Try attacking Laura Ingraham, Catlick Gurl extraordinaire, with a huge radio and teevee presence, who peddles this same sort of hypocritical twaddle every live long day. As A Believing Catholic.

And then go after the bishops and archbishops who goad this anti-Democrat crusade on.

Lopez is a relatively minor part of an extensive and hierarchially driven right wing Catholic political operation.

Ingraham is at the center of it.

I've been thinking about this for quite a while now, and I've come to the following conclusion: Before people are born, the right-wingers are their best friends. There is nothing they won't do for an unborn child. However, once that child is born, they couldn't care less about it. Better learn to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, kid.

Off topic perhaps....and this won't win me a golden star by the editor, but...

The Clintons are running out of options after yesterday. Anyone want to speculate as to whether the Clintons are about to turn to the courts to sue the DNC to count MI and FL? Is that a possibility? Would/could the Supremes enable the theft of another election?

Also, how the hell does CNN get away with referring to this outcome in NC and Indiana as a virtual tie when Obama realized a net gain of delegates and popular votes yesterday, winning/losing by what would have been characterized as a landslide/squeaker, respectively, at any other time in history?

For six years The White House, the House and the Senate were a controlling majority lead by the Republican party. Why wasn't this the greatest of tragedies resolved then? Really, if they couldn't do it, who could? Why should the Mrs. and Mr. Obama be held to a standard that even candidates who were elected as pro life candidates couldn't meet? Conservatism, the greatest ruse ever.

One consequence of the occupation of Iraq has been the persecution of Iraqi Christians. Never a large group in Iraq, they made up about three percent of the population. But the church had been in existence for many centuries, and was allowed to exist even under Saddam. Many churches now stand empty; some have only tiny congregations remaining.

As of 2007 about half the Iraqi Christians had been killed or fled the country. As the occupation continues it may be that the Christian church in Iraq will eventually be destroyed.

Ironically, it seems that the many American Christian supporters of the war never even thought about the possible consequences for their Iraqi co-religionists, nor at this point do they seem to have any concern over the actual consequences. Like all other Iraqis, even the Christians are expendable. Surely the Iraqi Christians must be thinking "with friends like this, who needs enemies?"

If you're following the church's teachings, neither party is perfect, but the "deaths" to be laid at the Democratic party's door are 30-40x those for which the Republicans are responsible.

Those "deaths" can be laid equally at the Republican's doorstep as well, unless you're arguing that only women who are registered Democrats get abortions. Is that what you're arguing?

We could take it a step further and note how the Republican's blocking universal health care has likely contributed (if not outrightly caused) the death of uncounted American citizens of all age groups over the last two decades.

Is this a direction you really want to go, friend? Because I promise you there's no winners to be had on the argument.

I guess it is part of the "culture of life" to sweep the issue of pedophilia in the catholic church under the rug for over 100 years!

In the eyes of hawks like Lopez, killing enemies of Israel and the Christian holy sites they occupy would trump all else.

http://article.nationalreview.com/
/?q=MjUwNGQ4ZDRmNWU4NjhkYTg2MmQ0ZDE0YmE5ZjUzYmM=

September 11, 2007

A Real Neocon Speaks
Norman Podhoretz on this war we’re in.

An NRO Q&A

[...]

Lopez: Why Rudy?

Podhoretz: Rudy fully understands what World War IV is all about and he also recognizes that the only viable strategy for fighting it is to continue going “on the offense,” as he likes to put it. I also think he has the necessary qualities of a wartime president: courage, determination, and optimism. Like Reagan, he’s a happy warrior who simply refuses to envisage any alternative to victory. All the other leading candidates — in both parties — are grim and glum.

Lopez: Is someone who talks about Islamofascism and jihad going to win in 2008? Someone who scares people?

Podhoretz: I believe that the winner in 2008 will be the candidate who strikes the voters as most likely to lead us to victory in the World War IV. Which is why I think that Rudy can and will beat Hillary.

[...]

- - Norman Podhoretz, interviewed by Kathryn Jean Lopez

If Giuliani had won the GOP primaries, K-Lo would have fallen in line like the loyal follower that she is, and she'd be busy, these days, explaining why other issues trump abortion, and why pro-life voters should support Rudy.

Kmiec's comments are extremely well taken (and nice to hear from someone who has served prominently in Republican administrations).

The fixation of the right wing on abortion as the sum total of the "right to life" is disgusting. As Glenn points out, the Iraq war (and similar aggressive adventures) is perhaps the most obvious example of their disregard for innocent human life.

But let's not even focus on "innocent," because what does that even mean? The Catholic Church has been quite clear in its condemnation of capital punishment, even in cases where it is clear that the condemned is not innocent of the crime for which he is convicted, because the Church condemns taking any life. But has any politician ever been threatened with excommunication for supporting - indeed, ordering - capital punishment? Not to my knowledge.

Obviously, as Kmiec points out, life involves more than just birth (or contraception) and death. And any concept of morality has to consider what comes between conception and death - any concept, that is, but the Republican concept.