You had me at “…the honeymoon is over…”

Dear Mr. Steele,

I wrote you a letter quite some time ago. You never responded to my concerns and I was more than a little irritated. I felt that further indicated the disregard that our party has shown to its constituents, even though it is what I expected to happen. I had come to expect nothing more. You probably thought I would say “nothing less” but you read it right; I didn’t expect much based on the recent track record of our party’s leaders.

I watched your speech today to the State Chairmen with great skepticism. I openly admit that I heard you were giving the speech, snarled and sat down to watch–ready for what I was sure would be a bunch of rhetoric and a “let’s make friends” attitude. I am writing this public letter now to admit that I was wrong and actually liked what I heard. I saw a man who has heard the message that the tea parties were intended to send. I saw a man who has stopped trying to be everyone’s best friend and who would like to emerge as our party’s leader. I want nothing more than to support you in that.

I would like to think that my earlier letter, and the countless others I’m sure you received, had something to do with this bold new approach. But to be honest, I don’t care what caused it. I am just happy that you have decided to get with the program. You said that this is not a game…it is serious–and you are right. This is not a popularity contest. Our party cannot be one of constant second-guessing and poll-reading. You were obviously preaching to the choir when you said that while President Obama is personally popular, his policies are increasingly unpopular. We cannot stand for the direction he is taking our country.

Today, you called a spade a spade. Like you said, “the honeymoon is over.” You made promises and they were in line with what I was thinking–imagine my shock after being previously snubbed. I was glad to hear you highlighting what the strategists would have us do, and countering those suggestions. We cannot tiptoe our way into a fiscally or socially conservative country. We must embrace our values and hold them high for everyone to see. We must be proud of the label conservative, instead of being closet conservatives. We are not the Democrat Party #2, we should not venture to emulate the Democrats. We are different, we have different values and we stand for different things. It’s high time we start saying that out loud.

So in closing, I would like to say Thank You. Thank you for taking that first step to lead our party in an unapologetic manner. Mistakes were made in the past, but for the sake of our country and her future, we must move past those mistakes. We cannot reinvent the party, but we must wake up the sleeping giant that is our base. Please remember those words that you spoke today, “we all know that you can say whatever you want, it’s what you do that matters.” Those words ring true, and you cannot take us down the rhetoric path. Actions speak louder than words. I saw your response to the President’s speech at Notre Dame regarding his words, and how they differed from his actual record on abortion. You are on the right track. You are speaking truth to power. We will stand up with you to do that. Please stay the course and don’t leave us standing alone. I am eager to hear more about your actual plans and actions in the near future. Let’s not turn this into another empty promise and a mass of left-behind voters wondering where our party went.

Respectfully,

Is Euthanasia in the future after the collapse of Social Security and Medicare?

By all accounts, Medicare is bankrupt and Social Security isn’t far behind. We will continue to have an elderly population in need of these services, even if we can’t afford to keep the programs running. It is a simple fact of life that everyone ages. We start to notice that we can’t remember what we used to know. We might not be as physically strong as we once were. Before we know it, we’re officially, the elderly. There was once a time when the elderly were looked upon as the pillars of wisdom in our society. Our grandparents could provide insight into years past, keep traditions alive, and impart a knowledge that can only come with age and experience. As I read reports today of the waning health of our programs for the elderly, I couldn’t help but see the correlation with abortion. If you’ve read anything I had to say in the past, you probably are thinking, “abortion…again?” Yep. You guessed it. Hear me out before you dismiss the correlation.

In my previous article regarding single issue voters, I highlighted how similar our society’s acceptance of abortion was to the Nazi philosophy of exterminating the “undesirables.” For whatever reason, be it “mental health,” “financial woes,” or even just “life circumstances,” some women make a “choice” to have an abortion. If you’ve ever heard a debate between a pro-life person and a pro-choice person, you’ve probably heard the argument that “we already have many homeless and starving children around the world…if we do away with abortion, who is going to pay for all of those unwanted babies?” This is where they throw in the idea that conservatives care about the babies until after they are born and then we disregard them. Of course that argument is ludicrous but they don’t care about logic, if they want to make a point, they’ll say anything.

Where am I going with all of this? It’s simple. Liberals whole-heartedly support giving women the choice whether or not to feed, house, and care for the babies that they are carrying, by allowing them to abort them before they are born. They list any number of reasons for supporting this. The PC reason is that it is the woman’s body, however if you argue against that, the real motivators come into play, such as financial burdens. I just read a comment regarding birth control legislation where the writer said this, “If they want to ban any family planning, then here’s what needs to happen. Everyone of them need to take on a foster child or two or three. If they want these unplanned pregnancies to happen, then put their money where their holy jaw is, and start supporting these kids.” The comment implies that conservatives who do not support contraceptive distribution have no right to feel that way because they are not the ones paying for these unplanned children after they are born. Following that logic, one can surmise that this person feels that the abortions are an ethical solution to a financial dilemma. There are many who feel this way, whether they say it or not.

Kittens at a humane society shelter.

Likewise, I’ve heard the argument made that unwanted babies who are not aborted end up being abused, and that it would have been better for them to have been aborted, rather than be born. In order to spare them the suffering that these victimized children endure, they argue that we should kill them before it happens. They argue that this is “more humane.” Oddly enough, this is the same argument that The Humane Society makes for euthanizing unwanted animals: There is not enough money, not enough food, and not enough homes for the unwanted animals so we euthanize them in order that they don’t suffer later. 

This brings me full circle to the reason for writing this article. We have had programs in place for the elderly which are now bankrupt, or on the verge of bankruptcy. Yet we continue to have people who need those services and are dependant on them for their health and well-being. What will happen if and when those programs cease to exist? Do we continue to go down this road to Liberal Land? If so, how far do we take it? Who is going to pay for the elderly to receive medical care? If they are lucky, they have families that can assist them. Some of them do not. Who is going to house those who live off of Social Security alone? Who will feed them? When the programs have been bankrupted and there is more being paid out than coming in, what will become of the elderly population?

Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger, a eugenicist. She thought that the world would be a better place if we stopped the poor and the undesirable (to be read “the un-white”) from procreating, and stopped their babies from being born if they ended up pregnant. This is a quote from a letter written by Margaret Sanger in 1939:

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts.

Yay women’s rights! Doesn’t that make you feel empowered? Another lovely quote from Margaret Sanger for your reading displeasure, “”The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” ~Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race.  Sanger promoted birth control “to create a race of thoroughbreds,” Birth Control Review (Nov. 1921).  Do you know who else was a eugenicist? Adolf Hitler.

The Nazi eugenics ideology spawned the T4 Euthanasia Program. Maybe you’ve heard of it. This was where they convinced medical doctors and mental health professionals that it was a humanitarian effort to kill off the elderly and the handicapped. The Encyclopaedia Britannica article linked above states that, “the Nazis referred to the victims as “burdensome lives” and “useless eaters.” According to bureaucratic calculations, the state could put funds that went to the care of criminals and the insane to better use—for example, in loans to newly married couples.”

A former T4 killing centre in Hartheim, Austria.

Let me sum this up if you haven’t been following. Planned Parenthood, our nation’s number one sponsor of abortions, was started by someone who believed that she was being a humanitarian by ensuring that those who were not “desirable” did not “breed.” She shared the views of Adolf Hitler, which were that eugenics were a great way to further the “master race.” Hitler and his followers decided that it was financially, and eugenically, wise to systematically cull the elderly and the “useless eaters.”

