Scott Brown wins!

UPDATE, 1/20, 4:05a: Received this note:

Fantastik, Jill! Today is a great day. I prayed that Scott Brown would win and he did. I am following all you pro-lifers, and I wish you all well. Keep up the good work Jill. Best wishes from Denmark.

UPDATE, 1/19, 10p: Statement from Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

I want to congratulate Senator-elect Scott Brown on his decisive victory. There's a reason the nation was focused on this race: The voters in MA, like Americans everywhere, have made it abundantly clear where they stand on health care. They don't want this bill and want Washington to listen to them. Americans are investing their hopes in good Republican candidates to reverse a year-long Democrat trend of ignoring the American people on the issues of health care, spending and the growth of government.

scott brown ma.jpgUPDATE, 1/19, 9:30p:Fox is reporting Coakley has called Brown and conceded.

The Boston Globe website has crashed as has MichelleMalkin.com and HotAir.com.

1/19, 9:20p: I flew in to DC this afternoon and am with my pro-life peeps watching MA election results.

Fox is reporting Brown is at 53%, Coakley at 46%. Fox reports the Associated Press just declared him the winner!


Comments:

Praise God for our democracy and our Christian Founders who, with fervent prayer and supplication, wrote the Constitution of the United States.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 8:35 PM


Can I git an AMEN?!!!

Posted by: carder at January 19, 2010 8:37 PM


Fist bumps, baby, FIST BUMPS!!

Posted by: carder at January 19, 2010 8:38 PM


Thank God.

Posted by: xalisae at January 19, 2010 8:40 PM


Drive to DC in your pickup truck, Brownie Boy!

And you might want to stop by John Kerry's place; take him for a REAL ride. Show him how it's done by us truck-driving hicks.

We're all gap-toothed now!

*cackle*

Posted by: carder at January 19, 2010 8:47 PM


X!

ROFLMBO!!!!!!!!

Yeah Baby!!!

Those Dems really pulled out all the stops too, BO,Slick Willy,

Guess BO's "gift" is being seen for what it is.

BS

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 8:50 PM


Holding on to our guns, bibles and pick-up trucks, toothless and happy!

Durn right!

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 9:01 PM


Wow! WHOOOOOHOOOOOO! Sock-it-to 'em baby!

Posted by: angel at January 19, 2010 9:05 PM


I say the Republican Party change it's icon from an elephant to a '73 Chevy Pick-Up truck with 53,000,000 miles on it. One mile for each baby aborted as a result of Democrat passage of Roe v. Wade.

The Democrat symbol should be changed to a snake.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 9:05 PM


I also have read that Obama has a 50% approval rating and that most people feel he has accomplished NOTHING in his first year in office.

Can the Nobel Prize be returned?

Posted by: angel at January 19, 2010 9:07 PM


Scott is a pro-choice Republican. While I don't doubt he'll be rejecting the health-care bill, I see his election as simply the lesser of two evils.


We still have some work to do.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 19, 2010 9:11 PM


The Nobel Prize is no longer noble, it's a fraud.

I mean how many people really believe the Al Gore global warming hoax and the Obamanation, "I want to reduce the number of abortions" BS, both Nobel prize winners?

The Noble Prize selection committee should be ashamed of themselves.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 9:13 PM


Looks like we get the senate version of the health care bill now, not the house version.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:14 PM


Ex-GOP, that assumes that the house has the votes to pass the Senate bill. They don't.

Posted by: Lauren at January 19, 2010 9:24 PM


Yay! This is so awesome!

Posted by: Keli Hu at January 19, 2010 9:24 PM


No way Ex, are you on drugs?

You think the Blue Dogs are going to vote for that piece of crap after this indictment of the Democratic agenda?

It would be political suicide.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 9:25 PM


Lauren - they don't? I don't think that is a done deal by any means - there's a lot of options left at this point.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:26 PM


(Sorry for the vulgarity, I'll try to clean it up. I'm just a little excited right now.)

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 9:27 PM


Ed - it is probably bigger suicide at this point not to get something done - though then the Dems could go more on attack with ads. The top dog Dems want this done though and they have a lot of options still. A short term loss in 2010 is nowhere near the impact as the long term gain for a cornerstone piece of legislation for the party.

Now, if anyone can screw it up, it's the Democrats - but I think this doesn't impact things as much as folks would like it to - and in terms of abortion, I wonder if it's a bad thing more than a good thing (as the Senate language has a good chance of staying now without alteration).

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:29 PM


No, Ex, they don't. Without Stupak, you lose the pro-life dems. Without public option, you lose lefties. Tax on healthcare loses bluedogs.

Posted by: Lauren at January 19, 2010 9:31 PM


Ex,

Don't you hear that sound? Democratic Senators and Congressmen up for re-election in 2010 have all let out a collective, "Oh #$%^!!!"

The pendulum has swung and there's no stoppin' Big Mo. (momentum)

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 9:32 PM


No Ex,

I disagree. Although you could be right, they might be dumber than we think they are.

If they have half a brain, they will go into full backpeddle, cya, "I should do what my electorate wants me to do / vote how my electorate wants me to vote" mode.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 9:37 PM


Half a brain? That might be assuming too much.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 9:39 PM


Lauren - did you notice how the House vote won by about the bare minimum? The votes were lined up, and the folks that needed to cast a vote to look better in their district were allowed to vote no. Unfortunately, both parties put party before country/people when it comes down to it. If it comes to that and they stick with the senate language to avoid the 60 votes needed in the senate, I think the dems will have the vote in the house.

Ed - What's interesting though is, do you want Brown across the country? Have you actually read much about the guy? I've read analysis that he's actually more left than some US senators - he's pro-choice, and rated to be more conservative than Scozzafava rated out - so from a pure political perspective, it will be interesting if there's now a bigger push within the GOP to bring more moderates to the table (because if played well with the Independents).

Will be interesting to follow - I think this means a few obvious things, but a lot of not-so obvious things.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:41 PM


Ed - It will be interesting to see what happens, but if I had to put my money on it, I would bet now that the house puts through the senate version to avoid the 60 vote limit, and then they go through the process of reconciliation to make changes to the bill. That's my gut at least - and I seem to get these things right about 30% of the time!

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:45 PM


Yikes - just saw this posted on Facebook - here's the new face of the GOP!

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/celebrity/news/scott-brown-nude-in-cosmo

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:48 PM


Hotty McAwesome, Ex-GOP. ;)

Posted by: Lauren at January 19, 2010 9:50 PM


Lauren -

I hear that a calendar is already in the works - Brown, Barney Frank...too bad Strom Thurmond wasn't still around!

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:55 PM


Boy, you're a tard. You're assuming that the American people WANT something done about the "healthcare crisis" by government. They overwhelmingly DO NOT. What planet are you living on?

Posted by: xalisae at January 19, 2010 9:56 PM


Ex, the problem with your scenerio is that it assumes that those protected representatives will come out of the woodworks to support the legislation now. I doubt very much they will. The political landscape is even more risky after Brown's win. IF they didn't want to expose themselves then, they won't now.

Also, a Barney Frank calander would be perhaps the most disturbing thing I could imagine.

Posted by: Lauren at January 19, 2010 9:57 PM


xalisae - why are you like that, and have you ever thought about getting counseling? How about you go back to watching the Bachelor and I'll carry on my civil conversation with some of the adults on this board.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:59 PM


What you don't realize Ex was this vote and the direction of our country is being determined by thousands and thousands and thousands of Christians falling on their faces, repenting of their sin and apathy, and crying out to God to end abortion, send revival, and heal our land.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 10:00 PM


Ex, call yourself what you are , a Democrat.

Chris, I don't agree that Scott is pro-choice.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 10:02 PM


Mods,

Sorry to be a prude, but you might want to remove Ex-GOP's link to the nude photo. Thanks.

Posted by: Janet at January 19, 2010 10:03 PM


Lauren - you very well could be right. Option 2 is that the house leadership says that the bill needs to pass (the senate bill) and that the things they don't like will be worked out through reconciliation process. I think either scenario might happen - and won't make the claim that I know enough to say something definitively.

Ed - then why did God send a pro-Choice republican into the picture?

Personally, I think this isn't great news for the pro-life crowd. The GOP just won big with independents by bringing out a pro-choice fiscal conservative. You know that others in the mold say that this should be the model in other states.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:04 PM


I prefer The Mighty Boosh, personally. Reality TV is a plague on the brains of the youth of America.

Anyway...it seems to me that you're the one living in a child's fantasy land, where Mommy Government supplies all of your needs and doles out portions evenly among her children, even if some of those children worked harder to come to their initial portion than others, and all the children are happy to accept what they are given.

I am like that because I do not suffer fools gladly. Personally, I think it's a great strength of mine.

Posted by: xalisae at January 19, 2010 10:05 PM


Janet - I agree! (though you can't see anything on the picture anyways).

