Those of you who know a little about me from me previous blog posts must think that I have found my way into the liquor cabinet from that title. Well, I put quotation marks around it for a reason. I’m quoting a man running for the State House of Representatives of Georgia in my district. His name is Bob Puckett, and he’s a Democrat.

This town houses Berry College, a liberal arts school on the largest campus in the world. as with nearly all institutions of higher learning today, it’s overrun by left-leaning faculty, and of course the young heads of mush they are constantly cramming with liberal dogma. To be fair, Berry’s not nearly as bad off in this area as many similar schools. There’s a young democrats club, and they decided to have a candidate forum, bringing in all the local politicians running for the left side of the aisle. Puckett was included. At the forum, he said:

“I am a Christian, and that’s why I’m a democrat. If Jesus didn’t care about children, then he would’ve been a Republican. Jesus was a democrat. You know what, he didn’t ride into Jerusalem on an elephant, did he?” Puckett joked.

That’s a quote from the Berry College Campus Carrier, the student newspaper. By the way, when you read it, be afraid for the future of journalism in our country. You think it’s liberal now?

Now, obviously the thing about riding into Jerusalem on an elephant was a joke. I will give him that. It’s not funny, if anything it’s a cheap political dig. But he intended it as a joke and I will not dispute that. The really sickening thing is the two preceding lines. Puckett didn’t exactly quote it, but he alluded to the line that has been a democrat party talking point for years, you know, “republicans want to pollute the air and water and kill people.”

Before going any farther, let me voice my opinion that God transcends political parties, and I won’t state that God has any particular political affilitation.

But, I have to take Puckett to task on his line about republicans “not caring about children.” The point here is that democrats are really sold on social justice, quite often they are in agreement with Church teachings on social justice even though some would love to see the Church completely evaporate. They just happen to think that the best way to spread social justice is through government, and therefore the police power of government to force me, you , and everyone into financially contributing to their social justice agenda. Essentially, they think government is the best thing since sliced bread (or maybe even before.) It is therefore understandable that they would think that any party that would oppose a burgeoning government bureaucracy to enforce a social justice agenda must “not care about children.” To them, government’s the only way to do it.

True the Church teaches on social justice, but the Church teaches it in the context of the giver being cheerful and willing to give. How many of us are cheerful and willing as we fill out that 1040? Republicans are truly all for social justice, but they are for the private sector doing it. Understanding that government is really only good at defense and coining money, Republicans suggest that it would be better if each one of us could decide which social justice initiatives we wish to support.

One other thing. Whether intentionally or not, the democrat party has become the party of “abortion rights.” By choosing to be a democrat, whether it’s his personal view or not, he has made one of the planks of his platform the preservation of abortion on demand in this country. Jesus cared about children. He says, “whatsoever you do for the least of my brothers, you do to me.” I would argue that the unborn are about as “least” as you can get. How can any democrat have the nerve to say, “If Jesus didn’t care about children, He would’ve been a republican,” when as a party the democrats have decided that they don’t care about the smallest, most helpless, most innocent lives in existence?

This article from CNS shows us very nicely how the Church is dealing with the investigation of a priest who “sexually abused” former Congressman Mark Foley 40 years ago. The most impressive thing to note is how the Church leadership is talking tough on the subject and not trying to brush it under the proverbial rug…even though the mainstream media is.

I’ve a few observations about the whole mess. First, it was most interesting that Foley’s attorney essentially got up a few days after it all started and said, (paraphrased) “Mark Foley isn’t making any excuses, but he does want you to know that he’s gay, alcoholic, and was abused by a clergyman as a boy.” Well, it was pretty common knowledge that Foley’s background was Catholic. Who within the Catholic Chuch calls their priest a “clergyman.” Some sort of weird legal-speak going on there.

On top of that, this seems like a perfect opportunity for the “old media” to me. They have one story that now tears down both the Republican Party AND the Catholic Church. There are many times in the past when they would have been milking this story for all it’s worth. But now, apparently, there are more important things out there to attack the Republican Party for now that we’re 2 weeks out from election day. The public is apparently sick of Mark Foley (more accurately, the public was sick of Mark Foley 2 weeks ago) so the media has moved on. I bet the conversation comes up again if the Dems get control of the Congress back.

Politics in America.

Yes, that’s right, it’s the amazing firebrand group “Pastors for Moral Choices. ” What does this name conjure up in your mind? A group of pastors standing up for social justice? Against the death penalty? In favor of living one’s life in accord with Holy Scripture? Against abortion?

