1600 Pennsylvania Avenue host David Shuster on Wednesday stepped up his attacks on Rush Limbaugh and suggested that if congressional Republicans "align themselves with Rush's statements about wanting the President to fail, they appear unpatriotic." For the second day in a row, Shuster berated a conservative guest about the radio talk show host. He repeatedly encouraged former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer to disagree with Limbaugh and complained: "And, Ari, first of all, when Rush says that all Republicans want the President to fail, Limbaugh's wrong, right?"
At one point, Shuster wondered why Republicans couldn't just denounce the "childish" comments by the radio host. He then seriously suggested that GOP members should say: "And we need to isolate Rush Limbaugh because we do have important issues to talk about." Later in the segment, the MSNBC anchor reiterated his assertion that Republicans might be unpatriotic.
He challenged: "Ari, is it unpatriotic for somebody to say they hope the President fails?" After interrupting a responding Fleischer, he continued, "...Is it unpatriotic -- since patriotism was such a crucial theme in the run-up to the Iraq war in the way the Bush White House defended it -- is it unpatriotic to say that you hope the President fails?"
[This item, by the MRC's Scott Whitlock, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
A calm Fleischer retorted: "David, I think it's the very nature of our system that people can believe that policies are not going to work. And you should stand on principles if you don't think the policies will work, you should say that."
On Tuesday's program, Shuster talked with Republican Congressman Ron Paul and repeatedly asked the same question: "How can we have that argument [about other issues], when even you, Ron Paul, are not willing to take this opportunity to say when Rush Limbaugh says that every Republican wants President Obama to fail, Rush Limbaugh is wrong?" See a March 5 CyberAlert posting for more: http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2009/cyb20090305.asp#3
A transcript of the March 4 segment, which aired at 6:05pm EST, follows:
DAVID SHUSTER: As Jonathan pointed out, the White House and its allies have been happy to crown the controversial Limbaugh as king of the Republican Party and quick to call attention to the GOP leaders who kowtow to him. Clearly, many congressional Republicans are now in a tough spot. If they align themselves with Rush's statements about wanting the President to fail, they appear unpatriotic. But, if they criticize Limbaugh, they may face the wrath of the conservative base that listens to Rush. Joining us now to talk about this is Ari Fleischer, former White House press secretary to President Bush. And, Ari, first of all, when Rush says that all Republicans want the President to fail, Limbaugh's wrong, right?
ARI FLEISCHER: Well, David, I think this entire issue is nothing but ridiculous. You know, I'm reminded of a president who at his inaugural address said the follow: "We have come to proclaim an end to the recriminations that have strangled our politics." He cited scripture and he said the time has come to set aside childish things. Well, Barack Obama's chief of staff is acting childish and so is everybody else in the Democrat Party who is picking this ridiculous fight at a time when they should be worried about fixing the economy.
SHUSTER: What about Rush Limbaugh, Ari? I mean, But, isn't the easiest way for Republicans to move beyond this is to say-
FLEISCHER: Rush Limbaugh was not elected- Rush Limbaugh was not elected to anything. The President was. And it was the very President who said put aside the childishness. What I think is happening here-
SHUSTER: Then, why are so many Republicans already kowtowing to him? Why did the Republican Party chair feel the need to apologize after first criticizing- why do so many Republicans this week- they have not been able to bring themselves to say, of course, Rush Limbaugh is wrong when he says they want the President to fail. What is it so difficult?
FLEISCHER: It's not the issue and I don't think Republicans should take the bait and talk about whatever Rush Limbaugh has said. Rush Limbaugh is a conservative radio host, a very popular one and I like him. But the issue is the behavior of the President of the United States and his staff. Which Barack Obama is it? Is it the post-partisan Obama? Or the Obama who sends his chief of staff out to act childish? This is the problem Barack Obama has. And he is acting more as a petty partisan instead of a president. This is the issue. These are our leaders. The economy is melting. It's been two weeks and we haven't even gotten the specifics of his banking proposal. Instead, he's reliving the moments, the worst moments of the campaign when we dealt with lipstick on a pig. Is this what Barack Obama wants his presidency to be about?
SHUSTER: Ari, you know politics- Ari, you know politics. You- I mean, wouldn't you acknowledge from a pure political play, that this is the wise White House strategy because you're marginalizing Republicans, you're painting the entire Republican Party, your opposition, painting them as being like Rush limbaugh?
FLEISCHER: This is just as foolish as it was when everybody got into a fuss about lipstick on a pig during the campaign. America is sick of this type of petty politics, and it was started by Barack Obama That's what I cannot get over. He is so different now than the Barack Obama he promised in the inaugural.
SHUSTER: Wait a second, Ari- Ari, wasn't it started by the Bush administration? I mean, I seem to recall during the Bush administration when Republicans had legitimate concerns and complaints about the direction of the war, there was a straw man set up involving General Petraeus. And that straw man was MoveOn.org and you played a pretty crucial role about trying to portray all Democrats as being unpatriotic and against General Petraeus as opposed to being against the strategy.
FLEISCHER: Well, my point was it was the Barack Obama administration that began this whole nonsense about Rush Limbaugh, which is what I thought you wanted to talk about. But, there's always room for differ [sic] with people involved in politics. But, coming from the President? The President's chief of staff to allege a radio host is the leader of the Republican Party? This is the petty nonsense that I don't think anybody expected from a Barack Obama. This is childish.
SHUSTER: Fair point. But, Ari, if it's nonsense and if it's childish, wasn't it nonsense and childish started by Rush Limbaugh?
FLEISCHER: Well, Rush Limbaugh didn't give an inaugural address promising to be somebody different. Rush Limbaugh, like the liberal hosts-
SHUSTER: Aww, come on, Ari! He's got 20 million listeners a day. He's got more power of the conservative listeners than anybody in this country.
FLEISCHER: David- The wings of both parties are entirely entitled to have vociferous voices represent each. That's why they're called wings. And Rush does a great job at it. The President of the United States, though? He's the one in 2004 who said there's not a red America or a blue America, there's one America. But then he doesn't act like it. He is trying to stir up-
SHUSTER: Then, why can't Republicans, Ari, say the same thing? Why can't Republicans say, "You know what, this is childish, ridiculous, Rush Limbaugh is wrong when he says Republicans want the president to fail. And we need to isolate Rush Limbaugh because we do have important issues to talk about?"
FLEISCHER: Because, then, they would be chasing the same childish game that Rahm Emanuel started. And I think it's to Republicans' credit if they have the discipline not to take the question and not to chase the issue. This is about Barack Obama and the manner and style, the tactics he's choosing to govern. Because, he held himself out as something very different and he's being just like all the rest of the politicians in Washington of both parties who came before him. But, that's not what people expected. How can you give an inaugural address saying to move beyond the childish things and let his chief of staff engage in the very childish things?
SHUSTER: Ari, is it unpatriotic for somebody to say they hope the President fails?
FLEISCHER: Patriotic? You know, I think-
SHUSTER: Is it unpatriotic if they say- is it unpatriotic- since patriotism was such a crucial theme in the run-up to the Iraq war in the way the Bush White House defended it- is it unpatriotic to say that you hope the President fails?
FLEISCHER: David, I think it's the very nature of our system that people can believe that policies are not going to work. And you should stand on principles if you don't think the policies will work, you should say that.
SHUSTER: Right, but they can also believe whether it's patriotic or unpatriotic.
FLEISCHER: It doesn't have anything to do with patriotism to say that. I don't think raising taxes and going on a spending spree is going to help the economy.
SHUSTER: But, it was unpatriotic, therefore, to criticize the surge in Iraq and to somehow issue some criticism with the surge and take issue with General Petraeus. That was unpatriotic, but it's not unpatriotic for Rush Limbaugh to say that it's okay for the President to fail.
FLEISCHER: No, what I think you're confusing here is MoveOn.org- What I think you're trying to throw into a Rush Limbaugh/Barack Obama conversation is an ad that Moveon put on that called General Petraeus General Betray Us. Now, they took their lumps for that as they should have taken their lumps for that.
SHUSTER: Right. An ad that Democrats- Here's the difference, Ari. Democrats roundly criticized MoveOn for that ad. I don't think you can find more than one or two Republicans this week who have criticized Rush Limbaugh. I hope the Republicans hope President Obama fails. That's the difference.
FLEISCHER: Well, I think what you're misleading in the statement, Republicans in philosophy believe the president's policies are not going to succeed. But, I can tell you, I want my 201K to be a 401K again. I want the economy to get going.
SHUSTER: It's fine to argue, it's fine to argue- It's fine to argue you think the President's policies are going to fail. It's a different matter when you say you hope the President fails. In any case, Ari, always great sparring with you.
Showing posts with label gop. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gop. Show all posts
Friday, March 6, 2009
Alter: GOP 'Party of Jell-O' for Not Standing Up to Limbaugh
During the 3:00PM EST hour on MSNBC on Thursday, anchor Norah O'Donnell teased an upcoming segment on Rush Limbaugh and the Republican Party: "Coming up, is the party of Lincoln in danger of becoming the party of jell-o? Why conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh could be a liability for the Grand Old Party."
O'Donnell was referring to an Newsweek article by columnist Jonathan Alter and later spoke to him about it: "I want to read from your piece. You write, 'everyone knows he has jumped the shark culturally, becoming a black-shirted joke even as he dominates the headlines. But it's worse than that for Republicans, Limbaugh has taken the great GOP calling card -- toughness -- and shredded it. The party of Lincoln is in danger of becoming the party jell-o.' Explain further."
Alter elaborated: "The great strength of the Republican Party for the last 75 years has been strength. The fact that they are a tough party and their rhetoric has been tough. They were tough against the New Deal. They were tough in a Cold War. They were tough on Monica Lewinsky. If you can't even stand-up to Rush Limbaugh, if the dittoheads come after you and you wilt and then apologize for perfectly legitimate criticism of a radio talk show broadcaster, how tough is that. You look wimpy, you look weak, you look whiney."
Alter's March 4 Newsweek "Web exclusive" article: www.newsweek.com
[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Later, O'Donnell brought up an appearance by Newt Gingrich on Thursday's Today: "And he essentially turned his fire on Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's chief of staff, essentially comparing him to Nixon's chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. What is with this demonizing of Rahm?" Alter defended Emanuel: "I -- you know, I think it was a perfectly fine thing for Rahm Emanuel to do...So I don't have any problem with Emanuel using that lever. It was -- it was a big fat one over the plate, so to speak, a real winner for the Democrats to go after Rush Limbaugh and obviously, the Republicans are stung." Alter added: "...to compare him to H.R. Haldeman, which is -- it's kind of lame, you know, to compare a guy who was convicted of crimes to the chief of staff at this juncture in an administration." Apparently it's still early to call Rahm Emanuel a criminal, but maybe in a few years.
Here is the full transcript of the March 5 segment:
3:38PM EST TEASE:
NORAH O'DONNELL: Coming up, is the party of Lincoln in danger of becoming the party of jell-o? Why conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh could be a liability for the Grand Old Party.
3:43PM SEGMENT:
NORAH O'DONNELL: Back to politics now, because it has been a busy day here in Washington. The chairman of the Republican Party says the GOP needs to go into rehab. That's right. As conservative radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh continue their verbal jabs at the White House, Michael Steele says he's trying to put his party in a position to offer positive solutions.
MICHAEL STEELE: I'm putting the party on a 12-step program of recovery. And this is going to take some time. It's going to take some effort. But we're prepared to move forward and to state the case, make the case to the American people that we've got something to offer. We're not the party that's just here to say no. We're not the party to be, you know, in opposition just for the sake of being in opposition.
O'DONNELL: Jonathan Alter is a senior editor and columnist for Newsweek as well as an NBC News analyst, he writes about this in Newsweek this week. Jonathan, good to see you.
JONATHAN ALTER: Hi, Norah.
O'DONNELL: I want to get to your article in just a minute and show of the -- what you wrote, because it's great stuff. But what about that latest sound bite from an interview that Steele did with WBAL radio, where he says he's going to put the party in a 12-step program, it's going to rehab?
ALTER: Sounds good to me. You know, the whole country's in recovery now, right. That 12-step idea, that could be the Obama plan for economic recovery. We're a nation of therapeutic thinkers and clearly the Republican Party is at a nadir and they need to kind of start over again and come up with some new ideas. So it's good that their chairman is thinking that way. I certainly believe in a strong two-party system.
