If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Every once in a while The Onion hits it out of the park, and this is one of those times.

If you were ever annoyed by an Obama zealot (and for the record, I never really was), you might enjoy this.

If you were one of Obama’s minions who helped get him elected, then I hope you too can enjoy this. Oh, and congratulations to you as well, your hard work got the job done.

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

Tags: Barack Obama, The Onion

Douglas Johnson, Legislative Director of the National Right to Life Committee, recently left a comment to one of my posts over at Donmillerfans.net regarding Don’s recent campaigning for Barack Obama. I asked Mr. Johnson if I could follow up his post with a few follow-up questions and he graciously agreed. But before I get to the Q&A, 3 quick disclaimers:

1. While Mr. Johnson comes across as very pro-McCain and anti-Obama, that is not the point of this post. I’m not endorsing a candidate either way. My point in posting this is to make sure the facts are out there in regards to Obama’s and McCain’s voting records on abortion. (and if someone wants to refute any of Mr. Johnson’s claims in the interview PLEASE contact me.) The views that Mr. Johnson expresses in this interview are his own, NOT MINE. In posting this interview, I’m not saying I agree with his conclusions and ideas.

2. For some of you, abortion is not a big issue. For others it is the biggest. Again, in posting this interview I am not saying that abortion should be the biggest issue or only issue for you to consider in voting. I’m not even saying it needs to be in your top 10. Everyone needs to make that decision on their own, and I trust that you will.

3. This is a bit long. Sorry. But I didn’t want to edit it down or break it into parts.

Alright, on to the interview…

————————————————————————————————————-

BA: Mr. Johnson, in the comments you left at donmillerfans.net you refer to Obama’s policies on abortion as “marketing strategies” that deflect attention away from his agenda that will increase abortions. I’m asking you to make a judgment call on this - and if you’re not comfortable doing so, just say so - but do you feel that Barack Obama is truly concerned with reducing the number of abortions that occur in this country?

DJ: No.  This “abortion reduction” talk is really a scam, cooked up among liberal think tanks and political consultants, and adopted as a marketing strategy — or as they say, “messaging” — for the general election only.  (During the pre-nomination season, the Obama campaign challenged any suggestion from the Clinton camp that Obama had anything less than an unblemished pro-abortion record.)

Based on Obama’s record and his commitments, he will push for a radical change in the status quo in the pro-abortion direction. To the extent he succeeds, it will drastically increase the number of abortions performed in the U.S.

During his entire political career, in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate, he has opposed every piece of pro-life legislation that has come before him — even on bills which many “pro-abortion-rights” lawmakers supported, like the proposals to ban partial-birth abortion and to protect all infants born alive during abortions.  I cannot think of any major component of the abortion industry’s legislative agenda that he has not endorsed in some way, or voted for.  He wants to block renewal of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funding of abortion.  Both sides agree that the Hyde Amendment has saved many lives — by the most conservative estimate, there are more than a million Americans alive today because of the Hyde Amendment.  He wants abortion to be part of his national health insurance legislation.

Obama is a cosponsor of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” which would make partial-birth abortion legal again, and invalidate literally hundreds of state laws that have been upheld even under Roe v. Wade.  This bill, by its plain language and the explicit statements of its chief backers, would invalidate all parental notification laws, require states to fund abortion on demand, and invalidate waiting periods and informed consent laws — just for starters.  It would also undermine the laws that protect pro-life health care professionals from being penalized for refusing to participate in abortions.  It is the most radical pro-abortion proposal ever introduced in Congress.  Yet, Obama stood before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the political arm of the nation’s largest abortion provider, and pledged, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.  That’s the first thing that I’d do.”

BA: Are you familiar with the 95/10 plan espoused by Democrats For Life (democratsforlife.org)? In your opinion is it possible to reduce abortions by 95% without repealing Roe V Wade? Are you aware of any instances in which Barack Obama has specifically referenced this plan, or has said that he plans to enact it?

DJ: You are referring to a bill that has been introduced in the Senate by Senator Bob Casey (D-Pa.) as S. 2407. While it was introduced as a single bill, it is really a compendium of 13 different legislative proposals.  One of these components Obama has already voted against, when it came up this year as an amendment.  It was a proposal to codify (make permanent) a Bush Administration rule that allows states to recognize an “unborn child” as a child eligible for health services under the S-CHIP (children’s health insurance program).  Even Senators Kennedy and Kerry supported that amendment, but Obama opposed it — because the pro-abortion lobby objects to any law or government policy that recognizes the existence of an “unborn child,” and Obama has never, ever bucked the hard-core pro-abortion line on any issue.

