If McCain Picks Romney, He Will Be Picking a Pro-Abortion, Fiscal Liberal

Those is the GOP establishment political and media elite including Karl Rove, the Bushies, Tony Perkins, Gary Bauer, James Bopp, Jay Sekulow, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, NRO, Human Events, and the Weekly Standard, among others have been diligently advancing the argument that McCain needs to shore up the GOP base by selecting Mitt Romney as his running mate because Romney is both “pro-life” and “fiscally conservative.”

And when McCain does select Romney as his running mate on August 29th as I have predicted for a long time that he will, the pseudo-conservatives at Fox News and National Review will be praising McCain for picking a “solidly pro-life fiscal conservative like Mitt Romney.” I can hear it now. Trust me, this is what you will be hearing ad nauseam 10 days from now.

The truth is, however, as I and a handfull of others have been reporting for well over a year, that Willard Mitt Romney is neither pro-life nor fiscally conservative.

Romney is not pro-life: While Romney and his supporters claim that he used to be “pro-choice” and had a “pro-life conversion” following a conversation with an anonymous Harvard researcher, the truth is that as governor of Massachusetts, Romney established abortion with a 50 dollar co-pay as a “healthcare benefit” (AFTER HIS PRO-LIFE “CONVERSION”) in his healthcare plan he signed into law that he called his “signature achievement” that was endorsed by Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and Planned Parenthood.

Romney also appointed a Planned Parenthood representative to sit on his healthcare advisory board with no pro-life member (AFTER HIS SUPPOSED “PRO-LIFE CONVERSION.”)

And, like Senator McCain who believes individual states can violate the unalienable right to life as guaranteed in the Declaration and Constitution, Mitt Romney opposes the central plank of the GOP since 1976, a federal protection of life amendment and believes that abortion is a “states rights issues.” How can you be “pro-life” and believe that states have a right to kill babies if the majority vote to make it “legal?”

Romney is a fiscal liberal. Governor Romney opposed the Bush tax cuts which earned him praise from uber-liberal Barney Frank. He raised taxes by over $800 million dollars which has devastated the Massachusetts economy. And, on his way out the door, Romney installed a quasi-socialist healthcare plan into law that has been an abysmal failure according to the Boston Globe, Cato Institute, and Wall St. Journal.

Romney opposed the Bush Tax Cuts, raised taxes and fees by almost a billion dollars, and instituted a liberal “universal” healthcare plan which was endorsed by Hillary, Teddy K, and Planned Parenthood and Ann Coulter is calling him “manifestly our best candidate?” Mitt has achieved what neither Hillary nor Barack nor any other liberal Democrat has been able to merely in instituting a “universal” healthcare plan that subsidizes abortion at 50 bucks a pop. And he is somehow a “fiscal conservative?”

The GOP elites claim Romney is a “pro-life fiscal conservative.”

Romney’s record demonstrates that he is the exact opposite–that he is pro-abortion and a fiscal liberal.

In other words Willard Mitt Romney is Hillary Clinton in a Ronald Reagan costume.

Buyer Beware!

For more on Romney’s far left wing record go here

Update: Tom Blumer of Bizzyblog.com has this outstanding piece entitled “Romney, Russia, Georgia, and Iran: The Last Straw”

15 Questions Rick Warren Should Ask Obama and McCain

My latest on Townhall.com

15 Questions Rick Warren Should Ask Obama and McCain
Gregg Jackson
Thursday, August 07, 2008

Pastor Rick Warren, author of the “Purpose Driven Life,” will be hosting a “Compassion Forum” August 16th at Saddleback Church in California in which he will be asking questions to both presidential candidates Senators Obama and McCain. According to a recent NY Times article, Mr. Warren was quoted as saying:

“Since I’m their friend, I’m not going to give them any gotcha questions,” Mr. Warren said, adding that a typical query would be, “What’s the most difficult decision you’ve had to make, and how did you make it?”

