Sharon Cobb On the Air
Former NBC News correspondent Sharon Cobb discusses the Presidential race from the Democratic perspective. Also, the Tennessee U.S. Senate race. Jessica's Law. Political involvement of the blogging community.Oatney On the Air-July 30, 2007
posted by Deacon David Oatney @ 7:54 PM
4 Comments:
David;
While I applaud Ms. Cobb's candor, as well as her articulated and thought out statements with you, I would love to debate her on abortion.
I find her views very misguided, but I don't think that would surprise you.
Her use of the term anti-choice is the type of rhetoric that is typical from the pro-abortion movement. If anyone is anti-choice, it's those who support aborticide.
Renee;
Of course, I agree with you. In my mind, Sharon represents the classic example of the most well-meaning liberal (she certainly is the most genuinely well-meaning liberal I've ever known), who sees the short-term situation, but cannot invision the long-term cause-and-effect of just how much a society that aborts its children cheapens life.
As Mother Theresa put it: "It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
Abortion, contraception, unrestrained and often unmerited use of the death penalty are all, in the end, the result of a society that cheapens life and creation. Life is no longer seen as precious, the life-giving act is merely an act of pleasure and nothing more, and rules are negotiable, and there is no God who gave them to us.
That said, I trust Sharon explicitly because she is one of the few liberals I know who actually has respect for the conservative point of view.
David;
I also take issue with both your collective takes on Fred Thompson. I know I am biased, and will admit that as an avid Thompson supporter. I am not one of those clueless supporters who is unaware of his work and Senate record. Since creating the BGSU for Fred Thompson blog, as Matt will attest to, Fred Thompson is getting quite a bit of my attention. I would challenge her statement that Thompson is "Bush lite", and that 20 hours worth of work for the NFPRHA is scandalous.
There are a total of 17520 hours in two years, and if you divide the 20 hours of work that Mr. Thompson did for the NFPRHA by the number of hours in two years - it roughly equates to ONE-TENTH OF ONE PERCENT or 0.0011415525. Now, compare that to the time you spend brushing your teeth everyday. If you average a minute (for the sake of argument) of brush time at least three times a day everyday for two years, you will have spent almost double the time Fred Thompson did over the same two years "lobbying" for the NFPRHA.
Liberals such as Ms. Cobb are irate that social conservatives are not as honked off about this as they think we should be. I'm sorry but I don't belong to the “I'm offended by everything club” that she has membership to. He was doing his job. If you and Ms. Cobb can afford to not do any work based on principle that's great; however, I am not afforded that luxury. Believe me, I have to swallow what I believe, and deal with a nursing home that offers shabby care, so I can provide for my family. Do I like it. No. Do I disagree with everything this company stands for. Yes. I question their business ethics daily. I'm not saying Thompson was scraping the bottom of the barrel, but I will not begrudge anyone trying to support him/herself. You do what you have to.
If they want to paint Thompson's not agreeing with a Federal amendment banning abortion or criminalizing it as his being pro-choice, then I'm sure National Right to Life would pull their backing (pardon the pun) -- in a heartbeat. But as someone who believes in States Rights, then I applaud Thompson for his constructionist views on this matter.
While Thompson is more moderate than say Ron Paul, and some other candidates --he is conservative where it counts. Both you and Ms. Cobb patted yourselves on the back about being able to find "common ground" on certain issues such as Jessica's law, and the census info debacle. As far as I'm concerned Thompson's ability to work with Senate Democrats is something I see as a positive, especially if we want to get anything accomplished in Washington D.C. Liberals bitch and complain that conservatives won't reach across the aisle, but then when they do --then it's "they aren't conservative enough", “why are you supporting them?”. I think that is what makes Thompson unique. He is not a polarizing figure. If and when he enters the 2008 Presidential race - he has the ability to reach across to a great many people. I highly doubt Ms. Cobb would be happy with someone like Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh in office - those who tow the Republican line and are unwilling to compromise at any cost.
Renee;
I think you have to understand that part of this is politics-Sharon is a good liberal and she expects (as do most Tennessee Democrats) that Fred Thompson is going to be the Republican nominee if he runs. They are preparing themselves for this by looking for any and every inconsistency, be it real, perceived, or purely imagined, in Fred's record. As a former national news correspondent, Sharon knows right where to look, too.
Yes, I get that Fred lobbied for a grand total of 23 hours here, and yes, I respect his States' Rights position on the issue since I am also a very strong States' Rights man, and I believe that it will be through strict adherence to States' Rights that abortion can be defeated-I get Fred's position.
I also know that I think abortion is a henous crime against humanity. It is so evil, in fact, that I could never consciously do anything that I thought might genuinely promote it as a strict matter of conscience, but also as a practicing and believing Catholic.
Post a Comment
<< Home