Throughout time, societies have “disposed” of their elders. In pre-civilized times, according to the book, Elder Abuse, the elderly were killed so that the strength of younger adults could be maximized. As this excerpt from Elder Abuse provides more detail:

The Hudson Bay Eskimo “strangle the old who are dependent on others for their food, or leave them to perish when the camp is moved.” In these societies, the old were killed in order to conserve resources, and mores were developed for the young to be cruel to the elderly so that the elderly would want to die: “The central Eskimo kill the old because all who die by violence go to the happy land; others have not such a happy future.

To many, this woman is someone's beloved mother or grandmother. In the future, will the culture of death and abortion lead to one where she is nothing more than a financial burden we're not willing to take on?

So where do we go from here? Do we wake up from this nightmare and realize that we have a moral obligation to end the culture of death. Even if some believe that those deaths are a humanitarian effort, we must stand up for those who do not have a voice. If we don’t, we could be looking at a future filled with a “pro-euthanasia” movement. I’m sure that it sounds far fetched, but so did socially acceptable eugenics–that is before the great Margaret Sanger had her way. Is the liberal society we live in one that would one day give the caretakers of the elderly a “choice?” After all, the idea that “it’s my body, it’s my choice” is not too far off from, “it’s my house/food/money, it’s my choice.” Would we then allow the children of the elderly to elect to euthanize their aging parents if it wasn’t financially prudent to keep supporting them? If so, what about those who don’t have families to make the decision? Does it then become up to “the state?”

Of course with Nationalized Healthcare, a simple lack of providing treatment for certain incurable treatments would be “the state’s” easy way to enforce this euthanasia without having to say it out loud.  This is remniscent of those earlier societies that either took their elders off to a remote island to let them starve to death or simply packed up and moved their nomadic tribes, leaving the elderly and disabled behind to die alone.  I’m sure you’ve heard reports of family members living in Canada or Europe with National Healthcare who are heartbroken that the government withheld this or that lifesaving treatment from their loved ones, and the result was death.  What is this, if not a government endorsed euthanasia?  The obvious and most logical next step is to give the caretakers the choice to euthanize their elderly charges when and if they become too much of a bother.  Having socially accepted abortion certainly opened the door for this line of thinking.  Isn’t the strongest argument for being pro-choice the idea that the embryo or fetus is not a fully functioning human being yet?  Well that is easily reversed after we’re no longer of much use to society.  When we age, we are often not fully functioning human beings.  Sometimes we are completely dependant on our caretakers for even the most basic of life functions, much like a child in the womb or newborn.  I can’t count the number of times that I’ve heard a pro-choice person say that because babies cannot eat, drink, or eliminate without the help of someone else, they are not given the same right to life.  I argue that this logic could be applied to the elderly and disabled with the same misguided “humanitarian effort” in mind.  We can no more sanction the killing of our elderly “for financial benefit” than we can the aborting of babies for these reasons of self-preservation.

Purposeful killing of the unborn is heralded as “choice,” while accidental death is criminal.

 

Pregnant Silhouette

In this day and age, it is insane, at best to think that vast portions of our society believe that bringing a child into this world naturally-in a home full of love-should be a criminal act, worthy of felony prosecution should tragedies occur. On the other end of that spectrum, we are a nation who sees nothing wrong with abortion-on-demand. If a woman makes the “choice” to deliver her child, in her home, with or without a midwife, she is judged. What was she thinking? Doesn’t she know the risks to her baby??? Is she that stupid and selfish? You’ve heard all of the comments and insults that go along with this line of thinking. The “medicalized birth” advocates want us to believe that the issue at hand is the safety of the child. If a mother wants to labor and deliver in her own home, she is viewed as reckless, on the premise that she is endangering her child’s life. Am I the only one who recognizes a big fat dose of hipocrisy when I see it? Can anyone else not see that the same group of the population is arguing against the rights of a mother to bring forth life in the manner of her own choosing, while at the same time they are arguing that if that same mother wished to end that child’s life before the delivery, she would be well within her “God given rights?”

Janet Fraser is a proponent of something that is termed “free birth.” That is a homebirth, without the assistance of a medical professional or midwife. Let’s remember that women have been giving birth this way since the beginning of the species, and that OBs and babies are NOT a “chicken and egg” dilemma. We had babies being born before Obstetrics was a twinkling in someone’s eye. Babies and mothers have died in childbirth, and that is tragic. It is ALWAYS tragic. But it is not criminal and it is not morally wrong. Let’s get our priorities straight people, a woman who is trying to birth her child is not to blame if her child is lost. But every single time an abortion is performed, the sole intent is to kill that child. Listen to what I am saying to you. If I decide I do not want my child, I can go into an abortion clinic and ask an abortionist to kill my child. Liberals would applaud my decision. They would claim that they knew it wasn’t easy for me, but that I made the right choice for my family. Now back up a bit. I do want my child and I want to give birth at home with my other children and my husband. If my child survives, and a liberal hears about it, they will still label me as ignorant and reckless. But if my child should die, they label me as negligent and downright criminal. What has happened to our moral compass as a society?

On March 27, 2009, Janet Fraser’s baby girl died during her birth at home. As you might imagine, this event has sparked conversation and those who would criticize the choice to birth at home have jumped at the chance to demonize this mother. Yes, this mother who wanted to have her baby in her home, in a process created by our Creator, suffered a tragic loss. It is one of life’s great mysteries. Some children do die in childbirth–at hospitals and at home. It is unfathomable that the pro-choice crowd can’t see the idiocy in embracing a woman’s right to kill her child, yet rejecting the notion that a loving mother has the right to birth her child in any manner that is comfortable to her. Let’s please stop pretending that the pro-choice movement is or ever was about protecting women’s rights. It is about whatever happens to be convenient at the moment. Just as the business of obstetrics is a huge money maker, the abortion industry is a cash cow for those willing to gobble up the resulting blood money. Make no bones about it. Rights are not the issue. The only right Planned Parenthood and their ilk are concerned with is their right to your money.

10 weeks after conception, and perfect little feet.

I am a religious person, but this is not even a religious issue. This is a moral issue and one that has brought our country into an uncivilized state of thinking. We literally think that it is a-ok to kill babies who are unwanted. Just take a look at the record of our new Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Sebelius is, and always has been, “pro-abortion.” I am aware that our president, like most pro-choicers, claims that “no one is pro-abortion.” He is dead wrong on that notion. Sebelius was quoted in an interview published twenty years ago on October 29, 1989, in the Wichita Eagle, Sebelius, who was then a member of the Kansas House of Representatives said, “I think for me and a lot of other people, there are certain inalienable rights established for a person, but those are not applied in utero.”

Her dear friend and donor, Dr. George Tiller–aka The Baby Killer–was able to count on the support of pro-abortion Sebelius’ veto pen time and again. Tiller, for those of you who don’t know, is the infamous baby killer who will abort any baby, at any stage of pregnancy, for $5,000. Thank God there were elected officials who called for the withdrawal of Sebelius’ nomination, but it was too little, too late. She was welcomed with open arms into the current administration.

According to Midwifery and Childbirth in America, by Judith Rooks and Charles S. Mahan, M.D., “more than 40 were arrested, investigated, and prosecuted for practicing Midwifery in California during a twenty-year period between the early 1970s and 2003.” Direct Entry midwifery is still illegal in some states. Abortion, on the other hand, is a choice. You might recall that Roe v Wade was passed in 1973. At the same time that feminists were championing their “choice” to kill their unwanted babies, and yours too, we were criminalizing the act of naturally bringing forth the lives of the wanted babies. Who among us even knows how we even came to be a society that embraced the idea of Roe v Wade? Do you even know WHO “Roe” is? “Jane Roe” is Norma McCorvey. She felt desperate and alone, and she lied about being gang raped so that she could have her case heard. To this day, she regrets her decision and the results that followed. She tells her story in an autobiography, Won by Love, a DVD entitled “I Was Wrong,” and speaks out about the evils of abortion even still.