Setting aside for the moment the fact that we as Christians have a solemn obligation to speak prophetically to the world about Christ and His Word even if what we say makes our “friends” uncomfortable, as a Christian, interested in knowing specifically where the candidates stand on issues in relation to their Christian faith, not only do I want to know what the most difficult decisions they’ve had to make are, but how their personal relationship with Jesus Christ and His Word actually informed and influenced those decisions.

The “Compassion Forum” will focus on global poverty, HIV, and the environment, which are all issues that should be of concern to all Christians. But I hope that Mr. Warren will also pose questions regarding the great social and cultural issues of our time including abortion, embryonic stem cell research, same-sex “marriage,” and the mainstreaming of homosexuality. People can watch turn on any of the mainstream networks for non-threatening softball questions for the candidates. Mr. Warren should use his forum as an opportunity to ask the difficult and challenging questions not often heard in a presidential campaign. This may be his last opportunity before it becomes a “hate crime” to do so.

Here are some questions I suggest Mr. Warren asks candidates Obama and McCain:

1. For both candidates: What is truth? Who is truth? And Is that truth transcendent and applicable at all times to everyone regardless of their impulses, behavioral preferences, desires, wants, nationality, ethnicity, religious dogma, gender, race, etc?

2. Sen. Obama, you have said you are personally pro-life but in favor of abortion rights up to and even including after delivery in some cases. Why are you pro-life personally if an abortion doesn’t actually kill a baby in her mother’s womb? Also, do you think Jesus would be in favor of abortion? Why or why not?

3. Sen. McCain, you claim to be personally pro-life as well. Why? And if you believe that abortion always ends the life of the developing baby in her mother’s womb, why would it be ok for individual states to legalize killing babies? Don’t our nation’s founding documents the Declaration of Independence (”life, liberty, pursuit of happiness”) and Constitution (5th and 14th Amendments) guarantee the right to life that no individual state can violate?

entire article here

The Failure of Romneycare Further Demonstrates Romney not an “Economic Conservative.”

One of the biggest reasons those who support Mitt Romney for VP is that he is supposedly an “economic conservative” who will shore up support among “pocket book conservatives.” As I and others have been saying for quite a while now, Romney’s actual record proves that he is neither socially conservative nor fiscally conservative.

Today’s Wall St Journal editorial provides further proof that Romney’s “signature” achievement as governor, his government run quasi socialist “universal” healthcare plan, has been a total bust which is no surprise since government mandates and price controls always lead to contrived scarcities, decreased quality, and inflated costs.

Here is what the Wall St. Journal had to say about Romneycare:

Most of this growth in coverage has instead come via a new state entitlement called Commonwealth Care. This provides subsidized insurance to those under 300% of the poverty level, or about $63,000 for a family of four. About 174,000 have joined this low- or no-cost program, a trend that is likely to speed up.

As this public option gets overwhelmed, budget gaskets are blowing everywhere. Mr. Patrick had already bumped up this year’s spending to $869 million, $144 million over its original estimate. Liberals duly noted that these tax hikes are necessary because enrollment in Commonwealth Care is much higher than anticipated. But of course more people will have coverage if government gives it to them for free. The problem is that someone has to pay for it.

Thus the extra tab of $129 million, which may need to go higher because it relies on uncertain federal funds from Medicaid. For now, Mr. Patrick wants one-time (yeah, right) charges of $33 million on insurers and $28 million on providers, plus some shuffling of state funds. The balance comes from an estimated $33 million boost in the state’s “pay or play” tax: If businesses don’t offer “fair and reasonable” insurance to their employees, they get hit.

This is a textbook example of how business taxes evolve into “pay or pay,” the first recourse of state-funded health systems. Politicians love levies on business because they disguise the overall bill from voters. But such taxes are merely passed along to workers in the form of reduced take-home pay, since all health costs are part of compensation.

entire article here

With healthcare reform already a major issue in the election, the last thing McCain needs is to pick a running mate like Romney whose signature healthcare plan/economic reform that was endorsed by Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and Planned Parenthood, has been a total failure.

