Palin exposes Obama's abortion extremism

Governor Palin, the GOP vice presidential nominee unveiled Obama on abortion while campaigning in Pennsylvania.

In this same spirit, as defenders of the culture of life, John McCain and I believe in the goodness and potential of every innocent life. I believe the truest measure of any society is how it treats those who are least able to defend and speak for themselves. And who is more vulnerable, or more innocent, than a child?

When I learned that my son Trig would have special needs, I had to prepare my heart for the challenges to come. At first I was scared, and Todd and I had to ask for strength and understanding. But I can tell you a few things I’ve learned already.
Yes, every innocent life matters. Everyone belongs in the circle of protection. Every child has something to contribute to the world, if we give them that chance. There are the world’s standards of perfection … and then there are God’s, and these are the final measure. Every child is beautiful before God, and dear to Him for their own sake.

As for our beautiful baby boy, for Todd and me, he is only more precious because he is vulnerable. In some ways, I think we stand to learn more from him than he does from us. When we hold Trig and care for him, we don’t feel scared anymore. We feel blessed.

It’s hard to think of many issues that could possibly be more important than who is protected in law and who isn’t – who is granted life and who is denied it. So when our opponent, Senator Obama, speaks about questions of life, I listen very carefully.
I listened when he defended his unconditional support for unlimited abortions. He said that a woman shouldn’t have to be – quote – “punished with a baby.” He said that right here in Johnstown –“punished with a baby” – and it’s about time we called him on it. The more I hear from Senator Obama, the more I understand why he is so vague and evasive on the subject. Americans need to see his record for what it is. It’s not negative or mean-spirited to talk to about his record. Whatever party you belong to, there are facts you need to know.

Senator Obama has voted against bills to end partial-birth abortion. In the Illinois Senate, a bipartisan majority passed legislation against that practice. Senator Obama opposed that bill. He voted against it in committee, and voted “present” on the Senate floor. In that legislature, “present” is how you vote when you’re against something, but don’t want to be held to account.

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat, described partial-birth abortion as “too close to infanticide.” Barack Obama thinks it’s a constitutional right, but he is wrong.

Most troubling, as a state senator, Barack Obama wouldn’t even stand up for the rights of infants born alive during an abortion. These infants – often babies with special needs – are simply left to die.

In 2002, Congress unanimously passed a federal law to require medical care for those babies who survive an abortion. They’re living, breathing babies, but Senator Obama describes them as “pre-viable.” This merciful law was called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Illinois had a version of the same law. Obama voted against it.
Asked about this vote, Senator Obama assured a reporter that he’d have voted “yes” on that bill if it had contained language similar to the federal version of the Born Alive Act. There’s just one little problem with that story: the language of both the state and federal bills was identical.

In short, Senator Obama is a politician who has long since left behind even the middle ground on the issue of life. He has sided with those who won’t even protect a child born alive. And this exposes the emptiness of his promises to move beyond the “old politics.”

In both parties, Americans have many concerns to be weighed in the votes they cast on November fourth. In times like these, with wars and a financial crisis, it’s easy to forget even as deep and abiding a concern as the right to life. And it seems our opponent hopes that you will forget. Like so much else in his agenda, he hopes you won’t notice how radical his ideas and record are until it’s too late.
But let there be no misunderstanding about the stakes.

A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for activist courts that will continue to smother the open and democratic debate we need on this issue, at both the state and federal level. A vote for Barack Obama would give the ultimate power over the issue of life to a politician who has never once done anything to protect the unborn. As Senator Obama told Pastor Rick Warren, it’s above his pay grade.

For a candidate who talks so often about “hope,” he offers no hope at all in meeting this great challenge to the conscience of America. There is a growing consensus in our country that we can overcome narrow partisanship on this issue, and bring all the resources of a generous country to the aid of both women in need and the child waiting to be born. We need more of the compassion and idealism that our opponent’s own party, at its best, once stood for. We need the clarity and conviction of leaders like the late Governor Bob Casey.

He represented a humanity that speaks to all of us – no matter what our party, our background, our faith, or our gender. And no matter your position on this sensitive subject, I hope that spirit will guide you on Election Day. I ask you to vote for McCain-Palin on the November fourth, and help us to bring this country together in the rational discussion of compassion and life.

************************************
I wonder why the McCain campaign hasn't been trying to attack Obama on the issue of abortion until now. Thank God, Palin has gone on the attack. In the remaining weeks (and hopefully at the last debate) if they open up on this front, many independent swing voters and pro-life Democrats may take a pause -- pause enough to swing their votes to the GOP.

A Democratic Voice for McCain-Palin '08

A feminist and a Democrat is voting for the Republicans this November. What's her reasoning? I found it interesting, particularly the abortion comment.

Vicious Obama partisans have driven Clinton supporters like me out of the party. And PUMAs will vote for McCain/Palin in November.

Obama has a thin resume. He is a first-term senator from Illinois who has spent most of that term running for president. He was put in charge of a Congressional committee and has not held a single committee meeting. His career has been more about self-promotion than public service.

The media have vetted Palin more in a week's time than Obama was vetted in 20 months. They have crawled into her uterus and her ovaries as well as those of her 17-year-old pregnant daughter.

What's wrong with this picture? The PUMAs know.

As a lifelong Democrat, I am leaving the party with a feeling of profound regret and sadness. It's not that I'm a creationist, a pro-lifer or an environmentally unfriendly person, but as Susan B. Anthony said, no woman should support a party that doesn't support her.

It's not enough, as a PUMA interviewed by CNN at the Republican Convention said, to wave abortion and the Supreme Court in our faces to "keep us in line." No, we don't have to come home to the UnDemocratic party because we have nowhere else to go.

