Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Had Enough Yet?
I'm already feeling a tad bit annoyed about the elections. It's kind of like the feeling I get when I hear Christmas music and see a store putting up decorations, next to the Halloween costumes for a October holiday that hasn't even passed by yet. I mean, I love hearing Christmas music and seeing the decorations after Thanksgiving, and I can even tolerate the stores pushing it back before the last Thursday in November. But October? Really? Do we really need an entire season (as in 3 months) of Christmas?
Still, even Christmas in October has one redeeming point. It reminded me to start making my Jesse tree and getting ready for advent. The intense election coverage doesn't even have that point in it's favor.
For the first five minutes it might have been interesting, if rather disgusting and dishonest, to see liberal media outlets turn their sights on whoever was the man or woman, of the moment in the GOP. They'd show sound bites of them that taken out of context, which made each in turn look like a blathering idiot, while seeing if there was anything the candidate had done since kindergarten that might be used as ammunition against them. I mean, at least it demonstrated the complete lack of journalistic ethics in much of our mainstream media. One by one the leaders would fall off the top and begin to attempt to reclimb the heights from the single digit poll number section.
As a result, I attempt to get my information as to what the candidates believe directly from their own words and from their voting records. Yet as I listen to the debates, and hear the candidates own beliefs, from their own mouths, I still have a hard time finding much that makes me excited to go to the voting booth anytime soon.
And let's face it, for me to really like a candidate they only really need one thing: to be solidly pro-life. In other words, they must understand that once a life is formed it is a life and should be protected as such. How hard should it be to meet that standard in a party that's supposed to be the pro-life party? Apparently harder than one would imagine.
Let's start with the former front runner, who's seemed to be the most consistently towards the top of the polls. The media just doesn't understand why pro-lifers are leery of Romney. After all, they tell us, everyone flip flops on all sorts of issues. Everyone. And then they show various other candidates who've flip flopped on taxes and Medicare and social security. And I sit there thinking, are you really that dense? Do you really not see what the differences between voting for what's politically expedient when it's an issue of tax cuts and voting for what's expedient when it means the death of thousands of children? The thing is, we've seen "solidly pro-life candidates" sell out when the stakes were high enough and it meant getting what they wanted. So the idea that Mitt "I was pro-choice because that's what it took to get elected in Massachusetts, but now I'm pro-life because that's what the majority of Americans are" Romney will fight for the rights of the unborn isn't something that most of us can buy into. So there's one candidate I can easily check of my list.
"life begins at implantation" line and I wanted to throw something at the computer screen. I'd actually never heard that particular argument until a facebook debate the week before, and I have to admit, I find it kind of baffling. It buys into the pro-death line that whether life exists, is based on the mother's body, not on what's already forming when conception occurred, usually about a week earlier. By Newt's logic, the abortion pills would all be a-okay. So my support of Newt went out the window when he said those words.
Now if only we could get Santorum to do a bit better in the debates. He just doesn't have the slimmy Washington quality that keeps him from losing his cool, maybe because he really cares about the unborn, and that passion can make him seem like a bit of a hot head when he's being questioned (Paul Zummo wrote a great article asking why more Catholic don't vote for him, here).
And, in the end, I'll be voting for him because he's the only candidate who I believe will honestly do his best to protect the unborn. Isn't it sad that out of a large pool of supposed "pro-lifers" they all seem to hedge their bets in some way by limiting their definitions of life to make themselves more electable? But I guess that's just politics as usual... Either way, I'll throw my support entirely behind whoever the GOP choses, when the time comes. Because no one that comes out of the convention could be more pro-death than our current, if they're born alive let them die in a closet, President.