Of course you are right about Obama. No prolife Catholic or other Christian can vote for Obama. I can not in good conscience vote for John McCain. He violates all Christian just war theory and that is against my prolife views. John McCain will do nothing against abortion. He never even talks about it. The neocons and Rockefeller republicans that control the party hate the prolife movement. To vote for a warmonger like McCain or a proabortion liberal like Obama is talking lesser evils. For me It is Chuck Baldwin. Then I can sleep at night.

the original jack,

while I would have a lot of time for people like chuck Baldwin, I can help but think that votes by principled conservatives for him would be a massive strategic blunder. There are currently 4 conservatives on the Supreme court of the US. McCain, if only through cynical political necessity, would replace the likes of John Paul Stevens with jusges cut from the same cloth as Scalia and co.
On issues such as war, McCain would be unable to launch an Iraq II in Iran, in support of Georgia, or anywhere else for that matter becuase he simply wouldn’t get it through the congress or passed the country. American Conservatism is carrying on as American liberalism did in the late 70s, like wiley koyote running oblivious to the fact that they have lost the country and arguing over irrelevent little points. Be hard headed and realistic, vote for McCain.

With all due respect transatlantic: There is no way a conservative justice could ever get through the heavily democratic Senate. McCain would only nominate at best David Souter, Sandra Day O’Conner, or Anthony Kennedy. All McCain is intrested in is war and following the neocon agenda. 70% of the party is prolife yet the 1% that is Jewish and the 30% Rockefeller Republicans set the agenda. Don’t forget that five of the Roe vs. Wade majorty were appointed by Republicans. They just want our votes but give us virtually nothing. A vote for McCain is a vote for more of the same.

@ original jack

You say that conservatives have done nothing about abortion - but there is a huge diference between keeping the status quo and actively promoting more radical forms of abortion.  If Obama’s lovely wife is to be believed, they mean to launch a revolution of “choice,” which would put the most extreme forms of prenatal infanticide on the table, front and center.  The GOP congres did pass the partial-birth abortion bill. 

And don’t be so sure the Dems will control Congress forever.  To vote for one presidentail candidate based on what you think Congress will look like two years after the election is, I think, imprudent.

As for your ongoing “the Jews are behind it” crap, without even thinking I can list three neoconish Jews - Prager, Medved and Leon Kass - who had some say in public debates recently and are as anti-abortion as any blue collar Catholic.  Please.

There are currently 4 conservatives on the Supreme court of the US. McCain, if only through cynical political necessity, would replace the likes of John Paul Stevens with jusges cut from the same cloth as Scalia and co.

Really? McCain has publicly stated he does not favor overturning Roe and he has never introduced a single piece of pro life legislation.

McCain, because he is deemed more reliably pro-Israel, will be the next President and McCain specialises in cutting deals with the Dems.

As far as I know he has NEVER convinced Dems to co-sponsor or support a conservative initiative. But he is going to stand-up to the Dem controlled Senate and appoint pro-life judges? Please.

But, MANY republicans are willing dupes and will allow themselves to be talked into voting for him because of the SCOTUS.

NOTHING is easier to predict. I happens every damn election cycle

Baloney Sebastian! I said Republicans not conservatives have done nothing but cheap talk about Abortion. The Republicans have taken our votes but have given nothing. All it took to overturn Roe was to pass a simple majority vote in congress to restict jurisdiction of the Surpreme Court, in the matter. It would then be returned to the states, where it belongs. The Republicans had majorities in congress in both houses and the Presidency from 2002 to 2006. They did nothing to pass such legislation. The only Republicans who ever sought this simple constitutional remedy were Ron Paul and Jesse Helms.

Pat’s column is brilliant in one regards. This column will be spread far and wide in the conservative blogosphere. If McCain would dare try to push a blantant proabort like Lieberman or Ridge there would be a massive revolt. We will get another wihy washy blowhard instead.

I agree with you that “we will get another wishy washy blowhard instead.” That’s assured.  McCain will not pick a substantive candidate.  McCain and his people still think they can get minorities and lefties to vote for them if only they show compassion and all the rest.  I live in NYC and it amazes me how little the GOP leadership knows of the prejudices and hatreds of the Left.

Pat seems to be firing a warning shot across McCain’s bow - don’t nominate a pro-choice VP. As for voting Republican because of the SCOTUS. Since 1968 Republicans have appointed 12 of the last 14 SCOTUS judges and we STILL have a majority for Roe.  In fact, we have no idea where Roberts would vote on this issue. Voting Republican because of the sCOTUS is a con game. The Republicans want pro-life votes but will never overturn Roe v. Wade.

