Tag Archives: abortion


Of Turkeys Pied Pipers and Newt Gingrich

turkeyA friend contacted me yesterday and with no preamble said, “Have you been following the New York District 23 race? You can say I told you so.”

About thirty seconds later when my brain finally kicked into gear  I responded with, “Ok, I told you so.”

The friend was referring to New York’s November 2 Special Election for Congressional District 23, and the fact that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is backing Dede Scozzafava, the “Republican” in the race. The word “Republican” is in quotes because she isn’t really a Republican…oh, wait a minute…I guess the voting record of Scozzafava is basically in line with most Republicans today…so never mind the quotes.

As yesterday’s Wall Street Journal editorial piece pointed out, Scozzafava’s voting record has allowed the Democrat in the race to accuse her of raising taxes too much as a member of the New York State Assembly.

And Scozzafava’s voting record is plenty good reason to run screaming in the other direction IF you give a good gosh darn about limited government, fiscal restraint, or…dare I say it…the Constitution…but there are apparently a whole truckload of other questions about the GOP’s choice, ranging from her connections to ACORN front Working Families Party and, from what I can glean, pro-choice position.

Yeah, Republican…she fits RIGHT in.

Does the fact that the New York GOP is backing such a loser come as any surprise? Of course not!

Is it a surprise that Newt Gingrich would back her?

NO…and yes.

On principle, it’s not a surprise at all. Yes, I repeat, on principle, not a surprise.

It is only a surprise from a point of  view of political savvy. I think Gingrich has exposed himself far too early on. I’m actually a bit stunned. Maybe Newt Gingrich is not as smart as I thought.

Why did he do this? Who really knows? He didn’t need to. Even though the candidate is a stinker – a real stinker – he had to go step into it. Apparently he and more importantly the RNC and the GOP of New York think that if they take a currently very popular figure “from the right” and have him endorse this stinker, the people of New York are going to continue to be stupid enough to look the other way and vote for her.

Clearly, there are some people who think Newt Gingrich has a lot of political capital to spend. Maybe they are testing the waters on the Gingrich endorsement power…early.

The RNC is still playing the game. And they are counting on the American people to play along…as they have been doing for years.

I wonder if they will.

How in the hell did Gingrich manage to re-invent himself in such a manner that anyone was listening to him in the first place?

Newt Gingrich should have never again graced the political stage based on personal conduct alone.  Anyone attempting to lead who leaves his wife in the manner Gingrich did ought to go gently (or otherwise) into that good night.

Yes, character does matter. Character in a representative republic is everything.Gingrich Cartoon

Even if we could lay that aside, Newt Gingrich is not someone anyone with a love of the Constitution or “conservative values” should be listening to.  For confirmation,  all one has to do is listen to him over a period of time – closely – and he will reveal that himself.

Gingrich believes that government should solve every problem.

After having my own eyebrows raised one too many times in listening to speeches and TV appearances, I discovered a 1996 video on Google that detailed things about Gingrich that are more than bothersome.  Related, a series of articles that includes quotes from Gingrich himself on “The Third Way”, his affinity with “Conservative Futurism”, etc. Again, these gems were discovered after I saw red flags on my own.

The bottom line is, Newt Gingrich is “down” with the whole global governance thing. And, any blathering from him about bi-partisanship lasts about as long as it takes to cuddle on the couch with Nancy Pelosi to do a commercial about global warming or to sidle up to Al Sharpton to talk about education.

As usual, when push comes to shove, as in New York’s District 23, Newt is backing the Republican. The stinker Republican.

Why was I granted one of those rare opportunities to tell someone “I told you so”? I’d talked to the friend months ago when I was tearing my hair out over the fact that Gingrich had official endorsed the Tea Party movement and the  brain trust that was the “National Tea Party Coalition” in control of “Tax Day Tea Party” sent out an email blast crowing about it.

The decision was so popular with Tea Party organizers that the idea was quickly swept under the rug and Gingrich proceeded to co-opt from the sidelines.  I wonder how many Tea Party “packs” American Solutions ultimately sold?

