WingRight
LifeEthics
@GovernorPerry should not drop out!
If Governor Perry drops out, most of the Nation will never get a chance to vote for our candidate, or to influence the Republican primary at all. I’m afraid that the voices that claim that the “Powers That Be” really determine our candidates will be proven right.
Now, I’ll admit to being an early supporter of Governor Rick Perry. I’m still convinced that the Governor is the right man for the job. And he’s the only one of the remaining candidates who still has a job – and the only one who hasn’t been running for President for over a year.
Part of the reason that Romney is always in front is the script that he IS the front-runner. And part of the reason that Governor Perry is trailing is the repetitive script that he can’t win because he got in so late and made mistakes in his first couple of debates. I’d think more people would have noticed how fast Rick Perry learned debating, and how much he has improved in such a short space of time. But no: the consensus is he goofed up in September, so it’s all over.
The reality is that it’s still January. Even after South Carolina and Florida – the first “winner take all” primaries – just 5% of the Delegates to the Republican Convention will be determined. No one can possibly be declared the winner of the Republican Primary until late March. With less than 50 delegates out of the 1144 needed to win, half of the 2288 total, the race is – and should be – still on.
While both Santorum and Gingrich are Conservatives, their histories are no less tainted than any other candidate, and some of those votes and actions will need to be defended. Neither can speak authoritatively about working in the private sector, creating jobs, serving in the military, or upholding the Second Amendment. Worse, both have a long record of “crossing the aisle” and forgetting to come back.
Gingrich has been married three times and has a very public history of adultery. He muddled his response just last month as to when life begins and the balanced budgets he brags about depended on the Sustainable Growth Rate.
Santorum has a lack of executive experience, as well as the specter of his support for Senator Specter (who turned Democrat) and his loss in Pennsylvania. He also voted against the Right to Work Act because, as he said last week, Pennsylvania is not a Right to Work State.
And then, there are the wives. Apparently, there was a “war” over the wives at that meeting of Christian leaders last week. As the Republican platform supports the Defense of Marriage Act, the wives will become an issue when their husbands go up against Obama.
Governor Perry has had well over 11 years of experience running Texas, both as Lieutenant Governor and Governor. He understands what it means to be required to balance a budget, work with a contentious Legislature and fight for laws not only in the House and Senate, but in the Courts and in public opinion. He understands the ramifications of regulations and appointments to regulatory bodies.
He’s the only one of the five remaining candidates other than Paul who has served in the military, having volunteered to serve in the US Air Force near the end of the Viet Nam War, becoming a pilot for over four years and retiring as a Captain.
On the social issues, there’s no one with a better record than Governor Perry: he has been married to one wife, and has always been pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, pro-state’s rights.
Governor Perry doesn’t just say these things because he believes it’s what Republicans and Conservatives want to hear. Governor Rick Perry, in his books, Fed Up! and On My Honor, and in his years of service to the State of Texas, has proven that he understands and believes in Conservative ideals.
Does Texas ‘informed consent’ law signal a successful new strategy against abortion? : News Headlines – Catholic Culture
Knowledge is power. Especially when it comes to Courts and lawyers. Knowing that the baby who might be aborted is not just a lifeless “tissue” or “product of pregnancy” is bound to change hearts and minds. Someday, abortion will be thought of in the same way that we think of slavery.
Legal scholar Hadley Arkes believes that the groundwork for a powerful challenge to legal abortion has been laid, in a judicial decision affirming the “informed consent” law in Texas.
Judge Edith Jones wrote a carefully reasoned decision in Texas Medical Providers v. Lakey, Arkes writes. Her decision, emphasizing that the new Texas law does not place any barriers in front of a woman seeking an abortion, is very likely to withstand a Supreme Court challenge, Arkes believes.
Beyond the judicial sphere, the Texas precedent should encourage legislators to consider bills that protect the unborn without directly challenging the Roe v. Wade precedent, Arkes suggests.
That move is bound to set off crippling tensions within the party of abortion in Congress. They are the tensions that could make that party come apart, and bring us to the beginning of the End.
Texas has already determined that it’s wise to regulate doctors, medicines and surgical procedures. In the case of the abortion laws and sonogram requirements, the rules for action are placed on the doctor doing the procedures. The doctor is the only one being “made” to do anything.
We have a 2005 State law mandating 24 hour waiting period and a set of steps to ensure that the patient, the woman who is going to have an abortion, receives thorough informed consent. Texas also protects other patients with regulations requiring specific informed consent for sterilizations, hysterectomies, radiation therapy and electric shock therapy. These procedures are often performed on patients who may be vulnerable to outside influence (by the doctor or family members pr social expectations) and all carry risks of permanent harm and consequences that the patient should know about.
The Sonogram Bill ensures that the woman seeking an abortion will meet the doctor who will perform the abortion and that the physician will tell her the status of her pregnancy and the development of baby, all before she’s sedated and in a gown, before she’s up in the stirrups.
Who would go for any treatment without first meeting the doctor? Would you consider it “punishment” or “shaming,” much less based on some “religious value” to enforce Texas’ similar informed consent laws for patients about to undergo radiation therapy, electric shock therapy, or a hysterectomy? Where’s the outrage about shaming or frightening the smoker when the doc sits down to explain why you need bypass surgery?
Would any one argue that the man who goes in for radiation therapy does not know that he might have cancer cells remaining in his body? Or that a woman doesn’t know that she won’t ever be able to have children again if she has a hysterectomy? (We’ll skip the problems with consent for electric shock therapy.)
The Bill is reminds me of our earlier fights to allow patients to own their own medical information, to make our own choices with full, informed consent. It’s patronizing to tell women seeking abortion that they don’t need to see their own sonogram or to consider sharing her medical information with her as interference by the State.
5th US Court of Appeals: Texas may enforce abortion law
Wonderful news! The sonogram bill will be enforced as it winds its way through to the Supreme Court. For my critique of the very poor reasoning of the Federal judge who delayed enforcement, see this.
Will post the link to the ruling when it’s available.
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A Texas abortion law passed last year that requires doctors to show sonograms to patients can be enforced while opponents challenge the measure in court, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks’ temporary order against enforcing the law, saying Sparks was incorrect to rule that doctors had a substantial chance of winning their case.
Sparks ruled in Austin in August that several provisions of the state law violated the free-speech rights of doctors who perform abortions by making them to show and describe the images and describe the fetal heartbeat — all of which doctors have said is not necessary for good treatment.
The appeals court cited a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that “upheld an informed-consent statute over precisely the same ‘compelled speech’ challenges made” in the current Texas case.
Earlier rulings have found that laws requiring doctors to give “truthful, nonmisleading and relevant” information are reasonable regulation, not ideological speech requiring strict scrutiny under the First Amendment,” the appeals court said.
“‘Relevant’ informed consent may entail not only the physical and psychological risks to the expectant mother facing this ‘difficult moral decision,’ but also the state’s legitimate interests in ‘protecting the potential life within her,'” Chief Judge Edith H. Jones wrote in the appeals’ decision.
via The Associated Press: Appeals court: Texas may enforce abortion law.
Unified Theory of Conservatism: Constitutional Ethics for a Small Government
There’s no conflict between the three legs of Reagan Conservatism, in spite of the confusion surrounding contraception and homosexual “rights” we witnessed during the New Hampshire debates. Social issues such as the right to life and traditional marriage are equally compatible with small government and States’ rights as National security and fiscal responsibility, just as the Declaration of Independence is compatible with the10th Amendment to the US Constitution. Conservatives agree that the best government governs least, but we don’t forget that there is a proper role for even the Federal government.
After all, the Constitution is based on the existence of inalienable rights endowed by our Creator as outlined in the Declaration of Independence: the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Preamble to the Bill of Rights explains the States’ desire to ensure Constitutional limits on the Federal Government, using the least force and intervention possible to prevent or punish the infringement of our inalienable rights.
