Family Research Council
April 7, 2009
Talk show host and author Tavis Smiley has written a new book called Accountable, which attempts to navigate the difficult waters swirling around the success or failure of Obama’s presidency. Smiley, who is African American, is quoted in the Washington Post today as saying that if Obama fails, “it may be another 400 years before we get another African-American president.” Smiley is at the center of a raging debate among African-American leaders about the limits of tough questioning of the new president and his policies, a debate in which Smiley has been in the minority as an advocate for treating Obama as a man and not merely a milestone. Smiley is on the right side of this debate, in my view, but his apocalyptic opinion that Obama holds the fortunes of African-American politicians in his hands only feeds into the mantra of those who regard Obama as an untouchable symbol. A failure of Obama’s policies would and should damage only those policies - massive expansion of government, nationalization of various parts of the U.S. industrial sector, international naivete, and radical social liberalism - but that failure should merely pave the way for the election of someone of opposing views. There are a number of conservative African Americans of stature who have that resume, and the country could well elect one of them president before 4 — and not 400 — years have passed.
April 6, 2009
Here’s what we are reading today.
- “Pitt researcher again pursues cloning patent,” Walter F. Roche, Jr., Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (April 4, 2009)
- “Limb-saving trial shows promise,” Jill Coley, The Post and Courier (April 5, 2009)
- “Pregnant (Again) and Poor,” Nicholas D. Kristof, The New York Times (April 4, 2009)
- “Gay marriage issue returns - to a changed America,” Dante Chinni, Christian Science Monitor (April 6, 2009)
- “Governor’s Veto and Over-Ride Vote Looms,” WCAX-TV (April 5, 2009)
- “UM students to screen porn film,” Stephen Kiehl, The Baltimore Sun (April 4, 2009)
- “Bone-repairing stem cell jab hope,” Michelle Roberts, BBC News (April 6, 2009)
- “Obama’s stem-cell decision opens door to immorality,” Patrick Moynihan, Rockford Register-Star (April 4, 2009)
April 6, 2009
From a Catholic physician and Notre Dame alumnus:
Dear Father Jenkins,
What a shocking abdication of moral principles you and the university have displayed by honoring Barack Obama. How can such an enemy of life be given a platform at Notre Dame? This is a man whose avowed mission is to force abortion and contraception services on Catholic hospitals. He has unwaveringly supported late term abortions, for any reason, as well as the disgusting partial birth abortion procedure. He repeatedly voted against resuscitation efforts for babies who survived botched abortions. As a Catholic physician, I am appalled at the life destroying policies he has already enabled with the stroke of his pen.
No amount of sophistry or spin can justify his evil actions nor the actions of a Catholic school which gives tacit approval and support to such scandalous behavior. What a propaganda coup for the anti-life forces of evil! This is a scandal that gives cover and rationalization to Planned Parenthood, the Nancy Pelosi types, and to organizations like the anti-life Catholics for Choice. Do you not realize that you are being used, that Obama has suckered you into tacit approval of his virulent anti-life message?
When grave moral error has been committed, as in this situation, you must do everything you can to correct it and prevent the evil consequences of such an act. I urge you to cancel this invitation and rectify this ill-conceived travesty.
Joseph Leaser, M.D. ‘54
April 4, 2009
The internet is alive with stories about President Barack Obama bowing low before Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah. It was bad enough when George W. Bush invited this odious tyrant to Crawford and was pictured walking hand-in-hand with him. The White House defensively claimed then that it was a Saudi custom for men to express their friendship by holding hands. Had they never heard: “When in Rome, do as the Romans do”? That was bad enough. This Obama obeisance was horrible.
Franklin D. Roosevelt was accused of wanting to be a king. But he knew a lot more about how to behave around monarchs than his present-day successors do. When King George VI and his wife, Queen Elizabeth (parents of Elizabeth II) came to the Roosevelt home at Hyde Park in 1939, Franklin and Eleanor gave them a picnic. They served the first British monarchs ever to set foot on U.S. soil hot dogs and beans! How thoroughly American.
April 3, 2009
Here’s what we are reading today.
