if only these people will vote for them. The politicians promise to give them money and prizes that don't belong to the politicians. They buy the votes with stolen money.

As a result the whole political system is driven by appealing to the sin nature of man, rather than the desire to govern justly.

It is bad enough that non-Christians support the Robin Hood philosophy of government, but today many Christians are also both advocating and voting for the same thing.
The “Faith Based Initiative” was offered to churches and other Christian ministries to tempt them to partake in the evil of stealing from others. Sadly, many of them thought it was a great idea.

Many Christians these days are displaying WWJD hats, shirts, jewelry and bumper stickers. They ask, “What would Jesus do?”, but they ask in ignorance because they've not taken the time to learn what Jesus actually did say and do.

Thou shall not covet and thou shall not steal were Jesus' commandments.
He thought these words were important enough to write them in stone!

A Bully Pulpit Needs A Preacher

President Teddy Roosevelt recognized what he called the "bully pulpit" of the presidency. The is one of the most significant powers that a President has. It gives the president a huge opportunity to persuade, to influence the hearts and minds of the people of this country.

Bill Clinton said "Abortion should be legal but rare." Yet, in eight years in the White House, he refused to use the bully pulpit to help save one life."

George W. Bush said "America is not ready yet. The hearts and minds need to be changed". Yet in his two terms in office he has refused to use the bully pulpit to persuade anyone not to have an abortion or persuade one doctor not to do an abortion or one legislator to write a constitutional amendment to protect life. He couldn't even persuade his own wife, his daughters or his mother to advocate protecting the unborn.

In the recent debate on Truthtalklive there was the question of which candidate would kill more kids. A better question would be... "Under 8 years of Hillary or Rudy, will either candidate save even one unborn baby?"

What almost every Democrat and Republican presidential candidate now has in common is the fact that they too will never use the bully pulpit to fight the fight for the unborn.

As sincere as Mike Huckabee may be in his position, as a governor his pro-life role has been mostly passive in his pro-life position...besides in almost every other position he's a liberal.

Alan Keyes in the ONLY candidate who will use the bully pulpit the fight the fight for the unborn as long as he has access to the pulpit.

If Rudy Giuliani gets into the White House as a Republican, the the pro-life wing of the Republican Party is dead and the influence the pro-lifers had on the Republican Party will be gone... maybe forever.

The reason why there has been a pro-life plank in the Republican platform is because up until recently many secular Republicans believe that it's been what's needed to get the support of the Christian right.
If they can get the vote support of the Christian right without having to be pro-life, they can then move to be an openly pro-choice party.

A bully pulpit is a terrible thing to waste. Let's vote to use it!

Romans 10:14

How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?

I Was Pro-life Before I Was Pro-choice... or Was It Pro-choice Before I Was Pro-life...?

So Mitt Romney is now saying he is Pro-life? Has he checked his notes to make sure? Not only is he now claiming to be pro-life, but he now says he has always been personally Pro-life! What does that even mean?

Who was that guy who looked and sounded like Romney who has been promoting the legalized murder of pre-born babies for years? Was this an alien life form inhabiting his body? I know that Dennis Kucinich claims to have had alien contact, but is this now also the claim of Romney? In 2002 he was clear on his pro-choice position... except his opponent in debate accused him of being multiple choice.

In October 2004 he re-affirmed this position in a debate with Ted Kennedy.

November 9, 2004 - The day of his claimed epiphany where he later claimed to have changed his mind and became pro-life. On Feb, 7, 2007 Washington Post reports Romney's abortion epiphany took place on Nov. 9, 2004 in a meeting with Harvard researcher Douglas Melvin concerning embryonic stem cell research... but Melvin says Romney is lying about their conversation.

On May 25, 2005 The Boston Globe wrote an article that Romney was hinting at a change in position.... and suggesting that a move in position was positioning himself for a 2008 Presidential run.

Two days later on May 27, 2005 this video catches him saying he supports no change in the status quo for abortions in MA.

On March 15, 2007 on Larry King, he discussed his new pro-choice state by state postion... claiming he has always been personally pro-life.

In August 2007 claimed being pro-choice state by state... he skillfully double talked to avoid being pinned down on the contradiction that he had recently claimed to support a pro-life amendment.

Romney says enough of the right pro-life sounding phrases to convince gullible Christians to vote for him, but he is careful not to totally scare away pro-aborts.
Mitt Romney is willing to say whatever he thinks he needs to say to get elected.

Should a good temple Morman lie? What would Joseph Smith say?

Oops, I forgot... he was a liar and a con man too!

John 8:32

And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

Please Lie To Me!

Even though the 2008 elections are still over a year away, the political wars have begun. In every war there are casualties. In the political wars, truth is almost always the first to fall.

In the Republican party most of the candidates seem more prepared for Halloween than the Presidency of the United States. Each one is wearing his “I'm the real conservative” costume, even though the costume is ill fitted at best, and tearing at the seems at worst.

Lying is common for politicians and we've come to expect it. Now it seems like we not only expect it, we let them get away with it and sometimes we actually desire it. The Christian pro-life right is especially guilty of this. Candidates who have supported legal abortion their entire careers need only say “I'm pro-life” and most of the Christians will just take his word for it. Never mind that the candidate has never done one thing to advocate the saving of even one innocent pre-born baby. Why are these Christians so easily swayed away from the truth?

Sometimes we are just naïve, wanting to give the guy the guy the benefit of the doubt, but often it is lack of effort to seek the truth. Some actually want to be lied to so that they can justify (to man) voting for a bad candidate who they think can win.

If we are going to vote, we must only vote responsibly, because we are responsible for our vote.

A naïve voter is not a responsible one... neither is a voter who won't seek or see the truth.

Matthew 10

16 “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.