Truth is the beginning of wisdom…

Archive for November 4th, 2008


Posted by straight shooter on November 4, 2008 under Abortion, Political, Social Concerns

Style over substance

Jane Jimenez

There is an irony in recommitting myself to a career of writing in the wake of four debates in this 2008 presidential election. I am personally motivated to write because I believe words matter. Alas, they don’t matter to everyone.

Words don’t matter. Glib is what works. Style is cultivated. A smooth voice that glides over the top of words, served up with a charming smile. The package delivered to voters is beautiful. Inside? Inside the Obama package, unwrapped after the election, what can we expect?

  • Partial-birth abortion and infanticide, ensuring that babies die who “accidentally survived abortion,” will be finally and permanently be entrenched as lawful “choice” in America.
  • School “choice” will be limited to “choosing” to stay in the public school system, denying parents a real choice to use their own tax dollars for top-quality charter and private schools.
  • Our American president will be able to further cultivate the already glowing approval of Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Hamas leaders, and Louis Farrakhan, all of whom praise Obama’s politics.
  • The Supreme Court will be used to make law in the United States, nine men and women overriding the will of the American people expressed in elections and the legislative process. We will work hard to make laws. The Supreme Court will work harder, striking down our laws and replacing them with theirs.
  • Marriage will no longer mean one man and one woman.
  • Legal immigration will be replaced by a U.S. citizenship conferred on people who happen to merely “show up” at the window to fill out paperwork.
  • Taxes will be increased on entrepreneurs and investors from less than 38% to more than 50%.
  • Entrepreneurs and investors will take their money…and their jobs…out of the country to countries like China and India where lower taxes will reward their investment. American jobs will move overseas.
  • New American jobs will be created when taxes on Americans are increased to build new social programs to provide FDR-style governmental work project jobs.
  • Healthcare will be nationalized, paid for and controlled by the federal government…just as countries like Canada and England admit failure with their own nationalized healthcare. They want what we have. Our president will want what they wish to abandon.

The majority of Americans are opposed to what is inside the Obama package. Amazingly, it seems that they might vote for him anyway. The wrapping paper and ribbons on the package look so pretty.

Obama’s objectives and the direction of the Democratic Party have been disguised by words that mean nothing. Media-speak. Instead of clearly stating that Obama supports the brutality of partial-birth abortion, he slips and slides all around the issue. He never personally would “choose” to stab a baby with scissors. It’s just that he won’t stop someone else from stabbing the baby.

Brutal words? Yes, only brutal words can fully describe brutality. But we are no longer about words that tell the truth. We are about wrapping paper and ribbons. The package.

Americans seem poised to vote for the prettiest package. Style over substance.

What a surprise, the day after the election, when we realize we are in for four years of substance that will take us away from where we really want to go. Some call this hope. It is a word of style that rings pretty.

But this is the kind of hope built on a list of destructive policies, including the legal killing of infants. It is the hope that motivates lemmings to the edge of the cliff.

Style has our attention now. But it will not last. Eventually, the package will be unwrapped. Inside? Like it or not, we will hold in our hands what we did not want to see. Substance.

Jane Jimenez ( is a freelance writer and former elementary school teacher dedicated to issues of importance to women and the family. She writes a regular column titled “From the Home Front.” Jane and her husband Victor live in Phoenix and have two children.


Posted by straight shooter on November 4, 2008 under Political, Social Concerns

Skin color not the right reason to vote

Charles Butts

An African-American pro-life leader gives his perspective on the election and the racism behind voting simply to “make history.”

Rev. Johnny Hunter heads L.E.A.R.N., Inc., an evangelical pro-life ministry, and believes that people going to the polls to help make history with their votes are making a mistake. He contends they ought to vote on the basis of the right candidate for the office.

“Anybody that voted for Hillary just because she was a woman, that’s called pride. You know, trying to make history,” he says. “The Bible teaches that if you want to see destruction, just have pride.”

Hunter suggests yet another aspect of the voting process to consider: racism in the Obama camp. “If somebody votes for John McCain because they’re white, everybody’ll call him a racist,” he adds. “I got news for you. You vote for anybody because of the color of their skin, you got a problem going on.”

According to Hunter, voters should choose a candidate in light of eternity. “I say if we want to do something for a historic moment, get in there and vote like we’re going to have to answer to God for our vote – because one day we will,” he concludes.

Putting Obama before Christ

James L. Lambert

A few days ago, I happened to be in the lobby of a medical office discussing politics with a woman who shared with me an interesting story. She had a friend recently tell her that even though Sen. Obama “advocated everything [she] didn’t believe in” — abortion, gay marriage, a bigger role of government in people’s lives, higher taxes, etc. — she was still “thrilled” to vote for Obama as president because he’d be the first black president in our country’s history.

While an Obama presidency admittedly would be historic, a person’s skin color obviously shouldn’t be a criteria for voting for that candidate. Religion — especially the Christian religion — has deep roots in this country. Yet it seems that many people who claim the Christian faith are casting their religious values to the curb in favor of being able to claim a role in “a historic event.”

Rev. Adlai E. Mack, senior pastor and founder of Christians United Church in San Diego, is alarmed by this trend. It was during the early 1970s, while working toward his bachelor’s degree from Princeton University, that Mack was introduced to moral dilemmas such as abortion. He was influenced by Dr. Paul Ramsey, professor of ethics, who decried the technique of ending human life so cavalierly in the womb.