Let me sum this up for you as simply as I know how to. We cannot consider ourselves a civilized people if we condone the killing of those lives that are not desired, and in the same breath criminalize the accidental deaths of those lives that we do desire. The entire argument for being “pro-choice” is that the mother should be able to make the choice, is it not? How then can we justify negatively labeling women who choose life differently than others, and positively labeling those who choose death? It is a miscategorization to say that “abortion is always a tragedy.” This implies that it is something that cannot be avoided. This implies that a set of circumstances was set into place that we as a people can do nothing about. Here we have members of Congress being arrested protesting to save the lives of the citizens of Darfur, rightfully so. I applaud these members for standing up against an injustice. Yet we have too few who will stand up to save the lives of our own unborn citizens. In light of the degredation of Miss California, post the gay marriage response, it would suffice to say that our country has taken “political correctness” to a whole new level, and has turned the idea of being morally superior on its head. Oh we care alright, as a united people we care. We just care about the wrong things, and can’t be bothered with the most basic right…The Right to Life.

Perfectly formed HUMAN feet.

The First 100 days, in one sentence, “I won…I trump you.”

President Barack Hussein Obama campaigned on being a better person than Washington was used to.  He essentially claimed that he would put an end to childish bickering.  He said that he’d pool everyone’s thoughts and ideas and promised to open up the White House to the public, making this the most transparent administration, thus far.  Well, he did, sort of.  If you count exposing anything that Obama seems to think will be damaging to the legacy of the previous administration, National Security be damned. He was going to be truly bipartisan, welcoming all ideas…and he does, so long as they are in step with his own.  He has token republicans in his cabinet, although that is about as bipartisan as he gets.  He was going to stamp out lobbyists influence, until he started appointing them.  He actually signed into law, on his first day as POTUS, an executive order stating that lobbyists could not serve in positions directly related to their prior employer for two years.  What he neglects to advertise is that this same law has a HUGE loophole which essentially nullifies it.  If the administration wishes to appoint a lobbyist, there is a waiver for that.  So basically this law is in place to look pretty.  It makes people think we’re keeping the lobbyists out of power, while making sure that the powers that be are able to put the lobbyists into positions of power. 

He has let Republicans come to the table, just long enough to snap a photo for the MSM.  Who really cares what they have to say, right?

In one of his erroneous statements, our President said, “In eighth grade math, we’ve fallen to ninth place.”  Well we are in ninth place, but considering we were in 28th in 1995, climbed up to 19th by 1999, and in 2003 we were up to 15th place.  By all accounts then, 9th place is something to be applauded.  Typical of his administration though, Obama chose to use a fact that most American citizens wouldn’t dig deep enough into to realize that the actual statement was a falsehood.  Don’t believe me, my liberal friends, just check politifact.com.    This is an example of the idea that it truly doesn’t matter WHAT Barack Hussein Obama actually says, but what is significant and memorable to his flock is HOW he says it.  They have given him an artistic liberty, if you will.  He’s free to take any factual statement and twist and distort it to suit his needs.  Much like the way he dismissed his prior pro-abortion voting record where he claimed “there was already a law on the books that addressed the issue.”  All the while knowing that the public doesn’t generally actually go back and READ the laws that were on the books.  If he says there was a law, there was a law, right?  Wrong.  There was a law on the books that dealt with protections if an infant was born alive, but that law left it up to the abortionist, who by the way was being PAID to perform the abortion, to determine whether or not the child he would abort would warrant any of those protections.  Most writers that I’ve seen who reference his deceptions regarding the “old Illinois law” simply paraphrase that law for you.  I commend them for at least doing that much, someone had to.  But then again that takes into account the possibility that you aren’t already enamoured with Obama and might actually listen to reason.  If you are one of those who simply brushes off these FACTS as “spin” then click the link above.  This IS the actual “law on the books.”  It’s quite long, and it is quite hard to find, so I wanted to make it as easy as kindergarten.  All you have to do is click and read.  Pay particularly close attention to section 6, subsection 2 (a).   That’s the part that Obama is pretending doesn’t exist.  Obama lied–Ahh, I just heard him on the news in his latest speech as I typed this…”Thank God for ‘change.'”  Yes, that is most definitely what The One has brought us, isn’t it?

Speaking of photo-ops, what a great photo op the government had in NY yesterday!  Terrified citizens running for their lives all the while jets are scrambling in a way that is remniscent of the days of lore.  What was that song?  “Have you forgotten?”  Obviously, the powers that be have forgotten.  Just like Obama seems to have forgotten many of his tag lines from the campaign days.  There is a very clear reason for that though, the POTUS seems to have forgotten that he is not still campaigning.  When the going gets rough, up there in Washington, the latest modus operandi is to launch a whirlwind media blitz.  They don’t actually take any real action, they just make one-liners and have a few staged questions from audience plants.  Bada bing!  They’ve got instant public approval!

Obama promised transparency all throughout the campaign.  He promised to shine sunlight on Washington.  He stated that all “nonemergency” bills would not be signed without giving the American public–that’s you and me–an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.  This was an out and out lie.  But hey, in all fairness, Mr. Obama did take the transparency idea somewhere.  He doesn’t want you to see what he or his administration is doing, per se.  But he has no qualms about shining sunlight on what the blame-it-on-Bush administration did.  Let’s get real though, it’s the first trick any magician learns.  Keep their eyes trained on this hand so that they have no idea what is going on behind your back in the other hand.  With one hand, he’s allowing the tactics that kept you and I safe since September 11, 2001, to be shared with our enemies–thereby undermining our national security.  With the other hand, he’s breaking promises right and left…pushing through bill after bill with the utmost haste.

He promised he would sit down with Ahmadinejad without preconditions.  Well, that hasn’t happened yet, but he did write him a letter.  *crickets chirping*

We all remember the praise that Obama got during the debates for stating that he would go “line by line” to root out earmarks.  Is that another instance where if he says he did that, it must be true?  Because in actually reading the bills, which he did not do, I’m finding that to be another flat out lie.

The administration actually orchestrated a dramatic confrontation between an outspoken talk radio host and members of the Republican party, and then reveled in the results.  If you haven’t been paying attention, this is yet another example of the magician’s trick.  Keep looking at the feuding Republicans, and pay no mind to the man behind the drapes.

In the most shocking turn of events, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report labelling peaceful, concerned citizens as potential domestic terrorists.  Fortunately all of the protestors and picketers who have views in line with the administration escape this sort of “profiling.”  It is perfectly acceptable to assemble, to be staunchly “pro-choice,” to be anti-Bush, or any number of leftist ideologies, in this day and age.  But the second a group of conservatives actually finds their voice, they are villified.  Lord help us and hope that no crimes are committed against any who fall under this category of “potential domestic terrorists” because our government was so irresponsible with their labelling.  I guess they think they are covered as far as vets go since Napolitano clumsily “apologized” for offending the veterans.  Somehow I missed her statements of apology to the conservative soccer moms of America for causing many to think that we might just snap at a moment’s notice and start stockpiling AK-47s. 

 I’ll leave you with an Obama quote, as shown on politifact.com.

“Make no mistake: We need to end an era in Washington where accountability has been absent, oversight has been overlooked, your tax dollars have been turned over to wealthy CEOs and the well-connected corporations,” Obama said at an Oct. 1 campaign stop in Wisconsin. “You need leadership you can trust to work for you, not for the special interests who have had their thumb on the scale. And together, we will tell Washington, and their lobbyists, that their days of setting the agenda are over. They have not funded my campaign. You have. They will not run my White House. You’ll help me run my White House.”

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Listen to HOW I say it, don’t bother with WHAT I’m actually saying.

