100% All-Natural Content
No Artificial Intelligence!

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Bachmann and Romney mad at each other or something about pro-life "pledge"


Every time I come across a story like this about how inane our "political process" has become, I can't help but think of that line from Battle for the Planet of the Apes: "Ape has killed ape!!!"

So newly-announced candidate for President of the United States Michele Bachmann is feigning righteous wrath (I know of no other way to put it) at fellow candidate Mitt Romney because he hasn't signed something called the "Susan B. Anthony pro-life pledge".

Here's what the pledge is about, according to the story at LifeNews.com:

The pledge has the candidates promising to support only judicial nominees who won't interpret the Constitution in a way that supports Roe v. Wade, select pro-life Cabinet members on positions affecting abortion policy, supporting legislation to stop taxpayer funding of abortions and Planned Parenthood, and to support a fetal pain bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
Y'know, every single item listed here, I agree with. In a lot of ways my personal beliefs about abortion are even more legally stringent. For one thing, Roe v. Wade is atrocious legislation from the bench, and not even something that should have reached the Supreme Court. It should have always been a states issue... and that is why so many abortion "rights" supporters have done their damndest to keep this a federal matter. Because they know that left to the individual states, that abortion would go down in flames in this country. But I digress from my line of thought...

It just seems to me that if a candidate knows what he or she stands for, then that candidate won't need to sign any "pledge" at all. Congressman Ron Paul has apparently signed it. But even if he didn't, it wouldn't bother me: having read his record for myself, I know he has an adamant pro-life position. That's something that can't be "earned" by the stroke of a pen on a pledge that at election time are a dime a dozen.

Here's what I'm getting at, folks: a person's values and virtues, ultimately aren't something that can be defined or not defined by whether or not that person signs this or that statement. That only serves to cheapen the candidate and it even cheapens the impact of such statements when they can be instruments of weight and worth.

And they cheapen us and what we should be expecting and demanding from those who offer to serve us in public office. If I vote for a man or woman for President, I don't want to be voting for a party automaton. I will and always shall vote for a person, not a product. Y'know: someone who can think and hold on to a position and understand why that position is held!

Or maybe I'm just asking for a little too much enlightenment from our political process...


Marc said...

I gotta agree. A candidates record is enough for me. He/she doesnt need to sign such pledges.

That said, even if Romney signed that pro-life pledge, I wouldnt believe him.