Rev. Mack agreed with Ramsey, and remains grieved that abortion harms so many — especially those in the black community. According to the Life Education and Resource Network (LEARN) — the largest African-American evangelical pro-life ministry in the country — three out of five pregnant African-American women will abort their child.

Besides currently performing his full-time duties as a local pastor, Mack is a longtime Christian activist who routinely visits abortion clinics with the mission to persuade mothers to forgo terminating the life of their unborn child. Last week, Mack directed his thoughts to fellow believers in the church and to the black community at large.

He told this writer on Thursday: “If you’re willing to sacrifice your babies, your children, and your business for Mr. Obama, you have that choice — but I will not.”

Mack continued: “If Obama wins, the babies lose. If Obama wins, your children will be discipled by homosexual [activists] in the public schools. If Obama wins, small businesses will suffer. Raising taxes would be the worst remedy during an economic downturn.”

Rev. Mack notes that Senator Obama has the most liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate and is a longtime friend of abortion providers. Since joining the Senate in 2005, the Illinois senator has received a 100-percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, the leading abortion advocacy group in the United States.

Furthermore, Obama has injected himself into the debate on gay marriage by denouncing Proposition 8, the California initiative that defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Biblical Christians agree that Christ himself has already defined marriage as between one man and one woman (Matthew 19:4).

On election eve, Mack concludes by asking his fellow believers: “Are you willing to sacrifice [your beliefs, your convictions] for this one man?”

I ask: Are you willing to put Obama before Christ?


Posted by straight shooter on November 4, 2008 under Abortion, Patriotism, Political, Social Concerns, Theological Concerns

I’m Voting For Those Not Yet Born

By Chuck Norris

My, how the landscape of elections has changed. Remember when the issue of abortion used to matter to conservatives in political races? Today presidential nominees can get away with murder, literally. They can smoke, toke and hang out with terrorists who do. What were once considered legitimate leadership litmus tests are now regarded as off-limit character assassinations and hate language. Recently, some nonprofit organizations have been threatened with the withdrawal of their tax-exempt statuses because their leaders merely voiced opposition to what they consider a moral issue: abortion.

Chuck Norris

Some people think after 35 years of ceaseless controversy since the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade that abortion is an “old” issue better dropped. I disagree. I do believe the economy is an important issue in this election, but it’s certainly not the only issue. We can’t just be concerned about our finances. We also must be concerned about America’s future and those who will occupy it. Our posterity matters. Their rights matter. And that includes their “unalienable Rights,” with which they have been “endowed by their Creator,” and among them are the quintessential rights: “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

Abortion is not about a woman’s “right to choose”; it is about a more fundamental “right to life,” which is one of three specifically identified unalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence (and the Constitution, through Article VII and the Bill of Rights). And it is a violation of government’s primary purpose: to protect innocent life.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1809, “The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.” He was not, of course, writing about the America of today, with state-sanctioned and even subsidized abortion and a movement to promote the killing of the elderly through euthanasia. But he could have been. His belief in what should be “the first and only legitimate object of good government” still should stand. Like Jefferson, our next president needs to uphold those same concerns, not say that such arenas are “above his paygrade.” If he and his administration won’t protect the rights of the living (even in the womb), then who will? A left-leaning Congress?

The truth is if Obama is elected, we will place a man in the highest office in the land who has the most liberal views and voting record on abortion of any president in American history. As a state senator in Illinois, he led opposition three years in a row (2001-2003) to a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of babies unintentionally left alive by abortions. He also opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion and strongly disapproved of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the partial-birth ban. He also voted to block a bill that would have required a doctor to notify at least one parent before performing an abortion on a minor from another state. He does not support the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion through Medicaid. Before a Planned Parenthood Action Fund last year, Obama promised to give first priority as president to the signing of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would make partial-birth abortion legal again. Strangely, Obama even once said he would not want his daughters to be “punished with a baby” caused by an unwanted pregnancy. With the next president likely adding two justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, it is clear that as president, Obama would appoint and support the most liberal judges and legal eagles, resulting in a pro-abortion advantage in our courts that would push abortion liberties to every extent of the law and land.

America’s Founders shared a basic view of human life and conception: Humanity is special, unique and should be set apart from the rest of creation. In fact, in early America, there were two basic beliefs that shaped most people’s views of humanity: God created us equal, and we are the highest creation of God. Their views were based on creation narratives in the Bible and expressed in the Declaration of Independence. In order for us to get back to our Founders’ understanding, we need to get back to a view of humanity that emphasizes the immortal worth of every human being. (That’s why I’ve devoted an entire chapter to “Reclaim the value of human life” in my new cultural manifesto, “Black Belt Patriotism.”)

My friend and prolific author Randy Alcorn recently was asked by a young woman, “Should we vote for who we think should lead our country solely based on their stance on abortion?” You can read Randy’s insightful response to that question on his Web site and blog ( I would respond to it by simply saying we all will answer that question in just one week, when we go to the ballot boxes.

Winning the election is not just about what the underdogs – such as John McCain and Sarah Palin, two maverick pro-life advocates – should do. But it’s about what the citizens who are fighting for the underdogs can do. We the people must stand up, go back to the basics, and once again vote our values.