The Uber-Scary Tebow Ad 1, Pro-Abortion Radicals -1
Yesterday, Hot Air posted the pre-Super Bowl ad of Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother. The ad was easily the least controversial I saw throughout Super Bowl Sunday- especially compared to the many Bud Light and men in underwear commercials, or the taxpayer-funded census ad and the American debt commercial, during the actual Super Bowl.
However, nobody in the general public had seen the real ad until the game. You know, the one feminists and pro-abortionists went crazy over because Tim and Pam Tebow, along with CBS, were allegedly pushing a radical pro-life agenda. So after seeing the pre-game ad, I was prepared for anything- you know, maybe a mention of God or perhaps even a a hug between a mother and her son?
Turns out I was wrong. Tebow actually tackles his mother- which is pretty funny, no matter what the fruitcakes say- while she is expressing concern about his safety and toughness. She then pops up before he does and “lectures” him about interrupting her sharing their story. He apologizes, stands to her left with one hand on each shoulder, and asks her if she still worries about him. She says that she does, because he’s “still not as tough as I am.”
All in all, this is a knockout, home run, touchdown, hat trick, whatever you want to call it, for Focus on the Family and the pro-life movement. Whether intentional or not, by not releasing the ad’s content until the Super Bowl, Focus on the Family let the crazies on the left run wild with speculation. The pro-life movement now looks kind, gentle and loving, if you even picked up on the sub-text of the ad. Focus on the Family, which has the background of the Tebow ad on its main page, in particular looked like a non-controversial organization to those who have never heard of it. The only mention of the organization is a few seconds at the end directing people to the Tebow’s story on Focus on the Family’s main page.
However, the victory does not end there. The Tebow ad has been discussed for some time on blogs, in articles, on The O’Reilly Factor, The View, The Laura Ingraham Show, Megyn Kelly’s “America Live” and of course on the websites of Life News and Planned Parenthood. Why? Because feminists and pro-abortionists went off the deep end to take the ad down. Had they waited for the commercial to come out before making a statement, they could have attacked from a base of knowledge. Had they ignored it, the ad might have caused a piffle of notice among Super Bowl watchers and been promptly ignored. However, by taking the path more traveled by attacking the ad with every weapon possible as soon as possible, they guaranteed the ad would be carefully observed by millions of Super Bowl commercial watchers.
When it comes down to it, the pro-life movement is increasingly in line with the views of Americans, especially young Americans. By making the Tebow ad a mainstream point of discussion for many days before the Super Bowl, pro-abortionists have made themselves look both the fools and out of touch with mainstream America, and placed the pro-life movement squarely in touch with the softer, kinder side of Americans, who by and large only want what’s best for everyone. This ad, or more precisely the pro-abortion reaction to it, will most certainly guide Americans to the side of the abortion debate that is truly about helping women and children, and helping families make the right decisions about life.
*This was originally published at Race42012.com
Best of thelobbyist 2009
Thanks to all our readers for making 2009 a great year for thelobbyist.? Below you will find the top post from each month during the 2009 calendar year.
January – 8 days until EPA annihilation of America?Stop Them! – nick r. brown
February – Pseudo-Scientists Kill Possum (Not to be confused with Opossum) – nick r. brown
March – Conservatives Just Don?t ?Get It? – nick r. brown
April – Pay for Performance Act of 2009: An Encroachment of a Free Society – sam theodosopoulos
May – ?I?d Pretend I Was One Of Those Deaf-Mutes.? – nick r. brown
June – Fox News Presents Obstacle For NH GOP Opportunity – sam theodosopoulos
July – Tie: The Personal Democracy Forum Doesn?t Help Conservatives & Personal Democracy Forum: The Future of the Conservative Movement – nick r. brown
August – The Moore You Know About Obama? -? tom qualtere
September – Conservatives Are Right On Gay Marriage – dustin siggins
October - We?ve Never Begged For Money? – nick r. brown
November – An Actual Solution To Health Care Reform -? nicholas j. rohrhoff
December – Pro-Life IS Pro Health Care Reform – dustin siggins
-nick
Critical Vote On Health Care Passes Senate
Officially, the Senate has not passed health care reform. Unofficially, the fight is over for this round. Senate Democrats overcame a filibuster by a party-line vote of 60-40, including the two independent senators who caucus with the Democrats.
As I said, it’s not officially over; the above vote merely provided official “cloture.” However, it is merely window dressing to get the bill passed by Christmas Eve, which seems very likely now.
The Heritage Foundation outlines what this bill will do to America’s budget, the unborn and taxes. In short, it’s a bad bill, which we already knew. However, there is still hope. The Senate and House bills must be compromised in conference- where the two chambers make two bills into one- and then voted on again in each chamber separately. The two biggest issues, as far as I see, that could shut down this reform effort are abortion and the public option. The House bill includes the latter, the Senate one does not. The Senate bill, however, allows public funds to be used for abortion and the House one does not. I hope Representative Bart Stupak (D-MI) holds strong on his abortion language and kills the bill. A pro-life amendment would help the health care bill that finally passes (if one does) not fund the murder of the unborn.
Fox News has a very revealing analysis about where various monies went to various senators in order to bribe them votes for the cloture vote. As Fox notes in the article, uncertain votes were brought in line as a direct result of how the Senate leadership decided to use our money.
Pro-Life IS Pro Health Care Reform
A few months ago, I wrote on Townsend?s Newsweek opinion supporting abortion and other non-Catholic beliefs. Now, she?s at it again, this time saying that the American bishops are ignoring health care over what she makes clear are minor concerns over abortion.