Liberals and Libertarians accuse Conservatives who advocate for social issues and national security of abandoning both the Constitution and the ideal of a small Federal government that is as “inconsequential in our lives as possible.” There are even some in the Tea Party willing to sacrifice these issues in order to form a coalition with the Libertarians to cut spending and lower taxes.
Unfortunately, the Left, Right and middle all manage to stir up not only the divide between Libertarians and Conservatives. They would also exaggerate conflict between socially conservative Catholics and Evangelicals who agree on the definition of marriage and that life begins at conception, but disagree on whether or not true contraception is ethical.
Abortion, medicine and research which result in the destruction of embryos or fetuses infringe on the right to life by causing the death of a human being. (See “Why Ethics.”) In contrast, true contraception prevents conception without endangering any human life. Therefore, unlike abortion, it does not infringe the right to life.
Marriage as a public institution is not merely a means to insurance and legal benefits. The definition of marriage predates the Constitution and goes far beyond culture, religion or National boundaries. Marriage affects the stability of the family and the well-being of both children and the husband and wife. (There’s strong research supporting the latter.) We define and defend traditional marriage in order to secure liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
These same inalienable rights are the justification for establishing National borders, protecting National security, and punishing those who break the law, while opposing high taxes and big Government bureaucracy and regulation that serves to not only redistribute wealth, but creates a dependency on more and bigger Government intervention.
Conservatives like Governor Rick Perry have been just as vocal in opposing the attacks on religious freedom and conscience by the Obama Administration as we have been in opposing increased taxes and regulations and the EPA’s over-reaching. We can stand secure in our understanding that the Conservative, Constitutional and proper use of government is to prevent and punish infringement of inalienable rights.
(Edit 11 AM 1/10/12 “Reagan” added to the first sentence. 04/09/14 – fixed a broken link. BBN)
Why “None of the Above” is not acceptable (Vote positive, vote @GovernorPerry )
I admit to voting for a “None of the Above” candidate in the Texas Republican Primary in 2008. However, by that time, my vote was no more than a protest against John McCain, who appeared to have been chosen by the Powers That Be (“PTB”) in the Republican Party, rather than the voters that I knew.
That’s not the case for voters in the Iowa Caucus, and the Primaries in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida.
Today’s news includes the NBC News/Marist poll, which indicates that more than half of registered voters in Iowa don’t intend to show up on January 3 for the caucuses. That means that 47% of you will effectively cast 2 votes; votes that have the potential to determine who will become the Republican candidate for President and which will at least decide who stays in the race and who withdraws. You are in a position to tell the PTB who you want on the ballot in November, 2012. Please vote for the candidate that shares your values, not the most electable or not-Whomever.
If I may, I’d like suggest positive reasons to vote in the contests mentioned above and to vote for Governor Rick Perry:
- 11 years of experience governing Texas, with the second largest population of all the States, an economy that would be in the top 20 in the world if it were an independent Nation, and one of the most diverse populations in the United States.
- A proven Conservative record, including advocacy for pro-life laws and for traditional marriage.
- On the record in his books, Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington and On My Honor: Why the American Values of the Boy Scouts Are Worth Fighting For. You can read excerpts at Amazon.com and on this blog here and here.
- A strong record of action to protect the sovereignty of the United States, the individual States, and the border between Texas and Mexico, and
- a personal history of volunteering to serve in the United States Air Force, achieving the rank of Captain as a pilot, marriage to Anita for nearly 30 years, and an outspoken man of faith.
@GovernorPerry MSM Loves Abortion and Hates a Texas White House
Every time I convince myself that the MSM hates Governor Rick Perry because they don’t want to spend time a hundred miles from nowhere (or 200 miles from Dallas
), they remind me that the real problem is the Governor’s core values.
The fuss this time is due to Governor Perry’s statement recognizing that the children of rape and incest are human enough to deserve society’s protection from intentional, elective killing. Last night I wrote about Rachel Maddow’s mad rantings concerning abortion and the children of rape or incest. Today, (while breaking with the rest of the media in choosing to use the term, “pro-life,” rather than the usual “anti-choice”) WFAA-TV in Dallas made sure that we understand that the Governor “enjoys deep support among pro-life groups, and signed their favored sonogram bill into law earlier this year.” Not only that, but,
“Pro-choice groups and many Democrats say they will keep fighting the sonogram law.
“”This will probably lead to a law saying that if a 14-year-old victim of incest wants to get an abortion, she would then have to submit to a sonogram, which is one of the most invasive procedures this legislature has come up with,” said Andy Brown, chairman of the Travis County Democratic Party.”
via Perry’s tougher abortion stance: What does it mean for Texas? | wfaa.com Dallas – Fort Worth.
I would like to commend WFAA for using the term, “pro-life.” Thank you, WFAA!
Disclaimer: I’m on the Board of Directors of the Texas Alliance for Life, mentioned in the article. And yes, we’d like to see all children, including those of victims of rape and incest, protected at least as much as the eggs of birds on the Endangered Species List.
Matt Barber: “Ron Paul is dangerous”
I decided in ‘08 that Paul was more dangerous than Clinton. Paul refuses to acknowledge that jet planes and missiles make the world a different place than the one that George Washington knew. I agree with Mr. Barber’s latest essay on TownHall.com and laughed at his description of “Uncle Ronny:”
“He’s that affable – if not a little “zany” – uncle who has the whole family on edge at Thanksgiving. “Oh boy; what’s Uncle Ronny gonna say next?”
“Still, you wouldn’t give Uncle Ronny the carving knife for the turkey, much less less the keys to the Oval Office.”
Ron Paul is not a Conservative. He has run as – and is, still – a (Capital L)ibertarian, with skewed ideas about the world based on tunnel vision. By claiming that he is only following the intent of the Constitution, he seems unaware that the Founders did not have to contend with international travel or laws permitting abortion due to Supreme Court rulings that have the effect of a Constitutional Amendment.
Although he has a great personal testimony about the sanctity of life and did finally vote to ban partial birth abortion, for years he refused to vote against Federal limits on abortion as performed in military hospitals or when minors are transported across State lines without their parents consent. And it seems that he doesn’t understand that defense is so much better when you can take it to the aggressor’s back yard and keep him as far away from our home as possible.
I’m hoping that, beginning with the Iowa Caucus, voters will remember that Governor Rick Perry has always been consistent about securing our Borders, defending our Nation from external attack, and protecting the most defenseless among us.
Just yuck! An evening with MSNBC
I’m tempted to say, “Never again!,” but I try to never say never.
I’m staying in a hotel while volunteering with the Rick Perry Iowa Strike Force, so I don’t know the local TV channels. While clicking through to see what was on, I paused at MSNBC. I’ve never watched at all except for clips on YouTube and assumed that both those clips and the Saturday Night Live parodies of Maddow show were atypical exaggerations. Nope, not if tonight is typical.
Every charge I’ve ever heard or read about Fox News is made concrete on this horrible channel. The Ed (Schultz) Show and Rachel Maddow (look ‘em up yourself, I refuse to link to them) are bitterly clinging to unions, abortion, and the far Left in all its forms.
For instance, Schultz featured a man who claims that Mitt Romney killed American Pad and Paper (AmPad) after Romney’s Bain Capital, purchased AmPad in 1992. The man, who now works for the United Steelworkers in Pennsylvania, also told ABC News in this interview that when the company started losing money, benefits for the “workers” were cut, so the union went on strike. He takes no responsibility for the damage that the strike might have had on a business under stress.