And while the WSJ limited its analysis to the economic effects of Romneycare, it is worth noting that his healthcare plan accomplished what no other Democrat has been able to in establishing tax payer funded abortion with a 50 dollar co-pay as a “healthcare benefit.”

If McCain picks Romney, McCain will lose whatever tactical advantage he may have right now on the healthcare issue in my humble opinion.

Have We Sunk So Low As A Nation That a Self Identified Christian Could Vote for Barack Obama?

Have we sunk so low as a nation who considers itself to be “One Nation Under God” that those who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ would vote for a man such as Barack Obama who believes it’s ok to kill living breathing babies? (Here is the proof by the way if this is the first you have heard about his opposition to the “Induced Infant Liability Act”)

As I wrote in the Wall St. Journal a few weeks back:

Sen. Obama is also in favor of taxpayer-funded abortion on demand and opposes bans on killing infants born alive after a failed abortion attempt, putting him to the left of even the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League.

Barack Obama believes that it is ok to kill babies after they have already been delivered! Living, breathing babies, born alive!

This isn’t Nazi Germany in 1945 my friends. This is the United States of America in 2008!

Again, I humbly ask those who have given your lives to Jesus Christ, how you could support, in any way a man like Barack Obama, who is opposed to laws that would protect babies born alive after a failed abortion attempt?

Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter.
If you say, “but we knew nothing about this,” does not He who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does He who guards your life not know it?
Will He not repay each person according to what he has done? (Proverbs 24:11-12)

In all fairness I would also ask those Christians who support John McCain a similar question. Although McCain has voted to ban late-term abortions and claims to be “pro-life,” he doesn’t support a federal human life amendment (the central plank to the GOP platform) and believes that it is ok if individual states legalize abortion similar to those such as Stephen Douglas who believed that slavery should have been a “states’ rights issue.”

To those who self-identify as Christians who support politicians who support abortion, I suggest you watch the following video entitled the “Hard Truth.” (I will warn you that it is very graphic and is located right above the “ESPN Video 2007″ about one quarter of the way down the page from the top.) You should also prayerfully consider sharing this video with anybody who believes that abortion doesn’t kill a living human being. They should not have a problem agreeing to watch if abortion isn’t “killing an actual human being.”

For those of you who believe that:

“Righteousness exalts a nation but sin is a disgrace to any people.” (Proverbs 14:34)

I ask:

Can we honestly expect God’s Divine Providence and Protection if we continue to kill 4,000 babies per day and elect leaders who don’t believe that our founding national charter, The Declaration, as well as the Constitution, both guarantee an unalienable (i.e. “God Given”) right to life for all human beings?

Something to thoughtfully and prayerfully consider….

Blessings,

Gregg

BUYER BEWARE! What You Would Get In a Vice-President Romney

(Hint: A demagogue who has already changed history)

GUEST COLUMN BY GREGG JACKSON + JOHN HASKINS RFFM.org

When Ann Coulter endorsed Mitt Romney she called the former Massachusetts governor “manifestly our best candidate” — though the paper for which she is “chief legal correspondent,” Human Events, ranked Romney the #8 RINO (Republican In Name Only) in the nation in 2005.

GOP establishment pom pom girl Laura Ingraham and water boy Sean Hannity evangelize Romney on their radio shows as the second coming of Ronald Reagan.

Curiouser and curiouser!

Romney the wallflower bats his eyelashes and coyly pretends not to notice the increasing speculation of a McCain-Romney ticket–even as he criss-crosses the country campaigning and fundraising for McCain–the same John McCain who Romney said during the primaries was “almost indistinguishable” from Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.

But perhaps Romney intended that as a compliment, since Romney was a virtual GOP clone of Barack Obama, until he repackaged himself to seduce conservatives.

