Has the abortion lobby taken on the tactics of LGBT advocates?

January 5, 2016

“Planned Parenthood sent people into pharmacies all over the state looking for violators until they finally found Stormans pharmacy.

“Within five miles of Stormans pharmacy, there are over 30 pharmacies that sell the morning after pill, so it’s undisputed that none of the customers have ever been denied timely access…”

This quote from the article (which follows) is what is disturbing.

It appears the Christian owners of the pharmacy were directly targeted, which is interesting for the following reason: has the abortion lobby taken on the tactics of the LGBT lobby?

Some time ago, I read an article that explained how the recent Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage came about. (I can dig it up, if anybody’s interested, but it might take some searching.) If you remember, back in 2008, Prop 8 was passed in California banning gay marriage. The black community which turned out to vote for Barack Obama, also overwhelmingly voted to ban gay marriage, many citing that they were offended by the LGBT’s likening of the gay struggle to the civil rights struggle. The article (for which I’d have to search) explained that just saying the two “struggles” were similar wasn’t enough, LGBT advocates needed to show there was “widespread” discrimination against gays.

Thus, we began to see a photographer here, a baker there, and a wedding venue in another state refusing to supply a product or service to a gay couple seeking to “get married”. And what was the common thread? All of these people targeted were Christians who said they could not provide that service or product because it violated what they believed. These cases kept cropping up and the providers were always Christians. The tide began to turn and Christians were put on the defensive, accused of being discriminatory and the illusion of “widespread” discrimination was complete. And in just 7 short years, there were numerous leaders in the black community agreeing it was a similar struggle, whereas just a few years earlier, they were offended.

And now we have a Christian-owned pharmacy not wanting to sell abortion products. Over 30 pharmacies within 5 miles were found to supply the drug(s), so access was not an issue. Nevertheless, the pharmacy is being told to sell the drug or they will be found to be in violation of the law. Perhaps, the only silver lining in this story, is that Washington is the only state with this kind of law at this time. But I wouldn’t be surprised to see other states adopt similar laws very soon.

I would also not be surprised if we begin to see not just pharmacies, but doctors, and other providers targeted in the same way, creating an illusion of discrimination and/or a lack of access to “medical care” in order to justify and expand taxpayer support of abortion and abortion products. The side benefit will be the excoriating of Christians and what we believe. It may also provide an avenue to punish Christian business owners or Christian practitioners for not acquiescing to popular culture.

Gird your loins. It’s going to get ugly.

Planned Parenthood Is About To Shut Down A Christian Pharmacy For Refusing To Sell Abortion Drugs

Photo of Casey Harper

Casey Harper
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/04/planned-parenthood-is-about-to-shut-down-a-christian-pharmacy-for-refusing-to-sell-abortion-drugs/#ixzz3wPHJNSZk

A family-owned pharmacy is on the verge of being pushed out of business because they say the owners — devout Christians — won’t sell drugs like the morning after pill.

Washington state passed a law in 2007 that pharmacies must provide emergency contraceptives, like the morning after pill and the week after pill, which many pro-life groups say are equivalent to abortion because they may prevent a fertilized egg from implanting on the wall of the uterus, effectively killing it.

Stormans Inc., a Washington pharmacy, may go out of business because its owners refuse to comply with the law and are now plaintiffs in a legal battle with the state. The two other plaintiffs in the suit are pharmacists, one who lost her job because of her refusal to sell the drugs and the other who has been told she will lose hers if the regulations are upheld. The plaintiffs say the law  violates their religious beliefs and their conscience and that the law is unconstitutional. But a federal appellate judge ruled against them in July of last year. They appealed to the Supreme Court Monday, their last chance of saving the Stormans business and the pharmacists careers in the state.

