(Must Read & Pass on!)What’s Wrong With Double-Poxer Pro-lifers?

cosmos-liturgy-sex.com ^ | September 20, 2008 | Hierothee

[Publius804]

What’s Wrong With Double-Poxer Pro-lifers? Filed under: Uncategorized — Hierothee @ 11:09 am

In my occasional travels through cyberspace, I have noticed that many pro-life Catholics are so fed up with the current state of American politics that they refuse to vote for either major party. Mark Shea is perhaps the biggest example of this. Indeed, one of his readers has accused him and his ilk of being “double-poxers.” They say a “pox upon both your houses” to Democrats and Republicans alike. They will vote for a third-party candidate, or not vote at all, and this, Shea’s reader asserts, is impractical thinking that will all but ensure a Democrat victory and the appointing of radical, activist judges who are pro-abortion.

I am in agreement with Shea’s reader, but I have a different way of putting it. Shea’s reader does not go deeply enough in his analysis of why “double-poxing” is wrong-headed. The double-poxers are not just impractical: they fail to see the guiding telos of the socialism homogeneously embraced by Democrat Party leadership. In order to assess the current political situation, one needs to go beyond the issue of practicality (though that is important) and even beyond specific issues such as war, torture, euthanasia or even stem-cell research and abortion. One has to acknowledge the true nature of socialism.

Socialism seeks to impose the mechanized central government as the religious authority in people’s lives.

[MHGinTN]

Voting a feckless third party is almost cowardly, and may in fact be cowardly in this particular election given what we know about the lying cheating infanticide defending Marxist who is the Democrat party candidate.

Do something? ... How about putting money where mouth and heart are, by heavily supporting a 527 which will publicly stand against the evil Barack Obama represents, despite the harrassment that comes to those standing against blatant evil. How about speaking out all over the Internet and calling talk radio programs, to highlight the truth about the infanticide candidate, Barack'ACORN'Obama.

In so doing, the listeners, the general populace, then has at least a chance to choose life over evil beacuse of hearing the truth. By exposing the heinous extent Barack Obama is willing to go to defend abortion on demand--he really did/does accept infanticide, if it will prevent Roe v Wade from being eroded--the connection to alive unborn children being 'euthanized' in utero awakens the conscience of individuals and thus the nation.

Politicians are finger-in-the-wind leaders, for the vast majority of the scum. What Americans are liking so much about Sarah Palin is that she is not a finger in the wind conservative, she actually lives the principles and walks the walk, and wants to bring her conservative values to bear on our national issues. We the people seem to be tired of democrat bipartisanship, which is 'step into our cesspool to be with us, to show unity.' John McCain has reached across the aisle, yes, and shared bills that most of us find downright dumb! But when have the perfectionist condemning McCain ever stopped to ask themselves how much weight Barack Obama will give to the pleadings of conservatives? Marxist Obama will not give a hoot in hell if you vote Constitutional party, if you aren't loyal to him, you are his enemy.

To take a cowardly third party approach when such an person is on one of the two party's tickets is asinine, self-serving vanity. And you can identify the faux values mouthpiece immediately, when they whine that Palin is only the vp candidate, that McCain is the presidential candidate. Yet when asked about the value of having Sarah on the ticket, these fake conservatives (really just magic thinking egocentric self aggrandizers in my book), these same spittlers will compare and contrast ad infinitum on Biden versus Palin, and talk on incessantly about how Sarah's debate performance will be crucial or how her position just a heartbeat away from being president is so vital to consider regarding her 'qualifications' to be president and importance on the ticket.

Enough already! The verbal flatulence is becoming a pervasive stench! Either a person with values rationally reaches toward a ticket with values, weighing the future consequences of their vote, or they're just spittling to read their words and grand fantasies.

There are two men in this race who have a chance to become the next head of this nation, only two. There are four paths on which to be a part of electing the next president:

1) cast a vote for McCain/Palin (then stay active seeking to influence McCain during his tenure, instead of sitting on lazy butt and complaining that things are not going according to desire);

2) cast a vote for Obama/Biden;

3)vote for a third party candidate and thus opt out of being an active participant in electing the next leader;

4) directly avoid casting a vote for the presidential spot.

What do positions three and four have in common? ... They opt out of being a direct influence in electing the next president. Voting for Bob Barr will allow an ACORN false ballot more pwoerful than an honest McCain vote (for those in rio linda).

If you cast a third party vote, you become one of a non-leadership number; if you don't vote, you become just another of the deadheads the rest of the sovereign honest voters have to drag along while trying to get a round of golf finished (reference to the old joke about the two guys who were such dedicated golfing buddies and one of them died on the second tee ... it was the longest round of golf the surviving partner ever played).

