Ron Paul – March for Life 2008

This is a comment from PJ in our Ron Paul meetup:

We were encouraged by the many, many RP supporters we saw there, along with the prominent RP signs and banners. Also encouraging was that we saw only one little, hand-made “Grassroots for Huckabee” sign and only one Thompson sign (I missed that one). RP was among the legislators who took a few minutes at the podium, and he was the only presidential candidate there.

Article from a Michigan paper:

Ron Paul gets Roe nod
by Press wire services

Wednesday January 23, 2008, 9:19 AM

AP PhotoThe doctor is in: Ron Paul used his medical background to argue against abortion Tuesday.

WASHINGTON — Ronald Reagan and other Republican presidents have addressed the thousands of abortion opponents who annually march from the National Mall to the Supreme Court in remembrance of the court’s Roe v. Wade decision.

The event has not always been a draw to GOP presidential hopefuls, but Tuesday’s pre-march rally on the 35th anniversary of the landmark ruling had one notable exception: Ron Paul.

Among people holding up more typical “Defend life” and “Stop abortion” signs, some held banners in support of the Texas congressman, a libertarian with an anti-war bent.

Paul was among about a half-dozen lawmakers who spoke at the two-hour rally, and he cited his credentials as an obstetrician who has delivered 4,000 babies.

“The debate over when life begins should not be a debate. Let me assure you: All life begins at conception,” he said.

Paul also scored a right-to-life coup of sorts by claiming the endorsement of the Roe in Roe v. Wade — Norma McCorvey, who won the case for abortion rights but has since changed her stand. She runs the Crossing Over Ministry, formerly called Roe No More.

“He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it,” McCorvey said in a press release from the Paul campaign. “He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn.

“After taking all of the presidential candidates into consideration, it is obvious that Ron Paul is the only one that doesn’t just talk the talk,” McCorvey said.
Continue reading “Ron Paul – March for Life 2008”

“Jane Roe” Endorses Ron Paul

From Reason Magazine:

“Jane Roe” Endorses Ron Paul
David Weigel | January 22, 2008, 11:52am

About an hour ago Norma McCorvey, a.k.a “Jane Roe” from the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, formally endorsed Ron Paul at the Phoenix Park hotel in Washington. Why didn’t she endorse a frontrunner like Mike Huckabee? Thank the grassroots: She saw a newspaper ad in Nevada, bought by Paul supporters, using the analogy of the frog and the pot of boiling water to demonstrate what was happening to America. “It touched my heart.” That was three weeks ago, and McCorvey keynoted a pro-life Paul rally in Nevada on January 12th, but the campaign made the official announcement today before Paul spoke at the March for Life. McCorvey:

I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v Wade. Ron Paul doesn’t just talk about being pro-life, he acts on it. His voting record truly is impeccable and he undoubtedly understands our constitutional republic and the inalienable right to life for all. Ron Paul is the prime author of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v. Wade. As the signor of the affidavit that legalized abortion 35 years ago I appreciate Ron Paul’s action to restore protection for the unborn. Ron Paul has also authored H.R. 1094 in Congress, which seeks to define life as beginning at conception. He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn.

Paul took questions from a tiny audience of press and local supporters after elucidating his abortion views. Roe was wrongly decided; federal courts need to be taken out of the loop on abortion law to let states make their own laws. A constitutional amendment would be “a tedious solution; it takes a long time.” Pro-lifers need to make this possible, in public opinion, before lawmakers move. “The ultimate test of the right to life movement is how we change attitudes on this.”

McCorvey was frustrated at the lack of attention her original Reno endorsement got, but she was lighthearted today. “When you’re president,” she asked Paul, “can I stay over at the White House?”

“Anytime,” Paul said. The supporters in the back of the room cracked up.

“I’ll take the Lincoln Bedroom,” said McCorvey.

Don’t Eat and Run!

Here’s my chat with Tom today:

Sarah: btw, aiden just puked.
Sarah: he was running while eating carrots
Lovey Love Love: every message from you is an adventure
Sarah: and he swallowed a baby carrot whole and started to choke
Sarah: so I grabbed him and put his head over the trash
Sarah: lots of throwing up
Lovey Love Love: yay!
Sarah: and finally, the large carrot lodged in his throat popped out
Sarah: he hadn’t even chewed it
Sarah: no bite marks at all
Lovey Love Love: it was in his throat, though… he wasn’t choking
Lovey Love Love: right?
Sarah: I guess you’re right
Sarah: it was stuck in his throat
Sarah: not windpipe

So what is it called? I need to find out.

Tabitha’s Threat

In the end, Tabitha enjoyed reading the first part of Meet Kaya and excitedly described the book to her father over dinner last night.

But it was quite a different story yesterday afternoon when Tab declared in her Monster Voice, “I’m going to go live at Aunt Diana’s. This house is WORSER than I thought. I’m going to have a step mother and step father: Diana and Steve,” upon being asked to finish her reading assignment.

Aunt Diana’s response, which I loved:

——– Original Message ——–
Mon Jan 14 15:18:30 2008
From: Steve&Diana
Subject: Re: Tab’s threat

Tell her I’m terrible and would give her TWO reading assignments and have her clean her room!

Love you guys!

Diana ( a.k.a. “Meanest mommy ever” – Ian around age 4)

This exchange provided an opportunity to talk about making threats and saying words to intentionally hurt someone, and the importance of being diligent in our school work. We must strive to glorify God in do all things, including our attitudes, speech and work ethic.

(From my inner monologue) Fine. Maybe I should complain a little less about washing dishes. And, while I’m at it, maybe I should stop waiting until every single dish we own is piled up in the sink before I begin. There, I said it.

Prayers Offered in the State of Dryness

While shaking my fist at my oven tonight (I need to recalibrate the temperature – it runs, I’m guessing, about 50 degrees too hot) for burning my homemade onion & rye bread, I was listening to audio from one of Pastor Strawbridge’s archived sermons from March of last year entitled, “The Spiritual Discipline of Prayer”.

At the end of the sermon, Strawbridge read a quote from C.S. Lewis’ Screwtape Letters that stuck with me enough to replay the audio and jot it down. The quote encourages Christians to pray even when we feel far from God or don’t feel like praying.

As you read this excerpt, bear in mind that it is written from the point of view of the devil teaching another devil how to tempt a new Christian. When the devil refers to “our cause”, it is the cause of getting Christians to fall away from the Lord. The “Enemy” is, in this context, referring to God.

Now it may surprise you to learn that in His efforts to get permanent possession of a soul, He relies on the troughs even more than on the peaks; some of His special favorites have gone through longer and deeper troughs than anyone else. The reason is this. To us a human is primarily food; our aim is the absorption of its will into ours, the increase of our own area of selfhood at its expense. But the obedience which the Enemy demands of men is quite a different thing.

Hence the prayers offered in the state of dryness are those which please Him best. We can drag our patients along by continual tempting, because we design them only for the table, and the more their will is interfered with the better.

Our cause is never more in danger than when a human, no longer desiring, but still intending, to do our Enemy’s will, looks round upon a universe from which every trace of Him seems to have vanished, and asks why he has been forsaken, and still obeys.

*Trough
Pronunciation: \ˈtrȯf, ˈtrȯth, by bakers often ˈtrō\

2 a: A conduit, drain, or channel for water; especially : a gutter along the eaves of a building b: a long and narrow or shallow channel or depression (as between waves or hills); especially : a long but shallow depression in the bed of the sea — compare trench

RE: Are Women the Problem?

From the Daily Paul:

Are women the problem?
Posted January 12th, 2008 by FoolshGame

I know it is politically incorrect to say so… but, are men the only ones that care about liberty?

Who are the vast majority of women going to vote for in November 2008? They’re either going to vote for Hillary or Obama. And, in the Republican primaries, which will decide the nominee on the Republican side, those that do vote Republican (and, they’ll be a small minority compared to those that vote Democrat), they’ll either vote “evangelical” for the Huckster or “neo-con” for Rudy.