Another component of S. 2407 is a minimal “woman’s right to know” provision, which would require that before a woman procures an abortion, she must be provided with certain information, including “the probable gestational age and characteristics of the unborn child at the time the abortion will be performed.”  One of the purposes of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” which Obama strongly supports, is to invalidate state laws that contain such “right to know” requirements, so I don’t think you will see him supporting a federal law that contains any such requirements.

BA: As the Legislative Director for the NRLC, one can assume that a presidential candidates views on abortion weigh heavily on your vote. Do you consider yourself a one-issue voter? What advice would you give to someone who is questioning whether or not to give the abortion issue any weight when trying to determine which candidate to vote for?

DJ: Gross disregard for the right to life of innocent human beings, such as Barack Obama has displayed, should be considered a “disqualifying issue.”  If the government will not protect your basic right to life, then anything else the government may offer in terms of civil liberties or beneficial programs is not going to be of value to you, because you have to be alive to enjoy those liberties and benefits.  The right to life is the predicate to all other rights.

BA: John Roberts said that Roe Vs. Wade is “settled as the law of the land”. Do you believe it will ever be repealed?

DJ: All Supreme Court rulings are “the law of the land,” until they are changed — that is why they call it the “supreme” court.  And every Supreme Court ruling is “settled” — until unsettled by another case, or by a constitutional amendment.  Certainly, there is no basis in the actual Constitution for Roe v. Wade — it is the textbook example of judges misusing their power to impose their personal policy preferences.  So, it should ultimately be overturned, which would restore power to elected lawmakers to protect unborn children.  But how soon that happens will depend on those who nominate and confirm Supreme Court justices.  Obama really has made it quite clear that a commitment to Roe, or worse, is going to be a requirement for anybody he would nominate to the Court.  McCain wants justices who will stick to interpreting the law and leave the legislating to elected lawmakers.  Right now, there are four justices who even wanted to strike down the ban on partial-birth abortions, so the appointment of one additional pro-abortion judicial activist could produce a radically pro-abortion court majority.

BA: It was only 8 years ago that John McCain said that Roe V Wade should NOT be overturned. Do you feel his complete 180 in this issue is genuine, or was this motivated in part by a desire to win the votes of pro-lifers?

DJ: This is a reference to a single anomalous statement purportedly made by McCain before a newspaper editorial board in 1999, which McCain immediately clarified.  McCain has been in Congress since 1983, and he has voted consistently anti-abortion throughout that period.  He has voted explicitly against Roe v. Wade both before and after the disputed statement.  He has sponsored pro-life legislation that, according to pro-abortion groups, offended the principles of Roe v. Wade.   In short, McCain has a full quarter-century record of consistent public policy actions against abortion and against Roe v. Wade.

BA (question submitted by Jordan Green of the Burnside Writers Collective): It seems Christians supporting Barack Obama are weighing the abortion issue differently than they did in 2000 and 2004.  Maybe a vote for McCain means a small chance at Roe v Wade being overturned,but they’re also looking around and saying, ‘We had a Republican presidency and Congress for most of the last 8 years, and things don’t look too good at this point.’  In your opinion, does the chance John McCain has to make ground on the abortion debate outweigh issues like the economy, Iraq War, foreign policy and foreign energy dependence?

DJ: I will leave it to others to debate the relative merits of the candidates on these other issues.  My interest is in making sure that those who sincerely care about the right to life of unborn children, and newborn children, have the facts.  Then they will have to weigh those facts as they see fit.  It would be a shame if people made their evaluations based on the mistaken idea that nothing positive has been accomplished by elected pro-life lawmakers in the past, and/or that Obama’s position is less bad than it really is.

On the positive side, despite the constraints imposed by the Supreme Court, the pro-life side has had significant gains.  At the federal level, despite stiff resistance from pro-abortion interest groups and their congressional allies, under President Bush we’ve enacted the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, protections for pro-life health care providers, and others. At the state level, we’ve enacted hundreds of laws — parental notification, informed consent, waiting periods, curbs on tax funding of abortion, and others — and there is empirical data that these laws in the aggregate prevent hundreds of thousands of abortions.  All of these limits on abortion would be nullified by Obama’s “Freedom of Choice Act.”

Keep in mind, too, that it is not only a question of how soon Roe will be overturned.  Given the wrong kind of nominations, the Court could make things even worse.  In 2007, four Supreme Court justices voted to strike down even the ban on partial-birth abortions, on the basis of a hard-line pro-abortion legal theory that, if it gains a majority on the Court, also will jeopardize the Hyde Amendment and many other hard-won pro-life gains. Obama made it clear that if given the chance, he will appoint justices who agreed with those dissenters.

BA: Outside of voting for a pro-life candidate, what are some specific things individuals can do to help reduce the number of abortions in this country? Are there specific causes, foundations, or life changes folks can make that come to mind?