In fact, “PFMC” stands in opposition to South Dakota’s ban on abortion! Yes, babykilling is now a moral choice. Apparently a ban on abortion is “regressive, discriminatory and dangerous way of life.” Sure. Regressive in the sense that we would in fact be going backward to a time when it was safer to be a baby in the US. Discriminatory against destruction of innocent life. Dangerous in the sense that a person might have to live with the bad choices they make rather than just have the results sliced and diced. Sure would be a horrible world to live in where there’s no abortion.

Well, the focus is shifting from the Vatican back to Denmark now. Somehow I don’t think the B16 aspect of this issue will go away. But apparently some Danish kids made a video mocking Mohammed, and so, now the Muslims are mad (or they’re going to be mad because the BBC told them to) and will start rioting…and the kids involved in the video are in hiding.

Here’s a nicely done piece on Why the Muslim World Can’t Think Straight (author’s title, not mine). This is well worth reading because it gives us a nice history of Islam and why it’s at odds with Christianity.

Here’s an blog post that everyone should read. This is amazing. A post-abortive woman wrote to the author of the AP article I discussed previously, with some amazing information about the proportions of post-abortive women who are pro-life vs. pro-abortion.

No, I didn’t kill my baby…but that’s basically the headline of the Ms. magazine coming out next week. We have this nugget of joy from the Associated Press, sent out as a wire story all over the planet.

At a pivotal time in the abortion debate, Ms. magazine is releasing its fall issue next week with a cover story titled “We Had Abortions,” accompanied by the names of thousands of women nationwide who signed a petition making that declaration.

See, in South Dakota they’re voting to outlaw abortion entirely, so the AP has to respond. How does the AP respond? By hyping an upcoming issue of a feminazi magazine. Most folks don’t even know what Ms. is…because no one talks about it. A few on the fringe read it, but mainstream America doesn’t give a flip about Ms. Magazine. Nonetheless, these are dire times for pro-abortion people. The media must do its part. Note that the whole paragraph is the words of the reporter, not of an interviewee.

“We have to get away from what the politicians are saying,” she said, “and get women’s lives back in the picture.”

That’s a quote from the President of the Feminist Majority, who publishes Ms. Note through the rest of the article how careful they are to only get certain women’s lives “back into the picture,” and how others aren’t paid much attention at all.

Ms. executive editor Katherine Spillar said more than 5,000 women have signed the petition so far — heeding its appeal to declare they are unashamed of the choice they made.

Not only must we permit abortion on demand, we must be proud of it? Seems to me that the only reason a woman would sign this would be that she’s so ashamed of her decision that she needs to abate the shame by placing herself shoulder to shoulder with 4,999 other women who did it. Strength in numbers and all that. Really sad. Essentially, “I’m proud that I murdered my baby.”

The signatories include Ms. founder Gloria Steinem, comedian Carol Leifer, and actresses Kathy Najimy and Amy Brenneman, but most are not famous names.

Then why even list them? And, through the rest of the article, look at how the other women who are focused on are “successful” women by the feminist movement’s standards. No women who were working the fryolator and had no chance of supporting their baby. How about this - no women who were raped and impregnated as a result and “needed” an abortion. Hmm.

Jones said she got an abortion 10 years ago — enduring harassment from protesters when she entered the clinic — in order to finish high school. She went on to become the first member of her family to graduate from college, and hopes at some point to attend law school.

Good thing, because I have never heard of any programs for women who have babies to help them get their high school degree. Surely that baby’s quality of life would have been terrible, and was worth a lot less than Jones’s “hope” to attend law school. That’s just spin. Tell me that she actually attended law school, not that she hopes to. Oh, by the way, if you’re pregnant, the high school won’t take you if they find out you give up your baby for adoption.

Another signatory, Debbie Findling of San Francisco, described her difficult decision last year to have an abortion after tests showed that she would bear a son with Down syndrome.

As we all know, such a test is always 100% accurate. And I know that there are no childless couples out there who would want to adopt a Down syndrome baby.

Findling, 42, is married, with a 5-year-old daughter, and has been trying to get pregnant again while pursuing her career as a philanthropic foundation executive.

Two interesting things here. First, I fear for any baby she might conceive, because if it isn’t perfect, it’ll be murdered too. Second, I wonder if it’s possible that permanent damage was done to her reproductive system by the abortion? No, silly me, that never happens.

She says too many of her allies in the abortion-rights movement tend to minimize, at least publicly, the psychological impact of abortion.

“It’s emotionally devastating,” she said in a phone interview. “I don’t regret my decision — but I regret having been put in the position to have to make that choice. It’s something I’ll live with for the rest of my life.”

This is the first line in the whole article that makes sense. Too bad more time isn’t spent on the psychological impact. Still, though, this woman needs to carefully consider her words. If she was in the position to have to make a choice, then she had 2 choices. She made one choice. That wasn’t the choice she had to make.

Thanks to the Associated Press for doing their part to promote the culture of death this evening!