I'm sick of the talking heads claiming the high road of 'my principles are so important that I will live under marxist infanticide leadership before I will vote for a partially better candidate. Such people are the reason Congress has not ended abortion on demand, for they will opt out of the process since they are above any compromise. They can pat themselves on the back and claim superiority, but they've been complicit in an ongoing slaughter.

Well guess what, such an attitude endangers my grandkids, so you perfect fools have nothing but my contempt.

[MHGinTN]

I not only read the whole article, I posted a reply at the website.

[Unam Sanctam]

Obama is a Marxist and a danger to the republic. There is no excuse for not voting against Obama in this election.

[Gondring]

You seem to have missed: “However futile our ultimate efforts may be in this regard [...]”

[Gondring]

Funny you mention your grandkids while advocating the short-sighted position.

[metmom]

Ping-a-ling....

[magisterium]

Can you read??? Did I not say that the strategy I advocated should be used in states where the Republicans have absolutely no chance anyway? Did I not say this twice, in fact? Get a clue! McCain is not a "conservative," neither is he even remotely to be considered one. he is marginally better than Obama, at best, everything considered. He is the nominee precisely because the RNC could bank on "good Republicans" like yourself holding their noses and voting for him. How many times do you hold your nose and vote for a so-called "conservative"-who-isn't until you get that you're being "had" by a section of their party that cynically uses you? How many times does the lesser-of-two-evils "choice" have to be foisted on us before we say "ENOUGH!"?

Don't you dare call people of my opinion "cowardly"!! You have no idea to what extent I have been involved in the quixotic attempt at conservative politics in this cesspool called Massachusetts, so I suggest you take your ill-conceived and slanderous appellations elsewhere than here with me.

The Republican platform has been eroded for nearly four decades, bit by bit. It will be further eroded unless and until the so-called Religious Right stands up to them and threatens them with abandonment unless they get their act together. This ain't going to be accomplished by "rewarding" them with unquestioning obedience when they chip away at their former core, nor will it be accomplished when we unquestioningly give "approval" to very mediocre candidates like McCain. The future bodes ill if a message isn't sent to these guys that they won't soon forget.

Meanwhile, vote for the guy if you feel it will stall things another four years. But you'll be left with a similar choice in 2012, worse, if anything. The erosion will be that much more advanced. The kingmakers in the party have no use for either of us, and, as they see the Christian base shrinking over time, they will be less and less inclined to even throw us the crumbs that they do throw us now. You can hold a wolf by its ears in an attempt to stall his biting you, but, sooner or later, you have to let go. Let go now, while your arms and hands are still strong enough to fight!

The Republicans have effectively abandoned us; it's time to give a real impetus to a new party. Start at the local level, and build up its "street cred." But we need to begin now in order to make it viable in an election cycle or two. If we only start ten years from now, it will be absolutely too late.

[MHGinTN]

I'm trying to decide if you're offering the koolaid because your master(s) sent you to create as much confusion as possible at a conservative website, or if you are in fact this naive. ... I've been reading posts under your name for a few weeks now, so I the conclusion is the former. You have an agenda and it is not defeating the Marxist scratching at the door.

"The Republicans have effectively abandoned us; it's time to give a real impetus to a new party. Start at the local level, and build up its "street cred." But we need to begin now in order to make it viable in an election cycle or two. If we only start ten years from now, it will be absolutely too late."

You attend all of your premises upon the naive belief that even if Barack'ACORN'Obama gets elected with democrat control over House and Senate, you will have fair opportunity to build political capital as an opposition to absolute control. If you were merely naive, I could work with that. But you are a pernicious agitprop, and I have nothing but disgust for your fifth column ilk.

You further change focus (a typical agitprop tactic), to urge grassroots work to build an alternate party from the ground up, starting this year ... and the Obama braintrust laughs at that one if they didn't send you to sew this gordian knot, knowing that if you will only let them into complete power, zeal can be squelch easily, can be made impotent in a matter of months.

No, I'm not buying your bilge, spittlist. Withdrawing from the battle against Obama, to dance off into 'a gress roots effort to start a new party' serves the strategy of the Marxist mangod. You are a useful idiot to that campaign.

[huldah1776]

how long has tissue harvesting been going on in the U.S. and why, oh, why is it legal? I heard rumors but not anything substantial even on the pro-life sites I visit. We are truly doomed.

[MHGinTN]

Decades ago, vaccine producing companie used fetal tissues harvested from aborted or miscarried children as tissue base for cultivating measles vaccines. The abortion industry got into the business of supplying a nearly unlimited supply of 'fetal' tissues but law making it illegal to sell fetal tissues from an abortionist to a research facility resulted in a vast middleman industry.