DJ: Voting for pro-life lawmakers is essential, but certainly there are other essential pro-life activities as well.  We encourage involvement in the work of state and local Right-to-Life organizations, which are involved in the vital work of educating people, especially young people, regarding the wonders of life before birth and the brutalities of abortion.  There are thousands of crisis pregnancy centers and programs, some freestanding and some church-affiliated, that provide practical forms of assistance that many women need to carry their babies to term.  If Obama is able to cut off all federal support for crisis pregnancy centers, as he has advocated, that won’t make the job any easier, but volunteers and private donations are the backbone of these programs. These are just examples.

————————————————————————————————————-

Thanks to Douglas Johnson for answering my questions, and thanks to anyone who read this far.

And again, I’m not trying to influence anyone’s vote with this, I’m sure most of you already have your mind made up. I only hope this has cleared up some misconceptions and left you more informed than when you started.

There’s a lot of issues out there and abortion is just one of them. I hope you all are able to think through all of them and cast a vote for someone on November 4th.

Intelligent and graceful comments can be left below…anything inappropriate will be garbaged.

Tags: Abortion, Barack Obama, Douglas Johnson, NRLC

If you watched the presidential debate last night, then you know that the most uncomfortable moments - other than McCain calling Obama “that one” - was Tom Brokaw’s increasing annoyance over the blatant disregard for time. Both camps had agreed to the 2-minute and 1-minute limits on responses and rebuttals, and both candidates blew through them on every answer like a tired motorist blowing through a stop sign at 2am.

Let’s face it, it’s ridiculous to expect politicians to be short winded. (1-minute rebuttals?? really??) It’s also ridiculous to expect them to play by the rules. That’s why I think the rules need to change. Forget the green-yellow-red traffic light on the floor. We need a better system of keeping time and enforcing clock abuse.

Here’s a few ideas:

The Mic Drop: As soon as their time is up, cut off power to their mic. I can guarantee that after being cut off mid-thought once or twice, they will learn to wrap up their thoughts before losing their voice.

The Orchestra: You know how award shows will cut off long-winded acceptance speeches with music that gets louder and louder every second? Let’s do the same thing at debates. Let’s hire an orchestra to sit next to the stage and start playing in ever-increasing volume as the candidates blow through their time limits. Or maybe an orchestra wouldn’t be brash enough? Perhaps we could do the same thing, only we could have Nickelback or Lil Wayne start performing. That might get them to wrap things up on time.

The Dueling Mics: How about this? As soon as a candidate’s time limit is reached, his opponent is allowed to talk into his mic at the same time. The possibilities are endless. The opponent could chime in with little quips and insults ever few seconds (”not true”…”he’s lying”…”you suck”…) or he could just pull a Jim Carrey in Dumb and Dumber and make the most annoying noise in the world until his opponent shut up.

The Mini Life-Sucking Machine: Remember the Dreaded Life-Sucking Machine in the Pit of Despair from The Princess Bride? We need to attach a mini version of that to each candidate. We can make a belt out of it. Then as soon as their time allotment has expired, they start to feel the pain from the machine as it inflicts damage to the small of their backs. The longer the candidate wants to exceed his time, the more pain he feels as life is sucked out of him. Then we’ll find out just how important it is to these guys to finish their thoughts.

The Strip Tease: This one is simple, for every question asked each candidate gives their answer. Whoever goes longer has to remove one article of clothing. Want to keep those pants on? Then you better stick to answering the question and not ramble on for 2 minutes rebutting the comment the other guy made 10 minutes ago. For the sake of all of our eyes, I pray this idea is never put into practice. No one is interested in seeing McCain answering the boxers or briefs question by dropping trou.

The Chess Clock: The great thing about this idea is we assure each candidate gets equal time. Let’s say we give each candidate 30 minutes of speaking time for the entire debate. In the middle of the debate floor each candidate has a button (think Deal or No Deal) they press to start their clock and turn on their microphone. As soon as the first candidate is asked a question, his/her clock starts counting down from 30 minutes. The longer he spends on each question, the less time he will have to answer subsequent ones. When the first candidate is done talking, he slams his button,and the clock starts for his opponent, who follows the same protocol. If one candidate was markedly more succinct in his answers than his opponent, he might find himself at the end of the debate with 10 more minutes than his rival, allowing him to talk for a while without interruption.

The Donation Obligation: Here’s the idea: for every second over the allotted time that the candidate speaks, he has to give $500 out of his own pocket to the party of his opponent. Last night it seemed that on every question these guys were asked, they blabbed beyond the legal limit for an extra 30 seconds (at least). Under this plan, those 30 seconds Barack went over his allotted time would mean a $15,000 donation to the Republican National Committee. And every time John McCain demanded he got a chance to rebut as well would cost him the same. You have to admit, it would certainly make things interesting. What would be more important to a candidate, spending an extra minute to clarify a position he feels is crucial to the election, or keeping the $30,000 it would cost to clarify that position out of the coffers of his opponent?