 Not too long after this statement, he was quoted as saying, “I won.  I think on this one, I trump you.”  What?  Did he think he was above using the schoolyard phrase as so many of us are used to hearing it?  He would have scored more points with third graders if he’d have just broken out in a round of, “We won, we won, we shot the b.b. gun!  You lost, you lost, you ate tomato sauce!”  In short, the Obama administration’s first 100 days has been chock full of partisan attacks, veiled threats against private citizens exercising their collective first ammendment right to peaceably assemble, and flat out lies.  Gee, I can’t wait to see what they have in store for us next!

Meghan McCain issues civil war warning…look out!

Meghan McCain, daughter of John McCain, is warning the GOP of an impending civil war.  She cites her desire for an “out with the old, in with the new” philosophy for the Republican party.  I do applaud Ms. McCain for stepping out from her father’s shadow and making her voice heard–and encouraging other young women to do the same.  However I think that her general idea is a bit misguided.  Ms. McCain seems to want to be “more inclusive” as a party by “…[b]reaking free from obsolete positions and providing real solutions that don’t divide our nation further.”  By “obsolete positions,” she means support for traditional marriage.  I have to wonder if Meghan has actually read the 2008 Republican Platform.  Her assertion is that by using “more gay-friendly language” the Republican party will garner a wider base and the attention of a younger, more hip crowd.  The latter may be true.  Welcoming gay marriage may quite possibly attract the attention of a younger crowd, but it would do so at the expense of the Republican crowd.  Ms. McCain seems to want the public, and the gay community, to believe that the Republican party is currently “anti-gay.”  She is mistaken.  The Republican party is pro-traditional-marriage.  I have yet to encounter a Republican, regardless of his/her age, who was opposed to “civil unions” to allow gay couples the same legal rights as married couples with regard to health care, next of kin notification, etc.  Republicans are opposed to the redefinition of the sanctity of marriage.  Please don’t be fooled, this is not an issue of rights.  There is no unalienable right for each person to marry his/her partner of choice.  Our unalienable rights were endowed by our creator.  We acknowledged this in the Declaration of Independence, and this term is referenced widely.  If we are ok with acknowledging that we do have a creator, aka God, then why would we think that He got it wrong when he designed us for procreation?

As a conservative Republican, I could care less what two grown people do in their bedrooms.  Contrary to what you may read in salacious headlines, the Republican party is not trying to butt into peoples’ sex lives.  Instead it is trying to esure that the definition of “marriage” is upheld.  Can we just call a spade a spade here?  If the issue were one of rights, civil unions would be welcomed by people like Ms. McCain.  We probably should address marriage vs. civil unions.  Essentially the problem as I understand it, is that there is no uniformity.  Some states, not all, recognize civil unions.  And some states recognize only their own civil unions, but not others.  Apparently some states allow certain benefits for civil unions, while other states do not allow or address the same benefits.  I vehemently agree that this is a problem.  There should be uniformly recognized laws which regulate civil unions.  I would support a federal level of protections under civil unions.  But I cannot and will not support the redefinition of the term “marriage.”  A marriage and a gay union is inherently different, and as such, the recognition of them will differ.  We cannot grant the right to procreate to a gay couple, it isn’t within our power.  Instead that right is granted by our creator.  The best we can do is to protect the rights of partners to have insurance benefits and the likes.  Even if every state in America guaranteed the right to marriage for all–gay and straight–the two types of marital relationships would still be different.  No amount of legislation will ever make them the same.  That is not discrimination, it is a simple genetic fact.  I, like Meghan McCain, have gay friends.  But that doesn’t mean that I am kidding myself into thinking that they could ever look forward to having a marriage like my husband and I share.  I do wish that they could have that.  But it wouldn’t be a matter of us changing the definition of marriage to suit their relationship.  It would be them pursuing different relationships that would allow them to procreate.  That is not my law, it is God’s law.

There is no storm brewing within the Republican party.  There is not a huge divide of the “young” and the “old.”  There is most certainly an awakening going on, but it has nothing to do with a war within the party.  To the contrary, if Meghan hasn’t noticed, the party is energized and electrified at the moment on a unified front.  I’d like to invite Meghan McCain to join the Republican party, but I would respectfully request that she not ask us to check our morals and values at the door. 

Meghan McCain speaking to the Log Cabin Republicans regarding her desire for the GOP to "go gay."

Ms. McCain stated in her blog that Republican resistance to gay marriage goes against conservative values—and our own self-interest.  I wonder why it is that Meghan thinks sacrificing our values is good for the party?  Obviously she has a different idea of what conservative values are, than I do.  Certainly we would gain Democrats’ favor if we adopted their values, but what would the result be?  Do we really NEED two Democrat parties?  I mean I guess we could feasibly hold an election with one “liberal Democrat” and one “conservative Democrat” but somehow I think that is not what is best for our country.  Isn’t that the goal of having more than one party in the first place?  Is our goal not the betterment of our society?  As I understand it, we have differing philosophies, and the will of the population is served when the majority wins an election.  I may not agree with the Democrats who are in power, but I do respect the process which placed them there.  I don’t ask that their party, in the future, become more conservative, or even Republican for that matter.  I am not promising to support them if they would only change this or that about their party’s stance.  Their party is what it is, I happen to not agree with it.  That is precisely why I am a Republican.  If I wanted to vote according to a Democrat’s values, I would change party affiliations.  I would suggest Meghan think about that in regard to her own views if she feels that strongly about them.  Before this gets blown out of proportion, I am not suggesting that people who support gay marriage should not remain Republicans.  But in the same vein that I would not agree with changing our views on the sanctity of life and the horror that is abortion, I can’t support her view that we change our stance on the sanctity of marriage.

Texarkana, TX Tax Day Tea Party Protest

I am a mother of four children.  I care about my country.  I love God.  I am a very passionate person and I put everything I have into everything I do.  I am 32 years old and I cast the first vote in my life in the 2008 election.  Can you tell that I’m proud of the former descriptives, but not of the latter?  I never took the time to vote prior to this because it really didn’t seem to matter.  I’m a Texan, and we not only bleed red here, but we vote red too.  I have always tended to agree more with the Republican candidates of the past than I have with the Democrats.  What’s more, it isn’t as if any of them have really ever stayed true to who they claimed to be when they were running anyway.  I felt that it was kind of senseless to take my time to go down to the polls to cast a ballot when the candidate I was rooting for (in TX) would win the state even without my vote.  Ladies and gentlemen, that’s what you call ignorance.  I was ignorant to the fact that the entire reason we are in this political state is that level of ignorance from so many constituents.  We do not hold our politicians accountable.  Look at the recently passed Porkulus, I mean Stimulus Bill.  They passed the bill, in a hurry like something I’ve never seen.  And remember I’m a mother 4 and as such have had many rushed visits to the Emergency Room.  No, these guys claimed that there was not a moment to spare, not even one to read the thing.  Pass, then read, pass then read.  I’m sorry but when I think of people sitting in an office somewhere signing their names to documents that supposedly represent my views, it is not ok for them not to have read the document first.  Think about it; they might as well be signing my name or your name on the dotted line.

So now you know that I’ve never been politically involved before now.  Better late than never, right?  If you listen to the MSM and the Democratic leadership, it is not better late than never.  Instead, we’ve got phony rage built on  “Astro-turf”, as Nancy Pelosi called it.

“…we call it astroturf, it’s not really a grassroots movement. It’s astroturf by some of the wealthiest people in America to keep the focus on tax cuts for the rich instead of for the great middle class.”  Nancy Pelosi, on being asked about the grassroots Tax Day Tea Party Protests.