Phil -

I did vote Obama. I also voted Norm Coleman for US Senate. I'm a Christian who leans slightly to the left these days, but a lot of that is because after Bush, I don't have a good feel on the GOP and what they stand for. I am a fan of healthcare reform after seeing my families healthcare bills go up like crazy - plus too many folks in our church have been socked hard by health care bills - I find the situation appalling.

If it makes you more comfortable to write me off as some flaming liberal, feel free - but you'd be wrong. Preachers kid - heavily involved in a church - pro-life but don't vote GOP on the issue because they just give it lip service.

That's just me - just want to clarify.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:09 PM


Ex,

I don't know why and I don't really care. He's lightyears better than the alternative and I don't really need to concern myself with that.

Make no mistake, this is a Pro-Life victory for his position on Health Care alone.

Perhaps he'll see a CBR GAP presentation or 40 Day for Life campaign or visit this blog and take on a more adament Pro-Life position.

Either way, today I celebrate the victory.

Tomorrow, I'm back on my knees.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 10:10 PM


I am like that because I do not suffer fools gladly. Personally, I think it's a great strength of mine.

Posted by: xalisae at January 19, 2010 10:05 PM
*******************

Preach it Sister!!! Go on with your bad self!!!

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 10:12 PM


xalisae -

Thanks for the info. In a board full of some very smart, respectful folks that I've enjoyed talking with - I frankly find no use for folks who are going to throw out insults like you do and paint broad assumptions on people instead of actually talking with them and understanding their viewpoints. If you have something interesting to say, please, say it. I think I've been nothing but respectful with the majority of the folks on this board (and as a Christian, I would expect nothing less than that of myself) - but am shocked that I continue to come across folks like you that insist on belittling instead of talking. It's sad really - but a sign of the times we are in.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:13 PM


Ex,

I don't mean to sound disrespectful.

It's just with so much politically correct bull dung flying around all the time, it's refreshing to me to hear X set it out plain.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 10:15 PM


Ed - you might be right - health care reform might go down and while it really won't impact abortion rates (most private plans cover abortion anyways - private plans are subsidized by the government through employee tax breaks, so we already fund abortions), health care reform will go down. You certainly could be right, and pro-lifers will celebrate.

You could also be very wrong on this being a good thing, if it means that the house passes the senate language to avoid sending a new bill back to the senate. Then we get Nelson's langauge, not Stupak's - and unless abortion gets dealt with in reconciliation - then it is probably a step BACK.

We'll see - I can't impact it nor do I know what will happen - should be an interesting few weeks Sir.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:17 PM


G'night all!!!

We can rest a little easier tonight.

Back to work tomorrow.

Peace.

Posted by: Ed at January 19, 2010 10:18 PM


Ex,

Health care is going up not because of a lack of government control but because of it.

Open the insurance market up to more competition and watch health care costs plummet.

It time to take away of control of the health care industry from the AMA and put it back into the hands and feet of people who know how to walk away from overcharging doctors and medical establishments.

Think about these things my friend before ever voting for a Liberal again....assumption is the lowest form of knowledge, words mean things, there no such thing as a free lunch, if a man doesn't work he should not eat, and principles matter.

I also suggest that you earnestly pray for the gift of discernment.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 10:19 PM


New article out about the posibility of the house signing off on the senate bill. Takeaway? Not likely.

"But several House members said Tuesday night that they had no interest in pursuing the most likely scenario for moving ahead with a bill — approving the already-passed Senate version of health reform in the House – and some said President Barack Obama should step back and start over."

www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31693.html

Posted by: Lauren at January 19, 2010 10:19 PM


Ed - I don't find you disrespectful - and even I'm going to be snarky from time to time.

I'm a Christian as well. Many/most on this board are.

I've been on a lot of boards about a lot of subjects, and I must say, while I've found many great folks like you that are respectful about their views - some of the rudest folks I've run into are on this board - which I think, says something very sad about the current state of how Christians talk to folks they don't agree with.

Just my opinion, which, I'm sure:
- Sucks
- Isn't heartfelt
- Is from a dumb liberal anyways
- Is a lie
- or is from a "tard"

Yes, lovely.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:20 PM


Sorry, someone like you who makes absolutely no sense ("man..republicans aren't going to actually do anything...I should vote for dems who are going to mess everything up when it at least remains pretty much at stasis under republicans, even if that stasis is less than ideal. I R SMART!" DUUUUH!) just kinda pushes my buttons. And then you talk about how religious you are, wearing your "Son of a preacher man" on your sleeve...GUESS WHAT: some of the WORST, ROTTEN TO THE CORE children/people I've EVER known were preacher's kids. That tells me jack-all about how moral you are. What DOES tell me how moral you are, is the fact that you are a LIAR, and if you're not a LIAR, you're gullible, and even if that isn't the case, no matter what, you're someone who is willing to sell out their country and unborn babies just so the government will fix your healthcare bills. Despicable.