O'DONNELL: I want to read from your piece. You write, 'everyone knows he has jumped the shark culturally, becoming a black-shirted joke even as he dominates the headlines. But it's worse than that for Republicans, Limbaugh has taken the great GOP calling card -- toughness -- and shredded it. The party of Lincoln is in danger of becoming the party jell-o.' Explain further.
ALTER: Okay. Norah, the great strength of the Republican Party for the last 75 years has been strength. The fact that they are a tough party and their rhetoric has been tough. They were tough against the New Deal. They were tough in a Cold War. They were tough on Monica Lewinsky. If you can't even stand-up to Rush Limbaugh, if the dittoheads come after you and you wilt and then apologize for perfectly legitimate criticism of a radio talk show broadcaster, how tough is that. You look wimpy, you look weak, you look whiney, you look all the things that they used to say about Democrats. So this has been the great strength of Republicans and they are squandering it by not being able to stand up to Rush Limbaugh.
O'DONNELL: I want to get your take on another thing, Jonathan, because I don't know if you got the chance to see Newt Gingrich on the Today show this morning, and he was asked about the state of the Republican Party. And he essentially turned his fire on Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's chief of staff, essentially comparing him to Nixon's chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. What is with this demonizing of Rahm? And was it a wise idea for the chief of staff to play the role of political operative and first sort of launch that salvo about Rush Limbaugh being the head of the Republican Party?
ALTER: I -- you know, I think it was a perfectly fine thing for Rahm Emanuel to do. The chief of staff is a very political position. Even for all the talk of bipartisanship, staying above the fray, that's something the President needs to do. But forever, Norah, it doesn't matter who's president, his chief of staff, his people, will be political. So I don't have any problem with Emanuel using that lever. It was -- it was a big fat one over the plate, so to speak, a real winner for the Democrats to go after Rush Limbaugh and obviously, the Republicans are stung. So Newt Gingrich is trying to compare him to H.R. Haldeman, which is -- it's kind of lame, you know, to compare a guy who was convicted of crimes to the chief of staff at this juncture in an administration.
O'DONNELL: Jonathan Alter with Newsweek, there for the health care summit. Jonathan, good to talk to you, thanks so much.
ALTER: Thanks, Norah.
www.mediaresearch.org
O'Donnell was referring to an Newsweek article by columnist Jonathan Alter and later spoke to him about it: "I want to read from your piece. You write, 'everyone knows he has jumped the shark culturally, becoming a black-shirted joke even as he dominates the headlines. But it's worse than that for Republicans, Limbaugh has taken the great GOP calling card -- toughness -- and shredded it. The party of Lincoln is in danger of becoming the party jell-o.' Explain further."
Alter elaborated: "The great strength of the Republican Party for the last 75 years has been strength. The fact that they are a tough party and their rhetoric has been tough. They were tough against the New Deal. They were tough in a Cold War. They were tough on Monica Lewinsky. If you can't even stand-up to Rush Limbaugh, if the dittoheads come after you and you wilt and then apologize for perfectly legitimate criticism of a radio talk show broadcaster, how tough is that. You look wimpy, you look weak, you look whiney."
Alter's March 4 Newsweek "Web exclusive" article: www.newsweek.com
[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Later, O'Donnell brought up an appearance by Newt Gingrich on Thursday's Today: "And he essentially turned his fire on Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's chief of staff, essentially comparing him to Nixon's chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. What is with this demonizing of Rahm?" Alter defended Emanuel: "I -- you know, I think it was a perfectly fine thing for Rahm Emanuel to do...So I don't have any problem with Emanuel using that lever. It was -- it was a big fat one over the plate, so to speak, a real winner for the Democrats to go after Rush Limbaugh and obviously, the Republicans are stung." Alter added: "...to compare him to H.R. Haldeman, which is -- it's kind of lame, you know, to compare a guy who was convicted of crimes to the chief of staff at this juncture in an administration." Apparently it's still early to call Rahm Emanuel a criminal, but maybe in a few years.
Here is the full transcript of the March 5 segment:
3:38PM EST TEASE:
NORAH O'DONNELL: Coming up, is the party of Lincoln in danger of becoming the party of jell-o? Why conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh could be a liability for the Grand Old Party.