Maddow focused part of her rants on Governor Rick Perry’s recent comments about a change of heart on the ethics of abortion and the exceptions for rape and incest. She repeatedly claimed that Rick Perry would “force” pregnant women to have their rapist’s child. She ignores that the child is also that woman’s baby and seemingly doesn’t understand that government wouldn’t *force* anything on anyone. Instead, government would be preventing action on the part of licensed medical professionals using regulated and licensed material and procedures, not forcing action on anyone.
My two hours watching MSNBC reminded me of the line (variously attributed to Lenin and Sun Tzu), “Call your enemy what you are.”
Spare Parts for Humans: Tissue Engineers Aim for Lab-Grown Limbs, Lungs and More | PBS NewsHour | Dec. 15, 2011 | PBS
“Just because we don’t regenerate doesn’t mean that we can’t regenerate. It just means that we don’t.”
Public Broadcasting System’s PBS NewsHour had a segment on regenerative medicine, reviewing the very impressive progress we’ve made in the last few years. The mere fact that PBS and scientists will state these facts in public is almost as huge, in terms of world view change, as the fact that the matrices plus stem cells work.
I was at a American Bioethics and Humanities annual convention when Yamanaka’s induced pluripotent cells first made the news. The Powers That Be for that group were angry and refused to allow any hopeful conversation that the iPSC’s would replace the need for research on destructive, embryonic stem cells. Damage control included scolding world authority figures *on* the panels for daring to bring up the subject in any serious way.
I’m convinced that the whole embryonic stem cell mess was more about the need to prove that abortion is wonderful and that there is no Creator. In fact, that’s exactly what one of the Clinton/Obama “bioethicists,” Robin Alta Charo, said about cloning in at least one meeting I attended in July, 2006. (More, here.)
Ms. Charo who introduces morality and her anti-religion bias into the conversation, by making it a matter of personal opinion whether or not embryonic humans are humans. The species of human embryos is a matter of taxonomy, since it’s scientifically documented and verifiable that the offspring of a given species are members of that species. Discrimination between the amount of protection given to some members of a species is much more a “religious” or moral decision than whether or not a given individual is a member of that species.
I’ve said it many times before, but: Break the egg of a bird, turtle, or lizard on the Endangered species list and it won’t matter that the animal couldn’t survive or was an embryo or fetus. The Feds know that an embryonic pelican is a pelican. We don’t have the same protection for our own children of tomorrow that we give lesser species, although we are the only species having the conversation in the first place.
CMS overturns Texas’ abortion provider exclusion @GovernorPerry
The Houston Chronicle article (not available when I wrote this earlier post) implies that the ruling from CMS is much more far-reaching than I’d thought. Our laws prohibiting State funds going to anyone who provides abortions may be overturned. This looks like it goes farther than simply disapproving of the priorities we placed on allocating our funds. It appears that Obama has decided that we can’t continue to make recipients of Texas funds sign a contract to not perform or refer for abortions.
If this is true, women can get prenatal care and teen girls can get their vaccinations in the same building where their neighbor is having her unborn baby killed! Or Texas can refuse Medicaid funds.
Texas will no longer be allowed to prohibit Medicaid recipients from receiving care at family planning clinics that perform abortions, the federal government informed the state Monday.
Arguing that the Social Security Act prohibits states from excluding such clinics, the federal agency that runs the program informed Texas that next year it will not approve an agreement like the one now in place in Texas.
“The issue is … whether a state can restrict access to a qualified health provider simply because they provide other services Medicaid doesn’t pay for,” Cindy Mann, director of the Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services, said in a phone interview with reporters. “The law does not permit this.”
Mann stressed that Medicaid “does not pay for abortions and will not pay for abortions.” She said the agency will extend Texas’ current agreement through March while negotiating a new one.
In a statement, Gov. Rick Perry responded that President Barack Obama is making women “pay the price for its pro-abortion agenda.”
“I am concerned the Obama Administration is playing politics by holding women’s health care hostage because of Texas’ pro-life policies, sacrificing the health of millions of Texas women,” said Perry.
Since 2006, Texas has provided low-income women 18 to 44 with family planning exams, related health screenings and birth control through the Medicaid Women’s Health Program. Last year, it provided services to more than 180,000 women, with 90 percent of its funds coming from the federal government and the rest from the state.
via Texas abortion provider exclusion blocked – Houston Chronicle.
Obama to Texas: Fund PP or no Well Woman money
The Obama Administration has told Texas that our State is not allowed to decide who will provide medical care under Title X Family Planning and Well Woman funds. The Administration has recently ruled in a similar manner for other States. (
This in spite of the fact that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) did give Texas a waiver allowing Texas to move all Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries to doctors in managed care plans. The managed care plans, along with cooperative coalitions between hospital systems and the doctors they will pay for seeing managed care patients, is consistent with the plans laid out in “Obamacare.” Evidently, so is Planned Parenthood’s survival.
CMS claims in this letter to Texas’ Health and Human Services Commission that we’re limiting the choices of the women because the State prioritized where to spend our money and who to pay for healthcare, beginning with county clinics and hospital districts, followed by doctors and clinics that provide comprehensive, continuing care. Since we only have so much money, our Legislature decided to support the most vital care givers. Even though we don’t specifically write in law that “Planned Parenthood, Inc., need not apply,” CMS doesn’t like our plan.
CMS was asked to give a “waiver” to Texas since the funding is outside normal Medicaid rules, because it funds care for adults who are not at the rock-bottom income levels. Texas also has a waiver in order to use funds for prenatal care, justified by counting the unborn child. (The pro-aborts have protested over and over that the mother, not her child, should be the one we count and that she should be allowed to use the money for any “reproductive services,” including abortion, that she wants.)
Texas Alliance for Life and Texas Right to Life have both issued statements opposing the CMS ruling.
From Joe Pojman, Ph.D., TAL’s Executive Director:
“We believe the State of Texas has every right to deny millions of tax dollars to Planned Parenthood, which is what the Texas Legislature and Governor Perry has chosen to do,” he said. “Senate Bill 7, passed last summer during a special legislative session, prohibits Medicaid tax dollars under the Women’s Health Program from going to abortion providers and their affiliated organizations.”
“This bill excludes several dozen Planned Parenthood sites from the Women’s Health Program, but it does not exclude any other hundreds of Women’s Health Program providers in Texas. Many of the other providers offer comprehensive primary and preventative care to low- income women in addition to family planning, which Planned Parenthood is unable or unwilling to provide,” he continued. “By threatening to cancel the Women’s Health Program in Texas, the Obama Administration is showing it would sooner deny tens of millions of dollars of medical services to low-income women rather than allow the State of Texas to cut off tax funding to Planned Parenthood.”
Addendum: this article from the Houston Chronicle (I quoted from it here) which implies that the ruling may go so far as to overturn our long-standing law that requires providers to sign a contract affirming that they don’t perform or refer for abortions.
Conservatives on my mind (Revision of earlier post) @governorperry
Conservatives understand that we shouldn’t make the perfect the enemy of the good. Personally, I’m reluctant to criticize Republican candidates before even one vote is cast in the Primaries. But Conservatives also know that if we ignore our principles for expediency, we risk losing both. if we learned anything in 2008, that is.
Even Erick Erickson of Red State says he’s ready to go “none of the above.” But “none of the above” won’t cut it this year. We are fighting an incumbent that is almost guaranteed the black, gay and pro-abort vote, not to mention all of the many people who can only survive by the redistribution of tax money!
We have an opportunity to vote our principles in Rick Perry. If you can’t bear Governor Perry or don’t believe his experience in governing Texas is indicative of his ability to govern the United States, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum are good options. In contrast, Gingrich or Romney would just be the latest version of “it’s his turn.” We need the consistency and the radical DC outsider that is Rick Perry.
I know that many Conservatives have either been divorced and remarried or have loved ones who have been divorced. Others have family members who are homosexuals. We might even have family members who have been convicted of crimes – and I’m not saying that either of the first two are crimes. However, we understand that messy personal lives are not the ideal, and we prefer that our leaders be someone that we can not only admire, but who will demonstrate that they hold – and live – our principles as their own.
