Sacred Beliefs Here and There

Now that Newt Gingrich has suspended his campaign for president, I hope he will have more time to write and think about policies. I read his last column in Human Events and I am afraid that Newt simply does not understand the difference between sacred beliefs in Afghanistan and here in America and why those beliefs must be respected there but not here.

The Obama administration may have adopted a formula that will come back to haunt it.

In an effort to appease religious elements in Afghanistan it has established a standard that could become a major defeat for secular extremists here in America.

In response to Afghan outrage over the inadvertent Koran burnings by the U.S. Military in February, the Obama Defense Department created a mandatory training for military service members in the region. It is entitled, “Proper handling and disposal of Islamic Religious Materials: Service Members/Civilian Training.”

You can read the 11 slides in the briefing here.

The most fascinating slide is the last one. There the Obama administration asserts: “We will hold sacred the beliefs held sacred by others.”

Apparently to President Obama, the sacred beliefs of Islam in Afghanistan must be held sacred by the U.S. government, but Christianity in America is a nuisance to be reshaped by ObamaCare, the courts and the bureaucracy with no regard for its beliefs.

Americans are noticing. Consider this protest from a Catholic group as reported to me by my friend and co-author Bill Forstchen:

“Without doubt the most powerful ad, aimed straight at Catholics, to take a political stand based upon our most basic beliefs.  This one is incredible and you know I rarely forward such things.”

You can see the video here.

The ObamaCare war against religious liberty extends far beyond Catholics. As the president of Louisiana College, a Baptist college dedicated to right-to-life principles told me, “If Obamacare forces us to violate our religious beliefs we will close the college.”

Let’s challenge President Obama’s assertion that “We will hold sacred the beliefs held sacred by others”.

If we must hold sacred Korans being used by Afghan terrorists to pass messages back and forth, then certainly we can hold sacred religious symbols held sacred by law-abiding Americans here in the United States. We can put back up the crosses and the Ten Commandments courts have forced us to take down—right?

If President Obama doesn’t object to Afghan children praying five times a day in school (he cited his own childhood memories of studying the Koran at school in Indonesia and hearing the call to prayer), why isn’t he open to allowing American school children to pray once a day, if they choose?

By its own words the Obama administration has set the test for defining itself.

Is Obama prepared to “hold sacred the beliefs held sacred by others” if those others are Americans?

Congress should put President Obama to the test and him to his new rule—first by passing legislation overriding the Health and Human Services Mandate that was an overt attack on the Catholic Church.

Silly Newt. There is a very good reason that religious beliefs in Afghanistan must be respected while in America we are free to disparage and ridicule them. You see Christians don’t usually blow people up when they are disrespected. Moslems have been known to do that.


Santorum’s Out

Rick Santorum ended his campaign today.

After calling Mitt Romney to concede the race for the Republican nomination, Rick Santorum suspended his campaign Tuesday during a press conference in Pennsylvania, his home state.

“We will suspend our campaign effective today,” Santorum said surrounded by members of his family in Gettysburg.

Santorum spent the weekend off the campaign trail with his 3-year-old daughter, Bella, who suffers from a rare genetic disorder, after she was rushed to the hospital Friday.

“We made a decision over the weekend that, while this presidential race for us is over, for me, and we will suspend our campaign effective today, we are not done fighting,” he said. (Yahoo News)

Since Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul are behind Santorum, it looks as if Romney will be the Republican candidate for president. He is not the one I would have preferred and I am not sure he can beat Obama, but I will vote for him and do what I can to see he is elected. I hope that every Conservative will do likewise. It might be tempting to hope Romney loses in the expectation of getting a more truly Conservative candidate in 2016, but I don’t think this country can recover from another four years of Barack Obama.





Romney won big in Illinois, Obama’s home state. Second place Santorum didn’t come close. Romney now has 560 delegates compared to Santorum’s 246, Gingrich with 141 and Paul with 66. I wouldn’t declare Romney the nominee just yet but since he has more delegates than the rest combined, it is beginning to look that way.

Alabama, Mississippi, and Hawaii

Rick Santorum won Alabama and Mississippi with Gingrich in second and Romney in third. After his Super Tuesday wins, this must be really frustrating. He did win in Hawaii, though, and he is far ahead in total delegates. Romney is the likely nominee but we’re not making it easy for him.