You can read about the development of this hideous industry by googling the name Senator Bob Smith and fetal tissue harvesting, and following the work he did in the late eighties and nineties to try and make this a major issue in the US Senate.

The tissue providers feathered their relationship with abortionist by 'renting space' in the abortuary at an inflated rate, for the privilege of harvesting on the spot.

Killing prematurely delivered alive babies by neglecting medical treatment for them was becoming a major abortion technique where tissue harvesters were set up with particualr abortionists.

It was becoming so wide spread that the United States Congress eventually pass legislation banning the practice, by mandating medical attention for preemies regardless of where they're delivered.

Barack Obama was working to prevent outlawing this particular abortion method known as 'induced labor abortion'. A misdirection/obfuscation campaign has been successful in characterizing the Illinois bills as seeking to mandate medical attention for children survive a botched abortion. But the truth is, Obama was trying to protect a particular way of killing babies, 'neglecting struggling children after they're forced to be born prematurely'.

If you're interested in how that killing method is accomplished, I'll explain it, but it brings tears to my old eyes even to describe it.

[MHGinTN]

The Democrat party is the party of abortion, from the legislative right straight through the higest offices. Democrats have empowered their political capital by championing ‘a woman’s specious right to slaughter alive unborn and just born children.’ The entire party is pond scum, but representatives like Tom Harkin seem so nice, so caring ... as long as you’re not an alive baby in the womb. And ol’ Dungheap Harkin calls himself a good catholic, as do many of the dead-soul democrats. But Obama is the worst to come up out of that cesspool yet.

[magisterium]

Name the posts. I don't post very much on the political side of things at all. I am almost entirely self-restricted to dealing with "religion" topics, on the Religion Forum only. You'd better back up your assertions, since you seem to be attempting a smear here.

And for what? Because I seek a remedy for the Republican Party's lack of true conservative candidates, because it is palpably clear to me that they are removing themselves, over time, from the conservative mainstream once held by the likes of Senator Taft?

My friend, in all likelihood, I am more conservative than you are. I lament greatly the removal of true conservatives, at least at the national level, in favor of RINOs, and the trend in this direction becoming more and more obvious over the last few decades. That the Republicans are drifting is undeniable, it seems to me. Drifting away from the Christian base they themselves embraced until not all that long ago. RINO's are everywhere now. Giuliani and my own former governor Romney come immediately to mind in that regard. These types of people are never going to really help us in the fight against abortion. And they and their fellow RINOs have the full backing of a lot of people at the RNC who cut the deals.

As I said, voting over and over for the Republicans without any question, hoping for a "better day" when they will do what is right instead of what is expedient in the "life issues," is a bit like holding a wolf by the ears. Sooner or later, you will have to let go, and the wolf will attack. It is better, under such circumstances, to let go and defend yourself earlier rather than later, while you are still strong. To do otherwise is only forestalling the inevitable, at the expense of your strength. Letting the Republicans totally off the hook over and over and over again is likewise forestalling the inevitable. UNLESS something is done now to EITHER get them pointed right again, or considering a truly conservative party.

Did I not say, several times, that the whole point to my suggestion was to "send a message" to the RNC to clean up their act? What's wrong with that, pray tell? If the "message" to these guys takes, so much the better. The safety valve that I suggested was to restrict this kind of "message voting" to states (like my own, Massachusetts) where McCain has absolutelu no chance anyway. This is safe policy that hurts nothing from the POV of electoral votes. In states where McCain is likely to win, and, especially, in states that could go either way, obviously, the strategy is different. That Obama is worse than McCain is self-evident, and I never denied that. What I said is that he is a weak Republican candidate, who is not all that much better, taken on balance, than Obama as far as the Christian Right ought to be concerned. On economic issues, on immigration, on health care mandates, etc. he is almost indistinguishable. It ain't called "McCain-Feingold" for nothing, you know! Even on the "life issues," while he is pro-life on something of an official level, he isn't all that gung-ho about it, really. I question how much emphasis he would put on that when it comes time to nominate a SC justice.

We've been hornswaggled time and time again. Three hundred million people here, and this is the best we can do? If something is not done to send that "message" i"m referring to, then I will be playing the prophet far more than I wish to. I hate being a prophet!

And, one more time, I'm not letting you off the hook on your allegations. You'd better come up with these posts you allege that I have written that demonstrate that I have some political agenda here. I treat almost exclusively to religious issues on FR, and you know it, my friend.

But what gives with the attempt to ban me? That, my friend, is hardly what people on FR, who are really on the same side, should be doing to each other. That may suffice over at DU, but not here. Again, you better come up with some other of these posts you allege I have made "over the last few weeks," or I will ask the same treatment you desire be meted out to you. A retraction from you will suffice to call off the dogs on my end.