In any case, Gingrich has been touted around for a while now as the next  GOP-Messiah and it’s just plain disturbing.  Mr. Gingrich is a fixture on Fox News Channel these days. He’s giving speeches every other day it seems.

I and others have gone several rounds with people over the whole subject of Gingrich. The reaction to any statements that Newt Gingrich is not the answer? Kill the messenger usually proceeded by lectures about not attacking “our own side”. Newt Gingrich is not on my side because he’s not on the side of the Constitution.

One of the most helpful things that could happen is for everyone to wake up and realize that it is “our own side” that is doing more damage to us than the other. The Leftists are easy to figure out, easy to spot. Their agenda is clear – to most of us. If we don’t clean house on “our side”, we’re dead in the water.

But people don’t want to hear about it. Or at least they don’t want to hear about it until someone with some “cred” says it. Trouble is, the people with “cred” don’t speak up at all or until things are pretty far down the pike.

Take for instance, Michelle Malkin. She is an excellent writer, extremely witty and often hits very hard where it counts. While I in some ways do appreciate her piece on Gingrich, I must ask…where has she been all these months? Where was she in March and April of this year? Where was she when the Tax Day Tea Party leadership team announced Gingrich’s endorsement of the Tea Party? Michelle was one of the four original “sponsors”, from March 2 going forward.

Gingrich’s history is available for anyone to see.  The travels with Al Sharpton and cuddling on the couch with Nancy Pelosi are not NEWS. The “We Care” (buying into the global warming nonsense) comfy couch commercial ran in 2007.  Why write an article about it in October, 2009?

Is Gingrich’s endorsement of Scozzafava really the worst sin he’s committed?

Or was it finally safe to call Newt out…under cover of all of the other articles? And why didn’t Malkin’s article spell out more facts about Gingrich?

This whole little drama makes me want to ask a lot of questions. Who on earth are we listening to? Who are we following? Why have we all succumbed so much to the culture of celebrity that we will only listen to the recognizable…regardless of their prior history? Why doesn’t plain good sense and fact have any appeal anymore? Why aren’t we all using more discerning judgment on our own or asking more questions?


Furthermore, why is it a cardinal sin to point out the bad boys within our midst? Why must we all walk in lock step?

The same friend who offered me the I-told- you-so opportunity gets really hot under the collar every time we talk politics and I point out what’s wrong with so many Republicans.

It’s not my fault that there is so much wrong to talk about. And it is really the worst kind of nonsense to state that by calling out Republicans you’re driving people to the Democrats.

How about driving away from all of these dunderheads who are leading us all off of a cliff?

I’ve had a couple of theories for a while now. Like my opinion on Gingrich, they’re not a bit popular, but I have them just the same. The first one is that as a country that is rather dangling on the edge of a precipice it’s clear that it’s taken us a while to get to this state. It’s taken a lot of people in power to get us to this point. The leadership in Washington and in most states, the political parties that have been in existence, BOTH of them, and long-standing alphabet soup groups…all have helped to drive us to the edge of that cliff. We the people, we’ve helped drive to the edge of the cliff, too.

It might be time to step away and rethink a lot of things. And  most of the establishment is worthy of more than a passing amount of suspicion.

It might be time to start over.

Again, I know it is an unpopular theory. I take a lot of heat for it.

I can call out Democrats and Leftists all day long. But I should hush up about Republicans, alphabet soup groups, or even other activists who propose to retread all of the tried and true tactics used so “effectively” in the past.

I have another theory. This one has to do with going along to get along and bi-partisanship. In other words, working with people who are not on your side. Compromising.

And this one takes us full circle back to Newt Gingrich. Again, Gingrich has been blathering about bi-partisanship for the last few years. He’s spoken of it in defending the company he keeps. And he defends his own compromising.  Compromising on standards.

Gingrich is very fond of Reagan these days. He’s been successful of late in painting himself as a Reagan-like figure. He even quoted him in defense of his Scozzafava endorsement:

“If you seek to be a perfect minority, you’ll remain a minority,” says Gingrich. “That’s not how Reagan built his revolution or how we won back the House in 1994.”