Super Tuesday

I know it’s late but I have been busy. Anyway, Romney won Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming. Santorum won Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. Gingrich won Georgia and South Carolina. Romney clearly won the most states and he did better in the south than I might have expected. The fact that Gingrich only won his native Georgia and South Carolina signals that his candidacy is essentially finished.Santorum did well, almost winning in Ohio, but I don’t think he will be able to compete with Romney much longer. Still, the fact that he only got 60% of the vote in Virginia with Ron Paul as his only other competitor shows how many Republicans would rather somebody else were the frontrunner

As far as delegates go, Romney now has 429, Santorum has 169, Gingrich 118, and Paul 67. They need 1144 to win, so the race is not over just yet, but I think Romney is all but certain to be the nominee.


I have been remiss in not mentioning the results of the primaries this week. Mitt Romney won all three, Michigan and Arizona on Tuesday and the Wyoming caucus on Wednesday. Santorum was second but Romney won by a comfortable enough margin. He leads on delegates too, with 154 versus Santorum’s 69, Gingrich’s 33 and Paul’s 26. I guess Romney is the inevitable nominee, at least for now. Super Tuesday is next week and we’ll see what happens.

Romney Wins Maine Caucus

Now it’s time for Romney to win one. This one being the Maine caucus. He won 39% of the vote with Pon Paul in second place with 36%. Romney also managed to win the CPAC straw poll with 38% against Santorum’s 31%. By number of delegates, which is the only number that really matters,Romney is way ahead with 98 delegates. Santorum is in second place with 44, Gingrich in third with 32 and Paul last with 20.

There is some question whether or not this long, hard-fought primary campaign is good or bad for the GOP. I have a feeling that the millions of dollars these candidates are spending to attack each other might be better spent against Obama. Still, it’s a whole lot more interesting this way.

Romney Wins Florida

I should have posted on this yesterday, but I was out of town all day. Anyway Romney won the Florida primary by a fairly large margin. He got 46.4% of the vote to Gingrich’s 31.9% and Santorum’s 13.3%. The pundits and commentators have all had their say and I don’t have much to add. I would like to point out the gender gap that really hurt Gingrich. As Dick Morris put it,

Here’s the reason Mitt Romney won in Florida: Women turned against Newt. In the primary Tuesday, Romney carried men by only 5 points, according to the Fox News exit poll, while he won women 52 percent to 28 percent — a 24-point margin!

Did women turn against Gingrich because of his personal baggage or the interview with his second ex-wife? Did they just dislike his aggressiveness or feel that he couldn’t win? We don’t know. But what we do know is that a gender gap that was not much in evidence in South Carolina surfaced with a vengeance one week later in Florida.

Some theorize that it took a few days for Marianne Gingrich’s allegations to sink in. Others suggest that women might just have gotten an uneasy feeling about Gingrich. But the fact that the gender gap led to Newt’s defeat is incontrovertible.

I think this will become a real problem for Newt Gingrich in future primaries and the general election. I think that a lot of women will look at Newt and his three marriages and be reminded of all the selfish or immature men in their lives.

It would be one thing if Gingrich’s indiscretions were nothing more than a quiet affair. His divorces and infidelities suggest a lack of constancy, an unwillingness to follow through on commitments, even a lack of self-discipline that could be fatal in a President. His actions say something about him, and not something good.

A Appeal from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

I continue to get fund-raising e-mails from the Democrats. Here is one of the latest from last week.

President Obama just laid out his path for America. Last night, the Republican presidential candidates laid out quite another.

We can fight like mad to help the president lead our nation toward economic fairness. Or we can let Newt and Mitt seize the White House and Congress – and hand it over to the 1%.

Economic fairness? That’s a dirty word to them. Middle class families? Fend for yourselves. Mitt would pay NO TAXES under Newt’s plan. None.

Which plan will you choose: President Obama’s, or radical Republican’s? Our FEC deadline is 7 days from now, and we still need $444,000. If we fall short, President Gingrich takes the oath of office before a Republican-controlled Congress. And America’s middle class will be finished.

Decision time. Can you chip in $5 to stop a total Republican takeover?

President Obama said it best tonight: “We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by. Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.”

I’m not willing to settle. No way will I allow these fanatics to undo all Democrats have accomplished in the past three years – or the past century, for that matter. Please give what you can, and join me in the fight.