“[Under the law,] it’s perfectly legal for a pharmacy to say we’re not going to stock the week after pill because we think its unprofitable or we want to specialize in geriatric drugs and don’t want to stock that drug or even if you run out, that’s fine too, but if you don’t have the drug because your religion forbids you that is illegal,” Luke Goodrich, Deputy General Counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “The actual text of the rule lays out a general obligation that pharmacies have a duty to deliver legal drugs in a timely manner and then has a bunch of exceptions.”

Refusing based on faith or conscience does not fit into those exceptions, and, Goodrich told TheDCNF, was designed that way on purpose to target religious pharmacists. He said that Planned Parenthood sent people into pharmacies all over the state looking for violators until they finally found Stormans pharmacy.

“Within five miles of [Stormans pharmacy], there are over 30 pharmacies that sell the morning after pill, so it’s undisputed that none of the customers have ever been denied timely access,” Goodrich told TheDCNF.

The family challenged the law in court, and a federal court struck down the law in February 2012 saying it forced religious pharmacy owners to violate their faith. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals then reversed the decision in July 2015 and reinstated the contentious law.

Goodrich said that Washington is the only state in the country with such a strict law and that the American Pharmacists Association, the leading group in the country, filed a brief in favor of the Christian pharmacists.

“There is going to be a tension there. In our view, the balance falls in favor of the patient who needs a medication,” Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel for Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, told U.S. News and World Report. “It’s better for women’s health if there are laws or regulations on the books where there is a statement by the regulatory agency that it’s a priority that women’s health care needs are met.”

There is scientific dispute over whether the morning after and week after pill actually destroys a fertilized egg, which complicates the issue. It seems the distinction is more disputed on the morning after pill, Plan B, but is more likely with the week after pill, Ella. A brochure for Ella states that it is “possible that Ella works by preventing attachment to the wall inside the uterus,” reports U.S. News and World Report.

“As a matter of science there’s no settled answer on whether the drugs do or don’t destroy a fertilized egg by preventing it from implanting,” Goodrich told TheDCNF. “There are studies which say that it is really difficult to rule out that it operates that way.  The bottom line is there is uncertainty on that issue. It’s basically like handing them a gun and saying ‘some of the chambers are loaded, some aren’t, and I want you to point it at this person and pull the trigger.’ Their answer will be, ‘I don’t want to do that even if there is only a small chance of killing somebody.’”

The Supreme Court will likely decide in April if they’ll take up the case. If they take it up, it will probably be in the fall of 2016.

“It’d be one thing if there was actually some record of some woman somewhere not getting timely action to a drug, but there’s no record of that,” Goodrich told TheDCNF. “It’s really a solution in search of a problem. The only thing the regulations do is punish conscientious objectors.” Goodrich told TheDCNF that if the law is allowed to stand, pro abortion groups would try to make this law the standard nationwide.

“Ever since Roe V. Wade the states and the federal government have consistently protected all medical professionals from being involved in what they consider an abortion,” Goodich told TheDCNF. “This would really be the first time the legal system has given the green light to force people to be involved in what they think is an abortion.”

Sen. Ted Cruz at CPAC 2015

February 27, 2015

Hopefully, our next President of the United States.

Barack Obama is Bush Lite

September 23, 2014

Ben Shapiro’s Truth Revolt posted this. Don’t miss.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-obama-bush-lite

It’s the ultimate insult to a guy who’s blamed everything on his predecessor. In this video, Bill Whittle excoriates the president for “doing the same things for the same reasons his predecessor did, only he’s doing them late, doing them badly and blaming everyone else.” As Shapiro notes, “Bill Whittle shows why Barack Obama is nothing more than Bush Lite.”

Holding fast

August 26, 2014

I confess. I’m a little down. The republican party has won one.

Last year I divorced the GOP and became a registered conservative. I was fed up with the lies. Most republican candidates seem to become just conservative enough to suck conservatives into voting for them and then stab you in the back once they’ve won the election, abandoning conservatives in favor of being democrat-lites. I was sick of it. I felt battered by the republican party.

