|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Review Just say I dont to Bride Wars
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
Meltdown 101 The importance of same-store sales
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
Broadcasts to mobile devices to start in 22 cities
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
New TV trends Internet movies, 3-D, power saving
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
UN halts Gaza aid, truce resolution deal approved
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
UN Security Council calls for Gaza cease-fire
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
UN Security Council calls for immediate Gaza truce
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
UN calls for immediate cease-fire in Gaza
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
Pope Benedict jokes about hoarse voice
Southern Ledger - January 9, 2009
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
IS WAITING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL BAN ON ABORTION REALLY PRO-LIFE?
November 18, 2007 -
November 25, 2007
When the nation’s largest right to life organization endorsed Fred Thompson last week it sparked some criticism of his pro-life record by his disappointed opponents for the Republican nomination. Thompson produced a 100% pro-life voting record during his eight years in the U.S. Senate, yet some in the pro-life community were dismayed by the National Right to Life endorsement decision and see him as “squishy” on the issue. He believes Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overturned, but he has also expressed doubts about whether a Constitutional ban on abortion is practical or politically feasible. Consistent with his Federalist principles, Thompson prefers to allow the states to apply restrictions on abortion should Roe v. Wade get overturned. It is that viewpoint that has evoked outrage from those who claim Thompson’s approach is actually a pro-abortion position.
Thompson’s preferred policy process lies at the foundation of the Constitution. In the 9th Amendment it is clearly stated that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” As if that is not clear enough, the Founders added the 10th Amendment to underline the point: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Restating the point that the power of deciding policy issues resides with the people and the States is the Constitutional effect of SHOUTING.
This Federalist approach to handling issues actually has very little to do with any particular policy itself, since it was intended to be broadly applied rather than on a selective basis to promote a specific political agenda. There can be little doubt that this is the approach the Founding Fathers intended; and respecting that approach does not mean Thompson is "soft" on the issue of abortion. He simply believes that the Constitution means what it says.
Thompson also recognizes political reality. A national ban on abortion, which could come about under a Constitutional amendment, is beyond the realm of political possibility at this point. Keep in mind how hard it has been to achieve a legislative ban on partial birth abortion...and the vast majority of Americans support THAT ban. A Constitutional amendment to ban abortion is not going to happen in the forseeable future. The votes are simply not there. The issue is further complicated when the debate includes whether a ban should or should not include exceptions for rape, incest of the life of the mother.
Leaders of the various pro-life organizations understand this, even if they won't publicly acknowledge it. Nevertheless, many continue to pursue the quixotic legislative absolute ban rather than a more realistic alternative of incremental victory for the unborn. Thus, they oppose the Thompson approach, which would allow individual states (guided by the conscience and votes of their citizens) to determine their own laws on restricting abortion on demand. Given the opportunity, there are perhaps thirty states that would impose restrictions on abortion that could dramatically reduce the numbers of unborn babies killed each year. Abortions would indeed take place in the remaining states, just as they do now. And abortion on demand would continue to occur in those states while the effort to pass a Constitutional ban on abortions would continue. But the practice would come to an end, or face reasonable restrictions, in many places.
The bottom line is that the Thompson approach would actually save lives while the "we won't save anybody until we can save everybody" plan will result in hundreds of thousands of abortions each year that COULD be prevented. So, which approach is really MORE pro-life? I suspect that the unborn babies in Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, and numerous other states where voters would support restrictions on abortion would support Thompson and his Federalist approach...if they could. The fact that the nation’s largest pro-life organization sees the practical, and life saving, value of an incremental approach to abortion policy should be applauded rather than utilized as a political wedge to divide pro-life voters.
### |
 |
 |
THE SCHIP FUNDING FRAUD EXPOSED. -
November 4, 2007 -
November 7, 2007
Last week the SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) $35 billion expansion legislation passed again in both houses of Congress. President Bush has again vowed to veto the bill, and it received fewer votes than needed for an override of that veto in both the Senate and the House.
Despite claims that the bill had been “revised” in response to concerns expressed by opponents it still provides health insurance coverage for millions of adults under the guise of a “children’s” hea... |
 |
|
WILL FRED POUNCE ON HILLARY'S ILLEGAL ALIEN MISSTEP? -
October 31, 2007 -
November 4, 2007
As Hillary Clinton continues to stretch her lead in national polls among likely Democratic Party primary voters it is becoming increasingly clear that the nomination is hers to lose – unless she makes a major mistake. In the most recent debate she may have done just that on an issue that resonates strongly with the voters: illegal immigration.
When asked about her position on a controversial proposal by New York Governor and fellow Democrat Elliot Spitzer to grant drivers’ licenses to... |
|
|
CLEARING THE AIR ON SCHIP? -
October 20, 2007 -
October 27, 2007
Last week the U.S. House failed to override President Bush’s veto of legislation that would have reauthorized and expanded health insurance coverage under the SCHIP program by $35 billion over the next five years. The Senate had the votes to override the veto, but the Senate leadership opted to wait for the House to act before scheduling their own vote on the matter. Tennessee Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker both voted for the legislation and would have voted to overturn the President’s... |
|
|
THOMPSON STEPS UP FOR FIRST DEBATE. -
October 7, 2007 -
October 14, 2007
In the roughly four weeks since Fred Thompson made his campaign for the Republican nomination for President official there have already been a lot of significant moments. His first visits to Iowa and New Hampshire, his first quarterly fundraising report, several major media interviews have all been among the big steps that Thompson has taken. None, however, is bigger than a Tuesday night date in Detroit, Michigan with his fellow Republican candidates for his first major debate.
The othe... |
|
|
CHEAP LABOR IS PROVING TO BE VERY COSTLY. -
October 1, 2007 -
October 7, 2007
Those who favor continuing to allow illegal aliens to flood into the U.S. regularly tout our supposed need for “cheap labor” as the primary justification for ignoring our immigration laws. Unfortunately, for U.S. taxpayers this “cheap labor” is proving to be incredibly expensive.
Earlier this year, Robert Rector and his colleagues at the Heritage Foundation sought to quantify the burden that is being imposed on American taxpayers by the 12 to 17 million illegals that currently reside in... |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Keep up with Steve, join our G-Mail List to receive Gill Show updates and Steve's weekly column... |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