You wanna get down with me? Let's get down.

Posted by: xalisae at January 19, 2010 10:22 PM


Hisman: "if a man doesn't work he should not eat"

Didn't Jesus say this first?

Posted by: Hal at January 19, 2010 10:26 PM


Ex-GOP @ 10:09,

What are you talking about????

You put the link up and you agree it should be taken down????

Posted by: Janet at January 19, 2010 10:26 PM


Phil -

Heading to bed - but last thought for the night. The stock market was up today, led by health care stocks as it became clear the reform was less likely. Stock market was led by insurance companies and pharmaceuticals. "Rising health care stocks led the market higher as the prospect of a logjam in Washington eased concerns that profits at companies like insurers and drug makers would suffer."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Health-stocks-pull-market-apf-2391737630.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=3&asset=&ccode=

So, maybe we're stuck with double digit health care increases each year, but at least we avoid the regulation we fear, and the drug companies and insurance companies can continue to make their billions.

Tired - gave blood today - heading to bed. Night all.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:26 PM


I have no respect for those who do not deserve it.

HisMan, however, I have the utmost respect for. Thank you for putting things nicely when I am at my boiling point.

Posted by: xalisae at January 19, 2010 10:26 PM


Hal,

Your Jewish brother Paul, alias Saul of Tarsus - former murderer and persecuter of the church said via the Spirit of Christ, "if a man does not work, he should not eat".

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 10:32 PM


Or perhaps the stock market was up because people see that the threat that Obama posed to the greatest economy in the world and yes, the greatest purveyor of the Gospel, has lessened.

Jesus was not against money my friend, only the love of it.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 10:35 PM


Obamacare is D.O.A. It isn't just Scott Brown, it is what he represents: a repudiation of arrogant thug Chicago style politics. This election is a political earthquake that is sending out tremors across the beltway and into every town and village in the country. Every politician is on notice: if you want to keep your seat--listen to the people!

Posted by: Jerry at January 19, 2010 10:45 PM


And when Obamalosireid-care is buried, what's left? Another pro-abort sitting in the Senate.

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at January 19, 2010 10:52 PM


CC:

C'mon, in all things, give thanks. God is in control.

Now start praying earnestly for Mr. Brown.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 10:55 PM


BREAKING NEWS: Acorn just conceded that there were simply not enough Disney characters to get Coakley over the top.

More on the fours...

Posted by: carder at January 19, 2010 11:04 PM


This is very bizarre for Massachusetts. Very bizarre indeed. This is, without a doubt, the most liberal state in the country with arguably the most liberal city in the country- Boston. How odd.

Posted by: Vannah at January 19, 2010 11:28 PM


I'm sure you praised god just as much in November of 2008. Anyway, life is ebb and flow. Enjoy your victory tonight of a pro choice Republican from MA.

Posted by: Hal at January 19, 2010 11:50 PM


Hello, Hal. How are you? :)

Posted by: Vannah at January 19, 2010 11:52 PM


Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, head of the House Democrats' campaign effort, said...

"President George W. Bush and House Republicans drove our economy into a ditch and tried to run away from the accident," he said. "President Obama and congressional Democrats have been focused repairing the damage to our economy."
-----------------------------------------------------------

What a strange choice of analogies considering it was the drunk Senator Ted Kennedy who actually drove a car off a bridge and then stumbled away from the submerged car and abandoned his female passenger to death by drowning.

And just exactly what have B.O. and his democRAT accomplices,drunk on their newly attained power, done to repair the damage to the economy except raise taxes and spend more than they take in.

The State of Massachusetts invites citizens to come to Boston for a Tea Party to celebrate Brown's election and America's victory.

Jew hating mass murdering muslims need not attend.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 19, 2010 11:52 PM


Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 10:13PM

"I frankly find no use for folks who are going to throw out insults like you do and paint broad assumptions on people instead of actually talking with them and understanding their viewpoints. If you have something interesting to say, please, say it. I think I've been nothing but respectful with the majority of the folks on this board (and as a Christian, I would expect nothing less than that of myself) - but am shocked that I continue to come across folks like you that insist on belittling instead of talking."
------------------------------------------------------

xalisae,

You are encroaching on my turf.

It is not that I mind sharing or doubt your ability.