A change has occured between now and back then. That was displayed when Bush tried to impose Harriet Miers on the country. The GOP know that if they dare screw with the base on this issue the base will bolt. I heard through the grapevine that if Giuliani got nominated Dobson was ready to bolt, if only to sink him. If he did he and a pro-life movement would take the majority with them with them ultimatly killing the GOP like the GOP killed the Whigs way back when. Bush got Clarence Thomas through the Senate and it the Democrats do try and torpedo a nominee without good reason they will end up with egg on their face. Also I would think that if the GOP can limit its losses to 2 or 3 in 2008 (leaving a 46 seat minority) it will be fairly OK in 2010 and would make heavy gains in 2012 when their will be a ton of Democrats in Red states up for election.

Transatlantic: Kennedy, Souter, O’Conner and Stevens these are what we will get. There will never be enough Republican votes in the Senate to overturn a filibuster. The Republicans will be lucky to have 39 seats. Get along, go along McCain has a zero chance of fighting for a real prolife Surpreme Court nominee.

Even Pat Buchanan mercifully stops short of saying “Vote McCain”, Robert Kagan’s latest vicar on earth.

White Catholics have predominantly voted for the winning candidate in the last eight Presidential Elections. Yes, eight. Every time since 1976.

But what have the Republicans ever done to deserve the blue-collar Catholic vote? They have never done anything, but quite the reverse, to deserve any blue-collar vote at all, on which they have nevertheless long depended. And as for Catholic votes, McCain would merely continue the long Republican tradition of pretending to be against abortion while doing absolutely nothing to kill the goose the lays the electoral golden eggs.

Obama might be no better, although he might surprise us: as C S Lewis pointed out, nobody ever converted from unbelief to liberal Christianity; and the black churches are not without their pro-lifers, as well as being mainstays of things like the Alliance for Marriage.

But he would certainly be no worse, because he simply could not possibly be any worse.

, http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com

If McCain would dare try to push a blantant proabort like Lieberman or Ridge there would be a massive revolt. We will get another wihy washy blowhard instead.

Knowing that what AIPAC wants, AIPAC gets, I don’t see any reason McCain won’t pick Lieberman and be praised for placing a unifying ticket before the American people so as to move beyond the bipartisan bickering..blah, blah, damnable blah.

I am the same age as Israel and I have yet to see a “massive revolt” against the so called conservative republicans while I have seen many putative Christians show more concern for Israel than babies in the womb.

If McCain does lick Lieberman, Mr. Buchanan will STILL be able to pen a column explaining that, as bad as that ticket is, it is still better than the Obama and Hilary ticket.

Obama won’t, finally, pick Hilary as VP just like Reagan would never have chosen George Bush as his VP.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B02E4DE133AF933A05754C0A9669C8B63&sec;=&spon;=&pagewanted=3

I think polls show Obama is weak (notwithstanding the promotion of him as Pres. on the part of some of the Obots writing for Taki)and he will be forced to take her as his VP and the media will swoon…

but even a major media swoon can’t defeat AIPAC.

Of course Obama as a good Democrat loves abortions- they all do. No surprise there.

The activist pro-life Catholic minority needs to get over the fantasy that RvW will ever be overturned. Not going to happen. And even if one day we had 9 Scalias in the SCOTUS, there would be revolts in Congress, States, Cities and on the streets. No President will ever touch that. The admirable efforts of these Catholics need to be spent on education and other more effective venues, where a difference can actually be made.

The more immediate and realistic concern of all Americans, Catholics included, is to make sure that a traitor who will send thousands of Americans to their death in foreign lands is not elected as president. The Catholic case against McCain is even stronger yet. And I hope that Buchanan will write that column soon. For McCain won’t do anything against abortion and he will launch wars against Iran (if W isn’t ordered to do so before) and McCain can’t wait to start a real war against Putin and Russia. What so many have tried to avoid for decades, this unstable little man will undo in a second of rage.

Obama is a terrible choice, but McCain is the absolute worst. Buchanan needs to divorce himself of the near meaningless Democrat-Republican dichotomy and use his status and power to work for Bob Barr and help the American people see the absolute and dire necessity of a third party.

http://www.firstthings.com/blog/2008/08/11/sin-boldly/

Sin Boldly

Posted by Keith Pavlischek on August 11, 2008, 12:08 PM

From the Westminster Shorter Catechism:

Q. 14. What is sin?

A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.

From the Baltimore Catechism:

Q. 278. What is actual sin?

A. Actual sin is any willful thought, word, deed, or omission contrary to the law of God.

From Senator Obama:

Q. Do you believe in sin?

OBAMA: Yes.

Q. What is sin?

OBAMA: Being out of alignment with my values.

Not that there is anything to the chatter about Senator Obama’s “Messiah complex,” mind you.

http://falsani.blogspot.com/2008/04/barack-obama-2004-god-factor-interview.html

The Obots will just ignore this malevolent, malign, messianism and take him at his word when he says things that tickle their ears

Pray for those that would commit such sins, because we sure as hell don’t have leaders that will support just and moral laws.

