Life vs. Life: Why The Abortion Issue Rules Us All

A Potential Life at Two Days Old

In this charged election year, no matter who claims the White House in 2009, we will be electing at least one person with restrictive views on abortion to the White House.

John McCain proclaims that he is “proudly pro-life” (although in the 2000 election, he stated just the opposite). His running mate, Sarah Palin, is far more credible and consistent in her stance against abortion, and even belongs to a group called “Feminists for Life.” As for Barack Obama, he has veered away from the traditional Democratic framing of “safe, legal and rare,” and has been talking about how women shouldn’t get third-trimester abortions just because we’re feeling blue; indeed, we gals are such frivolous creatures that we, as a matter of course, must consult a committee before making such a momentous decision. At least Joe Biden, Barack Obama’s running mate, is unwavering in his pro-choice stance, and drafted the Violence Against Women Act in 1994; however, many of us will never forget his role in casting doubt upon Anita Hill’s story, which helped confirm the arch-conservative Clarence Thomas – another anti-choice Justice – to the Supreme Court.

35 years after Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in America, why is that decision such a controversial and emotional one in our political and personal lives? I believe it is because the choice to terminate a pregnancy is perceived as a choice of one life over another. And how can one make such a choice without agony and conflict? How can a just and lawful nation allow the murder of a child by its mother?

Except that’s not really what happens, is it? What happens in an abortion is that a mother trades a potential life for an actual life. But that simple idea has become lost in a fog of pseudo-science, emotional manipulation by both parties, religious interference and deep-seated societal misogyny.

The Democrats gave away the Populist schtick to the Republicans (h/t Valhalla)

Remember this guy below?  His name is Tito Muñóz, a  small construction business owner who went ballistic at the press last week at a McCain/Palin rally for attacking Joe the Plumber from 1:21 to about 3:40 where he now famously said “I was born in Colombia but made in the USA” (the other guy after that is an anti-choice guy so skip to the end):

Now, Tito the Builder opened a rally for Sarah Palin in Virginia.

Not only is Tito another working class man looking to better his life, but…Latino vote?  CHECK.  Working Class vote?  CHECK.  Aren’t these the voters a part of the DEMOCRATIC base???  Oh, that’s right, we’re not part of the new 2008 Chicago Edition Democratic party anymore!   You have to be on the VIP guest list to belong to the new DNC.  Since there is no room for the working class voter in the Democratic Party – take a guess who they are going to vote for?

From Harriet Christian, a lifelong Democrat, diner waitress who famously denounced the Democrats for rigging the primaries at the RBC meeting on May 31st, 2008, to Joe the Plumber a guy who Obama came up to with a gazillion TV cameras while he was playing ball with his son, and now Tito the Builder are becoming the voices of Americans everywhere who dared ask the questions and confront the media about Barack Obama’s illegitimate selection as the Democratic Presidential Candidate.

Democrats had a candidate that won the majority of the votes, connected and resonated with working class voters which understood her talk about raising taxes without scaring the heck out of people, has a sparkling clean record and background, the gravitas, love and grasp of solving problems for our country.   She’s still working her heart out for Downticket Democrats since the “That One” is too busy to help the DSCC and DCCC as he is supposed to do as the Democratic Party “Leader.”

Speaking of working class voters and the economy, this guy thought the same thing we all did (h/t/ Hillbuzz):

¡Que viva Los PUMAs!

PUMAs are neck-snapping Obama’s lead in FL

The Florida PUMA is prowling!

On Friday, I reported the latest SUSA polls with the following breakdown for Florida:

52% of Hispanics are voting McCain

22% of African-Americans are voting McCain (WOW!)

13% of Liberals are voting McCain

39% of Moderates are voting McCain

34% of Pro-Choice voters are voting McCain

53% of Central Florida is voting McCain

18% of registered Democrats are voting McCain

44% of Independents are voting McCain

39% of non-Religious people are voting McCain.