The Newt is everything that we have been fighting since McCain was nominated. The ability to debate does not equate to the ability to govern.He has been selling himself as the next in line, ever since Obama’s inauguration, according to the report in the Real Clear Politics’ Election 2012: the Battle Begins. The story is that Gingrich hosted a dinner for Republicans on the night of the inauguration.
Worse, if Newt Gingrich is the Republican nominee, we won’t have the family values and principles that the base of the Conservative Republicans have rallied ’round. I’m not sure his history of serial adultery can stand up to opposition of same sex marriage. If marriage is plastic enough to support Newt’s history, then why not?
I’d like to believe the Catholic conversion that went along with this latest marriage is a good place to reset Newt’s sexual morality and ethical credentials. However, Gingrich can’t even stay on point on when life begins, telling us one thing on Friday and begging Catholics to tell us he meant something else on Sunday.
If Conservative bloggers are willing to go with pretty talk, will Conservative voters follow? I don’t think so. I believe that the TEA Party has proven that we are outside the influence of Party politics. We work from the Republican Party only as long as the Republican Party will honor our principles and at least appear to support *us.*
I am somewhat afraid that the TEA Party is too busy deciding whether personal lives and a true understanding of first principles – life, liberty, “first do no harm” – are important if their property is secured. I’ve watched in disbelief as uncertainty about the flavor of the month’s views on abortion, when life begins, true marriage and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is justified because of some mistaken idea that giving up ideology will give us the White House.
It’s indeed time to make the decision to support principles or not. But few of us will vote in New Hampshire, Iowa or South Carolina. Our choice of which candidate to support is only urgent if we are blogging, writing, advocating and donating money.
Whether your biggest fear is that Obama wins, or that Romney wins, the next 2 or 3 months are the time to support Conservatives. Don’t choose to advocate for or donate to the “electable” candidate long before your own before your primary, for pity’s sake!
Edited at 15:00, 12/8/11 to add last 3 paragraphs, and on December 25 to correct mispelling.
@GovernorPerry to Blitz: “You guys are a bigger pain than the back surgery.”
Governor Rick Perry was grilled by Wolf Blitzer on CNN‘s Situation Room on Wednesday, December 7, with frequent interruptions and repetitious questions. (Full transcript, here.) “Blitz” once again earned the nickname given to him by Herman Cain.
The Houston Chronicle, which leans far to the left, reported on the interview in a blog entry entitled, “Perry talks about pain meds, gay Scouts and the VP job”
[Perry] Asserted that his July spine surgery, which he noted involved the use of his own stem cells, was “incredibly successful.”
Blitzer’s question included the issue of pain medication, and Perry said, “I’m back running again, three to four miles, four to five times a week and I was off for 10 weeks. I probably took pain medication for the first 10 days, two weeks. And after that, the surgery has been awesome. … You guys are a bigger pain than the back surgery.”
But of course, the real problem for both Blitz and the Chronicle’s blogger is the Governor’s statements concerning pro-life, faith-based Catholic hospitals and adoption services, the lawsuits against the Boy Scouts who refuse to admit openly gay scout leaders and the limits on Catholic aide to victims of human trafficking. The Chronicle and Blitz each call these acts of “discrimination.” Blitz even asked Governor Perry whether “separation of church and state, does that mean anything to you?”
Perry pointed out the difference between “freedom *of* religion” and “freedom *from* religion. The question should be whether the First Amendment phrase “and the free exercise thereof” means anything.
Under the Bush Administration, Catholic Charities and hospitals weren’t forced to provide adoption services for homosexual couples or to pay for abortifacients like EllaOne or refer to abortionists in order to provide adoption assistance or prenatal care.
The Obama Administration is doing just the opposite. On top of the policies of the States of Illinois, Massachusetts, and others that are limiting Christian, pro-life adoption agencies, the Obama Administration is moving forward on regulations to severely restrict conscience.
Must every agency that receives tax money provide an absolutly full range of services? Lay aside the fact that adoption and abortion are not compatible with one another. It seems evident that birth mothers and and adoptive parents that go to Catholic charities and adoption agencies would have a pretty good idea about the philosophy of the group based on religious tenets.
That’s probably the fear of the prospective gay adopters: as the Governor says, “People will vote with their feet.” Why would a prolife Catholic girl who finds herself an unplanned pregnancy – who admittedly has most become pregnant by committing what she considers a sin – “choose” to have her baby raised in a home that doesn’t share her values? And why on earth would she ever “choose” to seek care for herself and her baby from a doctor who also kills the babies of other women?
The advocates for choice must, in fact, hate choice – they certainly fight to prevent it, even to demand that we act against our own “choice” and conscience.
@Governor Perry, @Freedom2Care: Abortion Ideology Trumps Aid for Victims of Human Trafficking
Regarding Governor Perry’s comments about the Obama Administration’s war on religion:
A grueling December 1 hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee revealed the disturbing answers to these questions, in the process infuriating Republican committee members and others concerned with aiding victims of human trafficking.
By the end of an over three-hour long grilling of U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) officials, one message had become clear about the Obama administration’s criteria for receiving the $4.5 million in federal grants for trafficking victims services:
Pro-life groups need not apply.
via Freedom2Care: Abortion Ideology Trumps Aid for Victims of Human Trafficking.
The regulations were written to prevent any pro-life group from receiving grant money:
The funding opportunity announcement for the “competitive” grant stipulated:
Translation: Participate in abortion or forget the grant.
Wentworth: redistricting to be fair to the Dems
Hey, Senator Wentworth! We don’t want a balanced consensus on the maps — we want Republican maps.(And we want Dr. Donna Campbell for Senate District 25.)
We don’t want activist judges, but neither are we willing to give up the right to draw our electoral maps just because it’s hard. We want Conservative Legislators, preferably Conservative, pro-life, pro-family Republican legislators – That’s why we sent 100 to the House this year, and won a 101st when he saw the light.
Earl Jeffrey has a column in the San Antonio Express News on Dec.6 th, begging us to cross the aisle and “all just get along:”
In addition to separating communities of interest, gerrymandering protects incumbents. Protected incumbencies discourage challengers, so voters’ choices are limited to a “token” challenger or to no choice at all.
Since both political parties have proven conclusively that they are unable to resist the gerrymandering urge, Senate Bill 22 would have created an independent, bipartisan citizens’ redistricting commission that I believe would bring more of a sense of balance and a semblance of fairness to redistricting.
via Federal judges redraw Texas redistricting maps – San Antonio Express-News.
Gingrich fails human ethics, human embryology
Even though we are the only species having this conversation, that doesn’t mean that we always get it right.
I was hoping that the recent Catholic conversion of Republican candidate for President Newt Gingrich would ensure that he is pro-life and would act correctly if he is ever elected to an office. Unfortunately, he doesn’t understand the basics of embryology. He fails human ethics and would end up charged with a Federal offense if he tried to make this argument to the Environmental Protection Agency about any animal on the Endangered Species List:
“Well, I think the question of being implanted is a very big question. My friends who have ideological positions that sound good don’t then follow through the logic of: ‘So how many additional potential lives are they talking about? What are they going to do as a practical matter to make this real?’
“I think that if you take a position when a woman has fertilized egg and that’s been successfully implanted that now you’re dealing with life, because otherwise you’re going to open up an extraordinary range of very difficult questions.”
“. . . In addition I would say that I’ve never been for embryonic stem cell research per se. I have been for, there are a lot of different ways to get embryonic stem cells. I think if you can get embryonic stem cells for example from placental blood if you can get it in ways that do not involve the loss of a life that’s a perfectly legitimate avenue of approach.
“What I reject is the idea that we’re going to take one life for the purpose of doing research for other purposes and I think that crosses a threshold of de-humanizing us that’s very very dangerous.”
via Gingrich Breaks from Some in Anti-Abortion Community on When Life Begins – ABC News.
Speaker Gingrich is absolutely wrong to say that we who hold the “ideological” position that human life begins at fertilization have not thought about the implications. If we hadn’t done so on our own, some utilitarian like the Speaker would have forced us to do so.
Just as with any other species, the mammal human embryo is the same species as the mother and father, and the one time when that life begins is at fertilization. What is it that implants? Would the technician in the in vitro lab or even the stem cell lab care what happened to the egg and the sperm if there is no fertilization?
Implantation is another step in that life that began at fertilization of the oocyte by the sperm.
Ectopic pregnancy is an event like cancer or heart attacks or kidney failure: when the normal process doesn’t go the way it should and people die. Because of the immediate and inevitable danger to the life of the mother and the unquestionable inability of human medicine to save the embryonic child, we don’t even count the procedures we do as “abortion.” when documenting abortion and maternal health statistics.
If we did call it abortion, it certainly would not be an “elective” abortion, but a procedure done to remove an eminent and known threat to the life of the mother who could die within minutes due to internal bleeding when the embryo grows too big for the fallopian tube at sometime between 6 and 8 weeks of age.
The sperm is not a life. Some do believe that any sexual act should be directly tied to and open to procreation, but not all Christians who object to abortion or other euthanasia agree agree on this point.
The least educated, lowest technician in the in vitro lab knows the difference between the sperm in the cup, the oocyte and the embryo. Within hours, they know whether the embryo is.
In vitro fertilization is an ethical problem when the embryos are not treated with the respect and care due the human dignity of all our children. The human embryo in the dish is the same species as the embryo in the fallopian tube. (See above.) Several countries have laws limiting in vitro fertilization, the numbers of embryos and some require that any embryo fertilized in the lab be implanted.
First, there is no way to obtain embryonic stem cells other than to destroy or endanger an embryo.The cells obtained from umbilical cord blood and the placenta are technically fetal, not embryonic stem cells. But, as the Speaker notes, no one has to die to obtain them.
And yes, our society has some tough decisions to make. Will we continue to refuse to provide the same protection for our own children that we give to a pelican or a sea turtle?
Legislator says stem cells helped » Times Record News
This is a wonderful story. I’m very glad for the Representative and for all the patients who receive their own stem cells and have good results. (My granddaughter, at 15 months old in 2001, received an anonymous little boy’s umbilical cord blood after her bone marrow completely failed. More here.)
Someday, I believe we’ll find the stimulating factors that make the body’s stem cells activate the way we want them. In the meantime, this is what our researchers – and Legislators – are finding out about ethical adult stem cells (not destructive embryonic stem cells.:
State Rep. Rick Hardcastle, R-Vernon, participated in a recent round of autologous adult stem cell treatments to help his multiple sclerosis, similar to what Gov. Rick Perry had done in July.
Although the stem cells are not embryonic, doctors in the U.S. are still skeptical of the procedure because it is not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
Adult stem cells are taken from the patient’s fat, sent to a lab where they are developed, then reintroduced to the patient via intravenous therapy.
The treatments are used to treat patients with autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, Crohn’s disease, Parkinson’s and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Hardcastle was diagnosed with MS almost 10 years ago and repeatedly said the treatments worked phenomenally for him.
“I’m walking on water and near bulletproof,” Hardcastle said from a casino in Las Vegas, where he was with his wife for the National Finals Rodeo. “Since I had the third treatment, I have fished in the river in Alaska. I have walked up and down stairs without having to hold onto the handrail like a goon. It’s just been phenomenal so far.”
Hardcastle said just having his balance is an amazing thing because since he was diagnosed, his balance was one of the first things to go. He spoke at length about how easily he was able to walk the stairs at the Las Vegas event.
“Eight years ago, I was having to literally … stop to step over a concrete barrier on a parking curb. I just walk across it now like I did 20 years ago,” he said.
Truth, Logic, Siri, and PCMag.com
The Lord does work in mysterious ways, but most of the time He just uses the laws of physics and the logic that He invented. Still, I was surprised to find an argument for pro-life versus abortion logic on a technology blog at PCMag.com. And the simple logic of pointing out that abortionists don’t use the word “abortion” when advertising their services is much more telling than I believe the author knew.
“”Siri is doing exactly what it was built to do—provide answers to questions like, “Where can I get an abortion?” using its own algorithms and the online resources it has available to craft answers.
***********
“”Consider the current kerfuffle. This is simplifying things a bit, but the gist of this story is that Siri is getting hung up on a word, “abortion,” because organizations that actually offer abortion services tend not to use the word as much as anti-abortion organizations do. So when Siri goes looking for where to get an “abortion” in the digital wordscape of the Internet, lo and behold, it returns addresses for Crisis Pregnancy Centers rather than Planned Parenthood.””
(via Siri is Dumb. There, We Said It. | News & Opinion | PCMag.com.)
Or, it could be Steve Jobs’ last word from beyond the grave reminding us of all we could have lost if his mother hadn’t chosen life rather than abortion.
For those who don’t use the iPhone: Siri is a voice-activated program that searches for answers to questions. Think of a “Google” that you can talk to.
Okay, I will admit to a lot of bias in favor of protecting the lives of our children of the future. I’m a pro-life advocate and serve on a couple of Boards for Pro-life advocacy: Texas Alliance for Life which lobbies for pro-life laws and regulations in Austin, Texas and even a “Crisis Pregnancy Center,” Options for Women in New Braunfels, Texas. But this irony is too rich.
There is no big conspiracy paid for by “anti-abortion” forces to influence us to “Choose Life.” Steve Jobs most likely didn’t set this up before his death in order to contrast his adoption by loving and nurturing parents with abortion and to remind us of what we lose by the death of every child whose life is intentionally ended before birth.
And this is not a “glitch.”
The Creator of the Universe didn’t have to break a single law of nature to point out the simple fact that abortionists don’t tend to admit what they do. Truth and Logic worked as they should in this case.
The Philosophical Argument for Life | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson
Let’s hear it for the class of 2014! Here’s a great example of a thinking young woman who wrote for the Harvard Crimson. The Comments are very good, too!
In response to the growing hostility toward discussion of the abortion issue on campus and dissolution into name-calling, as seen in the impressively consistent vandalism of Harvard Right to Life’s poster campaigns, I’d like to present a philosophical argument for the pro-life position. HRL’s innocuous “Smile, your mom chose life.” posters have been ripped down within hours of posting almost without exception. At a school where free speech and diversity are valued so highly, this is a travesty. However, it seems to follow from the fact that the Harvard community limits its dialogue about abortion to religion and politics. I will set these aside to address the ethics of the situation, without which reasonable discussion is impossible.
The reason there is so much tension and so little understanding between individuals of differing opinions on the abortion issue is that the two sides approach it from completely different angles. The “pro-choice” side emphasizes women and their rights while the pro-life side focuses on the other person involved. We can all agree that women should have control over their bodies—but it is imperative to determine whether or not a second person is involved before we can talk about women’s rights.
The philosophical argument for life has two simple premises one from natural value and one from natural science.
The premise based on natural value is that all human beings have the right to life because they are human. Surprisingly enough, this is the premise that most pro-abortion philosophers will disagree with in the modern debate—they will deny universal values altogether and argue instead that values are simply subjective.
The premise based on natural science is that the life of each individual mammal begins at conception. Modern science has made it nearly impossible to defend the view that the fetus is not human, considering that from the moment of conception it has human DNA, so the issue centers on personhood. If the human is a person only when neurologically functioning as a human, then by that same argument it would be permissible to kill people while they are in deep sleep, in comas, or mentally handicapped. Similar arguments can be made for location and viability. The only time when we can consistently argue the human fetus becomes a person is when he or she becomes human: at conception.
via The Philosophical Argument for Life | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson.
Geron Awarded Grants (under ObamaCare Stimulus)
Just one more failed “stimulus” project? This past week, Geron announced they are no longer pursuing their research in embryonic stem cells. They laid off 66 employees.
The US government should never have been in the business of picking and choosing business winners and losers. We certainly shouldn’t be giving money for destructive embryonic stem cell research.
Included as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, the QTDP program provided a tax credit to encourage investments in new therapies to prevent, diagnose, and treat acute and chronic diseases. Companies, such as Geron, that cannot currently use a tax credit were allowed to apply for a cash grant
in lieu of a tax credit.
To be eligible for the program, projects must show reasonable potential to result in new therapies to treat areas of unmet medical need; prevent, detect, or treat chronic or acute disease and conditions; reduce long-term health care costs in the United States; or significantly advance the goal of curing cancer within a 30-year period.
In addition, preference was given to projects that showed the greatest potential to create and sustain (directly or indirectly) high quality, high-paying jobs in the United States, and advance United States competitiveness in the fields of life, biological, and medical sciences.
Projects were selected jointly by the Treasury Department and the Department of Health and Human Services.
via Geron Awarded Grants Under Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Project Program.
Geron To End Embryonic Stem Cell Research : NPR
Geron is getting out of the business of doing Embryonic Stem cell research. Trust me, if there were any objective truth to the idea that destructive Embryonic Stem cells could make money, the Corp. would stay in.
From NPR:
Earlier this week, the Geron Corporation announced it was abandoning its research into using embryonic stem cells to treat spinal cord injury. Geron was the first company to get the green light from the FDA to conduct clinical trials using embryonic stem cells. That was way back in 2009. And now, citing, quote, “capital scarcity and uncertain economic conditions,” the company is looking to sell off that part of its business and focus on other work.
Thomas Sowell Interview on Human Events (video) @TeamRickPerry
Landmark interview with a brilliant man who possesses a brilliant mind.
Watch the whole thing, for a look back at this incredible man’s history and experiences. Beginning with an interview in 1981 with William Buckley, and moving on into the 2011 political climate. Dr. Sowell discusses his own evolution from Marxism to Conservativism. Segment 5 includes comments on President Obama and the current Republican Presidential rate.
Peter Robinson of Uncommon Knowledge shows us his own brilliance by his questions and demeanor.
TEXAS ALLIANCE FOR LIFE FILES BRIEF IN 5TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS TO DEFEND TEXAS SONOGRAM LAW
“If Only There Were A Vaccine for Hysteria” Redux*
World Net Daily sometimes goes off the path, but this time, they are posting emotional noise in the article, “’My headache’s about to explode’: U.S. girls just dropping dead.” Author Joe Kovacs even goes so far as to support the claim by the organization, Judicial Watch, that the vaccine against Human Papilloma Virus, Gardasil, is harmful by citing a case of “meningococcal disease,” caused by the bacteria, Neisseria meningitides.
The article or the claims have no basis in fact. There was one case of anaphylactic shock, but no other deaths due to the vaccine. There has been no pattern of serious adverse effects and the major problems have been sore arms and fainting which looks like a seizure to those who haven’t seen it before. (I’m a Family Physician who has had fathers faint in my office and the hospital while watching procedures or shots. Mothers tend to sit when I ask them to, so they’re less likely to faint.)
Gardasil is not derived from the actual HPV virus. It is made the same way that insulin is made for patient injection for diabetes: bacteria is tricked into producing proteins that “look” like bits of the virus, but are never in any way active as an infectious agent.
The article notes that there have been over 35 Million doses of Gardasil given in the United States. We have 10 years of experience. Back in 2006, before Governor Rick Perry made news my adding Gardasil to the list of mandatory vaccines for school children, we already had five years of history and reviews of the vaccine. We have all sorts of studies and surveillance going on currently. Take a look at the world-wide surveillance.
Everything that has an effect is likely to have a side effect. However, this article and the hullabaloo over Gardasil is hysteria. There are mechanisms that allow us to predict bodily reactions and enable us to practice medicine: we know how the body is likely to react to disease, a new exposure or stress, or to medications. There is no mechanism for the “my head is going to explode” symptom.
We do know enough to be able to say what does not have a basis in science. Science and medicine are getting *better* at predicting outcomes, not worse. Read up on “biological plausibility.”
In the comments, people are saying that the CDC and FDA are part of big conspiracy, that people shouldn’t trust their doctors. The reason that there are more recommended vaccines is because we are doing research to find more vaccines to prevent diseases, not because some horrible conspiracy is growing.
* We don’t have a vaccine for hysteria, although Michael Fumento called for one back in 1999, in his op-ed on a similar hullabaloo surrounding the anthrax vaccine.
Sequenom to Sell Down Syndrome Test 2 Years After Pullback – Bloomberg
Note the pretty “terminating the pregnancy” phrase that’s used instead of aborting the baby (or even the usual term used, “fetus”).
This new test will, indeed “change the conversation about abortion.” This news story, including comments from utilitarian bioethicist, Art Caplan, Ph.D., will move the conversation much earlier into the pregnancy and remind us about the risk to healthy children in healthy mothers from tests for genetic markers. It will also stir the debate on late-appearing diseases like Alzheimer’s dementia and breast cancer.
(Who knows, we might be getting closer to tests for behavioral tendencies or even the “gay gene,” if one is ever found.)
Sequenom doesn’t indicate whether there are false positives or what the accuracy is in women who are not at “high risk” for having a Down’s Syndrome child.
The blood test is accurate in detecting Trisomy 21, the genetic chromosomal abnormality that most commonly causes Down syndrome, 99.1 percent of the time as early as 10 weeks into a pregnancy, the San Diego-based company said in a statement. The test, and others that will be able to identify genetic abnormalities early in pregnancies, will alter the debate over abortion, said Art Caplan, director of the center for bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania.
“For many people this test makes it morally, emotionally and psychologically easier to have an abortion,” Caplan said in an interview.
Caplan said future prenatal tests may be able to indicate if the fetus had biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease, or breast cancer, or other diseases. Those tests will raise questions about what issues will trigger potential parents to choose an abortion. A survey published last month in the American Journal of Medical Genetics showed that only 4 percent of parents with Down Syndrome children regretted having them.
Ethical Shift
“Ethically, we are now starting to see the shift in the issue of what counts as a medical disorder, what’s significant enough to test for, what’s a genetic disability or just a difference,” he said. “Many in the Down syndrome community would say it’s just a difference.”
via Sequenom to Sell Down Syndrome Test 2 Years After Pullback – Bloomberg.
Benefit Concert Planned For Bastrop Fire Victims
The benefit show at UT’s Erwin Center will now kick off at 6:30 p.m. Doors will open at 5:30 p.m.
Tickets ranging in price from $25 to $250 are available at TexasBoxOffice.com.
Performers include:
Christopher Cross
Terri Hendrix
Eric Johnson
Joe Satriani
Asleep at the Wheel
Texas Tornados
Randy Rogers Band
Lyle Lovett
Willie Nelson
Dixie Chicks *barf*
George Strait
Proceeds will go to the Austin Community Foundation’s Central Texas Wildfire Fund.
You can also buy T-shirts to support the Bastrop Fire Department (BFD) from the UT Senate. Click Here or at the pic above.
AUSTIN, Texas — A huge benefit concert to help out the more than 1,500 people who lost their homes in the Bastrop County wildfire is planned for next month.
Willie Nelson, Lyle Lovett, the Dixie Chicks, Asleep at the Wheel, Steve Miller, with Eric Johnson & Joe Satriani, Shawn Colvin & the Court Yard Hounds, and the Texas Tornados have all signed up to perform.