What do you think? Would any of these work? Got an idea of your own? I’d love to hear it.

Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain, Political Debates

On Sunday I flew my brother Josh into Philly from Boston for the week. It has been a while since we’ve had some good hang time, so I took the week off of work and we’re just gonna hang out all week.

It just so happened that Don Miller was campaigning for Obama in Virginia on Monday night, and since Josh is an Obama guy, and I’m a Don Miller guy, it seemed like a good opportunity.

That was yesterday, and here’s what went down:

2:30pm - Josh and I fill up the Jetta with gas and head out. Without traffic this trip should take about 2.5 hours. I’m enjoying a Coke Zero.

4:30pm - We hit a bit of rush hour traffic in the D.C. area. I am not enjoying the Coke Zero anymore because I have to pee something fierce. Josh has never been to D.C. so he enjoys the glimpses of the Capitol building and the Washington Monument as we drive through.

5:30pm - Normally our bodies are 70% water. My body is now 70% urine. Traffic is CRAWLING in Virginia as we drive past the Pentagon.

6:00pm - So much for 2.5 hours. 3.5 hours later we finally arrive at Virginia Theological Seminary where this campaign stop is being held. These are not huge events. It’s just Donald Miller sharing some thoughts and answering questions. For some (maybe all) of these events he is joined by Joshua Dubois, the National Director of Religious Affairs for Barack Obama (here’s an article on him if you’re interested). I text Don to see if he is here yet, but he replies and says he is about to leave the hotel.

7:00pm - There’s maybe 25 people gathered in this small auditorium to hear Don. A dozen or so more will trickle in over the next hour. I feel a hand on my shoulder…it’s Don, offering a warm “good to see you, Bryan” and an even warmer cinnamon roll from Cinnabon. I introduce him to Josh and then he takes a seat up front so he can be introduced. (And sadly, I made up the part about the cinnamon roll)

7:15pm - Don talks for 10-15 minutes on why he is voting for Obama, and specifically why he believes Obama is the best candidate for people of faith. He highlights abortion…John McCain has no plan to reduce abortions other than criminalizing it, which will mostly likely not happen…Conservative Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has said that Roe V Wade is “settled as the law of the land”…even if Roe was overturned, it would give power back to states, and abortion is legal in some states independent of Roe, meaning women could travel to get them anyway, or have them illegally…Obama has adopted the 95-10 initiative that has a stated goal of reducing abortions by 95% over the next 10 years. (some have said there’s a better chance of it reducing abortions by 10% over 95 years, but for what it’s worth it is, at least, a plan)…i think those were most of his points on that issue.

7:30pm - Don opens it up to questions. Typical Q&A fare happens. Good questions and good responses. Right at the end the organizer gets up to close things but a man who didn’t get a chance to ask a question pipes up that he has one last question. When the organizer starts to tell the man that we really need to close things up, he tells her “No. I don’t think so. You sit down!” We all looked around like, who is this dirtbag? But the organizers stayed calm and even let him ask his question and get it answered. Good for them.

8:00pm - Josh and I meet a Japanese guy who is drawn to Josh’s Red Sox jacket. We talk about Matsuzaka, Okajima, and this guy’s website - Sushi 4 Obama. This guy was cracking us up, very funny.

8:30pm - Don invites Josh and I out with a group of other folks for a beer. We drive 15 minutes down to Old Town, which apparently is a part of Alexandria right down on the water. Reminds me of Baltimore’s Inner Harbor, very cool.

9:30pm - I didn’t get a chance to talk to Don much, but it was cool because there were 3 people there who work for the International Justice Mission, the cause that I blogged about the other day. The one dude’s name was Andrew, and the other dude’s name was something that I can’t remember. Brandon, perhaps? I’m terrible with names. But we got to talk about my book and my sites and IJM and all sorts of stuff like that. It was very cool.

11:00pm - We left the bar and had a 2.5 hour drive back. The first 30 minutes we spent listening to the end of the Red Sox game, which was amazing. Mike Sociable and his suicide squeeze blew up in his face like an overblown balloon. Then Jay Bay and Jed Lowrie got it done. Awesome.

1:30am - We rolled into the driveway, tired, but not too tired to watch the replay of the end of the Sox game. More Awesomeness. And off to bed.

All in all it was a great night. Good company, good discussion, and minimal traffic make for a great road trip. I’m glad we got to go. If you get a chance to hear Don Miller speak, it’s always a good idea. Even if you don’t agree with him on everything, he’ll always make you think.

Tags: Alexandria, Barack Obama, Donald Miller