Here We Go… Moving Left

21 11 2008

Barack Obama won the presidency this month by winning a handful of key states that Bush won in 2000 and 2004 and John McCain needed but did not get. There were several key demographics in each of those states that Obama won over to his side that I will address later. Many voters in these states were Christians who mistakenly believed Obama, a self-proclaimed Christian, would certainly not move as far left as their fellow believers were warning them. As a Christian, I must have grace for the poor judgment my fellow Christians displayed in their choice of president (no I-told-you-so’s), but in order for us to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past, it is important to point out these errors. 

This “non-I-told-you-so” occurrence I’m referring to is the ambushing by liberal Democrats to unseat Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) from his position on the Energy and Commerce Committee and replaced him with Rep. Harry Waxman (D-Calif.). Waxman’s overthrow is disturbing to many Democrats, who see the move as spurning the seniority system and an indication that Obama and Pelosi is veering their party sharply left

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats steered the House toward more aggressively tackling global warming and other environmental problems Thursday, toppling veteran Michigan Rep. John Dingell, a staunch supporter of Detroit automakers, from an important energy panel in favor of California liberal Rep. Henry Waxman.

The switch could help President-elect Barack Obama on Capitol Hill with one of his favored issues: trying to curb global warming by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. But Waxman’s combative stance on climate change and other issues also could alienate Republicans and moderate Democrats, making it harder to get the bipartisan support Obama will need.

Of course the AP release limits the scope of this leftward coup to environmental repercussions and the automotive business. And this is precisely why it was important for Christians who supported Obama to heed the warnings and not vote for him. Obama’s march leftward is a smoke and mirror show and most Obama supporters cannot tell you the other, more important reason, this appointment is important. 

The Energy and Commerce panel is one of the most important House committees, with sweeping jurisdiction over energy, the environment, consumer protection, telecommunications and health care programs such as sex education and taxpayer funding of abortions. You may remember that Waxman was the one who used your taxpayer dollars to launch unsubstantiated attacks on the validity of abstinence education and pregnancy care centers. 

According to FRC Action, the leadership will not pursue the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) next year. Democrats have decided the issue carries too much political risk. They plan to postpone the legislation until they can chip away at smaller pockets of the values movement. 

With Waxman’s appointment and today’s story that President-elect Obama is delaying the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, it seems the leadership plans to attack life and family by quietly dismantling things that won’t make front-page news like increasing taxpayer funding of abortions, ending conscience protections, and inhibiting free speech. Until they’ve paved the way with these incremental changes, liberals are putting off big ticket items like same-sex “marriage,” FOCA, and gays in the military.

Don’t continue to be fooled, brethren. If you helped vote in a president who stands opposed to these biblical principles because you liked his tune on other issues, here is your proof that he IS a leftist as we said he was. And this won’t be an isolated incident.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

7 responses

21 11 2008
pzefo3

Here is what is really interesting to me…although, it may have very little to do with your post.

Nationally, the issues of abortion and gay marriage were on many state ballots. The American people consistently voted against gay marriage but to maintain current standards of abortion laws/limits.

This says a couple of things to me. First, American people as a whole want a definition of marriage as 1 man and 1 woman. Personally, this is a non-issue for me. But, I did find it interesting. Second, the American people seem to want to keep the option of choice for women concerning abortions.

With that in mind, I think it is time the right-wingers consider a new strategy. Abortion is what it is and it ain’t changing for a long time. Even if McCain had won there would have been little change. So, it’s time to get behind President Obama’s initiative to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies by 95% over the next ten years. We need to accept the reality that abortion rights are NOT going anywhere and see how many lives can be saved.

I’m sure you’ve heard the silly kid saving a starfish analogy (“it matters to that one”). It seems as though some conservatives have an all or nothing strategy in this regard. If they can’t save them all, they do not seem willing to work with the other side to even save a few.

I guess I’m too much of a realist.

22 11 2008
Here We Go… Moving Left : Stop The ACLU

[…] Posted on November 21, 2008 Crossposted at Truth and Reason […]

22 11 2008
Truth and Reason

I am going to post a more in-depth analysis of the election closer to Jan. 20, and I do find it interesting that in FL and CA, especially, voters passed marriage amendments, but Obama won both states. That should be a bit disturbing for a Christian; shows there is a disconnect between many believers and what a true biblical worldview is.

I think your point about accepting Obama’s initiatives has a nice ring to it, but it’s a pipe dream. For a non-believer, who has no values, it’s easy to accept an initiative to reduce abortions, while the candidate goes behind their back and selects a Health Committee leader who could care less about reducing abortions. They could care less how many babies die. But they feel better about themselves. But Christians who supported Obama, if they understood who Henry Waxman is, would be outraged, because his selection is contradictory to his campaign promise to reduce abortions.

I don’t think there are many conservatives out there who still have the pipe dream of overturning Roe next month. We all accept the “starfish approach,” but part of that approach also means not helping dry up the ocean.

I’m a realist too, but I’m first and foremost a Christian, no matter what might seem “real” or “possible” on this earth, I won’t dilute my worldview because my interpretation of the bible might offend somebody. If they’re offended by what the bible teaches, it’s their choice, not mine, and only God can help them.

22 11 2008
Mr. Incredible

==The American people consistently voted against gay marriage…==

No, they didn’t.

They voted against so-called “same-sex ‘marriage.'”

The fact is that a man who insists he is homosexual may marry a woman who claim to be homosexual. Heterosexuality is not a requirement of individuals.

==… but to maintain current standards of abortion laws/limits. ==

That limit applies equally to all.

==American people as a whole want a definition of marriage as 1 man and 1 woman.==

They align themselves with God, and that is good.

==Personally, this is a non-issue for me.==

No surprise there.

==the American people seem to want to keep the option of choice for women concerning abortions.==

So, it seems many try to have one foot in and one foot out, and they think they’re safe.

==it’s time to get behind President Obama’s initiative to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies by 95% over the next ten years. ==

“‘President’ Obama”? He’s not president yet.

“Initiative”?? It’s not like this is new.

==We need to accept the reality that abortion rights are NOT going anywhere…==

How do YOU know?

22 11 2008
Mr. Incredible

==I won’t dilute my worldview because my interpretation of the bible might offend somebody.==

PRAISE GOD, neither will I!!

22 11 2008
Mr. Incredible

==/==The American people consistently voted against gay marriage…==

No, they didn’t.

They voted against so-called “same-sex ‘marriage.’”==

Lemme clarify that.

They didn’t even vote aginst so-called “same-sex ‘marriage.” The vote was whether to define “marriage” as the union of a “man” and a “woman.” That doesn’t exclude men who say they are homosexual, nor women who say they are homosexual.

24 11 2008
More Broken Promises « Truth and Reason

[…] Broken Promises 24 11 2008 Last week, I discussed Barack Obama’s leftward shift of his party despite the perceived claims to govern from the center. I also said there would be […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: