IT'S TIME FOR PRO-LIFERS TO THINK "PRO-CHOICE"
By Mary Starrett
July 19, 2008
In fewer than 4 months, we will elect a new president. Many Americans have bought into the myth that we can only select that new president from column A or column B- the Democrat Obama or the Republican McCain.
That is simply not true. When it comes to choosing the next president there are- as well there should be- more choices than the frightening prospects, Obama and McCain.
I am among the growing number of Americans seeking a choice other than that one party that masquerades as two.
I am for choice in ideology, choice in principles, choice in picking the one candidate who hasn’t jettisoned the principles embodied in the United States Constitution.
I am grateful there will be such a choice this November.
Fortunately, there is a man seeking the presidency who squares up solidly with the Founder’s concepts that government must be held in check.
Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin,(www.Baldwin08.com) a minister, talk show host, writer and author is the one candidate who’s all that and then some.
Baldwin is, to be sure, a D.C. outsider, and for that, I am glad. I’ve had enough of career politicians who get elected and immediately commence to connive their re-election strategy, power-brokering their political futures by dancing to the tune called by the global elite.
Baldwin gets that the Founders had it right when they strongly urged Americans never to allow their government to enter into entangling alliances with other nations.
Barack Obama doesn’t get this critical, non-negotiable point; neither does John McCain.
While McCain’s touting the virtues of continuing the bloodbath in Iraq, for “100 years” if necessary, Obama this week suggested we send more troops to their death in Afghanistan.
So, while the Democrats call for “peace” their party’s standard-bearer is ginning up the war machine to send 7,000 more Americans to another sand trap hell hole. I guess Obama figures the 36,000 Americans licking sand off their parched lips in Afghanistan’s blistering terrain could use some company.
Chuck Baldwin is the candidate who reminds us that playing robo-cop the world over can never be in our best interest as a nation. Besides the blatant unconstitutionality of the incursions into Iraq and Afghanistan, it does not speak well of our regard for the lives of those we march off to combat.
While Obama bristles at all suggestion we secure our borders and turn back the invading “undocumented migrant” hordes coming into the United States, he seems quite content to ask American soldiers to defend the borders of perennial battlefields in third world middle eastern countries.
Obama’s recent love-in with the racist pro-reconquista group La Raza (“the race”) should cause the hair on the back of our collective neck to stand straight up.
McCain, ever proud of his record of authoring pro-illegal, pro-amnesty, anti- American legislation with that good conservative Senator Ted Kennedy is the other ‘alternative’ in this presidential race. So, I ask all thinking American voters, is this the “choice” we have in November? What is the “choice” in this offering?
It’s astounding that those who say they are for peace and against the foreign entanglements our Founders warned against and who are against more amnesty for illegals would support Obama or McCain. Either these folks aren’t paying attention to the stated positions of the two ‘front-runners’ or they have simply plugged their ears while saying “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you”.
Even more astounding is the recent poll showing Evangelical Christians are rallying around Obama in ever-increasing numbers.
evangelical public relations researcher has stated Obama could possibly
garner a large number of Evangelical Christian votes in November. A
Rasmussen poll showed Obama is now drawing 32% of the support of those
who label themselves “evangelical”.
Mark DeMoss, president of The DeMoss Group, believes Obama could wind up with 40 percent of the evangelical vote.
Again, I use the word astounding to describe that state of affairs, but then again, we have to remember that one third of “evangelical” voters re-elected Bill Clinton in 1996.
Do so-called “evangelicals” know that Barack Obama is so rabidly anti-life that as an Illinois legislator in 2002 he voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act-a bill so basically humane (it made provisions for babies who survived abortions instead of allowing them to be left to die in soiled utility rooms and medical waste sections of hospitals) that even the shrill pro-aborts at NARAL wouldn’t lobby against this bill. Yes, even NARAL figured out they couldn’t defend infanticide and call it “reproductive rights.”
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin is the only candidate now seeking the presidency who is 100% Pro-life. Chuck Baldwin is the only candidate who is for closing our borders, ending the free-ride for illegals and for bringing our troops home.
When it comes to supporting a presidential candidate, I will not choose the lesser of evil on any count. That is why, in the race for the White House -this pro-lifer is staunchly pro-choice.
� 2008 Mary Starrett - All Rights Reserved