I would completely dismiss Nancy Pelosi’s comment if I didn’t think she knew a thing or two about Astro-turf.  I seem to recall her claiming to be an ardent, practicing Catholic, and essentially arguing with Catholic Bishops regarding when the Catholic church believes life begins and a woman’s “right” to an abortion.  So by her own definition, her own Catholic faith is not really “faith,” it’s what we call “Astro-turf.”  To further use her verbiage, it’s astroturf by supposed religious individuals to keep the focus on “rights” instead of addressing the issue at hand…which is that she supports the murder of tiny babies in the comfort of their mothers’ wombs.

Alright, we’ve gotten that out of the way, now on to the party…The Tea Party, that is!  

I was one of the organizers for Texarkana’s Tax Day Tea Party.  I registered voters for the event on behalf of Smart Girl Politics.  By the way, I’m a blogger at smartgirlpolitics.blogspot.com in case you’re interested.  I was somewhat nervous about what our attendance would be.  I had never been to a rally before, so I was afraid we would be expecting 500 and 12 people would show up.  As a mother of 4, I am constantly running late.  We planned to arrive early, and we were about 10 minutes early, so that’s doing great!  The event was PACKED!  I couldn’t get to my voter registration table because we were elbow to elbow, out in the streets.  I think that I ended up changing 4 voters’ addresses, and other than that, thankfully everyone else was already a registered voter!

I can’t describe the looks on the faces of everyone who was there.  Think of the feeling you get when you hear Lee Greenwood sing, “God Bless the USA.”  Who doesn’t get goosebumps when you hear it?  Looking at their faces, and the sheer pride in their cause was like that.  I was one of the speakers, so I’ll include my speech below.  Be kind, remember, it was my first rally, and most definitely my first speech. The words in red are what was said before the recording began.

Hi Everyone!  You’ll have to excuse me…I’m just a mother of 4 and a wife…I don’t get a teleprompter so I’m going to use my notes.

 I voted for the first time in my 32 years this past federal election.  I have gone through years of thinking that no one really governed by my values anyway, so my voice didn’t count.  I didn’t bother to get out and vote before now.  I heard Sarah Palin speak and she struck something in me.  Here was a woman who shared my conservative values and she wasn’t apologizing for them or trying to hide them.  Many people loved her for that…and many people hated her for them and still do.  And that’s ok.  The problem comes when our politicians promise to share our common goals and then get into office and have a change of heart.

 I’ve debated time and time again with my liberal friends and acquaintances and they always seem to have the same answers for me.  They tell me, “That’s just how it is in Washington.”  “That’s just how politics works.”  They say, “Of course they’re going to make campaign promises that they never intend to keep-that’s just part of the process.”  And my favorite response was when someone told me, “we have to look at the candidates and vote for the person we think will do the least amount of damage.”

 When I have these conversations I am reminded that politics only works that way because WE THE PEOPLE have allowed it.  We, like my liberal friends, see that our elected officials-Democrat AND Republican-are not living up to what we elected them to do.  They scheme to get their earmarks added onto every bill.  They spend ungodly amounts of our money and they don’t even bother to READ THE FINE PRINT!  How many times have you heard that phrase?  Read the fine print?  If we sign a contract as citizens, we’d better be darn sure we read every line of it because we are agreeing to pay our hard earned money.  But when it is a politician signing on the dotted line, it isn’t his or her personal funds, so they take a very nonchalant stance about it.  Everyone assumes that SOMEBODY read it, and that WHOEVER that person is, THEY wouldn’t be pushing for it, if it wasn’t good for the American people.

 We have to stop thinking like this and we have to hold our politicians to a higher standard.  They haven’t changed thus far because we haven’t made them.  We have quietly grumbled in our own homes or to our small circle of friends.  How well has that been working for us?  If you are here, you are likely fed up with the direction our government is trying to drag our country.  Quietly venting to your friends and family does nothing but blow off a little steam.  If we want to make real changes, we are going to have to do it at the polls-from the bottom up!  Vote with your values and ideals, and tell everyone who you see, the direction you want YOUR country to move.

 Some of you may not be currently registered to vote.  Some of you may have moved recently and need to update your voter registration.  On behalf of Smart Girl Politics, we are conducting a voter registration drive tonight.  If you would like to register, please see me before you leave.  If you have a friend or relative who needs to register but isn’t present, please take them home a registration form.  Don’t put it off like I did.  If we aren’t out there making our voices heard, we have no right to complain! 

Remember these words by the beloved Abraham Lincoln in his famous Gettysburg Address “this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people,    shall not perish from the earth..” NEVER did President Lincoln say that government should be ABOVE the people.  Take those words to heart…make sure your voice is heard…send the message that WE THE PEOPLE “shall not perish from the earth” and LET – FREEDOM – RING!!!

People keep asking: What’s next? Well, my answer is simple. Do not stop! Do not shrink into the shadows, and do not forget about the voice that you found! There is a very good reason the MSM and the administration tried, and still tries to minimize what we have done. They are hoping that if we feel slighted, we’ll just go away and they can go on with “business as usual.” My theme song from now until the end of time for the Conservative movement is, “We’re Not Gonna Take It!” We may have been the usual conservative crowd, quietly minding our manners and trying not to ruffle feathers, in the past. But those days are gone, and we’re not gonna take it anymore!

Single Issue Voters are Ignorant–or are they?

 Anonymous said…
I hate to say this as I will surely be accused of being a troll, but the Republican party has become the political action wing for big corporations, right wing zealots, and deep pocketed fanatics. Fox News on the other hand is the media relations firm for these same groups.

The actions of this group [Smart Girl Politics] has thus far been nothing but insulting to conservatives, and their values. And when I say conservatives, I do NOT consider right wing zealots of Christianity (one topic voters are idiots), racists (how the hell did they get such a big voice in the party), and rich white men (who are either trying to make more money, or keep the money they have) conservatives.

As a liberal, as an American, and heck as a human being – the current incarnation of the Republican party both sickens and scares the crap out of me.

Please take it back.
 April 15, 2009 12:06 AM

The above is a comment I received in response to my posting of a letter to the RNC Chairman, Michael Steele.  I was inspired to address the “single-issue voter” hatred in this country, by those who seem to have forgotten what it truly means to be one.  Single-issue voters and politicians really have a bad wrap in this country.  I should know, I’m one of those crazy, right-wing, Christian zealots who vehemently opposes abortion—above all other political issues.  Sure I want our country to be financially stable.  Of course I want us to have good foreign relations.  I want our citizens to have access to good schools and great health care.  But am I able to turn a blind eye when murder of one faction of our population has become widespread and accepted?  I’d have to say an emphatic NO.  Thank you for whatever terms you may have just labeled me; I’ll wear them proudly.  I can no more idly sit by and bite my tongue as an unborn child is murdered than I could if I were passing someone on the street who was killing another person in front of me.

I am proud to say that I am in great company as a single-issue voter, though.

Single Issue Voters-Religious Persecution throughout the years sent the Pilgrims searching for a land where they were to free to worship.

Our country was founded by single-issue voters.  Above, and forsaking all other issues, the Pilgrims came to this country to avoid religious persecution.  They loathed it so much that they fled their homeland, in search of a more righteous place.  Their mindset was such that they would, today, be lumped together with us “ignorant single-issue voters.” 

 

Abraham Lincoln was another “single-issue voter.”  His hot button was slavery.  That darned slavery…if he had just sat back and minded his own business, this world would be a better place…we could all just live and let live…the government wouldn’t be able to come down on people who try to own other people. 

Single Issue Voters finally stood tall and demanded that the disgusting practice of buying and selling people came to a halt in this great country.