Friday Night Lights and recent Emmy winner Kyle Chandler will be the host.
The concert, dubbed Fire Relief: The Concert for Central Texas, has been organized by Austin music moguls Ray Benson and Peter Schwarz, who say they pulled together all of their resources to put the show on.
Tickets go on sale Friday at Texas Box Office. Prices range from $25 to $250 for the Oct. 17 show.
via Benefit Concert Planned For Bastrop Fire Victims – San Antonio & Texas News Story – KSAT San Antonio.
Pro-life Pregnancy Centers sue Austin, Texas
In April, 2010, the Austin City Council passed an ordinance targeting Pregnancy Resource Centers (AKA “Crisis Pregnancy Centers”). The Liberty Institute , the Law of Life Project, the Texas Center for the Defense of Life and the Alliance Defense fund have filed a lawsuit on behalf of Austin Life Care and three other centers in Federal Court, citing free speech violations.
Disclaimer: These organizations are joined and supported by Texas Alliance for Life, whose Executive Director, Dr. Joe Pojman is shown in this photo. I’m on the Board of Directors of TAL.
(Seriously? The City of Austin doesn’t believe that it’s obvious to anyone that “Austin Life Care” is not an abortion provider??)
According to an article by “We Are Austin. com” published at the time, the ordinance was aimed at “limited services pregnancy centers,” and could result in fines:
The ordinance says two signs in black and white must read in English and Spanish, that states: “This center does not provide abortions or refer to abortion providers. This center does not provide or refer to providers of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved birth control drugs and medical devices.”
Each sign must be at least eight and a half by 11 inches and the text must be in a minimum font size of 48 point.
Before the vote, council members questioned how the ordinance will be enforced. The city’s legal team said Austin police will not enforce it, no one will be arrested for not posting the sign, and that enforcement will be complaint-based only. Pregnancy centers that do violate the ordinance, however, can face a fine of $250 for the first offense, $350 for a second offense, and at least $450 for a third offense.
Joining Austin Life Care are the Austin Pregnancy Resource Center, the South Austin Pregnancy Resource Center and the Catholic Charities of Central Texas‘ Gabriel Project Life Center. ALC has posted the signs, but the other three haven’t done so.
The ordinance, which is the first of its kind in Texas, requires each PRC to post a sign at its entrance stating it does not provide or refer for abortions or birth control services. Two of the pregnancy centers refer married clients to primary physicians for birth control, and the third center provides information to women about natural family planning and abstinence, two recognized forms of birth control.
There is no requirement forcing abortion facilities to post signs or provide disclaimers stating what services they do not provide for women.
Governor Rick Perry’s Speech at Value Voters’ Summit (Text)
GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: Ah, thank you. Oh, my goodness. Thank you all for that very powerful welcome.
And Pastor Jeffress, I want to thank you for a rousing introduction. He – he knocked it out of the park, as we – we like to say. And – and a fellow who on any given Sunday is working with 10,000 Texans in his – in his church. So I just again want to say thank you to quite a leader.
I’m also proud to be joined today by my best friend, someone who has done more to enrich my life than any other person, an individual who will be a fabulous first lady for the United States of America, my wife, Anita. (Cheers, applause.)
And it is good to be with all of you. I want to thank Tony Perkins for the invitation to speak at the – at the event today and – and – and for his work in advancing the conservative constitutional principles that have built the greatest nation in the history of civilization. Tony, thank you. (Applause.)
You know, so many of you have come – so many have come to this gathering of value voters, you know, and it really strikes me as – as interesting. There is no voter in America who is not a value voter. It’s just a question of whose values that they share. (Laughter.)
(Chuckles.) You know, you think about that. You know, some hold this worldview that government must be central in our – in our lives and serve as our caretaker. They seek more than equal opportunity, they seek equal outcomes. And you know, those in the White House today don’t believe – they don’t believe in American exceptionalism. They’d rather emulate the failed policies of Europe.
But we see what their policies have led to: 14 million Americans out of work, 45 million Americans on food stamps. And according to Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal, Bob (sp), nearly half of Americans now receive government benefits.
You know, in response to this economic misery, you know, liberals are now pointing the finger of blame at successful employers under the guise of fairness. But when they utter phrases like “fair share,” you just know – (chuckles) – they’re once again playing fast and furious with the truth. (Laughter.) (Chuckles.) And the truth is you can’t rev up the engine of an economic growth by heaping higher taxes on job creators. You can’t spread success by punishing it. You can’t unite our country by dividing it.
The answer to our troubles lies in a positive, optimistic vision, with policies rooted in American exceptionalism. See, American exceptionalism is the product of unlimited freedom. And there is nothing troubling our nation today that cannot be solved by the rebirth of freedom – nothing. (Cheers, applause.)
I happen to believe in this great country of ours. I believe in the capacity of our people to create prosperity through private ingenuity. I believe in the values of the American people. Americans know anything worth achieving in life requires hard work, not government’s handouts. And this present generation of Americans, they’re not looking for government to lead the way. They’re looking for America to get out of the way so that they can make the most of the freedom for their families.
But you can’t live free if you can’t find a job. You can’t live free if you inherit $46,000 bill in the federal debt. You can’t live free when the government gets between you and your doctor.
I believe it’s time to revive freedom for our families and our employers. If we’re going to get entrepreneurs and small businesses off the mat and on their feet again, we need to freeze all of the pending federal regulations that are out there for the next six months – freeze them all. (Cheers, applause.) We need to cut taxes for families and employers because the only kind of stimulus that will work is the kind that puts more money in your pocket, not government’s. (Applause.)
We – we need to repeal the job-killing bureaucratic nightmare that’s known as “Obamacare.”
(Cheers, applause.)
GOV. PERRY: You know, there are three pillars that serve as the foundation of our country: strong economy, strong families and a strong military.
In my home state, we have created about 40 percent of all American jobs since June of 2009. Our success is based on four rather simple principles. One is, don’t spend all the money.
GOV. PERRY: And number two is, keep the taxes low. Three is, provide a fair and predictable regulatory climate, and four, stop the frivolous lawsuits. (Applause.)
GOV. PERRY: They kill jobs.
GOV. PERRY: So that we passed the most sweeping tort reform in the nation and – which, I might add, includes a new loser pay law in the state of Texas. (Applause.)
You know, at the same time as the Fed chairman warns that the recovery is close to faltering, just yesterday the Texas comptroller’s office said our tax revenues have rebounded to pre-recession levels. (Applause.)
Our August – our August home sales rose. Our employment expanded. Our exports increased. Manufacturing activity started climbing again.
And yet there was President Obama, standing in front of the White House press corps, doubling down on the same failed strategy that had worsened our economic crisis and doubled our deficits. It just goes to show you that those blinded by tax-and-spend big-government ideology will never see the truth.
GOV. PERRY: Every day – every day – it is clear that the United States economy, for it to grow and to succeed, we need new leadership. (Applause.)
GOV. PERRY: President Obama’s commitment to the same old pro-tax, pro-government, pro-regulation policies – they failed our nation. America needs a new leader, with a proven record of job creation and sound economic policies.
You know, Texas is not immune to the effects of the national economic environment, but recent reports show that low, flat and fair taxes; reasonable and predictable regulations; restrained government spending is a proven recipe for job creation. The key to prosperity is liberty. Yet the larger government grows, the smaller our circle of freedoms. The most basic unit of government (see note at bottom – BBN) is family. And as a conservative, I believe with all my heart that the government closest to the people is the best for the people. There should not be a single policy coming out of Washington, D.C., that interferes with decisions best made by the family. (Applause.)
