Spector Threatens Bush to NOT appoint conservative judges

In short, most folks would rather back the abortionist and win, than back pro-life and lose.

This, they tell us, is "incremental gains."

(not sure which to do)

 

Yeah, I love the "incremental gains" thing.

Bush increases funding for Planned Parenthood to record levels. I guess it's an incremental gain because if Patricia Ireland were President she might have been worse.

PBA ban, which simply mandated a different (and more barbaric) method to kill the same babies is an "incremental gain".

Exploding federal spending on social programs of all types, and federalizing education, are incremental gains alright...for the socialists and liberals.

But, I guess with marching instructions from Limbaugh and Hannity, anything can be sacrificed on the altar of the GOP.

 

Glad to see you guys agreeing with each other!

The topic of this thread is Specter's threat to block Bush judicial appointees which, as you acknowledged PA Jim, is a threat that Senator Specter never made. Unless you have something relevant to the topic, I think this particular discussion is over, at least for me. Toodles

 

It took about 60 years of progressive liberalism to reach 1973... It took 21 more years for the conservative movement to result in a GOP congress... and another 10 years to claim both congress and the white house. Maybe progress can be made now but it may take a few years if the Specters and Chaffees of the GOP jump ship.

In fact, it may not happen until all 31 of the "red states" boot their tenured Dem Senators... or they become fearful enough of the folks back home to change their position.

I think the only politically intelligent course (also the morally correct choice) for the GOP is to push pro-life, strict constructionists judges (almost of the PA Jim flavor) onto the court. It will put every Dem Senator from a Red State in a position to buck their party elite or face the folks back home. North Dakota, Arkansas, and Louisianna immediately come to mind.

 

Twelve years ago we had a serious candidate to run against Specter in the GOP primary. He was a legislator from Southeast PA named Steve Friend. He was firmly pro-life.

The GOP machinery went to work, and..guess what...the "Christian right" politicians got behind Specter at the last minute.

Here we are, twelve years and millions of dead babies later...

And, lo and behold, Christians who claim to be outraged by abortion are still voting for him.

 

Scored points for "the man", time to move on, eh?

 

I demand a stop to abortions right now!

........ lotta good that did me ........... </font>[/QUOTE]It's not a top-down thing. It takes the grassroots-up to make a change like that. Notice that the Democrats stood on a pro-choice platform. That means that hardcore Democrat groups like Blacks, Jews, Moslems, and gays and lesbians are all solid pro-choice. Look at how many Catholics vote Democrat although they claim that the Catholic church is so pro-life. In this case, actions speak louder than words.

The GOP victory on all levels should be a help. Here in Indiana, the GOP took away a Congressional seat in southern Indiana that had been held by Democrats since Viet Nam. Also, we threw the Democrats out of the State House and the State House of Representatives in spite of the Democrats having gerrymandered the State Representative districts to defeat a GOP majority of a quarter of a million voters.

As soon as the non-GOP meltdown ends, maybe Americans of goodwill can cooperate to see that the GOP mandate leads to progress. Don't hold your breath with so many bad losers nowadays.

 

Sometimes you have to make a choice between party and your religious convictions.

Party seems to win, most of the time, as it did this time.

 

I agree 100%. That's why I'm against the grassroots supporting politicians who continue liberal policies including the status quo on abortion.

Yep. It's just as hypocritical as evangelicals voting for Republicans who are pushing the Democrat agenda.

Things will be worse. They have confirmed, in the last election, that their liberal policies are the raod to re-election.

I'd like to see that. But, again, the GOP politicians have discovered the formula to political power: give the action to the liberals, and a little vague lip service to conservatives.

 

Bush isn't the first person to realize that the way to defeat liberalism is to be more liberal.

German Chancellor Otto Von Bismark did that exceedingly well, combining an ultra-conservative program for window dressing, while introducing all sorts of social programs to undercut the left.

It worked like a charm.

 

And Bush is snickering about how easily we are led to believe he's pro-life.

 

Yep. He probably says to Rove: "this is just incredible...yuk yuk yuk".

 

BTW, the religious right has made a huge impact on abortion, by "grass roots" work. Changing hearts by being out there talking about it, and persuading people one at a time has been far more effective than trying to vote for politicians like Bush, who pretend to be pro-life, and then do the opposite.

The danger is that in giving to Caesar that which is God's, the religious right may lose whatever they have gained.

Abortions are declining, not because they've been outlawed, but because people are thinking about what an abortion really is.

And maybe, that's how it should be.

 

Galatian,

You are exactly right, which is why I have constantly pointed out that abortion is an issue of the heart and we must change the heart. The hope of Christianity is not in the government. It is in the gospel of Jesus Christ.

That does not mean, however, that we totally withdraw from civic responsibility as the free church did. We can still exercise our voice and we should. We should not invite persecution. We should do what we can to be a "finger in the dike" while we are here.

 

Good point, Larry and Galatian.

We teach children not to steal, but we still need laws against theft.

So, while I agree with both ouf you about the need to teach people and preach the gospel, it is also important to work for proper laws to protect the innocent. That's what God instituted government for.

Not looking for an agument, not even disagreeing. Just adding my two cents.

 

PJ,

I think the main disagreement you and I have is over the best way to get those laws that we agree are necessary. It seems that in your thinking, the best way is an all or nothing approach. To me, I think an incremental approach is the only viable option. But we can certainly disagree on that part. I wish that all abortions were outlawed.

There was a story in the Detroit Free Press this week about a teenaged couple expecting a baby. The boy hit his girlfriend in the stomach with a baseball bat over several weeks to cause her to miscarry.
http://www.freep.com/news/locmac/beating18e_20041118.htm

Another story linked from WND this morning talked of a British girl who wanted to abort and started taking drugs for it. Then she changed her mind and wanted to keep it but the doctors told her that there was already irreparable damage done and she would have to finish the abortion. She did, but decided she wanted an "atonement baby." So at 16, she is pregnant again.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat974.html

Life is cheap. And it hits all too close to home.

 

Here's a cartoon that addresses Specter

Cartoon in NYT on Tuesday