Now, Real Clear Politics has THIS to report:

Polling Data

Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Obama (D)	McCain (R)	Spread
RCP Average	10/16 – 10/26	–	–	47.7	45.8	Obama +1.9
Reuters/Zogby	10/23 – 10/26	603 LV	4.1	47	47	Tie
Politico/InAdv	10/22 – 10/22	562 LV	5.0	48	47	Obama +1
St. Petersburg Times	10/20 – 10/22	800 RV	3.5	49	42	Obama +7
NBC/Mason-Dixon	10/20 – 10/21	625 LV	4.0	45	46	McCain +1
FOX News/Rasmussen	10/19 – 10/19	1000 LV	3.0	48	49	McCain +1
Quinnipiac	10/16 – 10/21	1433 LV	2.6	49	44	Obama +5

See All Florida: McCain vs. Obama Polling Data

Don’t believe the Hype – PUMA is in effect!

We do have a horse in this race, and it’s called DEMOCRACY.  DON’T GIVE UP!

(at MYIQ’s request, I changed the song for the O-Bots)

Ladies, Are You Sure You Can Pull That Lever All By Yourself?

Debate Thoughts

Yes, I forced myself to watch the debate last night. These things are painful to me, since I realize that no matter what happens, ONE of these two is going to be President. Crap! We deserved so much better this year, and we almost had it.

In any case, I thought this was the best debate. Bob Schieffer asked some idiotic questions, of course, and was blatantly favoring Obama in terms of time and slant, but for the first time, I felt we got a look at who these two men really were. The format was more intimate and allowed them to interact with each other more closely. This was inarguably John McCain’s strongest performance, and he had the best line of the night: “If you wanted to run against George Bush, you should have run for President four years ago.”

Indeed. But what really stood out for me was when the candidates started talking about Supreme Court judges and, by extension, Roe v. Wade and abortion. Take a deep breath, feminists. You’re not going to like this.

Rep. John Lewis: Then and Now

From Sugar and Spice, Sugar’s comments on John Lewis’s recent race-baiting remarks directed at the McCain campaign:

I’m pretty much at a loss for words regarding the news that Georgia Congressman, and civil rights icon John Lewis said this about John McCain:

“What I am seeing reminds me of too much of another destructive period in American history,” Lewis said in a statement released to FOX News. “Senator McCain and Governor Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse.”

“George Wallace never threw a bomb. He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights,” Lewis added. “Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.”

I’m so sad about this. So very sad. Some months ago, I wrote about how the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was being pimped for Obama’s sake and now this. Lewis lived through the George Wallace era. He knows what that was like and he knows damn well that the issues of today where race relations are concerned can not compare to the hell minorities were living in back then. Why in God’s name would he say something so absolutely ridiculous?

I’m just. I’m flabbergasted by all of this, and my decision to not utter “yeah Congressman Lewis!” after hearing this news makes me a sellout? No, that makes me sane. I haven’t heard McCain or Palin once urge anybody to not vote. The idiocy of this all is just shocking and forgive me the disrespect, but John Lewis is a fool for pimping himself out like this after the way the Obama goons railroaded him into switching his support from Hillary to Obama.

Video of Rep. John Lewis on the PBS News Hour, January 14, 2008.

Video of Rep. John Lewis after he was pressured into switching his support to Obama after he was threatened with losing his seat in the House.

Video of Rep. John Lewis comparing John McCain with George Wallace

Unbelievable. Funny, I don’t remember this kind of media outrage when Barack Obama gave Hillary Clinton the finger. Or when Obama supporters yelled, “iron my shirt!” Or any of the too numerous to count episodes of misogyny that took place during the primaries. I don’t see the slightest effort to point out the sexism against Sarah Palin either. Yes people are angry, and unfortunately they are going to get angrier if the press insists on forcing their chosen candidate down our throats. It has gotten so heavy handed at this point that I dread what will happen when the votes are counted–regardless of which candidate wins, it looks like it could be very ugly.

Annnnnnd, Worst Debate Ever, My Friends

One Bored PUMA

Ooof! Was last night awful, or what? Terrible, banal questions. Terrible moderation, with Tom Brokaw sounding like the lockjawed girlfriend of the nephew in “Auntie Mame” (Top drawer!). Talking points and verbal tics galore from our two candidates (Obama’s “Annnnnnnnnnnnd” matched equally with McCain’s constant repetition of “my friends”), with very few standout moments for either. As in the first debate, the shadow of Hillary loomed large – her energy, her humanity, her solid commitment to Democratic principles, her delicious wonky command of each and every issue – and neither man even came close to matching her, although I was happy to hear McCain espousing her plan to renegotiate mortgages so that homeowners could stay in their homes (a pleasant surprise indeed!). In all honesty, I could barely stay awake through the whole thing.