Guy Cecil
Executive Director, DSCC

I am not sure which is the more disturbing thought; that people like Guy Cecil are cynical enough to believe (probably correctly) that the majority of Americans are simple enough to fall for this sort of nonsense, or that they really believe it. Their idea of “fairness” seems to be to take from the people they think have too much and give to the people, generally their supporters, who have too little.

If Obama wants to know why a growing number of Americans are just getting by, he can look in a mirror. I also think it is a little strange that the man who hands out waivers from his policies and subsidies to green businesses while canceling the Keystone Pipeline should speajk of everybody getting a fair hot and playing by the same set of rules.

I wonder if the Republican fund raising letters are this stupid and dishonest. I imagine so, but perhaps they do not exhibit quite the level of ignorance of economics.

Here are some excerpts from an email I just recieved.

There are a lot of Americans asking the same question right now: are these Republicans kidding?

Corporations are people? The way to create jobs is to give rich people more money? Super PACs decide who gets elected?

I’m not buying it, and I don’t think you are either. But our skepticism is not enough — especially in a world where the Koch Brothers have $43 billion to throw at us. We need strong People-Powered campaigns to call out all these Tea Party Republicans, for trying to destroy the middle class in the country we all love.

I was under the impression that the Tea Parties were made up of middle class Americans. And, who else is going to create jobs but rich people. Maybe if they were able to keep more of their own money, and were not punished for getting ahead,  there would be more jobs available.

This isn’t just about hitting the DCCC’s $500,000 grassroots goal, before tomorrow night’s deadline.

This is about the 22 million people in this country who can’t find a full-time job. This is about the 50 million people in this country who can’t see a doctor when they’re sick. This is about the 47 million people in this country who need government help to feed themselves (and no, Newt, the answer isn’t to demonize them).

The Republicans sure won’t help the jobless, the homeless, the sick, the poor and the hungry. So that job falls to us. We need champions in Congress who will fight for the middle class, and everyone aspiring to get there.

Suggesting that government policies encourage people to be able to take care of themselves rather than encouraging lifelong dependence on the government is not really demonizing them. I suppose it all depends on just how you define help and whether you want the American people to be free and independent or government serfs depending on handouts from their lord and masters.

By the way, whose fault is it if so many people can’t find a full time job? Who has been in the White since 2009? Who had control of both houses of Congress from 2007 until 2011, and who still has control of the Senate?

Mitt or Newt?

Here is a cartoon in USA Today that neatly illustrates the dilemma I feel about the two frontrunners for the Republican nomination.

I feel like a woman who must choose between two lovers. Mitt is the nice, dependable boyfriend. He seem to be the steadier, safer of the two. Newt is the bad boy. He is more exciting, but maybe more dangerous.  I should prefer the safer choice. But, I keep having the nagging feeling that these are not the times for safety.

Meanwhile, Ann Coulter has been spending the last few columns promoting Romney. She clearly has no use for Newt Gingrich. She makes a good case but the truth is that neither man is clearly superior in terms of Conservative credentials or even, I think, electability. Coulter is right in noting that Gingrich is far more the Washington insider than Romney, but that isn’t really the point. Romney is the clear favorite of the Republican establishment, whoever that might be exactly, simply because they feel he is more electable. They may well be correct, but they really haven’t had a stellar record in picking winners in the past.

Coulter concludes her column with this observation.

Romney is the most electable candidate not only because it will be nearly impossible for the media to demonize this self-made Mormon square, devoted to his wife and church, but precisely because he is the most conservative candidate.

No, it won’t be impossible for the media to demonize this Mormon. The Mormons have a number of beliefs and practices that to non-Mormons seem weird or even cultish. There are certain aspects of the history of the LDS church that are not very positive. Something like that could perhaps be said of any religion, which is why decent people today do not mock other peoples’ religions. The liberals in the media feel no such decency. The only religion they are reluctant to criticize is Islam and that is out of cowardice. They have never forgiven the Mormon church for supporting Proposition 8 in Califoria This is, of course, no reason not to vote for Romney, but if he ends up being the nominee, we had better be prepared for media exposes of the Mormons and late night comedians making jokes about magic underwear.

Also, for a look for what might have been, check out Mitch Daniel’s response to Obama’s State of the Union address.


I wish he had chosen to run.


%d bloggers like this: