Massachusetts For John McCain

US Federal Human Life Amendment

zanagy — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:16:14 -0400

Hi guys,

I have started a petition for a United States Federal Human Life Amendment. I need to get this petition out to as many people as possible and it will take support from many, many citizens, organizations and companies to get the word out. Please personally read my petition, sign it and send it on to everyone you know. Additionally, if you have a website, please speak to your board (if you have one) about approving a link on your website to my petitition. If you have any other suggestions, please let me know.

My initial goal is to get a million signatures, but my ultimate goal is to get 5-10 million signatures in order to get Congress' attention in this matter. We need to show congress that American citizens want to protect all life in the United states. Please click on the link below, sign the petition and send it onto as many people as possible. This is a foundation for the beginnings of a grassroots effort to make a Federal Amendment to the US Constitution: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/us-federal-human-life-amendment.html

*********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My Story:

I want to take a few minutes to tell you my story from both sides of the abortion issue. I am not proud of many of my decision in my life prior to becoming a Christian, but I want to take accountability for them and help other women not to make the same mistakes that I have made. When I was 18 years old, I spent one night with my boyfriend (we had even used a condom). When I realized I had missed my period, I took a pregnancy test, which came out positive. I didn't know what to do. I was scared, especially of my mother's reaction. So I called the adult in my life that I most respected and trusted, Fran, my cousins wife. She immediately said that I needed to get an abortion. She told me that she would inform my mother that I would come to her house in a couple of days "to babysit" her newborn (as I had done several times before) for the day. In actuality, I she would take me to the nearest clinic to abort the child. I had always done as I was told because to do otherwise meant a beating, so I did as I always had done, even though I had vowed I would never have an abortion if I got pregnant. Everything went so quickly. Two days later, Fran and I went to the clinic. It was over in a few hours. I remember going into a room to be "counseled" before the procedure. The only thing done in that room was a blood test, followed by explanation that the procedure would take 2 hours to complete and from which to recover. No one told me of the emotional expectations nor that an abortion was extremely painful to the child "fetus". No mention of the fetus was mentioned at all, nor what took place during the procedure. I was told that I would be put under anesthesia, then when I awoke, I would wait until I had a bowel movement and urine excretion to ensure my organs were properly working before I could leave.

When I started to awaken from the operation before I was even aware I was awake, I began crying. As I became cognisant I was surprised by my emotional response, so I asked the doctor why I couldn't stop crying, especially because I was a person that very seldom cried for any reason. He responded that 95% or more of the women and girls came out from an abortion in that manner. I then asked him if it was a chemical reaction to the anesthesia. He replied that it was not a physical response because the same anesthesia was used in many operations and that people do not have the same response when rejuvenating from other operations. He said this was a unique response to abortion. I was not a religious person and I had not been brought up going to church, or even discussing religion. So, I knew right then and there on the recovery bed, that what I had done was wrong because my response had not been conscious - it had been sub-conscious in nature. Additionally, the fact that so many other women had had that same response further made my realization concrete.

Guilt chased me for many years after that, until the day that I was baptized and realized I had finally been forgiven and was able to forgive myself. Two years later, I was studying at the Defense Language Institute (DLI) to become and Army Arabic Linguist when my father suddenly died from a heart attack/stroke/seizure combination. I went through a great mourning period of which I didn't have the maturity nor the moral foundation on which to properly handle the situation. Dad died in March of 1988. For 3 months, I suffered internally without having the opportunity to discuss my sorrow with anyone. When the pain became more than I could bear, and although I had not been sexually active in a long time, I sought comfort, at this time, through sex. I spent the night with a man that I had been dating since I first arrived at DLI and with whom I had hopes of deepening our relationship. When he agreed to spend the night with me, I took it as a sign that he wanted to move to the next level of commitment. I got pregnant that night. We did not spend another night together, so I knew the exact night I had gotten pregnant that July. Chuck was always with a group of people, so I got up early one morning (before physical training, we called it PT) to catch him while he was in his room alone getting dressed to give him the news. The first words that came out of his mouth was "get an abortion". I was shocked at first, then became angry. I knew this time without a doubt that I would never do that again, so I told him so. Then it was his turn to become angry. He told me that he had a military career ahead of him and that this would keep him from progressing as he wanted. I told him I would have that baby without him then.

I t is with certainty and clarity that I tell you today that I have NEVER regretted keeping that child. I have spoken and read many stories since that day about women that have had abortions and those that have chosen to keep their children for various reasons. I have not come across a single woman who has NOT regretted, been ashamed of and has suffered from her choice to have an abortion AND I have NEVER come across a woman who HAS regretted keeping her child. Quite the contrary, I have only found who women who have chosen to keep their child has only been blessed and uplifted by the choice not to murder one of God's creations.

I would like to blame my fear of my mother (because I was deathly afraid of her), my lack of knowledge of Christ, my immaturity and youth on my wretched decision to murder my child, but I must take accountability of the fact that despite all of that, I knew deep down in my heart that it was wrong and I can not place blame on any set of situations for my action. I and I alone made that choice. I could have chosen to take responsibility for my actions and I could have been blessed, but instead I took the coward's way out. However, I must say, that had I been more informed, had a relationship with Christ, had a stronger core foundation in my life, and if the abortion had been illegal, I am sure that I would have made the right choice.

That is why I am sharing my story with all of you today. I am hoping that by sharing my disgrace, I can rally you and others to take a stand for "the right" and maybe I can help other young women be more informed of the consequences and less equipped to make self-damaging choices (through the legal system's misguided laws) by changing the laws of the land through a Federal Constitutional Amendment which will protect all of God's innocent persons.

Today I am a happily married woman (of 17 years) to Jaime De La Cruz with 2 children. Breylin, (who I did not abort), who is a blessing to me, is attending the University of Arizona as a Sophomore, and Emilio who is about to be a junior in high school.

If we work together, we can do this. Please stand with me in protecting those lives from the American(US) holocaust by signing my petition and by sending this email onto everyone you know and encouraging them to sign, as well:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/us-federal-human-life-amendment.html

FYI: Norma McCorvey was the plaintiff in Roe vs. Wade. She did not go looking for an attorney to fight to have an abortion. At the time, she was speaking with an adoption attorney and he gave her name to 2 attorneys that he knew wanted to fight the anti-abortion statutes in Texas, at the time. They went to her and asked her to be their client. She agreed to be their client, but she did not want her name made public so her attorneys used a pseudonym. She didn't even attend any of the court proceedings because she didn't want to actively participate. Additionally, even though she won the case, she never had an abortion, even though she did give 2 of her children up for adoption. Today, she is a 100% pro-life activist fighting abortion on all levels after have worked in an abortion clinic for years.

To read an interview by her go to: http://www.priestsforlife.org/testimony/normamaster.htm

Wyoming For John McCain

A Dynamic campaign? Or an Anemic One ? ...Mass Mouthing Off

The_Mass_Mouth — Sun, 11 May 2008 16:24:47 -0400

John McCain needs to run a dynamic campaign. An anemic one will not do. It is yet unclear which sort of campaign his will be.

Now that Barack Obama is to be the Democrat nominee, the November election will be as energized as any Presidential election I've seen since 1988, maybe since 1968. Though BHO is by far the most leftist Democrat nominee since George McGovern, it is exactly his ultra-leftism which gives his campaign its energy (that, and the 9 % of all votes to be cast that his 92 % support among African Americans gives him to begin with). Today in America the ultra-left is well populated with rich, even super-rich liberals who look down upon America, who represent an overseas view of what America should be. This is new. 50 years ago the ultra-left in America was mostly wage-earners. The Viet Nam war began to bring wealthy folks into the ultra-left. Today they dominate this end of the spectrum. They have tons of money to spend and they know supremely well how to network. They also know how to organize. The BHO campaign will be as well-run and as well funded as any ultra-left campaign has ever been, anywhere in the world. read more »

Massachusetts For John McCain

The V.P. Choice Is a Distraction...Mass Mouthing Off

The_Mass_Mouth — Mon, 05 May 2008 17:08:25 -0400

A lot of discussion has arisen about whom John McCain will choose as his Vice President. Though interesting, as it concerns someone being raised into the Presidential Picture, the topic is a distraction. John McCain is not going to be elected President by selecting a good Vice President. A Vice President can maybe bring his or her own state into the President candidate's win column, or he or she can add strength in a policy area, true; but that isn't a major addition to the entire picture. So let's get back to the big picture, OK ?

This election will be won by John McCain, maybe, IF he succeeds in doing the following things:

1.convincing Americans that he is the strongest, most knowledgeable candidate with respct to freign policy issues including (but not limited to) War on Terror matters.

Here I feel very confident. read more »

Massachusetts For John McCain

CURIOSER & CURIOSER...MASS MOUTHING OFF

The_Mass_Mouth — Thu, 01 May 2008 10:48:14 -0400

For those who stand with John McCain -- Republicans especially -- the Democrat campaign becomes curioser & curioser. During the past six weeks or so, as Barack Obama's "politics of hope" has crashed and burned, to be replaced by the politics of doubt, more and more endorsements have come his way. Those who one would think would be saying "I don't THINK so!" to him are saying "yes I can." What exactly is going on here? The more the candidate stumbles, and looks untouchable, the more endorsements he gets. Strange indeed. Very strange.

Of course it might be, as Dan Henninger hints in todays WSJ, that Barack Obama's daily new friends really aren't ftriends at all, that their "endorsement" is nothing more serious than a pat on the back, a kind of political one-night stand rather than a marrage. This might be the case. After all, again as Henninger says, today they are running away from Hillary; tomorrow they might run away from Mr. Obama.

It's an odd way to present a campaign. Do the Democrat politicians really want to tell the American people that their "commitments" are good for one ride only? Are no more permanent than one of Bill Clinton's womanizings? Without trying to relive or re-accuse that cycle, let's remember that in politics the candidate sets the tone. Bill Clinton set an example, in sexual matters, that seems to have carried over into political ones: that a promise of support is good only for the moment. Strange indeed. I doybt that America's voters will choose to vote for such momentary I do's.

Or, it may be that the De,ocrat politicians see Mr. Obama falling like a stone and want to try to prop him up, to give him "moral support," to ease his fall, as if to say "see? it wasn't racism that is sinking you, we support you, you have a future in our party" even as they notice, and do not mind seeing, Hillary Clinton move close to being nominated. That way, they think, they can keep Black voters from staying home -- or voting for John McCain - on election day because Hillary is the Democrat nominee. "See, Black America?" they might be signalling, "when the going got tough for the first serious Black candidate for President, "we stood tall. It is not our fault. We are and always will be the party of Black America!"

It might work. Myself, I find it sad and I think it tremendously devious. We who support John McCain have perhaps the most honorable, un-devious candidate for President in modern times. With John McCain, what you is almost always what you get. He is who he is. You can depend on John McCain. You know John McCain. Politics in a de,ocracy may have attributes in it of contradiction, of shape-shifting, of contingency. But there is no place in a democracy, if it is to work well for people, for infinite deviousnes. For promises good only for an instant. For conning your most loyal supporters. With the De,ocrats, it's always Elmer Gantry time; and Elmer Gantry was a fool.

Massachusetts For John McCain

THE OIL PRICES ISSUE.....MASS MOUTHING OFF

The_Mass_Mouth — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 10:24:13 -0400

One of the major issues in this year's election is going to be oil prices and what to do about them. Unfortunately for the Democrats, whose mantra is that George W. Bush has created high oil prices and could lower them again if he wanted to, the economic world actually exists, independently of Democrat rhetoric. In the economic world, then, is where we need to search for analysis of why oil prices are high and might well continue to rise.

In the economic world, oil prices are climbing because demand is growing rapidly at the same time that oil supply is declining. As many publications have reported these past few weeks, oil production from non-OPEC countries is declining at an ever faster rate. Mdexico, Norway, and our own North Slope field will likely run dry within the decade. That would not matter except that new oil production has been slow to develop despite the doubling of oil's barrel price since 2005. Why so? Why aren't thousands of oil exploration companies popping up overnight to go out in search of this liquid license to print money?

Part of the answer is one that George W. Bush stated correctly in yesterday's press conference: Congress is loathe to permit further drilling in North Alaska. The rest of the answer is the same: counties all over the world have been reluctant to approve increased oil exploration and production. Even OPEC, which has agreed to increase its output of crude, has set a production limit, one which significantly falls short of expected demand.
Second, the vast new oil deposits recently found way off-shore under the deep ocean will read more »

Massachusetts For John McCain

RE-READING "THE CONSCIENCE OF A CONSERVATIVE"....MASS MOUTHING OFF

The_Mass_Mouth — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:35:25 -0400

Recently I felt the need to re-read "The Conscience of a Conservative." You may suppose that this book was written by Mitt Romney, or Rush Limbaugh, or Marc Sanford or some such. It wasn't. It was written by Barry Goldwater, United States Senator from Arizona, whose seat John McCain now holds.

Barry Goldwater was the Republican candidate for President in 1964, a year in which the John Kennedy Assassination, which had happened less than one year prior, mazde it impossible to mount a Republican campaign. Yet other than that election, Barry Goldwater was a winner. He also created (along with Bill Buckley) the modern "conservative" movement from which Ronald Reagan soon arose -- the rest of the story we all know.

Or do we ? Barry Goldwater was the ultimate "conservative," the man who gave the movement its name, and yet he was

* pro-choice - fiercely so
* pro gay rights -- it was he, a reserve military officer and proud of it, who famously said "I don't care if the soldier is straight as long as he shoots straight!"
* for limited government and no deficit spending

He was these things, indeed he was passionately for liberty of the individual. It was Goldwater who said "Extremism in the cause of liberty is no vice."

So what happened? Why does the word "conservative" today suggest a person who is militantly pro-life, anti gay rights, and in favor of tax cuts for the rich leading to huge deficit spending ?

In a word, religion. That's what happened. During the 1970s and even more so in the 1980s, as a result first of the Supreme Court's ROE v. WADE decision, religious fundamentalists became political activists.

Barry Goldwater hated that. His view was that religion had no business being a subject of political action or of legislation, federally or in the states.

It might also be relevant here to note that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor -- a Ronald Reagan appointment -- was from Arizona. "Conservatives" don't like her much either. Actually, "conservatives" don't much like ANYONE who thinks for him or herself. Their view is that you either obey "conservative principles" or you are anathema.

This penchant for doctrine has infected much more than just the "social" issues. It was rigid doctrine, blind & deaf to common sense & the facts, that caused the Iraq part of our War on Terror to go so grievously wrong. Between Donald Rumsfeld's refusal to listen to our soldiers and Paul Bremer's disastrous de-Baathification, what should have been a strong victory almost became disaster. Only as disaster loomed did John McCain's view -- that we needed to INCREASE our force, not shave it down, and to empower the Sunnis, not make them jobless -- did we turn toward victory.

Fortunately for liberty, Barry Goldwater tradition remains strong in the Western states. Wyoming's Dick Cheney, when pressed by religionists to oppose his lesbian daughter Mary's rights to marry said "freedom means freedom for everyone." Barry Goldwater would have agreed.

So where does John McCain fit in to this discussion ? First, as an Arizonan, he is linked by tradition and comradeship to Sandra Day O'Connor, Barry Goldwater, and that pathway of "conservatism." He thinks for himself, on all issues. Clearly as President he will not be working day and night to impose the religionists' view of things on a Republican party already dangerously off the rails in that direction.

With John McCain, and in the company of his campaign, I feel comfortable, even cherished, as I express my passionate belief in FREEDOM OF THE INDIVIDUAL, no matter what his or her sexual orientation, to make his or her private decisions on private matters without having his face filled with interventionists and their placards. I know that John McCain will not retard medical research -- which saves lives, right? -- because of religionists' objections. I know that though John McCain gives a nod to Samuel Alito, he will almost certainly choose Sandra Day O'Connor -- and her THINK FOR YOURSELF ethic -- as his Supreme Court justice role model.

When reporters say that John McCain is "the real thing," as does today's WALL STREET JOURNAL, this is what they are talking about. John McCain makes up his own mind how to respond to a challenge or a decision. It's his basic policy. In the great American tradition, he lives and will govern AD HOC and not by a BOOK OF IMMUTABLE DOCTRINE.

As for "The Conscience of a Conservative," in it Barry Goldwater spoke passionately about his opposition to Communism in all its aspects, implications, and practices; and he spoke equally combatively about deficit budgets, government regulations, federal micromanagement of everything, the bludgeoning power of federal financial "assistance." You ought to read (or re-read) this book, newly reissued and readily available at big bookstore chains. It might start you re-thinking who is really a conservative and who is just a Busybody with a Busy Book.

Massachusetts For John McCain

THE MEDIA GETS IT WRONG....AGAIN...MASS MOUTHING OFF

The_Mass_Mouth — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:49:01 -0400

Funny that no one's yet commented on the strange inclination of the media to assert that John McCain is at a disadvantage because of all the excitement and interest currently going to the Democrats. Hmmmm...as I see it, during this period of being "at a disadvantage," John McCain keeps on improving in just about every new poll. Both in his favorability ratings and his matchups against Hillary and "Obama" he has increased his standing. The Rasmussen Reports have our guy's favorability rating today at 55 % and his matchups at 50 % to 41 % against "Obama," 49 % to 42 % against Hillary. All three of these numbers have risen continuously since "Super Tuesday." read more »

Massachusetts For John McCain

WHO REALLY WAS THAT MAN ???? ... MASS MOUTHING OFF

The_Mass_Mouth — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:26:17 -0400

WHO REALLY WAS THAT MAN ? .....MASS MOUTHING OFF
Michael Freedberg -- The "Mass Mouth"

March 24, 2008 12:30PM EDT
Updated: March 24, 2008 03:41PM EDT
Tags: obama, politics, election_2008.

Here we are at March 24th, 2008, just four months into the Presidential election season, and already the tidal wave that was "Barack Obama" has receded -- with a vengeance. From idol worship to ill skepticism this phenomenon has gone, so over the top that you have to wonder now what it was all about. Who really WAS this man? WAS he a man, or just a craze ? I have seen crazes before in American politics, but usually they arise gradually, painfully. It took John F. Kennedy an entire election - and then some -- to achieve craze status. Ronald Reagan didn't really achieve it until after not two, but three entire national campaigns and one governorship race. Yet here was a craze that grew out of absolutely nowhere to such proportions that it almost swamped the Democrat party's all but designated nominee, a woman with a long and distinguished (if controversial) record. read more »