There were a few things to remark upon, however. So let us begin the obligatory post-debate analysis, shall we? (For those who managed to avoid the snoozefest, a full transcript can be found here.)

Social Security?

What was going on here?

Brokaw: There are lots of issues that we are going to be dealing with here tonight. And we have a question from Langdon (ph) in Ballston Spa, New York, and that’s about huge unfunded obligations for Social Security, Medicare, and other entitlement programs that will soon eat up all of the revenue that’s in place and then go into a deficit position.

Since the rules are pretty loose here, I’m going to add my own to this one. Instead of having a discussion, let me ask you as a coda to that. Would you give Congress a date certain to reform Social Security and Medicare within two years after you take office? Because in a bipartisan way, everyone agrees, that’s a big ticking time bomb that will eat us up maybe even more than the mortgage crisis.

Giant. Red. Flag. Alert!!!!!

Calling Social Security and Medicare “entitlement programs” is neither accurate nor conducive to constructive reforms. Social Security and Medicare are part of a social safety net that prevents millions of our citizens from falling into desperate poverty. Moreover, these programs are being paid for through taxes, and every working person pays into them. There is nothing “entitled” about people who receive the benefits they have earned.

Sarah Palin is one of us now

Yep. She’s a racist, because she criticized Barack Obama. The AP says so.

By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is “palling around with terrorists” and doesn’t see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign.
And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.

Yes, AP writer Douglass K. Daniel has determined that Palin is making a “deliberate attempt to smear Obama.” But is it a smear if it’s true? If Barack Obama announced his candidacy for the Illinois state senate at the home of former Weathermen Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, and Obama worked with Bill Ayers in two different foundations over a period of years, and his opponents point out that he is friendly with them; is that a smear or is it simply a statement of fact? And what, pray tell, makes this statement “racially tinged?”

I’ll let Douglass K. Daniel of the Associated Press explain it all for us.

Palin’s words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee “palling around” with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn’t see their America?

In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers’ day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.

Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as “not like us” is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.

Most troubling, however, is how allowing racism to creep into the discussion serves McCain’s purpose so well. As the fallout from Wright’s sermons showed earlier this year, forcing Obama to abandon issues to talk about race leads to unresolved arguments about America’s promise to treat all people equally.

Well that’s about as clear as mud. Talk about a circular argument! First Daniel reads between the lines of what Palin said and decides that when she said the word “terrorist,” she really meant to imply that Obama hangs around with “dark-skinned, radical muslims.” Daniel apparently thinks that Americans are too stupid to know who the Weathermen were because it all happened {gasp!} 40 years ago. And then he makes Palin responsible for internet rumors that she never mentioned or even hinted at in her speech. Finally Daniel completes his sophomoric “analysis” by arguing that Obama should never be “forced to abandon issues to talk about race.”

Guess what? Palin never came close to referring to race in her speech. Why on earth should Obama have to address race in response? In fact I didn’t see any mention of race in his campaign’s response to Palin.

So now Palin is being hounded by the media and called a racist because she said something Barack didn’t like. Because he’s special. He’s supposed to get a pass on anything unsavory in his biography, while at the same time he is free to lie about his opponents. It’s perfectly all right that Obama implied that Sarah Palin is a pig, because…because…

I don’t know. Because the press and the power structure have anointed him as the inevitable next President? This is bulls&$#t!!  And I’ve had just about enough of it in the past year to last me three lifetimes.

Leaders Lead

There is some serious deception being practiced on us by Obamanation, the Obama bloggers and the Kool-aid slurping media.

To hear them tell it, the current financial problem is all the Republican’s fault and John McCain is using the crisis as an excuse to avoid debating Obama.   To quote one of Jeralyn’s fans:

“He’d rather flip off the American people than face the music Friday night.” 
 