3:43PM SEGMENT:
NORAH O'DONNELL: Back to politics now, because it has been a busy day here in Washington. The chairman of the Republican Party says the GOP needs to go into rehab. That's right. As conservative radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh continue their verbal jabs at the White House, Michael Steele says he's trying to put his party in a position to offer positive solutions.
MICHAEL STEELE: I'm putting the party on a 12-step program of recovery. And this is going to take some time. It's going to take some effort. But we're prepared to move forward and to state the case, make the case to the American people that we've got something to offer. We're not the party that's just here to say no. We're not the party to be, you know, in opposition just for the sake of being in opposition.
O'DONNELL: Jonathan Alter is a senior editor and columnist for Newsweek as well as an NBC News analyst, he writes about this in Newsweek this week. Jonathan, good to see you.
JONATHAN ALTER: Hi, Norah.
O'DONNELL: I want to get to your article in just a minute and show of the -- what you wrote, because it's great stuff. But what about that latest sound bite from an interview that Steele did with WBAL radio, where he says he's going to put the party in a 12-step program, it's going to rehab?
ALTER: Sounds good to me. You know, the whole country's in recovery now, right. That 12-step idea, that could be the Obama plan for economic recovery. We're a nation of therapeutic thinkers and clearly the Republican Party is at a nadir and they need to kind of start over again and come up with some new ideas. So it's good that their chairman is thinking that way. I certainly believe in a strong two-party system.
O'DONNELL: I want to read from your piece. You write, 'everyone knows he has jumped the shark culturally, becoming a black-shirted joke even as he dominates the headlines. But it's worse than that for Republicans, Limbaugh has taken the great GOP calling card -- toughness -- and shredded it. The party of Lincoln is in danger of becoming the party jell-o.' Explain further.
ALTER: Okay. Norah, the great strength of the Republican Party for the last 75 years has been strength. The fact that they are a tough party and their rhetoric has been tough. They were tough against the New Deal. They were tough in a Cold War. They were tough on Monica Lewinsky. If you can't even stand-up to Rush Limbaugh, if the dittoheads come after you and you wilt and then apologize for perfectly legitimate criticism of a radio talk show broadcaster, how tough is that. You look wimpy, you look weak, you look whiney, you look all the things that they used to say about Democrats. So this has been the great strength of Republicans and they are squandering it by not being able to stand up to Rush Limbaugh.
O'DONNELL: I want to get your take on another thing, Jonathan, because I don't know if you got the chance to see Newt Gingrich on the Today show this morning, and he was asked about the state of the Republican Party. And he essentially turned his fire on Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's chief of staff, essentially comparing him to Nixon's chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. What is with this demonizing of Rahm? And was it a wise idea for the chief of staff to play the role of political operative and first sort of launch that salvo about Rush Limbaugh being the head of the Republican Party?
ALTER: I -- you know, I think it was a perfectly fine thing for Rahm Emanuel to do. The chief of staff is a very political position. Even for all the talk of bipartisanship, staying above the fray, that's something the President needs to do. But forever, Norah, it doesn't matter who's president, his chief of staff, his people, will be political. So I don't have any problem with Emanuel using that lever. It was -- it was a big fat one over the plate, so to speak, a real winner for the Democrats to go after Rush Limbaugh and obviously, the Republicans are stung. So Newt Gingrich is trying to compare him to H.R. Haldeman, which is -- it's kind of lame, you know, to compare a guy who was convicted of crimes to the chief of staff at this juncture in an administration.
O'DONNELL: Jonathan Alter with Newsweek, there for the health care summit. Jonathan, good to talk to you, thanks so much.
ALTER: Thanks, Norah.
www.mediaresearch.org
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Tony Perkins: The Elephants in the Room
As if the Republican Party didn't have enough problems already, Americans are now being subjected to an uncomfortable public spat between the RNC chairman and the conservative movement's most recognizable radio personality.