We own our own votes. We PUMAs waved our orange scarves at the Republican Convention and McCain wore an orange tie in our honor.

I talked to a former Clinton supporter at the Labor Day picnic. She is planning to vote, but not for president. She "can't vote for McCain" and won't vote for Obama.

I talked to a 20-year-old UI sophomore who supports Obama. She admitted that at her Coralville caucus, the Obama supporters shouted down the Clinton supporters and refused to let them speak.

So what's democratic about the Democratic Party lately? Not much. We women are welcome to donate to UnDemocratic candidates and volunteer our time.

But when we ask for a seat at the head of the table, all bets are off.

Why would we vote for McCain/Palin in November? Why did General Patton force-march the Third Army through snow and mud to save the American soldiers surrounded and dying in the Ardennes Forest? We're on a forced march against the UnDemocratic Party in 2008 to open up both parties to more women in 2012, 2016 or whenever Democratic leaders figure out that we're not going to shove over for the more politically correct candidate -- albeit with little to offer but impressive oratory -- and wait our turn.

Clinton and Palin together forced Wolf Blitzer on CNN to ask an important question of his CNN crew: "Should Barack Obama have put Hillary Clinton on the ticket?"

Yes, he should have.

If Democrats lose in November, it will be because Clinton's 18,000,000 votes -- as well as her appeal to working-class men and women in important swing states with a lot of electoral votes -- weren't enough to put her on the ticket.

Democratic leaders and Big Media engineered the final outcome before the race had played itself out. Those who get caught stacking the deck, lose. More importantly, they deserve to lose.
HWC on the "Hillary is 44" blog said it best: "I am voting for the party willing to nominate a strong woman for the two highest offices in the country and take a stand against the sexist attacks from the media.

"I look forward to a day in the future when the Democratic Party is also willing to nominate and support female candidates. Then, I will have the luxury of choosing which most closely matches my views on all of the issues. But, we obviously aren't there yet."

McCain-Palin '08: YES WE CAN!

With multiple media outlets confirming now that Governor Sarah Palin will indeed join the Republican ticket as John McCain’s running mate, McCain has clearly chosen to play offense rather than defense. Instead of a safe choice, such as closest runner-up Mitt Romney or genial Everyman Tim Pawlenty, McCain took some risk with a relative newcomer to national politics. Palin will inject risk, excitement, controversy, and an unexpected historic note to the Republican convention.

First, though, let’s assess the risk. Palin has served less than two years as Governor of Alaska, which tends to eat into the experience message on which McCain has relied thus far. At 44, she’s younger than Barack Obama by three years. She has served as a mayor and as the Ethics Commissioner on the state board regulating oil and natural gas, for a total of eight years political experience before her election as governor. That’s also less than Obama has, with seven years in the Illinois legislature and three in the US Senate.

However, the nature of the experience couldn’t be more different. Palin spent her entire political career crusading against the political machine that rules Alaska — which exists in her own Republican party. She blew the whistle on the state GOP chair, who had abused his power on the same commission to conduct party business. Obama, in contrast, talked a great deal about reform in Chicago but never challenged the party machine, preferring to take an easy ride as a protegé of Richard Daley instead.

Palin has no formal foreign-policy experience, which puts her at a disadvantage to Joe Biden. However, in nineteen months as governor, she certainly has had more practical experience in diplomacy than Biden or Obama have ever seen. She runs the only American state bordered only by two foreign countries, one of which has increasingly grown hostile to the US again, Russia.

And let’s face it — Team Obama can hardly attack Palin for a lack of foreign-policy experience. Obama has none at all, and neither Obama or Biden have any executive experience. Palin has almost over seven years of executive experience.

Politically, this puts Obama in a very tough position. The Democrats had prepared to launch a full assault on McCain’s running mate, but having Palin as a target creates one large headache. If they go after her like they went after Hillary Clinton, Obama risks alienating women all over again. If they don’t go after her like they went after Hillary, he risks alienating Hillary supporters, who will see this as a sign of disrespect for Hillary.

For McCain, this gives him a boost like no other in several different ways. First, the media will eat this up. That effectively buries Obama’s acceptance speech and steals the oxygen he needs for a long-term convention bump. A Romney or Pawlenty pick would not have accomplished that.

Second, Palin will re-energize the base. She’s not just a pro-life advocate, she’s lived the issue herself. That will attract the elements of the GOP that had held McCain at a distance since the primaries and provide positive motivation for Republicans, rather than just rely on anti-Democrat sentiment to get them to the polls.

Third, and I think maybe most importantly, Palin addresses the energy issue better and more attuned to the American electorate than maybe any of the other three principals in this election. Even beyond her efforts to reform the Oil and Natural Gas Commission, she has demonstrated her independence from so-called “Big Oil” while promoting domestic production. She brings instant credibility to the ticket on energy policy, and reminds independents and centrists that the Obama-Biden ticket offers nothing but the same excuses we’ve heard for 30 years.

Finally, based on all of the above, McCain can remind voters who has the real record of reform. Obama talks a lot about it but has no actual record of reform, and for a running mate, he chose a 35-year Washington insider with all sorts of connections to lobbyists and pork. McCain has fought pork, taken real political risks to fight undue influence of lobbyists, and he picked an outsider who took on her own party — and won.

This is change you can believe in, and not change that amounts to all talk. McCain changed the trajectory of the race today by stealing Obama’s strength and turning it against him. Obama provided that opening by picking Biden as his running mate, and McCain was smart enough to take advantage of the opening.