Another one claimed that “McCain’s deregulation fantasies got us into this mess.”  Oh really?  Senator John McCain, May 25, 2006:

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

(deleted)

Where has Teh Precious been during this crisis?  Doing what he does best – running for office.  As he put it:

“If they need me they’ll call me.”

Don’t wait for the phone to ring, Barack.  We don’t need you.  We don’t need you now, and we don’t need you next January.

Leaders lead.

UPDATE:

From the comments, DancesWithPumas gives the most cogent explanation I have seen in defense of Teh Precious:

“The crisis is above his pay grade.”

(UPDATE II)

A commenter correctly pointed out that Obama never voted on the bill because it died in committee.  I have deleted the erroneous information.

PUMA and/or Clinton voter resistance in the polls, plus Hillary on CBS -update NBC, MSNBC & CNN

We’re not just a “shrieking band of paranoid holdouts,” or “50 people.”  We’re 42% of Clinton voters.  28% of us will vote McCain and the remainders like myself, won’t know until Election Day.  Yet we are definite in our Nobama/PUMA stance and that’s what drives the MSM bezerk.  This means a big difference especially in the big three swing states, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.  If you have 42% of Democrats not vote for the Democrat in those states, the other party wins.  IT’S THE MAP, not the math.

What’s even more startling to them is this: more than 1/2 of us felt zero impact regarding the VP choices on either side.  Meh, Biden, Palin.  Still doesn’t change the fact the DNC stole votes to push Obama across the Primary finish line.  Who”l push him across the November 4th finish line?  Not the Mountain states. 

Poll: Obama struggling to win over Clinton voters

By ALAN FRAM and TREVOR TOMPSON, Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama’s support from backers of Hillary Rodham Clinton is stuck smack where it was in June, a poll showed Tuesday, a stunning lack of progress that is weakening him with members of the Democratic Party in the close presidential race.

An Associated Press-Yahoo! News poll shows that among adults who backed his rival during their bitter primary campaign, 58 percent now support Obama. That is the same percentage who said so in June, when Clinton ended her bid and urged her backers to line up behind the Democratic senator from Illinois.

..

Clinton backers’ reluctance to support Obama helps explain why he is having a tougher time solidifying partisan supporters than McCain. Overall, 74 percent of Democrats say they will vote for Obama, compared to 87 percent of Republicans behind the Arizona senator. About nine in 10 Clinton supporters are Democrats.

The problem that supporters of Clinton, the New York senator, have with Obama seems to flow from their measure of him as a candidate, not from issues. From establishing a timeline for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq to abortion to canceling tax cuts on the rich, their views of the importance of issues are virtually identical to Democrats in general.

Yet they find Obama less likable, honest, experienced and inspiring than Democrats overall do, and have a better view of McCain. And while majorities of Clinton supporters say Obama shares their values and understands ordinary Americans, they’re less likely to say so than Democrats overall.

Wow – you mean we don’t like him because of his inexperience?  And despite we share values, we still won’t vote for him?  Maybe it had to do with all that election fraud stuff.  And the article doesn’t call us bitter racists?  Ya don’t say!  

Well my fellow PUMA/Clinton Democrats, here’s another reason why we’re willing to sit this election out.  THIS is leadership in action, instead of hiding out somewhere in Tampa to study for a debate.  Ya think Obama is in “Uh Uh” rehab?

Here she is on CBS:

Today Show:

And on Morning Joe on MSNBC.  Yes, Joe, we want Aretha too.

H/T BostonBoomer for CNN clip, I can’t upload unless it’s Youtube, but here it is.  

Can we have Hillary back????

Blogosphere 1.0 in Full Panic Mode

Ever since McCain announced Sarah Palin as his pick for Vice President, the Obama bloggers have been screeching, tearing their hair, and running around like chickens with their heads cut off. Harry Reid called Palin “shrill.” If thinks her speech was shrill, what would he make of the goings on at The Daily Cheeto, TPM, and MyDD?

Suddenly, the Obamacans are waking up to the stark reality that they have nominated an unelectable candidate. He might have had a chance, but he was either too stupid or too arrogant to nominate Hillary Clinton as his Vice President. With her on the ticket, he probably would have won the election handily; but instead he chose gaffe-o-matic blabbermouth Joe Biden. Biden, who couldn’t even win the primary in his tiny home state of Delaware.