In case you missed it, new RNC Chairman Michael Steele was asked to comment on a Rush Limbaugh speech in which he wished failure on Obama's economic plan. Steele responded on CNN that Limbaugh is purely "entertainment," and his opinions can be "incendiary" and "ugly." When host D.L. Hughley implied that Limbaugh is the "de facto leader of the Republican party," Steele fired back, "No he's not. I'm the de factor leader of the Republican Party." On his radio show yesterday, Rush made an interesting distinction about Steele. "Michael ... you are head of the RNC; you are not head of the Republican Party." Steele has since apologized for his comments, even conceding that Limbaugh is a "national conservative leader."
As I told CNN's Anderson Cooper last night, this power struggle is emblematic of the broader rift between conservatives and the Republican Party. For the last few years, there has been an identity crisis in the GOP. Until the Republican leadership can find its voice on core values, there will continue to be a vacuum in leadership. If 20 million people are tuning in to Rush Limbaugh every day, then obviously he has something significant to say. Instead of attacking the voices that resonate most with grassroots America, Republican leaders would be wise to listen to them. Otherwise, a party on the verge of irrelevance will find itself on the brink of extinction.
The biggest example of this divide between conservatives and the GOP may be found in President Obama's pick for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). With the exception so far of Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), the nomination of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kans.)--arguably the most pro-abortion governor in the nation -- has been met by the Republican leadership with a collective yawn. Here is a woman who aligns herself against 80% of the country in suggesting that the government knows better than parents in children's health decisions, and yet the GOP can't muster the will to fight her nomination. As governor, she hosted a private reception for a notorious partial-birth abortionist, vetoed bills that would have made abortion clinics cleaner for women, and blocked court reforms that would have helped to prevent third-term abortions. Like President Obama, she even opposed protection for infants who are born alive during an abortion.
If Republicans won't take a stand now, when will they? Once Sebelius is confirmed, she will control the largest government agency in America with more power and resources to advance a radical social agenda that will drive a deeper wedge between parents and their children. Grassroots conservatives understand what's at stake here. Why doesn't the Republican leadership?
Additional Resources
FRC: Tony Perkins on CNN's AC360
Family Research Council:
801 G Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
P: 202/393-2100 or 800/225-4008
W: frc.org
In case you missed it, new RNC Chairman Michael Steele was asked to comment on a Rush Limbaugh speech in which he wished failure on Obama's economic plan. Steele responded on CNN that Limbaugh is purely "entertainment," and his opinions can be "incendiary" and "ugly." When host D.L. Hughley implied that Limbaugh is the "de facto leader of the Republican party," Steele fired back, "No he's not. I'm the de factor leader of the Republican Party." On his radio show yesterday, Rush made an interesting distinction about Steele. "Michael ... you are head of the RNC; you are not head of the Republican Party." Steele has since apologized for his comments, even conceding that Limbaugh is a "national conservative leader."
As I told CNN's Anderson Cooper last night, this power struggle is emblematic of the broader rift between conservatives and the Republican Party. For the last few years, there has been an identity crisis in the GOP. Until the Republican leadership can find its voice on core values, there will continue to be a vacuum in leadership. If 20 million people are tuning in to Rush Limbaugh every day, then obviously he has something significant to say. Instead of attacking the voices that resonate most with grassroots America, Republican leaders would be wise to listen to them. Otherwise, a party on the verge of irrelevance will find itself on the brink of extinction.
The biggest example of this divide between conservatives and the GOP may be found in President Obama's pick for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). With the exception so far of Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), the nomination of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kans.)--arguably the most pro-abortion governor in the nation -- has been met by the Republican leadership with a collective yawn. Here is a woman who aligns herself against 80% of the country in suggesting that the government knows better than parents in children's health decisions, and yet the GOP can't muster the will to fight her nomination. As governor, she hosted a private reception for a notorious partial-birth abortionist, vetoed bills that would have made abortion clinics cleaner for women, and blocked court reforms that would have helped to prevent third-term abortions. Like President Obama, she even opposed protection for infants who are born alive during an abortion.
If Republicans won't take a stand now, when will they? Once Sebelius is confirmed, she will control the largest government agency in America with more power and resources to advance a radical social agenda that will drive a deeper wedge between parents and their children. Grassroots conservatives understand what's at stake here. Why doesn't the Republican leadership?
Additional Resources
FRC: Tony Perkins on CNN's AC360
Family Research Council:
801 G Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
P: 202/393-2100 or 800/225-4008
W: frc.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