I know if you work at it you can do what I do, but being offensive' is not your area of expertise.

RINO,

We understand your point of view.

There is nothing novel or new about your ideology.

Your purported solutions have been tried and have failed repeatedly.

Pack up your 'big tent' and gather up your clowns and take your circus to another town that has not yet seen your show.

You can leave the elephants but do take your fellow rinos and jackasses with you.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 20, 2010 12:07 AM


Hi Vannah. I'm doing great. Hope you are good too.


Ken, you still seem angry about something. Life is good, try to enjoy it.

Posted by: Hal at January 20, 2010 12:08 AM


But what Ken says is so amusing, I can't see how anyone could say those things with anything but a smile, Hal. XD

Posted by: xalisae at January 20, 2010 12:31 AM


xalisae, I'm sorry to disagree with you. I find no humor in Ken's anger, only sadness. He's a troubled soul.

Posted by: Hal at January 20, 2010 12:51 AM


How ironic it is that Kennedy's seat was taken over by a conservative just in time to save us from this health care mistake.

Posted by: Against Abortion at January 20, 2010 1:24 AM


I'm just happy to see the DemocRATS with their knickers in a knot. I don't know where Brown stands on the life issue, but at least he's not Coakley. Burying this healthcare deal will do more to protect life in this country than anything else currently underway, so if the man simply needs prayer to come to a right view in this area, so be it.

Posted by: Elisabeth at January 20, 2010 3:01 AM


The good people of Massachusetts told pollster after pollster that they wanted to send a message to Washington. Well they certainly did that, didn't they?

"WE'RE IDIOTS!"

Congratulations, Massachusetts!

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

Posted by: Tom Degan at January 20, 2010 3:09 AM


I want to repeat Chris Arsenault's comment on January 19, 2010 at 9:11 PM:

"Scott is a pro-choice Republican. While I don't doubt he'll be rejecting the health-care bill, I see his election as simply the lesser of two evils."

Posted by: Jon at January 20, 2010 3:11 AM


Obama's lies are catching up with him. Remember when candidate Obama said he would only take the public funding for his campaign and then later went against his word. Remeber when he said that the health care debates in Congress would be televised on CSPAN, but instead the process is all done behind closed doors and selling out the American people to backdoor bribes of lobbyists and special interests. The only thing transparent about this guy is his arrogance.

Posted by: truthseeker at January 20, 2010 3:26 AM


Ed,
Praying with you!! Let Brown's victory be just the start of electing officials across our great country who actually listen to their constituents!! OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE and FOR THE PEOPLE!!

WOOOOOOOOT!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 20, 2010 6:06 AM


Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 19, 2010 10:02 PM
--------

Phil - I've been listening to my local talk radio stations here in New England, including one female host who is a libertarian, and has personally known Scott Brown for years. She's a pro-gay marriage, pro-choice Republican. When she says Scott backs Roe v Wade, I believe her. Additionally, the White House is not all that upset with Brown being in there.

Don't get me wrong - he's been on the radio multiple times, and seems you could have a good discussion with him, but the election was won by his gathering those independents and Democrats who could accept Brown because of his positions, and a big part of that acceptance in Massachusetts is being pro-choice.

My guess is his wife and daughters are all pro-choice.

SO - I'm glad Scott won, but am very leery. There's more here than meets the eye.

BTW - Wrentham, Scott's hometown, is only 20 minutes away from me, so yes, this is local politics.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 20, 2010 6:29 AM


HAL,

I told you we have more in common than you know.

"Nobody knows the trouble I have seen,

Nobody knows my sorrow..."

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 20, 2010 7:35 AM


My wife and I and another couple went to see the 'Book of Eli' last night.

I am surprised so much attention is paid to the 'book' by people who do not believe in it's contents or the GOD of whom it speaks.

I am also surprised by people who do believe in it's contents and the God of whom it speaks.

This movie is not for the squeamish, but then neither is the 'book'.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 20, 2010 7:47 AM


Posted by: Hal at January 19, 2010 11:50 PM


I'm sure you praised god just as much in November of 2008. Anyway, life is ebb and flow. Enjoy your victory tonight of a pro choice Republican from MA.

--------------------------------------------------

I am NOT praising GOD for Brown's election.

Brown's election may be just enough to slow the momentum of B.O.'s agenda so that it never makes it over the hump but instead like Wiley Coyote it rolls back upon him and his.