First Clinton, then Bush, now either Obama or McCain. Is this how it ends for a once somewhat decent country?

David. Yes. The history of the Old Testament teaches that when a country has an immoral leader, the country suffers punishment. That is the history of Israel in the O.T.

Short of an heroic act of political metanoia, penitential humility, a return to public worship of God and a return to the Constitution as the rule of law, we is screwed.

As one answer to the dire straits we are in, The Obots are prompting a man who appears to be a NPD

http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html#npd

Just what we need, a man who has no demonstrable accomplishments but who thinks he is the chosen one and who thinks YOU need to be reeducated.

“RvW will ever be overturned. Not going to happen. And even if one day we had 9 Scalias in the SCOTUS, there would be revolts in Congress, States, Cities and on the streets.”

Roe will never be overturned NOT because there will be “Riots” in the streets. Thats crazy. If Roe is overturned the matter is returned to the states. The people of each state can then decide. Thats what it was like in 1972, before Roe. The Repubs just don’t care enough to overturn it.

The Catholic Church’s position seems to be that the teaming hordes of third-worlders should breed unabated and be allowed unrestricted access to White countries.

THAT IS INSANE!

Any rational person acknowledges you can breed dogs to amplify certain characteristics: that’s called eugenics.

How does the song go? 

“Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, and don’t mess with Mister In-Between.”

I would agree that a strong anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, anti-Judeo-Christian, or anti-traditional religious case can be made against voting for Obama. Unfortunately, Mr. Buchanan’s case here is very weak as he focuses exclusively on the issue of abortion. Abortion certainly is an important issue to Catholics, evangelical Christians, some Orthodox Jews, and other traditionally religious people, but this sole issue should not be a litmus test for supporting or not supporting a candidate. The real problem with Obama is that his religious thinking has been too influenced by a mixture of black nationalism (i.e., Rev. Wright) and leftwing secular humanism and that this informs his religious thinking, politics, and worldview.

Buchanan will never write a “Catholic case against McCain” article.  He prefers a McCain
presidency to an Obama one.

Just the fact that these overbearing control freaks will demonize a medical practice by portraying it as something it is not, abortion used as birth control, and doing what they do best, relabeling something so that it is percieved as something it is not, makes me sick.  If you want to be religious, go ahead.  But it is a personnal thing and you should be ashamed to try to force your views on the rest of society.  You want a theocracy, go live in Iran.

But it is a personnal thing and you should be ashamed to try to force your views on the rest of society.  You want a theocracy, go live in Iran.

I hear ya. The whole Republic thingy whereby free men elect legislators who legislate laws that make particular acts illegal is nothing but Theocratic Totalitarianism.

Let’s just say I were dictator or king what would I decree as it pertains to abortion? I would make it
a legal medical procedure if done prior to the first 60 days. Personally I don’t think a fetus ought to
be aborted after conception since the child can be brought to term and put up for adoption. I believe
that marriage ought to be entered into ONLY because one is intending on having children. However sex
between two consenting adults can be healthy and often is in and of itself. If a child is
conceived out of wedlock then the child becomes the paramount issue just as if the couple were entering into wedlock, and ought to be brought to term. Or if the mother prefers aborted however prior to the end of
the second month. That’s not my personal preference but this is the sort of issue
unless there is compromise what you are left with is the worst of all worlds. It’s sad.
We are not yet a child centered culture either in our perception of why two or more people get married
or who is the paramount concern if there is conception out of wedlock. But it’s precisely the little
kids or children who are innocent, and who are helpless and who are the future. Rather we are yet a
SELF-centered culture and we call that ‘equal’ rights. That’s the euphemism. Is a four year old equal
to a forty year old? Is a four month old equal to an 18 year old? Is a three month old developing fetus
equal to its mother or father regardless of their ages? The point is we’re all more similar than
different but no two people are ‘equal’ in every regard. That doesn’t exist it’s a phantasm or chimera
we chase to justify that we are not a child-Centered culture but rather we are a SELF-centered culture.

The government can in theory take all my income. It can draft me and send me charging into a hopless, battle, thus killing me. It can regulate every aspect of my life. It can protect every other species of life. In my town I have to get and animal control officer and have him trap a groudhog, at huge expense, so he can set it in the woods somewhere. But heaven forbid that we in free legislative act protect a baby in the womb or even just after birth.

A terribly brilliant article. What has become of America? How can 300 million people be conned and controlled in this way?
What a choice: mass murder by war or by infanticide—actually both—which will continue and get worse under either frontrunner as president. Clearly after a year of your stupid elections American Catholics must surely have decided by now to vote for neither candidate. Women’s rights? The right to choose? My foot!
How can American revenge for “911” be satisfied by dismembering children half a world away? How can slaughtering Pathans and Arabs (and so many others past, present and future) possibly prevent another “911” happening? For your own good and the future of YOUR country please think before you eventually vote.
A foreigner.