GOV. PERRY: I’m proud to be the son of two tenant farmers. Where I grew up, we didn’t have much in the way of material goods, but we were sure rich. We were rich in spirit. We were abundant in faith. And we were devoted to family. Happiness wasn’t a product of what we had but what we believed.
And we believed we were blessed to live in the freest nation on this earth, that were fortunate to grow up where there was a strong sense of community, that there was nothing that we couldn’t achieve in “the land of the free and the home of the brave.”
In fact, my little country school where I grew up and graduated had a motto. It said: No dream too tall for a school so small. (Laughter.)
(Chuckles.) You know, there are millions of Americans that are born into less than ideal circumstances. Maybe they were born into poverty, born without a parent. But as a society, we must stand for the principle that every life – every life – is worth living, regardless of the circumstance. In America – (applause) – in America it’s not where you come from that matters, but where you’re going. As Americans, we must affirm the value of life, not just in our Declaration of Independence, but in the way that we live.
For some candidates, pro-life is an election-year slogan to follow the prevailing political winds. To me it’s about the absolute principle that every human being is entitled to life. All human life – all human life – is made in the image of our creator. (Cheers, applause.) And every innocent life must be protected, from the most frail, who are elderly, to the most vulnerable, who are unborn.
That’s why as governor I have consistently worked for pro-life legislation, policies such as parental consent for minors seeking an abortion, a ban on third tri-semester (sic) abortions, an informed consent law. And I’m proud to fight for and was proud to sign a budget that defunded Planned Parenthood in Texas. (Cheers, applause.)
Our obligation is not only to protect life and bestow freedom on future generations, but it’s also to instill character. Young Americans must never be taught about rights without also learning about responsibilities. We must not – (applause) – we must not proclaim the responsibilities of a free society and ignore the responsibilities of free individuals. We must never mistake liberty for license. One’s a right; the other leads to bondage.
For more than a generation, our culture has emphasized a message of self-indulgence at the expense of social obligation. We have reaped the consequences – in the form of teen pregnancies, divorced and broken families, the cycle of incarceration that joins young men with their fathers behind bars. The fabric of our society is not government, or individual freedom; it is the family. And the demise of the family is the demise of any great society. (Applause.)
This great country of ours has never been steered off-course when we have advocated policies that expand freedom and promote strong families. But neither can it be preserved without an unwavering commitment to our national security. You know, as Americans, we’re blessed to have the greatest fighting force for freedom in this entire world: our men and women of the United States military. (Applause.)
You know, there are some out there, some misguided souls that just say you can’t find heroes anymore. My, my, are they ever wrong. We have heroes today. They’re fighting in the mountains of Afghanistan and sands of Iraq. They’re those on covert missions, in places we don’t even know about, to find and destroy the enemies of this country. They put their lives on the line every day so that we don’t have to.
Over the years I’ve been so honored to have met a great many of those American heroes as I’ve traveled to their outposts in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I’ve signed letters to their loved ones who have made the ultimate sacrifice.
I consider myself so fortunate to have been able to wear the uniform of our country. And that experience, it informs my perspective about our defense policies. Specifically, I believe we must never put the military on a chopping block for arbitrary budget cuts as part of some political horse trade. (Cheers, applause.) Never.
The question we must ask is not what we can afford to spend on our military, but what it costs to remain secure and free. You see, a real key component of keeping America secure is keeping Israel secure. (Cheers, applause.) We can never forget – we can never forget that it was Israel that took out the nuclear capability of Iraq in 1981, and of Syria in 2007. Israel is our ally. They’re our friend. And when I’m president of the United States, America will again stand with our friend. (Cheers, applause.)
We’re not going to compromise when it comes to our national security, and that is true when it comes to defense spending, and it is also true when it comes to border security. And let me say this about border security. I have lived and breathed this issue for over a decade as a border governor. I’ve signed budgets that contain a total of $400 million of state security operations along that border. I’ve dealt with the carnage caused by those who traffic in drugs and weapons and people. As a border governor, I know firsthand the failures of our federal border policies. And I know the answers to those failures is not to grant amnesty to those who broke the laws to come into this country. (Cheers, applause.)
I was proud to sign legislation requiring a photo ID to vote in order to protect the integrity of our elections. (Applause.) And for the obvious security reasons, I vetoed legislation to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens. (Applause.) There is no homeland security without border security. Let me repeat that. There is no security without border security.
And make no mistake about it. What we are seeing south of our border is nothing short of a war being waged by these narcoterrorists. They represent a clear and a present danger to our country. They are spreading violence to American cities. They are peddling poisons to our children.
In the face of this threat, we shouldn’t take any options off the table, including security operations in cooperation with the Mexican government, as we did with Colombia some years ago. You can’t have liberty, you can’t have opportunity, you can’t have prosperity without security. The issue before our leaders of both parties is securing a better future for all Americans.
You see, economic security is a topic of discussion at millions of dinner tables all across this country of ours. In the past two months I’ve had the great privilege to travel across this country. And I’ve listened to thousands of Americans, and they’re not under any illusions about the current state of our country.
They’ve never mistaken hope for a handout because they want to earn their keep. They aren’t looking for soaring speeches. They’re looking for common-sense solutions. And they know our first order of business to getting America working again is sending our current president to the private sector. (Laughter, cheers, applause.)
You know, like all of you in here, I still believe in the exceptionalism of America. And to paraphrase both Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, America remains the last best hope of mankind. We must never forget that the exceptionalism of America can be traced right into our founding principles, the fact that the framers of our Constitution were the first in the history to declare that all men are created equal, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.
The hand of providence has guided America throughout our history, from those first colonists to arrive in the New World to the courage of George Washington during those darkest hours of Valley Forge to the defeat of tyranny during two world wars and the Cold War. Time and time again America has been the source of – of light in a world that’s been beset by darkness.
And like a lighthouse perched on the shore, we have provided this safe harbor to millions who have been adrift in a sea of economic misery. We can still be the country we aspire to, a source of light and hope to all who live here and those who come here. Anchored by our – our ideals, we can rebuild on the solid foundation of truth instead of the shifting sands of moral relativism. We can restore hope at home while projecting our values abroad. We can be the freest, most prosperous people to ever occupy the planet if we remain one nation under God.
God bless you, and thank you all for coming and allowing me to participate today. God bless you. (Cheers, applause.)
Read more: http://thepage.time.com/2011/10/08/perry-values-voter-summit-transcript/#ixzz1aD84PklF
Edit, 10-11-11, 12 noon: spelling, removed audience comments. Also, I heard the Governor say “the most basic unit of governance” not “government,” but the other transcripts agree with this one.
Campbell files to oppose Wentworth for state senate seat | The Gonzales Cannon
Good news for Republicans in the Texas Senate District 25!
Since our current Senator refused to allow me to be introduced as “Doctor for the Day” at the Capitol last May because of my efforts to get him to endorse pro-life causes, guess who I endorse?
Dr. Donna Campbell announced Monday her intention to seek the Republican nomination for Texas Senate, District 25 in order to fill a void of conservative leadership.
Campbell ran unsuccessfully to unseat Congressman Lloyd Doggett in last year’s congressional races, carrying every county but one — Travis County — in that district. She will oppose incumbent seven-term Republican state Sen. Jeff Wentworth, who is viewed as a moderate by most party members.
The 25th District includes Guadalupe, Hays, Comal and parts of Bexar and Travis counties.
via Campbell files to oppose Wentworth for state senate seat | The Gonzales Cannon.
Hat tip to Conservatives in Action.
Conservatives in Action: New Look
Take a look at the new look at Conservatives in Action.
“Red Sonja” reaches over 10,000 readers with her email newsletters, and her blog is sure to reach as many. If you want to read what Conservatives are thinking, read this blog!
Click here to get your “Choose Life” license plate
Rick Perry RickPAC
Yes, I'm still for Governor Perry!
RickPAC
SiteMeter
WingRight 