Wait a minute…Back up…that doesn’t make sense, does it?  No, this nation would not have been better off if Lincoln had ignored the issue of slavery.  Certainly he could have focused more on other issues and chose to just let those slave owners keep buying and selling HUMAN BEINGS, but thank God he didn’t.  He knew that it was the right thing to do, his critics be damned.  When we’re talking about an issue like slavery, it is easy to look back and realize that this was an entire population of humans who were being oppressed and brutalized, and it is blatantly clear that it was DEAD WRONG.  It is a disgusting portion of our history.  And you can thank a determined single-issue voter for closing that chapter.  Maybe, as he predicted, you have forgotten Lincoln’s words at Gettysburg:

The only known photograph of Lincoln at the Gettysburg Address.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government : of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. ~Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address

Maybe you’ll notice that Lincoln wasn’t only referring to the able-bodied people, or the rich people, or the white people, or the male people, or even the BORN people.  There is a little clue in there glaring back at all of us that so many like to sweep under the rug.  I’ll give you a hint, it is the fact that he was fighting for this nation, under GOD.

We are all people. Many single issue voters realized that and fought to have it recognized.

There is another very famous and beloved single-issue voter from our history.  He would likely still be here with us if he weren’t so hell-bent on pushing for that single issue.  This man was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

UPI photo Martin Luther King, Jr. leading the march from Selma.

His hot topic was civil liberties for everyone, namely African Americans.  He was killed for holding the unpopular, at the time, view that black people were just that…PEOPLE.  We can all look back and see how vile and ignorant so many of our countrymen were.  They literally didn’t consider one segment of our population to be as human as they themselves were.  They considered them “less than,” sub-human, if you will.  Thank God that enough people stood up to say that they too were “single-issue voters” and that they were unapologetic in that stance.  Our country is most definitely a better place because of their determined pressure on society.  We are no longer “separate but equal,” now we are just “We the People.”

Now I am aware that so many have denigrated us “single-issue voters” and we make great fodder for the MSM’s evening news.  But there was one country where there was not an overabundance of “single-issue voters.”  You probably know it as Nazi Germany.  Hitler campaigned on promises to make Germany be well respected by the world, to give them financial stability and power.  Many people thought that he was crazy for his views regarding the Jews, but they kept quiet about that because:  Hey, that man kept his other campaign promises.  It was unfortunate that he was slaughtering an entire segment of their countrymen, but for the most part, as a whole, their country was thriving.  Don’t you realize that when you tell a “single-issue voter” to be more “open” and to look at “all” of the issues equally to make decisions that you are asking them to be like the complacent German Christians?  They didn’t agree with Hitler’s treatment of the Jews, they knew they were going missing, but because the rest of life was ok for them under his control, they remained silent.  They weren’t directly killing anyone themselves, but their silence made them equally responsible for the Holocaust.

Corpses piled atop one another at one of Hitler's concentration camps. There were not enough single issue voters in Germany at the time. Too many ignored the horror because Hitler came through on many of his promises to them. They followed the "live and let live" philosophy where Hitler was concerned, yet many were not allowed to live because of their complacency.

You see, Mr./Mrs.  Anonymous Liberal, we cannot simply sit back and look the other way while babies are being slaughtered with no one to defend them.  We owe them more than that.  There are some issues that transcend the importance of all others.  I do care about taxes and foreign policy, but if I find out that even the best and most fair politician, will not stand up for the lives of those most vulnerable in our population, then I cannot, and I will not support them.  Pastor Martin Niemueller was arrested in Nazi Germany for preaching the Bible, and speaking against Hitler, consequently he was one of only a handful of German Christian leaders who did speak out.  A Lutheran chaplain visited him in jail and asked him, “My brother, what did you do? Why are you here?”  To which Niemueller replied, “My brother, given what is happening in our country, why aren’t you here?”   It isn’t those of us who are “single-issue voters” who should be chastised and criticized.  Instead, I think it is those who would dismiss such overwhelmingly important issues, in favor of other less meaningful things, who should be asking themselves why they are not standing up beside US.

 And now, on to MY hot button issue, Abortion.

What have you heard said about it and in defense of it?  A woman has a right to choose?  It is a necessary evil?  I would never have one, but I can’t tell another woman she can’t have an abortion?  I don’t agree with abortion but it is not my place to judge what someone else does?

What happens if you are sitting in your house and you hear screams and violent thuds from the house next door?  You run outside to see a young mother with a bloody knife in her hands and find out later that her six month old child was lying dead in the house in a pool of blood.  It’s not really your business, I suppose.  I guess if we’re continuing with this façade of “political correctness” one could say, “I wouldn’t kill my child, but I don’t know what her life circumstances are, maybe she made the right choice for herself and her family.”  But let’s get real here.  You’re anonymous on the internet; no one knows you’re reading this.  You won’t give me a report on your thoughts when you’re finished.  You can respond in your heart honestly.  What would you think in this instance?  And more importantly, what would you expect our government’s role to be?  I know that not a single one of you would respond that you think the mother made a choice and it was her choice, and that the government should respect her choice.  You aren’t about to tell me that while you wouldn’t stab your baby, you aren’t going to tell another mother she doesn’t have that right.  I mean, after all, maybe she’s just overwhelmed with her finances and wants to go back to school?  Maybe she’s got a terminal illness and it is just too hard on her body to keep caring for the baby?  Maybe she is even mentally ill and did not have a clue that what she did was wrong.  But you are still not going to tell me that you think the government should butt out and allow the woman the freedom to make that choice.  It is not just a choice; it is the choice to commit murder.  Someone who has an abortion is killing their baby.  If you’re “pro-choice” you’re going to argue that if you don’t acknowledge that the baby is “living” in the womb, then there is no way to “kill” that child.

This baby died as a result of an actual therapeutic abortion, not "for the mother's mental health." The mother had cancer of the cervix, and the uterus was removed. The development seen here is 10 weeks from the mother's last menstrual period.

 Merriam-Webster defines kill as:  “to deprive one of life.”  I would say that fits even for those of you who claim that an unborn child is not a living human, but the “potential” for life.  Terminating a pregnancy deprives the baby of life, even the potential for it, if that’s your next flawed argument.  It is only “just a choice” if you can remove yourself from the situation.  If you can just hear the word abortion but block out any images of what an abortion actually is, what it looks like, what it sounds like, and what it truly accomplishes–death.  It is not an unfortunate tragedy, that is just a pretty package to wrap it in.  It’s just you and me here, don’t kid yourself.

I’m constantly reminded, by people like you, Mr./Mrs. Anonymous Liberal, that I am just a sheep who has been guided by someone else with an ulterior motive of money or power.  I have to say to you, when no one is looking, when no one can hear, do you really think that an abortion is really “just a choice?”  If you answered yes, I’m going to have to surmise that you are one of those who wildly protests if someone dares to attempt to show you a video or photos of a dismembered baby who has been aborted, I mean who’s mother has made a choice.  You try to spin it so that the person trying to open your eyes is somehow some zealot who is crazy and trying to save babies and everything.  Again, I ask you, “Why aren’t you here?”

Tea Party Coverage, or lack thereof

On this April 15, 2009, I awoke with a feeling of culmination. Here it is. Our time has come to make our voices heard. I get online to check the MSM news outlets. I’m searching and searching and then it hits me: They are honestly refusing coverage. But how can this be? I mean, newsworthy things come in positive and negative forms. Certainly the MSM doesn’t “like” to have to cover stories about the deaths of children because that is depressing, but it’s news, and so they do their job. Certainly there are some in the MSM who favor traditional marriage (while this is not true of most of them), yet they earnestly covered the recent state decisions on gay marriage. If Jessica Simpson takes a bad photo and seems to have gained weight, THAT is newsworthy to every news outlet around.

Every MSM "news" outlet covered Simpson's supposed weight gain with zest.

