Neanderpundit

By not kowtowing to the Abortion on Demand morons.

Actually, all he did was answer a question that was asked of allthe candidates. Since I can’t find a transcript, here’s my crude transcription, which may not be perfect but I think captures the spirit of the discussion.

“What is your position on a woman’s right to abortion and not only that but to contraception and other reproductive services as whether Government should provide those services”, and “Another asks if you believe that life begins at conception and in that person’s view what would you do to help the babies that could be aborted during your term in the senate”

Hell, Donnely gave damned near the same answer as Mourdock, but Mourdock is catching a lot of flack becuase he answered the question honestly.

“I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that’s something God intended to happen.”

Well, perfectly reasonable.

You can’t take what he said out of context and make any sense of it, so by all means go watch it here.
When a Christian is asked that question, Mourdock gave the only answer a Christian can give. Anyone who gives any other answer cannot call themself a Christian with any accuracy.

So it wasn’t as if he came out and volunteered information about anything, he responded, and responded properly to, a question. He didn’t make any references specifically about what he was going to DO, he put his opinion out there for all to hear. Note the word “i think”. I liked him before, but I’m cemented to him now. I’m also smart enough to know a junior senator from Indiana is not going to overthrow Roe vs Wade, bad law though it is, anymore than he’ll be able to shut down SS or Medicare.

In our house we talk the talk but we most assuredly walk the walk too. I’m extremely pleased that there’s a candidate out there who does also.

There is no question the liberal establishment is reeling under the weight of- well, the truth. There’s a lot of BS out there, and the media is cranked up to 11 trying to erase the footsteps their Dear Reader has left behind him.

An advertiser may have thirty million pairs of eyes on his advertisement, but it only takes a couple thousand letters from the disgruntled to get them to pull an ad or even a whole ad contract. And at this time I imagine the advertisers are a little nervous about what the shows they advertise on are saying.

So as tough as it may be, watch the evening news, and write down the sponsors, and write them a letter. Even if you don’t use the product. If you don’t want to write a letter, copy/paste and use this:

Company name
Address
Dear Sir or Madam:

You advertise on the _________ show, and that show represents a level of partisanship I find distasteful, so until you no longer support that program with your advertising dollars I will no longer support you. I hope you agree that this level of partisanship does not deserve the support of advertisers, and you pull your campaign from that channel. When you do, I will resume consuming your fine products.

Thank you!

My name.

if ad revenue starts plummeting, maybe MSNBC will drop Chris Mathews and his tingle, whether or not they agree with him.

At some point in your life, you fell off your bike doing some stupid stunt or got your ass whipped or kicked for doing something out of line. Only if stupid becomes painful do people learn.

Now is the time to strike, while the iron is hot. The media cannot fight a battle on two fronts, and the run up to the election and the period mostly following it will be the best time to do this. Negative feedback will let us train the media into being a MEDIA again, and not just a ministry of lies.

I’m not a huge fan of Bill Whittle, but he makes an interesting case. He doesn’t make it as strongly as I would, but he approaches it from a couple interesting directions I guess I’ve always just taken for granted.

At the end of the day, the “Lesser of two evils” argument is, in my mind, a tool liberals are using to drive a wedge between conservatives and their votes. Nobody nowhere has ever answered the question “How does not voting fix anything?” with any honesty. The ONLY reason not to vote is ignorance and petulance. I can accept petulance, I do it myself quite often, but don’t pretend that not voting gives you some moral high ground, because it does not, and don’t pretend that “if enough people don’t vote it will send a message” because the message it sends is “I’m stupid, and bad at math” Pascal, always kinder and gentler than I am, says the same thing here as well.

Don’t care to vote because you don’t care what happens to this country and the people in it? that’s fine, have the balls to be honest about it and SAY THAT. Everything else is an excuse, and not a very good one. Think precipitating a revolution is a great idea? Think this will end in a “new American Republic”? Think you’re up to that? You might want to read this.

And to anyone who is enamored of the lie that incrementalism doesn’t work, I give you the Concealed Carry Timeline.