Ron Paul does not catch the imagination of women like he does with men; certainly, not in California… and, there are more than a few delegates to be had here in California, since they’ve gone to district-by-district delegate allocation.

We could send a lot of delegates to the Republican Convention, but we need women on board for the Revolution.

So far, they’re not. The next Ron Paul campaign TV ad should be directed at women. He should tell them why they should vote for him.

FoolshGame is right in the sense that many of the “undecided” women voting have said in exit polls that they, at the last minute, felt compelled to vote for other Republican candidates because they seemed to care more about women and family issues.

In reality, they don’t understand that “seeming to care” is not the same as “caring” . Neo-cons offer a platform that is actually harmful and undermining to families.

In Democratic races, some of the women who voted were quoted as saying that they voted for Hillary because they didn’t see much difference between the candidates so they chose Hillary based on gender (YouTube clip!).

A few thoughts –

1. Delegates. The straw poll results have been good – but participants are not the same people who are delegates. The RP campaign has been working on having delegates for each state – so far, does anyone know how many RP delegates were present at the caucuses? Is this “plan” working?

2. Motherhood. Many conservative women have children and taking time off from this 24/7 job to be a delegate or to go to a straw poll is difficult .

Maybe some of the husbands out there would volunteer to to take care of their children for a few days, or be willing to dip into the vacation fund and hire a babysitter. This way, their strong, conservative wives could help shape the image of the campaign and maybe even help convince the undecided women’s vote of the truth.

I know a number of moms who would be more active in the campaign except that they love their children and would not be likely to shirk their responsibilities at home in order to attend a campaign event. For moms with newborns who are nursing, it’s pretty much impossible to attend these events.

3. Need for practical application. While I’m reluctant to “soften the message” of the campaign, I would like to see Ron Paul’s wife and female family members speaking more often. It would definitely help!

I do think that conservative women understand Dr. Paul’s message perfectly – I think that there is still a need, and I have said this before, for the campaign to show in their ads the practical application of the liberty message.

This current generation only knows the Bush / Clinton empires and Dr. Paul’s message is like comparing apples to oranges.

Many voters, men and women, have no concept of the practical implications of freedom.

Their cages have become security blankets, and breaking free is scary. They’re used to having a welfare state who provides free shots, medical care, food, housing, education, etc. The idea of personal responsibility is scary because the current system does not reward personal responsibility.

I work hard, yet there are habitually unemployed people I know who get vouchers for their mortgage payments that cost more than what my husband pays for our mortgage payment.

Sharon Jasper is classic example of this, and forgive me for quoting Michelle Malkin – I can’t find another site with the original “slum” picture, complete with 60″ TV, in the story.

Even people who are not currently depending on welfare are comforted knowing they have a lifeline to welfare access if they fail financially.

Perhaps this is a rabbit trail, but look at the example of income taxes. How many people people do you know are comfortable with giving their money to the government each year as if it’s a bank? They otherwise would not have the discipline to put aside money. They see their tax return as an investment dividend! Think of all the feature articles during tax time with suggestions for whimsical ways to spend the tax return. You’d think they were talking about winning the lottery! The average person, groomed under current system, has no concept of being disciplined throughout the year to invest the same money to yield a greater return than they would if they let the government sit on it.

If the RP campaign wants the undecided vote, they need to show how this different (and to those who don’t study history or who have studied history with the current textbooks available, the Bush/Clinton way is the modern way vs. Ron Paul’s ideas which are the “old way”) way of doing things is beneficial to them.

Undecided voters are undecided because they don’t understand and can’t imagine the benefits of freedom. There is a fear of learning the hard way. The current system bails them out – like when they commit to stupid mortgage decisions that allow them to have their cake (house bigger than they need) and eat it too (government enforced deals from lenders to allow the idiots to refinance even if their credit is in shambles).

Freedom = responsibility.

4. Be encouraged!

  • Women4Ron Paul
  • Citizen Jane members for Ron Paul
  • GrannyWarriors
  • Ron Paul discussion at IVillage
  • Sarah Joy Albrecht
    (Mom to five children, ages six and under.. and I’d be a delegate in a heartbeat if I had a babysitter! ;-) )