If you’ve been hiding under a rock, or if you happen to be one of the few people who don’t watch FOX news, you may never have even heard of a Tea Party. I’ll give you a quick refresher course. As a tea party co-organizer, I think I have a bit of expertise on the subject. Many Americans are sick and tired of out of control government spending, runaway powers being added to governmental agencies that were not bestowed in the Constitution, and taxation without deliberate representation. It’s really that simple. It is not an attack on President Obama. It is an attack on an abuse of power that has been brewing for a very long time, and from both sides of the aisle. We’re mad at Republicans and Democrats alike. If we’re “haters” I guess the good thing about that is that we are equal opportunity haters.

MSNBC has no tea party coverage, this Tax Day, on its home page. However, for those interested, one can read about the new report which labels those against abortion or illegal immigration as “right-wing extremists.” One can read about exactly how “gays won a marriage victory in the Midwest.” One can even read about Bo, the President’s new dog. Over on CNN, you’ve got to search for it, but you’ll find a report from Howard Kurtz, entitled, “Who’s Promoting Tax Protests?” In the video, Kurtz proclaims that CNN is not covering the Tea Party Protests. He notes that none of his cohorts are covering the protests, other than FOX News. He seems to think that by actually reporting on the news, FOX is a “co-sponsor.” So are we to surmise from this that MSNBC was a co-sponsor for the gay marriage passage bills? Are they also co-sponsoring American Idol and the President’s new dog? No, I think not. I think that they were either amused or intrigued by the aforementioned stories, and they thought that the public would be as well. I think back to the protests of other groups that I’ve seen on the news and I can’t for the life of me understand why it could be that any reputable news source would PURPOSEFULLY and DELIBERATELY not cover the Tax Day Tea Party Protests. I watch the above video and I see Howard Kurtz smirking and laughing in a knowing way when he describes how MSNBC’s coverage has consisted of Rachel Maddow “making fun of this thing.” He has the audacity–I like that word, it caused so many people to think that Obama was a genius, so I’ll use it here–to state that the FOX News analysts, “said little or nothing about the huge deficits run up by President Bush…” and his aim is clear. He honestly thinks that if he can falsely convince the public that FOX News analysts didn’t speak up with dissent under President Bush, then the droves of American citizens who are mobilizing, should be dismissed. Kurtz sums up his rant by acknowledging that Hannity, Beck, et al on FOX are “commentators who are paid for their opinions.” As such, they are not obligated to give anything other than their opinions. Seeing the MSM outright ignore the protests has enraged the FOX News commentators, I’m thinking it’s because they have this strange notion that NEWS should be covered by those employed by news outlets. The MSM has not only taken a deliberate stand on the sidelines on this issue, but they have gone out of their way to discredit and belittle average American citizens.

No one is funding this movement. We are choosing to use our money to make phone calls, pay for gas, and make photocopies. Sure, FOX News is a news outlet, and as such, is covering the movement. You might have missed that day in Journalism school. Newt Gingrich may be lending his name and he may be encouraging like-minded people to act, but he is being supportive, not giving financial support. We demand that our voices be heard, NOW. I’ve heard it said by some of the MSM who are mocking us, “if this outrage is real and not staged, where were all of these people before now?” Some of us weren’t involved. Some of us didn’t care about politics. I, myself, didn’t have much interest in politics because I just thought it was a network of “good old boys” and that they didn’t care what I thought. I will be the first to admit that myself and others like me were ignorant. But guess what MSM? We’re standing up now. Regardless of when the problems started, regardless of who is in office, regardless of who you think is promoting our cause…WE THE PEOPLE have woken up. So in closing, I’d like to issue a public “thank you” to the likes of MSNBC and CNN for dismissing us. You’ve only managed to make us that more determined. I guess you could even say that by your inaction, YOU are the true force that is guiding us.

Passion of the Christ and American Politics

Happy Easter! When we hear that, if we’re adults (and Christian) we know on some level that this is meant to be a time to reflect on Christ’s choice to give his life for our salvation. We know that it is to represent His resurrection 3 days later. But if we’re all being honest, I think most all of us would say that when we think of Easter we think of bunnies and little girls with frilly dresses and kids hunting for colored eggs. And kids: they just see the candy. I’m guilty myself.

My family and I sat down to watch The Passion of the Christ this Easter Sunday. I had seen it, and I had been moved before. But our pastor mentioned it in church that morning, and my 9 year old asked if we had it and could watch it. Before we left church, we visited an exhibit that they had there of museum quality displays of items from Christ’s crusifixion. They had a true crown of thorns that we were able to hold in our hands and truly take in. Like all of the other kids, my 9 year old kept touching the thorns and poking himself and freaking out at how sharp they were. There was a life size cross that we could touch. They had a “cat of nine tails” whip, complete with shards of bone and metal for all of us to hold and feel the tips, imagining what damage was done to our Saviour with such an instrument. The robe and the dice were there. The bread and wine was there, and finally, they had a velvet pouch of silver coins. It should be noted that the pouch with the coins in it wasn’t a big favorite amongst the kids. It looked kind of boring, I think. Who wants a few pieces of silver when there are weapons or sharp things to look at? Granted, they did take note of what the sign said about it being 30 pieces of silver, but it didn’t get any of the oohs and aahs the other displays got.

Fast forward to a few hours later when we were sitting on the couch watching the crusifixion story unfold before our eyes. If you’ve seen the movie, you will remember it has subtitles. My 9 year old was afraid that he would miss something if he had to read it himself, so he asked me to read the words aloud for him. I highly suggest you try that. Reading of what happened to Christ is extremely moving, but saying those things out loud to a child touches you on a level that I didn’t know existed. As each item from the exhibit came to light, a deeper understanding of the reality of the situation shone on my son’s face. He saw the pouch of silver and grew visibly outraged with Judas, even calling him names and saying how stupid he was for doing such a horrible thing, “FOR THAT???” When Jesus was “chastized” with the cat of nine tails, among other things, it was not some theoretical event for this 9 year old. He had held and touched one the same morning. When the crown of thorns was rammed into Jesus’ scalp, that too, was “real” for Zackary. He had just been holding one a short while before, and I think he could still feel the pricks in his own fingers.

All of us were taught as children, that “sticks and stones may break our bones, but words will never hurt us.” We probably teach it to our own children as well. But I must tell you, that what disturbed Zackary the most about the mistreatment of Jesus was the laughing and mocking of the Roman soldiers and the followers of Jesus who didn’t say anything until it was too late. “Why don’t they stop?” he kept asking. And I think then and there, it became clear to me that words and the smallest of actions, DO HURT. And a lack of words hurts just as bad. I look around at society today and everything from gay marriage to abortion is touted as being “ok” by even men and women who claim to be, “of the cloth.” I was told by a female pastor who I went to grade school with that, “the Bible doesn’t reference abortion, so it doesn’t take a stance either way.” Sure, she said that any abortion was a tragedy, but still thinks that any woman who wants one should be allowed to have one. She blogs about and supports gay marriage, I presume “in the name of God.” I am unfairly picking on her at this point, but she is not an abstract media source, she is someone I knew once upon a time. I don’t think that she is alone in the least. Far too many “Christians” claim to love God, but when we see things that spit in the face of our Saviour in society, in politics, and in the media, we mutter something to ourselves and then steer clear of those people. Why don’t we stand up against it? Why do we allow it to continue to go on? We have allowed those in the media to literally laugh at and mock Jesus, just as those Roman soldiers did so many years ago. America, God love her, just elected a president who used as a campaign line, that people, “cling to guns or religion.” In my opinion, and in my heart of hearts, every vote for Obama, after such a statement, was someone spitting in the face of a bleeding and battered Christ, who was knowingly and willingly walking for miles to die for the same people’s salvation.