Bi-partisanship, compromise, wiggle room on standards, they all strike me as about effective as the former policy of detente in breaking the back of Communism. And we can harken back to Reagan for how smart an idea that was:

“Detente – isn’t that what a farmer has with his turkey until Thanksgiving Day?” - September, 1978

I don’t know about anyone else, but I think we’re at war at this point. I’m not interested in detente, bi-partisanship, or compromise. I want my country back. Back to the way the Founders intended.

I don’t want to be the turkey.


*ACTION ALERT!* Stop These Train Wrecks! Call Congress Today!

speeding-train-lgFaster than a locomotive!
Faster than a speeding bullet!
It’s a bird, it’s a train…
No, it’s….


Congress is moving through bills and hearings at the speed of light. Focusing on one issue alone is a luxury we simply cannot afford.

Things are moving too fast, bills are too long, too many traditions and even rules are not being followed, and too many diversions are being created to either expect accurate projections can be made or statements relied upon as to when any particular bill will actually come up for a vote.

Following the wisdom of “those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it”, we must learn that we should act as if these issues are imminent.

If you followed events closely leading up to the House of Represenatives’ vote on HR 2454 aka Cap & Trade, you likely noticed:

  • The prevailing wisdom of pundits, think tanks, and many on Capitol Hill was “Cap & Trade is in trouble”
  • Most people following issues in the Federal government and politics in general were focused on the outrageous actions of ABC News in regards to President Obama’s Health Care Town Hall when the announcement was made that Cap & Trade would be up for a vote on the House floor.
  • The House voted on HR 2454 late on a Friday afternoon, the slowest news day of the week.
  • The media opted to cover the death of pop star Michael Jackson rather than the passage of the Cap & Trade bill in the House.
  • Over 300 pages were added in the middle of the night and no complete copy was available at the time of the vote

There are several issues that require our attention NOW and going forward until they are DEFEATED (or passed).


  • Maintain pressure on US Senate and House representatives (contact them)
  • On particular issues, contact your Governor, State legislators, county, and city representatives.
  • Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper
  • Forward this message to everyone in your contacts list

Tips to be most effective:


  1. Call the office for your Senator or House reps. where your representatives are currently, right now that is D.C., but verify it on the phone call
  2. Ask to speak directly with your Senator or Congressman
  3. Be sure to give your zip code so they know you are a constituent
  4. Be polite, but firm
  5. The next best method to a phone call is a fax, the least, email


bill of rights

  • Several bills currently moving through Congress, if passed, seriously encroach on states’ rights, and in turn will put a lot of pressure on county and city governments.
  • It is essential that our state governments assert their sovereign rights
  • Although State legislatures are not currently in session this is the period during which legislators have the time to consider issues that need attention, or bills they will sponsor.



S. 909 Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Bill

Purpose: Increases penalties for certain crimes committed against certain people, particularly based on sexual orientation

Position: OPPOSE


  • Should not be snuck into a Defense spending bill
  • Endangers freedom of speech and religion
  • Presents problems with double jeapordy
  • Violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by singling out certain groups of citizens to the exclusion of others


Included as an amendment to a Defense Spending Bill (S. 1390) late last week.


Text of the original S. 909 bill on THOMAS

Politico.com Story Regarding the Bill Nearing passage

Washington Times: F-22 Votes Stalls in Hate Crime Redux

Text of Defense Appropriations Bill S. 1391 on THOMAS


Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court

Position: Senate member should oppose her nomination, vocally.