As a Boston talk radio host and writer-researcher (respectively), who both initially supported Romney (author Gregg Jackson lived out of state in 2002 and co-author John Haskins voted for him in 2002), we have followed Romney closely and know the truth about his record as very few people in America do. The truth is that many of the leading “conservative” lawyers, radio pundits and pro-family leaders whom we trusted for years have ruthlessly distorted and suppressed the truth about Romney’s hideous record as governor — even after all his “conversions.”

It took one hundred million dollars of Romney’s personal fortune to waterboard Americans with Orwellian propaganda from “conservative” talk radio, Fox News and “pro-family” lawyers and religious mercenaries. Their consensus is they’ve rewritten enough history enough to fool enough of the people enough of the time.

Many pundits and political prognosticators are now calling Romney the odds-on favorite to be chosen as MCain’s running mate–making it more urgent than ever conservatives–the field slaves of the Republican Party–know the true record of this man.

After reading the truth about this soulless demagogue, whom most of the GOP elites have airbrushed into a quasi-conservative, ask yourself if Mitt Romney is somebody, who as Dr. James Dobson of “Focus on the Family” stated, “is a man pro-family voters could support?”

1. Romney illegally imposed homosexual marriage as he had secretly promised “Log Cabin Republicans” a homosexual activist group he would, given the pretext of a legally meaningless court opinion. He publicly admitted that the four outlaw judges who belched forth the Goodridge opinion (urging the legislature to make sodomy-based “marriage” legal) had violated the state Constitution and their oaths of office. But bizarrely, he flatly contradicted the state constitution he had sworn to uphold by pretending he was bound by this opinion. He also opposed a citizen-led effort to remove the four judges!

He then authorized illegal changes to, and issuance of, still legally null and void marriage licenses to homosexuals in violation of the marriage laws which the state constitution explicitly says only the legislature can change (the same court has admitted this). But Romney and his hired “conservatives” falsely claimed that “everybody (knew) that the (judges) legalized same-sex ‘marriage’.”

rest here

Why Democrats Can’t Be Trusted With National Security Part 2,344,789

Same sex couples from out of state will be getting legally null and void “marriage” licenses in Massachusetts

The Massachusetts Senate today passed a bill that would repeal a 1913 state law that prevents gay and lesbian couples from most other states from marrying in Massachusetts…The bill now heads to the House, where Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi has already expressed support. Supporters said they expected the bill to pass the House and be signed by Governor Deval Patrick by the end of the month. “If that bill comes to me, I will sign it and sign it proudly,” Patrick said Monday.

Full Boston Globe article here

I wonder if those same sex couples from out of state who will get “married” in Massachusetts, when the 1913 marriage law is officially repealed, are aware their illegally altered and issued marriage licenses will be as null and void as every one that has ever been issued in Massachusetts for the last 3 years, since then Governor Mitt Romney authorized the first illegally altered and issued licences, falsely claiming that “the court had legalized same sex marriage,” and every one Governor Schwarzenegger illegally altered and issued for the last month to same sex couples in California(beginning on June 15, 2008)?

One thing I will say is that at least the Mass legislature is actually going about overturning the current marriage law in the only constitutionally prescribed manner via the legislative branch. (The only branch that can pass, revoke, overturn, or amend a law in any way.)

Now, if only these “legislators” could actually “overturn” the current marriage statute (Massachusetts General Laws chapter 207) which limits marriage to one man and one woman, same sex “marriage” would actually be legal. Although they have attempted to, they still have not done so. which means that same sex “marriage” is still illegal.

Might I suggest that before we attempt to spread the seeds of Jeffersonian Democracy and the rule of law to 7th Century Islamic Barbarians around the world that we consider practicing a little of it here in the good old U.S of A first? Just thinking out loud here…

And one last parting thought:

Admittedly, I am not a constitutional lawyer, but before passing a law that would allow same sex couples from out of state to get “married” in Massachusetts, shouldn’t the legislature actually legalize same sex marriage in Massachusetts first?
Again, just thinking out loud…