Why, as a society, do we think it ok for our elected leaders or those in power to look down on our clinging to religion in one breath, and then claiming to be religious persons themselves, in another breath. These people, in my observation, are wearing their religion like a sweater. When the winds change, they easily remove that sweater because it isn’t convenient to them. And if they feel a nip in the air by way of poll numbers, they call upon the designer of the sweater, trying to remind everyone that they are still card-carrying Christians, even if everything that they publicly support goes against Christianity. I am not trying to be judgemental here. I am truly concerned for our future. I feel sick to my stomach when I think of how Jesus must feel when our citizens mock him and those who follow him. He told us that it would happen, so I shouldn’t be surprised. I am just sad that more of us don’t stand up against it, that’s all. It wouldn’t take much. There are people willing to run for office who do stand for Christian values, and if we Christians would push more, there would be an incentive for them to put themselves out there for us.

Letter to RNC Chairman, Michael Steele

Handwritten note and birth announcement from Sarah Palin

Dear Mr. Steele,
I just received your latest survey, which you called a crucial project, without the likes of which the RNC cannot create a plan. I must respectfully disagree. The RNC has a problem, and the ultimate result of that problem was seen this election cycle. Barack Obama, as much as I despise what he stands for, did not ask people what they wanted, and ask for their money at the same time, BEFORE promising to act on the peoples’ desires. The RNC has got to change this. You speak of wanting to stand for every grassroots leader and individual who shares your values. Well if this is true, why does the RNC not reflect all of our shared values? Why is it that I am still reading about juvenile bickering in the headlines of even Fox News? Have you even thought of what a laughing stock the latest “disinviting of Sarah Palin” makes us look to any and every voter who may have been on the fence? Sure I’ve seen your apology over the Rush Limbaugh “is an entertainer” bit, but it rings hollow. It reeks of “political strategy.” If you honestly felt that way, why apologize? And if you didn’t feel that way, WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU SAY IT? Rush Limbaugh is not just an entertainer. He is an entertainer, for certain. But he, like Sarah Palin, has a specific set of goals, values, and ideals for America (if you don’t remember them, they’re the ones that our party stands for), and he does not apologize for them. He calls it like he sees it. Much in the same manner as Rep. Michelle Bachman calling out Geithner and asking him to show her where he was Constitutionally given any of these newfound authorities he is claiming. There is nothing wrong with that. You should be embracing that. There is a place for “moderate Republicans.” It is called Independent. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. If this party is still the Republican party and if our values are still worth having, shout them from the rooftops. Let no person question what you believe and what you will fight for. If we (the Republican party) don’t even know who we are or what we stand for, I can assure you that no one is going to want to take a stand with us. Who jumps to a ship that they know is sinking? No one does, I’m afraid.

I have listened to your commentaries on Fox for quite some time before you became the Chairman, and at that point, I was all for you being the Chairman, or perhaps a candidate. But you seem to have abandoned your true values and ideals for the sake of “strategy.” The only “strategy” that we need is to get back to our conservative (fiscal, moral, and size of government) values and ideals, and be steadfast in them. Then, and only then, should we DARE to ask for anyone’s money in support of those values. We cannot contribute to the gossip in the headlines, our moral values tell us that we should be above that. And our critics know this, which is why they jump with glee every time they hear a rumble, because they know it will be so well received in the main stream media.

If you have not figured out why so many average, heretofore uninvolved or uninterested citizens have backed Sarah Palin, I will attempt to explain it to you. She is who she claims to be. Her record in the past, and of the present, reflects the conservative values that we hold dear. She does not apologize about those beliefs or voting records. She does not change her stance to go along with some newfound strategy. One can never win when pretending to be someone he/she is not. People WILL donate if they are hearing Sarah Palin speak as a voice for the RNC because they believe that she truly does support and would vote the way our values sway us. I have the utmost respect for Newt Gingrich. But “uninviting” a loved and admired speaker does NOTHING to help in our efforts, and is probably about as anti-strategy as you were able to be. Did you poll your constituents to see where we stood on the uninvitation? No, I know this because I didn’t get an email about it. I read about it in an article in which the author couldn’t wait to point out to America how ignorant our party has become.

I will share something with you that I shared with Sarah Palin a few days after the election. I voted, for the first time in my life, this past election. I am 32 years old, a mother of 4, and am very conservative. I live in Texas, and for the most part, it is felt here that we’re a Red state, so I’ve always felt that my vote didn’t matter that much. And to be honest, I’ve never been moved by a politician before because they always seemed to talk the talk when it was strategically prudent, and then act in another way that helped them best in the polls. You all seem to know on a basic level that you are our employees and were “hired” on our behalf, but at your cores, you all disregard that when it comes down to it. Sarah Palin was different. Representative Bachman seems to be different as well. She is speaking up, however unpopular it is, to highlight the lack of constitutionality of many of the President’s initiatives. That could turn out to be political suicide. But what these 2 women seem to have grasped, that most of you have not, is that even if you don’t win another election and it is some other Republican who takes your place, it is NOT ABOUT YOU. It is about what is best for our country. If you truly believe that Conservative values of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and the value of life are best for America, then wear that on your sleeve. If one or two or three people speak out against you for it, so be it. THAT is what being a leader is about. Even those few who don’t like what you are saying will admire and respect you for staying true to who you are and what you claim you stand for. For the record, I sent a handwritten letter, 2 days after the election to Sarah Palin, detailing much of what I’m telling you now. What would you have done in response? Probably sent me a generic form letter thanking me for support, with my name merged in, and a scanned signature, so that you didn’t have to take time out to actually sit down and care about me on a personal level, right? That’s what most politicians do. Do you know what Sarah did? She, when no one was looking, the cameras were gone, I didn’t matter on a global scale, sat down and handwrote me a note back. She wrote it on her son, Trig’s, birth announcement, and mailed it back to me. It would have been easier, I’m sure, to have a staffer do a mail merge for the bags of fan mail she was getting, and I’m sure she does that sometimes. But please take an example from her. Get back to basics. Stand for our Constitution, and the values, as written, of the Republican party, and then just run with them. You have the ability to send out these mass emails asking for our thoughts. Well then REALLY LISTEN TO US, and act on what we say, even if you don’t think it is strategically the best move. We are the ones voting, and whatever it is that we want IS the best strategic move because if we don’t feel that you support our values, we not only aren’t donating, but we’re not wasting our time to get out and vote or convince others to.

Please don’t turn me, and the many others out there who have found a love and passion for involvement with our government, off to the idea. Please don’t put us back on the bandwagon that believes, “my vote doesn’t count…they will tell me one thing and then act in another way to better their political standing.” Please show me that you are still a person, and not just another part of the political machine. I’ve attached a scanned copy of the note that Sarah Palin wrote me, front and back. I’m only sending it, hoping that you will look at it, and see what such a small gesture, can mean to someone, and how actually caring about how we feel can make us supporters for life–and you have to know that with that support comes our pocketbooks. Please don’t be so naiive and do the RNC such a disservice as to ask for our money BEFORE you have adopted and acted on our values and ideals. Show us that we can depend on you not to change with the Washington winds, and the money and support will come. Myself and many others, will be your grassroots movement at the most basic level, but you have to stand for what we believe in. That simplistic idea is exactly how a man as extreme as Barack Obama landed himself in the Whitehouse so easily. He promised to do what his constituents wanted, the whole way through the campaign. He may be changing his tune now on some issues, but when he needed the support, he got it by reflecting the Democratic values. He wasn’t telling them his values were the only ones and that people could vote for him or no one. This is the feeling that many of us get from the RNC at the present time. I’m frankly shopping around looking for another party. I can’t consider myself Libertarian because of their stance on Abortion. I truly feel that THIS–the Republican Party–is where I belong, but please get back to what the party has always claimed to stand for, no apologies, no excuses.

With the greatest respect and hope for a positive change,

Natalie Nichols