Over the last year, I’ve become more politically active because of local progressives pushing an agenda of creeping tyranny. In California, because of the top-two system, political parties don’t really matter. I joined a local arm of a group that claims to be the conservative arm of the republican party. At the time I joined, I explained that I was a registered conservative, and with a rising conservative activist as a witness to the entire conversation, was told that it was no big deal. Last night, at a meeting, I was told that being a conservative would prevent me from being able to vote to endorse conservative candidates–which was the whole reason I joined, that it was in their by-laws. When the other conservative vouched for what was said at the time of sign-up, the person in charge said, “Why would I say that?”, impugning not just my integrity, but the other conservative’s as well. Once again, I felt like I was back at the republican battered women’s shelter.

Well, just because the republican party won this round, I’m not going back to the abuser for more. It just confirms why I left in the first place. 

 

“If the right is to have a future, it has to start thinking long term.”

June 11, 2014

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-long-march-through-republican-party.html

A don’t-miss, great entry by Daniel Greenfield of the Sultan Knish blog exhorting conservatives to take the long view, be willing to accept defeat in the short term in order to win the war in the long-term.

As I was reading through it toward the beginning, it was depressing, probably because he is so spot-on. The Republican party has lost its mojo. As Greenfield notes, “The GOP doesn’t actually believe in anything. The Republican Party once again brings nothing to the table.”  While Republicans are likely to make some gains in the short-term, as in reclaiming the Senate in the November elections, he wryly states:  “The Tea Party’s epitaph has been written. A confident Republican establishment is now prepared to possibly take the Senate in 2014 and then lose it again in 2016…[and then campaign in] the midterm election of 2018 where they will run on opposition to HillaryCare.”

He goes on to make some great observations in the differences between the left’s and the right’s tactics. He points out that while the tea party’s role in politics has been flawed, the left has continued to garner its coalition of groups into a consolidated front: “There are tensions, but everyone falls into line even though the single agenda cuts the throats of their own working class voters.” Greenfield also asserts, “The left was willing to accept multiple defeats in the short term to build a machine and a momentum that would take it through the system. And it succeeded.”

Mark Levin, in Liberty and Tyranny, states the long-term strategy of progressives and statists this way (Chapter 1):

The Statist also knows that despite his successful usurpations, enough citizens are still skeptical and even distrustful of politicians and government that he cannot force his will all at once. Thus he marches in incremental steps, adjusting his pace as circumstances dictate. Today his pace is more rapid, for resistance has slowed. At no time does the Statist do an about-face.

In conclusion, Greenfield writes:

The American Revolution was a fight between one of the world’s leading powers and bands of ragged farmers. The farmers lost badly, over and over again. They learned slowly that you don’t win wars on passion. You don’t win them in one battle. You do it by staying in the fight.

The left in America began as a political insurgency. Now it runs everything. It can be beaten, but doing that will require learning a lot of painful lessons and picking up the necessary skills. There will be less passion and more technique. There will be more organization and less waste.

This won’t end tomorrow or in 2016. Wars last a long time. They are passed on to children. They become a generational struggle. It’s a daunting prospect for individuals as all wars are. But the alternative to the voluntary sacrifices necessary to win a war are the involuntary sacrifices that  come from losing it.

 

Greenfield’s article is chock-full of insightful observations. Please take the time to read it.

 

Saturday, June 07, 2014

The Long March Through the Republican Party

Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog

The Tea Party’s epitaph has been written. A confident Republican establishment is now prepared to possibly take the Senate in 2014 and then lose it again in 2016 to another wave of historical change.In its defense the establishment, a motley collection of men paid by special interest groups whose future involves lucrative lobbying and even more lucrative consulting for the midterm election of 2018 where they will run on opposition to HillaryCare, can point to all the stupid and flaky Tea Party candidates who lost winnable elections. And they have a point.We wouldn’t have to put up with Harry Reid or Chris Coons. Though we would still have Barack Obama in ’08 and ’12 because the establishment ran two men with no ability to appeal to people worried about losing their jobs and homes against a man who could do the “Feel your pain” dance.

The left didn’t start with Obama. It was willing to run a roster of bad candidates with silly beliefs for higher office. And it watched as those candidates crashed and burned outside their urban safe havens. But the left didn’t stop. It didn’t sit back and accept that the Democratic Party’s mainstream candidates would be the best it could get. Instead it doubled down and kept on doing it until it paid off.

It didn’t matter if they became national jokes. It didn’t matter if for a while the left seemed as likely to take higher office as Superman. The left thinks long term.

It built a coalition of its base groups and got them to agree to a single agenda. It got the unions and the NAACP to back illegal immigration and gay rights. It got the environmentalists to back illegal immigration. It got the unions to back the environment. There are tensions, but everyone falls into line even though the single agenda cuts the throats of their own working class voters.

Meanwhile the GOP has no idea who its base groups are and would like them to go away.

The GOP celebrating a victory over the Tea Party is like NBC celebrating a victory over its own highest rated shows. Finally the experts who gave us the Romney Presidency and the De Facto Amnesty talking point will, hopefully, drag the Senate out of Harry Reid’s dead claws long after Obama and the Democratic Party discredited themselves with their own voters and even the media.

And they won’t have to credit the Tea Party for it.

The Tea Party’s role in politics has been flawed, but then how could it have been otherwise. Politics is a professional sport and in the age of television and Twitter, it’s most easily played by people who have been polished by media experts and consultants, who know how to recite talking points and nothing else. And the people most likely to take over have their own agendas.

The left was willing to accept multiple defeats in the short term to build a machine and a momentum that would take it through the system. And it succeeded.

Of course the left had advantages that the right does not have. No matter how much of a mess the left made, the Democratic Party would hang on to racially gerrymandered districts and it would be buffered against any major national changes by a judiciary, academia and bureaucracy that was largely in its pocket.

Reagan might win the White House, but business would continue as usual in Washington D.C. and the entertainment industry would push social change its way. Obama is a disaster for traditional Americans, but Reagan was only a setback for the left. It could afford to organize around opposition to him because it knew that his ability to undo everything they had set into motion was very limited.

The right doesn’t have those buffers. It couldn’t afford eight years of Obama even after eight years of Bush. And it’s easy to look around and see why. And yet it also can’t afford the GOP establishment.

What’s left is a choice between high stakes gambles on the future or dragging out the inevitable with the establishment. The Tea Party was a series of high stakes gambles, many of which did not pay off, but the road to Obamerica began with a series of high stakes gambles for the left.

And there are few short cuts.

The Republican Party once again brings nothing to the table. It’s no longer playing against old gentle enemies like the Kennedy clan or the Chicago Machine. It’s now up against an ascendant left backed by billionaires and the entertainment-media complex.

And ’08 and ’12 shows us how well it performs in that arena.

The GOP’s soulless teleprompter machines are no match the soulless teleprompter machines of the left. The ones on the left are occasionally capable of mimicking human emotions and make much better TMZ fodder.

And the left also brings ideology to the table while the GOP brings a shopworn Americanism that is vague on definition and big on grandiose rhetoric. Unfortunately the left has already hijacked that rhetoric and used its vague grandiosity to sell everything from illegal immigration to gay rights.

Tomorrow Obama can give a speech surrounded by American flags and quote from Madison and Lincoln to explain why he has decided to sell America to Saudi Arabia. It will be an obscene perversion and hypocritical nonsense, but then it will only be a matter of time until the GOP opposition summons forth a candidate who gives the same speech but with more flags.

He will say that you can only trust the GOP to get the best deal when selling America to Saudi Arabia.

