Thread by me.
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Sarah Palin gave a major policy address last week on how she will be an advocate for special needs children should she become the nation's next vice-president. But, does her record as the governor of Alaska demonstrate that support or is it merely an election ploy to gain votes?
The answer appears to be a resounding yes -- as the Palin administration put more money behind education and support services for disabled children and their families.
During her speech Palin said, "as governor, I've succeeded in securing additional funding and assistance for students with special needs. By 2011, I will have tripled the funding available to these students."
...
Thread by rhema.
I have become something I once reviled: a single-issue voter. I used to think that a wise voter tries to discern each candidate's intentions on major issues, and then casts his vote based on an assessment of who will do the greatest overall goodor the least evil. I thought those voters who support a candidate based on a single issuewhether he will increase school funding, say, or lower taxeswere shirking their duty to consider the full ramifications of putting someone in office. What good is electing someone who is "right" on one thing, I thought, if he gets everything else disastrously wrong? This was the reasoning I used as I congratulated myself for wisely apportioning my votes based on utilitarian calculations.
Now I suspect this sort of calculation misses something. I've become convinced that a nation which sanctions the extinguishing of unborn children, and further, the outright execution of near-term infants, doesn't deserve admiration even if it gets every other policy right.
I used to include abortion as part of my voting calculus, mind you, but only a part. What if a candidate is pro-life, for example, but favors disastrous tax and trade policies that would consign people to lower living standards? Or what if he wants to use our military in pursuit of ill-defined foreign policy goals? Shouldn't these things factor into my equation?
Those other issues certainly affect a country's safety, prosperity, and greatness. But I've come to believe that a nation that tolerates destruction of innocents deserves neither safety nor prosperity nor greatness. We've descended into barbarism, and it poisons how we treat the elderly, the incapacitated, even ourselves. We shouldn't be surprised, having made life a utilitarian calculation, that more and more humans become inconvenient.
"We will not be silent. We are your bad conscience. The White Rose will give you no rest."