Sotomayor has made public statements and issued rulings that indicate:

  • Lack of respect for the right to bear arms
  • Racial and gender bias
  • Lack of respect for property rights
  • Has indicated “empathy” is a higher priority than following the law


  • Made a statement that appellate court judges make law
  • Her testimony last week has troubling contradictions in contrast to her writings and the facts of her life.
  • During hear testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, she showed a surprising lack of technical legal knowledge during some questioning, particularly in an interchange with Senator Hatch.
  • Has had a high rate of judicial error – 40%+ (her rulings were overturned)
  • Supports abortion through her statement that Roe v. Wade is settled law


  • We should oppose those who are not clearly strict constructionists
  • Supporters of the Constitution in the Senate need to start showing themselves
  • Members of the Senate need to put the President on notice regarding this and future nominees to the Court


Conclusion of the hearings process, no clear date available regarding full Senate floor vote


Gun Owners of America has been closely watching and researching this nominee, providing very good general information (beyond the Second Amendment) on their site.

GOA’s Executive Director Larry Pratt, was a guest on a special episode of the Blog Talk Radio show The Constitutional Liberty Coalition Gets Grizzly on Thursday, July 16 to discuss the Sotomayor nomination.  Larry gave a good deal of detailed information about Sotomayor and why her nomination should be opposed. You can listen by clicking here.

Former Supreme Court Nominee Robert Bork made statements regarding Sotomayor and recent history on the confirmation process on Newsmaxx, Tuesday.

Wall Street Journal article on how little information was gleaned from Sotomayor’s testimony.


“Health Care Reform” / Socialized Medicine

Several versions exist Was H.R. 676 now, H.R. 3200 (see summary article, linked)

Stated Purpose: To make affordable health care available to all

Position: OPPOSE


Puts government in charge of health care decisions

Will implement rationing, meaning government will ultimately decide who suffers or not, who lives or dies

Will kill private health insurance

Will drive talent and innovation out of the health care industry, leading to a reduced quality of care

Will kill small businesses, particularly if certain versions pass

Anyone who states this will not lead to a single payer only (government!) is outright lying. There is ample evidence that supporters want government to be totally in charge of health care.


Unclear at this time. There are mixed messages from the White House and Congress. The President seemed to be continuing to push Congress to pass as quickly as possible despite the recent CBO report. Again, since there has been much “ducking and weaving” that has occurred, we must not let up on our opposition.


Text of H.R. 3200 on THOMAS

Forbes: A Bad Day for Obamacare?

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Report on cost of HR 3200

Forbes: Obamacare: The Cost Cutting Delusion

Wal-Mart supports socialized medicine

White House Less Firm on Date for Health Care Bill

Many Governors Oppose Health Care Bill: Label As Unfunded Mandate


The PASS Act H.R. 1291

Stated Purpose: To better protect the security, confidentiality, and integrity of personally identifiable information collected by States when issuing driver’s licenses and identification documents, and for other purposes.

Position: OPPOSE


  • This is yet another stealth bill, being “sold” as an improvement to “Real ID”, which has been very controversial
  • Passage of this bill means a NATIONAL Identity Card
  • Contains Biometric data like facial recognition technology
  • Real ID has always been sold as a way to “make us safer”
  • Many states have outright refused to comply, that is the reason for this latest maneuver, “to improve privacy”

Status: Currently in committee in the Senate; the next opportunity for revisions is July 29.


Text of HR 1291

Stop Real ID Coalition has a great deal of detailed information on this issue and provides frequent status reports.

OpEd News Article on HR 1291


HR 2454 (2998) American Clean Energy and Security Act – Cap & Trade

Stated purpose: Reduce carbon emissions, achieve energy independence

Position: Oppose


Basic premise is entirely flawed, based on faulty / controversial science

Is about control, not “protecting the environment”

Violates the Tenth and Fourth Amendments in many respects through encroachment on states’ rights and required inspections

Will devastate America’s economy through regulations and taxes imposed on businesses, causing increased costs for energy

Will touch most aspects of our daily lives from the cars we drive to the appliances in our homes


Passed by the House of Representatives on June 26, 2009

Currently in the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works (EPW); Committee Chair Barb Boxer (D-CA) released a statement last week that this bill will not come up for a vote until after Congress’ August Recess

*Despite Sen. Boxer’s statement, it is important to stay on this issue!*

written jointly by Shelli Dawdy and Sandra Crosnoe

@Stubborn_Facts  @scrosnoe