The GOP doesn’t actually believe in anything. It’s been through too many changes over the years. It’s become a big tent for fiscal and social conservatives, as long as they don’t actually try to set policy, for foreign policy hawks, as long as they don’t push for anything Democrats are opposed to, and for an assortment of constituencies that add color and identity, but don’t actually get their way.

Republicanism has become a bland colorless conservatism that stands for some sort of competence and a vague commitment to smaller government and a stronger national defense which exists in theory, not in practice. It’s for morals, until they become too unfashionable. It’s for apple pie, as long as it’s not too fattening. It’s for proving that the left is unfair to call it a crazy bunch of extremists.

In placid times, that can work. Ideology is tiresome and no one likes being yelled at. It’s why the left does so poorly in most elections. But in troubled times, people want something to believe in. They don’t want the hollow assurances of hollow men that everything is fine when it clearly isn’t.

That’s when the Republican Party actually has to stand for something and explain why it stands for it.

Neither party actually does that except in the vaguest of ways, but the public rightly senses that there is a system of coherent beliefs behind Obama. Many of them would run screaming for the exits if they had those beliefs spelled out for them, but they’re not details people. They respond to passion and certainty. They like knowing that a candidate is animated by something more than careerism.

The public rightly sensed that there was no such system behind McCain or Romney. Both men believe things, but they’re big on being pragmatists. Their beliefs adapt to the situation. They have their own moral centers, but it’s not ideological. Their passions are personal, not political.

The Tea Party changed that. It had clear and compelling beliefs. It stood for something. And now the GOP stands alone and stands for nothing.

The Tea Party isn’t dead, but the results didn’t show up quickly enough and there were too many setbacks. And no one likes defeat.

Whenever I’m asked how to beat the left in Field X or Z, I answer that it will take a long march through the system, one way or another. It’s either that or cut the field out of your life entirely.

That’s true of public education and the entertainment industry. You either beat them at their own game by thinking long term or you cut them out of your lives. Politics isn’t like that. Boycotting it isn’t an option. Not in the long term. The game is absolute power and that absolutely includes power over you.

The left is collectivist and the right is individualistic. Individualism is the strength of the right, but it also means that the left can create a machine that feeds tens of thousands of its best and brightest into public education until it dominates the system and indoctrinates who passes through it. It can plan this out and carry it out for generations.

Meanwhile many on the right bail out when they don’t see results after four years.

The left functions like an army. The right functions like a guerrilla movement. Guerrillas can outlast an army by resisting occupation, but not when the army is fanatical and singleminded, and not if it manages to control the territory.

If the right is to have a future, it has to start thinking long term. It has to learn to understand the territory and it has to stop assuming that showing up is most of the job or that one decisive battle will change everything. It’s not and it won’t.

The American Revolution was a fight between one of the world’s leading powers and bands of ragged farmers. The farmers lost badly, over and over again. They learned slowly that you don’t win wars on passion. You don’t win them in one battle. You do it by staying in the fight.

The left in America began as a political insurgency. Now it runs everything. It can be beaten, but doing that will require learning a lot of painful lessons and picking up the necessary skills. There will be less passion and more technique. There will be more organization and less waste.

This won’t end tomorrow or in 2016. Wars last a long time. They are passed on to children. They become a generational struggle. It’s a daunting prospect for individuals as all wars are. But the alternative to the voluntary sacrifices necessary to win a war are the involuntary sacrifices that  come from losing it.

 

 

 

“In America, the test of any political movement is not what it’s against, but what it’s for.”

February 10, 2014

Senator Mike Lee begins his tea party response to the President’s State of the Union address here by pointing out that the Boston Tea Party would have been little more than a footnote in history about individuals unhappy with an abusive national government–protesting the kind of government they didn’t want–had they simply stopped there. It took 14 years to get from Boston to Philadephia where, with the Constitution, they established the kind of government they did want. That is, “The founders made a point in Boston Harbor, but they made history in Philadelphia’s Independence Hall.”

Following are some of my favorite of his comments:

In America, the test of any political movement is not what it’s against, but what it’s for.

The Republican establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic establishment.

The President and his allies insist the real problem is inequality itself. But where does this new inequality come from? From government, every time it takes rights and opportunities away from the American people and gives them instead to politicians, bureaucrats and special interests.

Obamacare all by itself is an inequality Godzilla that has robbed working families of their insurance, their doctors, their wages, and their jobs.

Six of the wealthiest counties in the U.S. are suburbs of Washington D.C. (A reference to the self-interest and cronyism of the ruling class without actually saying it is.)

The President has promised an economy for the middle class, but all he’s delivered is an economy for the middle men.

My own party has been part of the problem, too often joining the Democrats to rig an economy to benefit the well-connected at the expense of the disconnected.

Others are working on proposals…so that business profits are won from customers, not through political connections. After all, if we’re going to reform welfare, we really should start with corporate welfare.

When it comes to health care, we know the best way to repeal Obamacare is to deliver better solutions. We can’t just return to the old system. Health care policy used to give too much power to insurance companies. Obamacare now gives far too much power to government. We know that real reform will put health care dollars and decisions where they belong, in the hands of patients, families and their doctors and nurses.

All of these proposals within the new Conservative Reform Agenda, along with many more to come, mark the road to Philadelphia. These principles and policies will work and will put Americans back to work, not by just cutting big government, but by fixing broken government, [and my favorite part of this segment…] not by just making government smaller, but by promoting bigger citizens, stronger families, and more heroic communities. [Standing ovation…from me, anyway.]

I’m confident that our best days as a nation are ahead of us, not because of government, but because within America’s diverse society of individuals, and families, and neighborhoods, and churches and businesses and communities, freedom doesn’t mean you’re on your own. Freedom means we’re all in this together.

There is much more. Sen. Lee outlines specific, proposed, common-sense legislation that will bring about relief for taxpayers and reinforce our freedoms, while helping those who need it. Thank you, Sen. Lee. You’ve given me hope that there are a few in Washington who believe it really is about “We the People.”

Success has a thousand fathers

November 22, 2013

Sen. Ted Cruz shows here why he’s a leader and a coalition-builder. With grace, he welcomes his critics into the fold in the effort to reverse a bad law. President Ronald Reagan famously said, “My 80 percent friend is not my 20 percent enemy.” In response to a question regarding his critics who now are sounding a lot like him, Sen. Cruz responded (@6:56):

“The great thing is, success has a thousand fathers. Failure is an orphan. I am happy for everyone in the Republican party who wants to claim success and parentage for us coming together and repealing Obamacare because it isn’t working. And the more who come together, the better chance we are going to have of actually successfully empowering the American people. If you want to expand health insurance, the way you do it is you want more choices and lower costs. What Obamacare does is provide fewer choices and higher costs. It’s great that we’re seeing so many people come on board. We welcome them all.”

Victories are won through the fight

November 21, 2013

Sen. Ted Cruz has withstood a lot of flak from not only the left but people in his own party for fighting what some perceive to be a losing battle, with critics yapping about his intentions being right, but his strategy being wrong. Others outright insulted him, accused him of grandstanding for political purposes, and even senators from his own chamber and his own party called him names. J. Christian Adams notes in the article below, “The Left knows victories are won through the fight.” And he should know…being more or less forced out of the DOJ for speaking the truth. Sen. Cruz has weathered the storm with grace, intelligence, and kindness unseen since the days of President Reagan. In my humble opinion, he exudes inspiring leadership that, I think, is rooted in conviction, something that Reagan had in abundance and exists only rarely today, and which Sen. Ted Cruz, Rep. Col. Allen West, Dr. Ben Carson, Sen. Mike Lee, Rep. Michele Bachmann, and Gov. Mike Pence all exhibit.