I don?t understand pro-choice Catholics. The Church has been against abortion since time unknown, and these Catholics want it to compromise? Why not join the Church in helping the poor, the homeless, orphans, preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place?and couples with marital problems? By helping the Church do these things, Townsend would take away much of the ?need? for abortions, as poorer, single woman who become ?unintentionally pregnant? tend to have a higher number of abortions than married, affluent women.
Townsend clearly doesn?t understand the Church?s view on abortion, as is made clear when she writes the following:
Why is it that the bishops are more concerned with restricting millions of American women from making health care decisions that are best for them and their families than they are with ensuring that millions of Americans ? women, men, children, immigrants, the poor, the middle class ? get much-needed health insurance?
As a Catholic, I dare say it?s because the Conference of Catholic Bishops has lost its way. For example, in Missouri, the Catholic Conference issued an e-mail alert urging ?those who are opposed to health care reform but are also pro-life? to ?stay focused on the abortion issue and get the Stupak-like amendment adopted in the Senate.?
Really? As Catholics, are we so laser focused on the issue of abortion that we are willing to join tea partiers and the like to bring down the health care reform bill? And at the enormous expense of millions of Americans who suffer every day because they can?t afford to get checkups, because they must choose bankruptcy in order to save the life of their loved one?
There are at least three major flaws with Townsend?s statements above. First, pro-life stances?are pro-healthcare reform. After all, the Church believes abortion is murder, and if health care reform is to be about improving life, health, happiness etc., than the Church?s position is 100% pro-health care reform.
Secondly, note what the Church did and did not do in the Missouri example Townsend uses. First, it asked people against the current health care reform efforts to support getting a pro-life amendment in. Essentially, the Church was asking its more conservative members to support saving the lives of unborn children by helping to?pass health care reform, despite those members? opposition to the latter. Secondly, the Church did not say- again, according to the limited information Townsend provides- that it wanted health care reform to fail. Instead, it specifically said it wanted the amendment included to pass health care reform.
Thirdly, the Church will never support abortion policies within our lifetimes. However, since it is clearly willing to give its substantial endorsement to a Senate bill that includes pro-life policies, perhaps Townsend could open her eyes to this fact and realize that by compromising on abortion, Democrats would already likely have a bill nearing completion in the Senate. As much as I dislike giving advice to Democrats, in this case it seems to be a no-brainer. Pass a pro-life amendment, you likely pass health care reform.
Unfortunately, it seems that Democrats didn?t get the memo. The Nelson/Hatch amendment mirroring the House Stupak amendment was tabled- essentially killed- yesterday. Also unfortunately, AllahPundit thinks Nelson left himself some wiggle room on filibustering a final Senate bill if it does not include the amendment. Let?s hope not, for the sake of millions of helpless unborn children who are currently at risk from this bill. Let?s contact the offices of Senators Nelson, Casey, Conrad, Pryor, Dorgan and Bayh, the six Democrats who voted for the amendment, and make certain they kill any bill that does not get the support of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Conservatives Must Distance Themselves From Randall Terry
In another embarrassing display of pro-life hypocrisy, ThinkProgress reports that activist Randall Terry is holding demonstrations on Capitol Hill?over health care reform. Some might remember Terry as one of the few (if only) pro-life activists to not outright condemn the killing of abortion doctor George Tiller last spring. Unfortunately,?Terry is probably?going to once again make real?pro-life supporters look bad in his own inimitable way. While we cannot stop him, we can make certain our pro-life actions follow in the Christian, compassionate way the vast majority of pro-life supporters act. Everything happens for a reason- let’s use this opportunity to remind ourselves of why people like?Randall Terry have little or no impact on the legislative process, and why the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Mormon Church and National Right To Life do. The left can get away with Terry-like actions and movements- conservatives and Christians cannot. We must hold ourselves to the proverbial higher standard.
Democrats Lied- Kids May Die
According to LifeNews.com, pro-life Democrats and Republicans are unlikely to get a chance to vote on portions of the House bill currently being worked?on by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) that will create a new method of funding. According to the Associated Press: “The main point of contention [among pro-life Democrats and pro-choice Democrats]?is the proposed new federal subsidies that would help lower-income people purchase health care coverage from private plans ? and potentially from a new government-sponsored plan ? within a new purchasing exchange.” Later in the article: “But the Democrats’ health overhaul bill would create a new stream of federal funding not covered by the restrictions….[Representative Bart] Stupak [D-Michigan]?says language specifying that someone obtaining an abortion must use her own money, not federal money from the subsidies, doesn’t go far enough because it’s impossible to clearly segregate funds in that way.”
I guess Nancy Pelosi and other pro-choice (read: pro-abortion) Democrats don’t get it- without a stipulation against abortions in the final health care bill coming out of the House, organizations like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops can’t support their bill.?Furthermore, representatives who would otherwise like to see more government involvement in health care but are against killing children?may not vote for the bill.?29 Democrats joined Stupak in sending a letter to Pelosi, and given how many Blue Dogs are joining with Republicans with regards to concerns over the cost of the bill and the public option…keeping abortion in the bill may just kill the House version of health care reform.
(One addendum: if President Obama really wants to be the “post-partisan” president he talked about on the campaign trail, and wants to find the “middle ground” on abortion as he said at Notre Dame…he could always pressure Pelosi and Co. into accepting Stupak’s bill. Then it would probably give the House the votes it needs to pass a health reform bill. The question, however, is will the president do that, or will he stick to his ideological belief that any unborn child is worth killing?)