It is not republicans or conservatives who have impeded the regress of the the 'progressives', it is democRATS maneuvering to feather their own nests and that small band of obstinate pro-lifer dems who have not sacrificed their conscience to please the godless fools in their midst.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 20, 2010 7:58 AM


Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 19, 2010 9:59 PM

"xalisae - why are you like that, and have you ever thought about getting counseling? How about you go back to watching the Bachelor and I'll carry on my civil conversation with some of the adults on this board."

--------------------------------------------------

RINO,

Thank you so much for the sincerest form of flattery.

Do not fret.

Being 'born again' is an experience, salvation is a process.

We are all being saved from somethings to some ONE.

Got room in 'your' tent for missy Coakley?

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 20, 2010 8:10 AM


Brown wins, but abortion is still legal. This election is but a tiny victory. You'll still probably see Kerry be re-elected again when he runs. The electorate in Mass. liked Brown over Coakley. Ideology was a factor, but I think that was way overplayed in the grand scheme of things.

Posted by: Ted at January 20, 2010 8:25 AM


Chris, the word behind the scenes is that he is pro-life. He at least is for more parental notification and against partial birth abortion for sure. Do you know how he is rated by NARAL and the like?

If he indeed is not pro-life, we should pray that he change. He seems to be a lot like Mitt Romney.

The real gain here is how it has weakened the most pro-choice president in history. Now we go for the jugular.

There is no real peace until one's enemy is totally defeated and that's what I am working for in 2010 and 2012.

Our survival as a nation depends on it.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 20, 2010 9:05 AM


Brown appears to be a moderate pro-choicer:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Scott_Brown_Abortion.htm

By which I mean that he's generally in favor of legalized abortion, but he's opposed to partial-birth abortion, public funding for abortion, and stomping all over conscience protections for healthcare workers. That's not great, no ... but it was better than the alternative.

Coakley is a pro-abortion extremist:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Martha_Coakley_Abortion.htm

Would I prefer to see a pro-lifer in every elected office across the land? Abso-frigging-lutely! However, we're talking about Massachusetts here, one of the "bluest" of the blue states. They're not going to elect a serious pro-lifer, at least not yet. So we should be pleased with what we got. One step at a time, slow & steady wins the race, etcetera, etcetera....

Instead of a pro-abortion extremist ... we got a moderate pro-choicer.
Instead of another vote for Obamacare (and government-subsidized abortion) ... we got the 41st vote to sustain a GOP filibuster.
And we got all of those things in Massachusetts!

You can be upset if you want, but I'm going to savor this victory for a moment. :)

Posted by: Naaman at January 20, 2010 9:11 AM


If this kills the abortion funding health care bill, its a victory and a result of the prayers, yes?

Its def a crack in the wall of progressivism that inundates N.E.

Even if its only a tiny tiny crack.

Posted by: todd y at January 20, 2010 9:22 AM


Instead of a pro-abortion extremist ... we got a moderate pro-choicer.
Posted by: Naaman at January 20, 2010 9:11 AM

That's how I see it too, Naaman. And as a Catholic, I am glad to see Washington denied the opportunity to add another "prochoice catholic" to its ranks.

Instead of another vote for Obamacare (and government-subsidized abortion) ... we got the 41st vote to sustain a GOP filibuster.

Yes, this is where I see the real victory from a prolife standpoint. It isn't that he's the lesser of two evils, it's that he presents the opportunity to lessen the evil inflicted by the party in power.

Posted by: Fed Up at January 20, 2010 9:59 AM


Posted by: Naaman at January 20, 2010 9:11 AM
------

I'm still considering what's happening in total. I'm fine with Brown for now (I'm not a Mass resident) but think over the long haul pro-lifer's shouldn't be compromising our integrity and principles to move things. I get the feeling (and I could be wrong) that pro-lifers are far more valuable to the independents than vice-versa.

In other words, independents seriously "depend" upon pro-life conservatives to bring about such victories. Absent such support, the 5% difference would not be there.

The pro-life contingent in MA should have said to Brown - we'll support you provided you agree to have a reserved, serious discussion on the issues of life. I think Scott would be reasonable enough to grant that.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 20, 2010 12:29 PM


I've been on a lot of boards about a lot of subjects, and I must say, while I've found many great folks like you that are respectful about their views - some of the rudest folks I've run into are on this board - which I think, says something very sad about the current state of how Christians talk to folks they don't agree with.

EGV,

While I'm all for civility, let's not get maudlin, here. If you say different things which flatly fly in the face of each other (or in the face of all sane reason), people can be excused for saying that you're either incalculably confused, lying, or some other deviation from "that which is true and integrated".