In the following video, Sen. Cruz responds to a question about his critics noting, “Success has a thousand fathers. Failure is an orphan,” and then welcomes his critics with grace to come together and, in so many words, get rid of this bad law. Sen. Cruz says, “I’m happy for everyone who wants to claim success and parentage for us coming together and repealing Obamacare because it isn’t working.”

Sen. Ted Cruz discusses the “trade-off” behind Obamacare

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recently spoke about not letting errors compound over time and that standing up for the right thing is always the right thing to do, even if it’s unpopular or criticized.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas

Thomas told Sykes that it is this belief that keeps him from getting discouraged when he writes a separate opinion in some cases that none of his colleagues—even Scalia—joins. “It took Harlan 60 years, but he finally won,” Thomas said.

This is a reference to Plessy v. Ferguson, where the Court in 1896 infamously ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment allows racially-segregated public facilities so long as they are “separate but equal.” Justice John Harlan famously dissented from Plessy, declaring that the Constitution’s amendments adopted after the Civil War were designed to eradicate such racially discriminatory laws. Thomas’ reference to 60 years later is to Brown v. Board of Education, when in 1954 the Court overruled Plessy and declared that segregated public schools are unconstitutional.

PJ Media

Ted Cruz Won

by J. Christian Adams

October 23rd, 2013 – 7:57 am

It has become clear after the government shutdown that if Obamacare isn’t destroyed now, it will be with us forever. Waiting until after a series of elections to try to kill it is a fool’s errand. There will never be more support for ending Obamacare than there will be in the next few months. Once the dependency class hooks up their Obamacare IV, it’s game over.

Let’s inventory how Texas Senator Ted Cruz won territory in the government shutdown fight.

First, the Left knows victories are won through the fight.  This is the core of the new Alinskyite model of the Left — continuous agitation, continuous fundraising, continuous energy. The fight builds support and support builds the fight.

The Cruz-led fight over the last few weeks has done the same thing for conservatives.  Cruz strengthened the fight against Obamacare because he exposed the insider D.C. establishment in a way nobody else has.  True, polls show that Americans have a lower opinion of the Republican Party after the fight.  But many of those with a lower opinion are regular conservative Americans who saw the establishment members of the GOP turn and bolt in the face of the fight.  Over two million signed a petition supporting Cruz.  That’s a heck of an email list, generated almost overnight.

Deal-making and compromise have pushed the country toward fiscal catastrophe.  Only Cruz and his supporters stood fast, and Americans noticed.

Capture

Second, now is the time to wreck Obamacare.  Some in the GOP think they can win a couple of elections over the next few years and unravel the program once the GOP gains the White House.  This ignores the shrinking attention span of the body politic.  It also ignores the fact that many in the GOP are part of the problem. The establishment GOP needs a series of inside straights even to win the seats necessary to implement this plan.  Worse, the Republican Party seems unable to grasp the ground game of the new Left.  The Left changes the narrative in the short term and ends up winning long term.   Compromise is never the game. Battles are won each day, and not deferred.

What evidence does the GOP offer to show they are likely to draw those inside electoral straights necessary to repeal Obamacare after 2016?  What makes anyone think they will win the Senate or White House? It certainly isn’t the performance in 2012 where an unpopular incumbent saddled by economic malaise crushed a Republican known for compromise and civility.

Fighters win these days, and Obama knows how to fight.

Compromise at the expense of liberty?

October 18, 2013

The Republicans, including Boehner and Cantor, who voted to reopen government and hike the debt ceiling.