- “Iowa awaits court ruling on gay marriage,” Grant Schulte, USA Today (April 2, 2009)
- “Senate threat kills UM plan for porn film,” Gadi Dechter, Laura Smitherman and Stephen Kiehl, The Baltimore Sun (April 3, 2009)
- “Late-term abortion bill gets first OK in House,” Jeannine Koranda, The Wichita Eagle (April 3, 2009)
- “Teen abortions at five-year high,” BBC News (April 3, 2009)
- “Meltdown impact extends to abortion, birth control,” David Crary and Melanie S. Welte, Associated Press (April 3, 2009)
- “The great euthanasia debate,” Charlemagne, The Economist (April 2, 2009)
- “An uneasy mix of religion and politics,” William M. Daley, Chicago Tribune (April 3, 2009)
- “Human Heart Can Make New Cells,” Forbes (April 1, 2009)
- “Unanimous ruling: Iowa marriage no longer limited to one man, one woman,” Staff Reports, The Des Moines Register (April 3, 2009)
April 2, 2009
For weeks the FRC Blog has been commenting on the growing prominence of CNBC as a national news outlet. We have also commented on the liberal counter-reaction against the network. Our point has been that even though the Left dominates the mainstream media (MSM), in a time of financial and economic crisis the MSM news organs are structurally ill-equipped to deal with stories of such complexity. CNBC has on-air staff with the smarts and the career training to discuss these matters at a sophisticated level. The MSM does not have people like this on their programs with a few exceptions (e.g., Lou Dobbs at CNN (who is not MSM)). Consequently, there has been a tremendous power shift toward CNBC.
CNBC is more conservative than the MSM, but it might be fairer to say CNBC is more libertarian and market-oriented. That being said there has always been a good mixture of liberals and conservatives on CNBC, and many Wall Street players were Obama supporters.
Well, the Left noticed the increasing prominence of CNBC and a campaign of mau mauing began quickly once Barack Obama became president. First, Rick Santelli was attacked; this effort was assisted by NBC’s Today Show. Jim Cramer was next, and his assault by Jon Stewart soon followed. However, it appears that a larger effort to compromise CNBC is underway, and it may be working. There is now an entire Leftist-“progressive” website devoted to serving up ideological attacks on CNBC: it is called “Fix CNBC.” (Go to the website and look at the long list of liberal big-wigs who have signed on. Amazing. This is quite an effort. I wonder who is paying for it?) Interestingly, Media Matters also presents an online petition at “Change CNBC,” and the language looks pretty similar to Fix CNBC’s petition.
April 2, 2009
Here’s some of the buzz from the blogosphere.
- “Anatomy of a Demonstration,” Cal Skinner, McHenry County Blog
- “A Conservative Rorschach Test?,” Philip Klein, AmSpecBlog
- “When Serving Makes You Sick,” Katelyn Beaty, Her.meneutics
- “What? No Prince or Sex Pistols?,” Tom McClusky, The Cloakroom
- “One Bonus Rep. Barney Frank Won’t Be Going After,” Tom McClusky, The Cloakroom
April 2, 2009
Last November, eHarmony capitulated to the New Jersey Attorney General who demanded that eHarmony cater to homosexuals. Despite an outcry from eHarmony success couples from across the country, eHarmony followed through this week on its promise to launch a same-sex matching service.
My wife and I met on eHarmony almost three years ago, and we quickly began recommending the service to our single friends who were also drawn to the company’s good reputation. Last year, I told The Wall Street Journal, eHarmony’s success didn’t come from its slick advertising campaigns. It was their high moral standards, because they rose above the ‘hook-up’ mentality of their competitors, and because they were openly helping people find marriage partners.
eHarmony always asks new customers how they “heard” about the service. At the top of the list is “word of mouth.” Since the same-sex matching decision was announced, we have heard from a steady stream of other eHarmony couples who are closing their mouths shut. Without this word-of-mouth campaign, fewer values-driven customers will pay for this service, resulting in a new eHarmony that bears little resemblance to the classic values matching service it once provided.
It’s disappointing to watch eHarmony take this road because I believe there is a vital need for a values matching service. With eHarmony getting out of this business, will we see another service step up to fill the void? I know there are many Christian dating sites. I won’t need to use a values matching service again, but I know single friends who do. For their sake, I will be looking out for an eHarmony “Classic” to rise again.
April 2, 2009
Recently, I had the pleasure to meet Peter and Helen Evans, authors of the book, Get Serious: The Church’s Stand on Contemporary Culture. The book’s subtitle asks, “Who ever said Christianity was nice?” Last Saturday, I read their book to really find out how the church views issues, such as euthanasia, animal rights, welfare, and genetic engineering. This book provided no sugar-coated response, rather, a thought-provoking and insightful look into these issues with various representatives from the Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox churches. The book is written in an interview style format and answers the questions one may have about the Christian perspective on these issues.
For example, on the topic of euthanasia, Mr. and Mrs. Evans ask an Eastern Orthodox priest, Jonathan Tobias about euthanasia and focus on recent events, like Terri Schiavo’s case, how the church views life support measures and suicide. Fr. Tobias provides detailed answers to the questions from a religious perspective.
Overall, the book is well written, and it offers a perspective that provokes serious conversation with a pastor or a small group.