Illustration: had you been genuinely as anti-abortion as you claimed (or even pro-life, which is somewhat different and larger), then when I called you out on your sneers against "pro-birthers", you could have clarified ("Hey, look, that's not what I meant!"), apologized ("Sorry, it was the heat of the moment, and I chose a bad term; lemme explain..."), or the like. But you used the SAME TERM, AGAIN and AGAIN. You're obviously sticking to your guns with that pro-choice epithet.

Reference:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2010/01/abortionbreast.html

I'll be honest: I made an educated guess (and I said as much, in saying that I was "going out on a limb") when I said that you were lying about being "against the act of abortion" (the accusation which so offended you); had you backtracked and disowned the "pro-birther" and the "I suppose it's a tough choice for a lot of women. Slight uptick in breast cancer risk, or live in a society where being poor and having a baby is a real issue" nonsense, I would have admitted my mistake and apologized unconditionally. You blew it, friend... and you proved your dishonesty, at least on this point, to me... and to Xalisae, if I read rightly (since that was when I first saw her call you out on your double-speak). As such, I find your laments about civility to be rather hollow, friend; you have no high perch from which to call down deprecations on the "lack of genteel discourse" of others.

(Are you going to show your civility by sneering at my verbiage again, now?)

Xalisae and I have our differences, both in style and in worldview, but she and I are side by side in our exasperation with you. If you want civil discourse, start with yourself. If you want honest relations, then stop talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you want to be considered "anti-abortion", then stop saying and doing manifold things which would promote, excuse, enable and/or enshrine it in our nation for ages to come.

Posted by: Paladin at January 20, 2010 1:01 PM


"One mile for each baby aborted as a result of Democrat passage of Roe v. Wade."

7 of the 9 judge on the Supreme Court that decided Roe v Wade were appointed by Republicans.

Republicans did this!

Posted by: ddevonb at January 20, 2010 1:42 PM


Scott Brown is on record supporting abortion being legal, supporting socialist medicine and other socialist policies and supports gay marriage being legal if the majority wants it.

There is simply no evidence that Scott Brown is less evil than his opponent... just not quite as stupid.

When it comes to evil, I would be more concerned about a an evil genius than an evil idiot.

Putting an (R) beside a liberal's name does not make him less evil.

Posted by: ddevonb at January 20, 2010 1:50 PM


Posted by: ddevonb at January 20, 2010 1:42 PM

"7 of the 9 judge on the Supreme Court that decided Roe v Wade were appointed by Republicans.

Republicans did this."

---------------------------------------------------

Before Rov v Wade I am not sure abortion was subject that ever came up when Presidents were considering nominees to the federal courts.

It is the justices that have been appointed by Republican presidents since Roe V Wade that need to be considered.

These would be justices appointed by Reagan, Bush, and Bush.

The democRAT presidents after Roe v Wade have only nominated liberal judicial activists to the federal courts.

The goofy thing to me is the republican position that they would never use abortion as 'litmus' test for nominees to the federal courts and the democRATs practice of applying the abortion litmus test.

Random sort of tangential thought: A conservative humanist might be more detrimental than a liberal humanist.

The liberal humanist at least has some sort of perverted and convoluted sense of compassion while the conservative humanist might be more like Joseph Statlin or Mao Tse Tung.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 20, 2010 4:39 PM


Ex-GOP: "Personally, I think this isn't great news for the pro-life crowd. The GOP just won big with independents by bringing out a pro-choice fiscal conservative. You know that others in the mold say that this should be the model in other states."

Like Virginia, you mean? Like New Jersey?

Posted by: bmmg39 at January 20, 2010 7:43 PM


Were Massachusetts voters a little more than a year ago, Tom, when Barack Obama won there by 26 percentage points.

Posted by: bmmg39 at January 20, 2010 7:47 PM


dd:

Yep, these rats, like one Sandra Day O'Connor were stealth Liberals, aka Democrats.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 20, 2010 11:05 PM


Ken, thanks for the heads up on the movie. With as many shifts as I pull, I hadn't heard or seen any promos for it (I rarely get to watch any TV, not that that is a loss!)

After I pulled 84 hours this week at work, we're having a well deserved date night this Friday night and when Steven asked me what I wanted to see, I was able to say, "Book of Eli"!

Posted by: Elisabeth at January 21, 2010 6:12 AM


Scott Brown is pro-choice - prepare to be disappointed once again. He's a social liberal and a fiscal conservative.

He also understands it was the independants who elected him into office and that he is a senator in a moderate to liberal state. He'll want to keep this job once 2012 rolls around. Wait and see.

