|
NRL News
Page 4
Fall 2012
Volume 39
Issue 4
Why Mitt Romney Must Be
Elected
By Dave Andrusko
This edition of NRL News is important, which is why much of the NRLC
staff has contributed prodigious amounts of time, insights,
suggestions, and stories to make this special Election Issue an
outstanding edition. My most fervent hope is not just that you and
your family benefit–as important as that is–but that you also share
with pro-life friends and associates all the information contained
in an issue that is bursting at the seams.
We have addressed in enormous detail the dramatic contrast offered
by pro-life Mitt Romney and pro-abortion Barack Obama. President
Obama himself (as does Mr. Romney) often talks about completely
different “visions.” Nowhere–NOWHERE–are those competing worldviews
more stark than on the issue of life.
On abortion Obama wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants
his hyper-pro-abortion base to be motivated to beat the drums but
hide away in the attic all the radically anti-life actions and
behaviors and winks and nods that make him the heartthrob of NARAL
Pro-Choice America, PPFA, EMILY’s List, and kindred souls.
The goal is to obscure that when NARAL says “jump” Obama says “how
high?” (not that he needs any persuasion) and to keep the
electorate’s eye off of Obama’s record going back to when he was an
Illinois state senator and opposed a bill that would have provided
legal protection to babies who survived abortion! Everything he has
done to further the abortion agenda–as a U.S. senator and as
President–flows from an ideological commitment that is as unyielding
and as far-reaching as it is scary. He has followed the logic of
abortion to its logical endpoint.
In late August after the love fest to abortion known as the
Democratic National Convention, there was a lot of talk about how
Democrats now “owned” the abortion issue. But this embrace of the
agenda of the most militant pro-abortionists was camouflaged in a
two-piece suit: “respect for women’s rights” and the by-now tiresome
“war on women” meme.
Compare and contrast: The Republicans’ strongly pro-life plank was
caricatured into absurdity–this in spite of a definitive debunking
from FactCheck.org which titled its story, “Another blatant abortion
falsehood from Team Obama.” But the Democrats’ platform, which
literally contains no limitations on abortion and requires your tax
dollars to grease the skids, largely received a free pass.
Why is exposing the truth about Obama so incredibly important? In
September, The Polling Company conducted a survey which found that
when voters in four swing states still up for grabs are exposed to
the real story about President Obama’s support for abortion and his
mandate violating religious freedom, it really hurts him.
The poll’s findings were potentially explosive.
By a 2-1 margin, these voters from the swing states of Ohio,
Virginia, Wisconsin, and Florida were less likely to vote for the
President when told “the health care legislation known as ObamaCare
contains provisions that allow for taxpayer funding of abortion.”
And “54% of swing voters said they would be less likely (35% much
less likely) to vote for President Obama after learning that he
voted against a law to give equal treatment and constitutional
protections to babies born alive after a failed abortion,” according
to the poll.
“The president’s record on the Born-Alive issue costs him support
even among his supporters: Nearly half (49%) of voters leaning
towards voting for President Obama said they would be less likely to
do so after learning about his record.” This latter result is highly
instructive because even 43% of self-described “pro-choicers” were
less likely to vote for the President.
Put another way, pro-abortion President Obama is attempting to
thread the needle: embrace abortion with the kind of a zealous
passion only Planned Parenthood and NARAL could love all the while
pretending it is pro-life Republicans Mitt Romney and Rep. Paul Ryan
who are the real “zealots.” And it’s hardly surprising that Obama
believes he can laud ”reproductive rights” and beat the drums for a
phony ”war on women” without paying the price that would be exacted
if the electorate understands that Democrats accept any and all
abortions up until birth. How often does CNN or the New York Times
or the Washington Post call him to account? Never!
One other consideration which may seem odd, since it comes from
Canada! Our northern neighbors live in a land that has no abortion
law and hasn’t for decades. This is a nation that rejected a call to
establish a parliamentary committee to ask if it makes any sense to
say (as Canada’s Criminal Code does now) that a child does not
become a “human being” until the moment of complete birth!
Canadian pro-abortionists are increasingly frustrated, angry,
and–this is no exaggeration–hysterical, even though they beat back
the motion to establish the committee. Why? For the same reason they
went ballistic over another bill (also thwarted) in 2008 to make it
a criminal offence for someone to attack a woman with the intent of
killing her unborn child.
In the most revealing quote, perhaps of all times, Joyce Arthur,
executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada,
explained her opposition: “If the fetuses are recognized in this
bill, it could bleed into people’s consciousness and make people
change their minds about abortion,” she told the National Post.
Forget abortion. To even say that it is criminal behavior for
someone to kill a woman’s wanted baby is absolutely
u-n-a-c-c-e-p-t-a-b-l-e. “Bleed into people’s consciousness”–what a
remarkable confession.
And this absolutist mentality is not confined to Canada. Don’t
forget that pro-abortionists fought our own “Unborn Victims of
Violence Act” tooth and nail even though it, too, was crystal clear
that it did NOT apply to abortion. Acknowledging in any context that
“it” is not an “it” makes the anti-life crowd in any nation sweat
bullets.
Coming back to the November 6 elections, it would difficult to
overstate how important is the outcome. Obama may be wishy-washy on
a lot of subjects, but he is unyielding when it comes to abortion.
If Obama wins a second term, in all likelihood he would have the
opportunity to replace a minimum of two justices on the Supreme
Court.
The composition of a High Court which has finally given evidence of
being open to reason and logic and new data about the extraordinary
toll abortion exacts not only on unborn babies but also on their
mothers would be altered by a man for whom support for unlimited
abortion—at any stage and for any reason—is as natural, as
spontaneous as breathing.
Obama must be defeated by pro-life Mitt Romney.
Paid for by National Right to Life PAC. www.nrlpac.org. Not
authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee
|