Spencer Bachus
Lou Barletta
Dan Benishek
Gus Bilirakis
John Boehner
Charles Boustany
Susan Brooks
Vern Buchanan
Ken Calvert
Dave Camp
Eric Cantor
Shelley Moore Capito
Howard Coble
Mike Coffman
Tom Cole
Paul Cook
Tom Cotton
Kevin Cramer
Rick Crawford
Ander Crenshaw
Steve Daines
Charlie Dent
Mario Diaz-Balart
Mike Fitzpatrick
Jeff Fortenberry
Rodney Frelinghuysen
Cory Gardner
Jim Gerlach
Chris Gibson
Tim Griffin
Michael Grimm
Brett Guthrie
Richard Hanna
Gregg Harper
Doc Hastings
Joe Heck
Jaime Herrera Beutler
Darrell Issa
Lynn Jenkins
David Joyce
Mike Kelly
Peter King
Adam Kinzinger
John Kline
Leonard Lance
Tom Latham
Frank LoBiondo
Kevin McCarthy
Patrick McHenry
Buck McKeon
David McKinley
Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Pat Meehan
Gary Miller
Tim Murphy
Devin Nunes
Erik Paulsen
Robert Pittenger
Dave Reichert
Reid Ribble
Scott Rigell
Hal Rogers
Mike Rogers
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Peter Roskam
Jon Runyan
Aaron Schock
John Shimkus
Bill Shuster
Mike Simpson
Adrian Smith
Chris Smith
Steve Stivers
Lee Terry
Glenn Thompson
Pat Tiberi
Scott Tipton
Fred Upton
David Valadao
Daniel Webster
Ed Whitfield
Rob Wittman
Frank Wolf
Steve Womack
Don Young
Todd Young

 

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2013/10/16/names-gutless-republicans-voted-obamacave/?utm_source=FAM_Blog&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FireAndreaMitchell+%28Fire+Andrea+Mitchell!+Exposing+Liberal+bias+cause+the+MSM+doesn%27t+have+to.%29

 

25 Republicans Back Obamacare

October 18, 2013

 

http://www.westernfreepress.com/2013/09/27/the-vote-is-in-senate-republicans-help-democrats-fund-obamacare/

 

 

More than two dozen Senate Republicans deserted the grassroots of their party Friday in a vote that paved the way to fund Obamacare.

 

Only 19 of the 46 Senate Republicans voted against ending debate on the House-passed continuing resolution to fund the federal government past September 30 and defund Obamacare. Two Republicans – Jeff Flake and Orin Hatch – did not vote.

 

A vote to end debate – supported by 25 Republicans – was tantamount to stripping the Obama care defunding measure from the continuing resolution.

 

Following is a list of the 19 Republicans who voted against cloture in support of defunding Obamacare:

 

NAYs —19

Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Grassley (R-IA)
Heller (R-NV)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Lee (R-UT)
Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)

 

 

 

Not Voting – 2

Flake (R-AZ) Hatch (R-UT)  
     

 

 

 

And now, the unfortunate yeas:

 

Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Blunt
Boozman
Burr
Chambliss
Chiesa
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Graham
Hoeven
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (WI)
Kirk
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Thune
Wicker

 

Following the 79 to 19 vote to end debate on the House-passed, the Senate voted 54 to 44 to strip the Obamacare defunding from the resolution. The Senate then passed the resolution by the same margin.

 

The unanimous Republican opposition to the amendment removing the Obamacare defunding measure was a cosmetic and meaningless vote. Some Republicans will now say they opposed funding Obamacare, but their vote to end debate opened the door to Democrats to save Obamacare funding with a simple majority.

 

The 25 Republicans who voted to end debate and fund Obamacare included the entire Republican leadership – Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, John Thune, Roy Blunt, and John Barrasso.

 

Now the targets of Republican opposition in 2014 are the vulnerable Democratic incumbents who continued to support

 

Obamacare – Pryor of Arkansas, Landrieu of Louisiana, Hagan of North Carolina, and Begich of Alaska.

 

There will be consequences Republicans as well. The 25 Republicans who voted for cloture and Obamacare funding defied a growing grassroots movement determined to defund or delay Obamacare. They defied the work of Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio and others who have worked for months to block Obamacare funding.