Posted by: SWIowa at January 22, 2010 1:07 PM


Paladin -

Sorry I haven't fit so perfectly in your mold, but I'm not going to change my language or fall into positions that I find as unworkable as they are illogical, just to please you.

I call them pro-birthers because I think they care very much that the baby is born, but don't care about the life after (as evidenced by the fight against health care, school funding, welfare, and anything else that might hit their pocket books). It's a view that I find illogical - thus the use of my term - which you are right - I stick by it.

Glad that this was such a huge moment for the right wing crowd though. I'm sure Brown will go a long ways to decreasing the abortion rates.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 23, 2010 2:19 PM


Ex-GOP Voter said [pro-lifers] "care very much that the baby is born, but don't care about the life after (as evidenced by the fight against health care, school funding, welfare, and anything else that might hit their pocket books)."

Nonsense! Many pro-lifers have big families.

health care: They vaccinate their babies, teach the children to look both ways before crossing the road, and forbid the teenagers to stay out too late or hang out with the wrong crowd. And they care about their children's spiritual health.

school funding: They care about their children's spiritual health so much that they fund their own schools in addition to paying taxes for the government schools. In Ontario, Canada, I attended a private Christian school for all of my elementary and secondary education, except for two years of home-schooling (because my parents couldn't afford paying the tuition for all six children on my father's Christian school teacher's salary).

welfare: Pro-lifers work hard! Christians believe that if a man will not work, neither should he eat. Nevertheless, Christians show the compassion of Christ--a responsible, personal compassion--by giving generously through the church and showing genuine interest in the welfare of their neighbours. They ought to be always ready to give an answer to anybody who asks a reason for the hope that is within them. Of course, they point to Christ.

Many pro-lifers are against big government. Christians and Americans are not statists. In God we trust. The civil government is His minister (Romans 13), but checks and balances and federalism are required to limits its jurisdiction to matters of justice.

Posted by: Jon at January 24, 2010 11:44 AM


Jon - all I'm saying is that recently, a non-Christian co-worker asked me why the religious right was fighting so hard against health care for poor people. For better or for worse, the very public relationships of FotF, FRC and the 700 club bring these types of comparisons. Perception is reality - and that's the perception that is out there.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 24, 2010 12:03 PM


Pro-aborts don't care whether the baby is born, and they don't care about its life after birth (as evidenced by their fight for health care, school funding, welfare, and anything else that might spare their pocket books).

health care: The baby will get its vaccinations, but after he grows up he will only have the national debts incurred by his parents' indulgence. (He might still have a place on a waiting list.) However, he might not even exist. Pro-aborts want pro-lifers to help them kill their children with "health care," thus increasing the burden of the national debt on the pro-lifers' children.

school funding: The baby is shipped off to strangers at day care because his mother's career is deemed more important than he. Or his mother is divorced, or his family is in some other way less than ideal or dysfunctional because of the pro-aborts' rampant sexism (sex wherever, whenever, however, with whomever). As for me, I never even went to kindergarten, because my mother said that kindergarten was for teaching children to tie their shoes, and she could teach me that herself. But now because of pro-abort, homosexual, pedophile sexism, many public schools seem to make their principle objective sex education i.e. sex as soon as possible. Oh, and they teach the children that humanism is not a religion, there is separation of religion and state, and the people's party is the Democrat party. And they teach college students their rights, except for the right to freedom of speech they deem offensive (especially not speech to defend those who have no speech).

welfare: Pro-aborts want to continue the vicious cycle of dependency to ensure a steady stream of customers from low-income minority neighbourhoods to the Planned Parenthoods that are locating in their midst. Pro-aborts hate crisis pregnancy centers, marriage laws, churches, and anything that points out reality, sin, and redemption in Jesus Christ.

I've written a little cynically, perhaps, Ex-GOP Voter. In previewing this comment, I see that you've already replied to my preceding comment. That one was more carefully written.

No, perception is not reality. Perception is perception. You know the definition of faith (Heb. 11:1): faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. Faith exists despite widespread unbelief.

Who is fighting against health care for poor people? The religious right, people say? Do you know the history of health care?

health care: Churches established the first hospitals.

school funding: Churches established the universities and the first publicly funded systems of education (at least in Canada).

welfare: Churches established orphanages, prison education, soup kitchens, etc. Besides the fact that redistribution of wealth is not a responsibility of the civil government, the civil government always inevitably does a very bad job of it. It's impersonal and doesn't effectively demand accountability. It doesn't inspire hope. It doesn't result in personal mentoring relationships.

Posted by: Jon at January 24, 2010 12:41 PM