[MHGinTN]

No one is trying to ban you. Try to control your paranoia.

We ran into each other on the Mormon discussion threads.

And you aren't worth wasting time poring over your posts to paly your obfuscation game. Democrats lie. You're working to get the democrat elected this cycle. I have no further use for exchanges with you.

[magisterium]

Pinging Jim was for what other purpose, then? Painting me as a DU troll, through I’ve been here for somewhat over three years without blemish, is for what other purpose, then? And what exchanges have we had on the “Mormon boards”? I rarely post stuff concerning Mormons, and, on the half-dozen or so times I have (in the 1700 posts I’ve made here on FR), I don’t recall saying anything that treated to “political” subjects. I’m still waiting for a retraction of that tar brush you’re trying to paint me with. I take scurrilous charges like yours most seriously. You have impugned my character here entirely without evidence. You have no idea how much more of a genuine “conservative” pedigree I come from than you suppose. You better make good on finding these supposedly “in the tank for the other team” posts you claim I have made, or you better apologize for slandering me here on this website. I am asking you semi-politely for the last time. Put up or shut up. Now.

[huldah1776]

no, do not trouble yourself. I will do the research. This is beyond my comprehension, again. Oh, the depravity of man. I visited the Military museum in Branson today, and the center room has the names of all those who sacrificed their lives during world war 2. Three walls covered with names. I was overwhelmed, but as I walked past the panels full of names, I thought of the nameless millions, known only by the name God has given them, and how many buildings it would take to memorialize their deaths.
Revelation 6
“ 15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 16They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

[MHGinTN]

You have a pleasant dyspeptic evening in your tantrum.

[Salvation]

I think I know Mark Shea well enough that he will vote for McCain-Palin. Just very analytical.

[ThomasThomas]

What are “double-poxers”?

[magisterium]

"Tantrum"? You sic Jim on my case, you accuse me of drinking the kool-aid put out by the Obama camp, you further accuse me of being "sent by my masters" which can only mean the Obama camp in your context, you accuse me of a"Marxist agenda," AND you accuse me of being a "fifth columnist" for similar groups, and all this while you say that I have posted a number of posts "in the last few weeks" to substantiate your accusations, AND YOU SAY I'M HAVING A "TANTRUM"???!!! The above only refers to your post 28, I'm not even dealing with the rehashings you made subsequently.

Buster, you not only have NO idea what you are talking about, you manage to step all over your tongue while PUBLICLY SLANDERING my good name! I DEMAND a full retraction RIGHT NOW, with a full apology, or I will ask that, at the very least, you be suspended for falsely accusing a fellow FR member with a view to having him outright banned without any warrant or evidence. Don't say that wasn't your object. You wouldn't have pinged Jim Robimson for any other purpose, especially drawing to his attention my alleged "fifth column" status. Maybe your style of wild finger-pointing without evidence was how people were done away with in the former Soviet Union, but that's not how things are done around here! You display, in that tendency, at least, more of a "Marxist" spirit than anything I have ever even THOUGHT, much less said, about anyone here or elsewhere.

I have put up with more left-wing cowchips here in Massachusetts from the Senators, Congresscritters and state reps who allegedly "represent" me than you will ever even imagine in ten lifetimes. The LAST thing I need is to have the likes of YOU impugning my good name by association with their ilk or worse. I have also, doubtless, done more personally in the pro-life movement (back in the 80's when Operation Rescue was active here in Brookline and Boston, with people being arrested and dragged-off in "pain compliance holds") than you are likely to have done. Don't you EVER attempt to smear me with association, no matter HOW vague, with the pro-death abortion industry up here again!

You can call this a "tantrum" all you want, but you have, in multiple ways and in multiple posts, smeared the good name I have RIGHT to! RM, I insist that this gentleman has impugned my character without cause, and has done so sufficiently that he ought to be suspended. In asking for this I feel I am being lenient. He wanted me banned outright, and post 28 proves it.

[RobbyS]

I wonder of Shea understands the dynamics of the two parties: About a quarter of the party, and about half of the leaders are pro-choice. They hate the influence that pro-life people have on the party, and would accept minority status just to be rid of it, because on most matters they are agreed with the Democrats. The Democratic Party is solidly pro-choice, except the blacks, who are ambivalent on the issue. Catholics are traditionally Democratic, and they have been mislead by many of the clergy into thinking that abortion is a secondary issue. Now that is changing, but the confused thinking of Pelosi and Biden —assuming they are sincere, is evidence that many Catholics are stuck with the Bernardin thinking of the’80s. The Cuomo sophistry of “personally opposed” did not come from thin air, but from false priests like Drinan. Nver was the perjorative meaning of jsuitical better applied than when applied to that man. May his soul rest in peace.