December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The news that Scott Brown opposes defunding Planned Parenthood probably shouldn’t be too much of a letdown for social conservative Republicans. Brown didn’t portray himself as a pro-life candidate. Unlike voters in Alaska who ended up with Lisa Murkowski as their pro-choice Republican senator, Massachusetts voters never had a real pro-life candidate to support.
Nevertheless, one reason to consider a vote for Scott Brown a pro-life vote was that he could cast a decisive vote against Obamacare, which, among its other faults, would otherwise represent a massive expansion of abortion. The news that he is now opposed in principle to defunding Planned Parenthood (he didn’t state that he would vote against a budget that defunded the organization) doesn’t change the logic of that vote.
Meanwhile, Tim Carney sees this statement from Brown as a reminder that, for political purposes, the fiscally conservative, socially liberal legislator is a fiction.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?