Chump 'Change'
By J. Matt Barber
January 22, 2010
So much for that whole "hopey-changey" thing; cute while it lasted, but the American people -- like Bernie Madoff investors -- now realize they've been duped. "Change" for the mere sake of change is simply chump change.
The seismic political shift that occurred in Massachusetts Tuesday night can't be overstated. Obama's Marxist, secular-humanist agenda -- shared by Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the elitist, Eurocentric left -- just ain't gonna fly in the good ole' USA. Not even in liberal Massachusetts. (I'm a right-wing "redneck," you say? Well, tough tea party!)
The delicious irony is that this senate contest between Republican victor Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley was for the late Ted Kennedy's seat ("the people's seat"). Old Teddy's baby, of course, was socialized medicine, and Brown's election may well force both Teddy's and Obama's signature issue off the duo's Faux-topian "bridge to nowhere." (Let's call it "Mary Jo's revenge.")
Those of us who prayed for a miracle to derail this ObamaCare monstrosity -- passage of which seemed a foregone conclusion just weeks ago -- have witnessed, along with the rest of the world, perhaps the greatest political upset in American history. It's just that: a miracle. (God really does have a sense of humor, doesn't he?)
Now, to Scott Brown: Many social conservatives (of which I'm one) have complained that the senator-elect is woefully flawed on social issues -- particularly abortion. This is true.
Still, to my pro-life, pro-family compatriots, I offer this: While bleeding to death, one may be left no choice but to apply a tourniquet. A tourniquet is less than ideal. It may even cost a limb; however, it's also likely to save one's life. Obama has sliced open America's wrists with his cutting political agenda. Time is of the essence. By providing Senate Republicans the crucial 41st vote needed to filibuster, Scott Brown supplies the tourniquet.
Consequently, ObamaCare may well wither on the vine. From a practical standpoint, countless innocents may be spared. How? We know that Obama's preferred Senate plan would require taxpayer funding for abortion on demand.
This means that millions of Americans -- in violation of their conscience -- would, through force of law, be made complicit in serial prenatal homicide. Therefore, it's no stretch, in my opinion, to conclude that Brown's election -- should ObamaCare go down as expected -- may have saved untold thousands, if not millions, of lives.
Of course, none of this justifies Brown's indefensible position on abortion, "civil unions" and other social issues. I and others will not rest until he, and all who have been so deceived by the euphemistic language of "choice" and "reproductive freedom," likewise recognize that all persons -- whether born or pre-born -- share an "inalienable right to life" that in every instance trumps another's phantom "right to choose" premeditated murder.
I also remind Michael Steele and the Republican minority that Brown's election was not as much an endorsement of him or his positions on the issues, as it was a furious and unequivocal repudiation of President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their positions.
>> Continued -- Page 1 2
|