Personhood Wins Colo Primaries

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Personhood Wins Colo Primaries

This is the show from Wednesday August 11th, 2010.

SUMMARY:

* Headline News with Bob Enyart: Today's show excerpts Ed Hanks' analysis of the Colorado GOP's primary races last night, but first, Bob talks about...
- Mecca's Islamic Clock Tower hopes to displace Greenwich at the prime meridian (see Bob's comment just below)
- One out of every 50 deaths in Holland are at the hands of Dutch doctors euthanizing them
- Another Boogeyman Story in the News Today, with the UN Climate folks urging folks to eat bugs
- Small middle-class California town making it's bureacrats rich of the backs of it's residents

* Bob's Comment Posted at the Telegraph website under the Mecca Clock story: Now in Mecca all worshippers, including Christians, Jews, and Muslims, can look up from their places of worship and see the worldwide official time! ... Oh, wait... Mecca doesn't allow synagogues to be built :( In fact, the Muslim government of Saudi Arabia does not allow Christians to build a church anywhere in the ENTIRE COUNTRY. Yet the media spreads the blatant falsehood that Islam is tolerant. As an American, I say let's keep GMT in Greenwich where it belongs. :)

* Ed Hanks’ Analysis of Colorado GOP Primary: The full article is at Ed's pro-personhood blog lookingontherightside.com. Excerpts:

...a big win for Personhood... The biggest victory for Personhood today was Ken Buck, for U.S. Senate. Opponent Jane Norton had endorsed Personhood... but on her website she endorsed abortion in cases of rape and incest, which is a stand entirely opposed to the concept of Personhood.

Americans United for Life... had endorsed Jane Norton. That was the first endorsement of any candidate that organization had made in four decades. Why did they endorse her? Because of Colorado Right to Life and the Personhood movement! AUL realized that if the winner of the primary for the U.S. Senate was a candidate who supported the Personhood strategy, instead of their compromised regulation strategy, it would be the beginning of the end for their control over the regulatory process. Why would they make this their first endorsement ever, in any state in all of history? Why prefer a candidate with exceptions over a candidate who would protect the life of the unborn from conception forward -- NO exceptions? Americans United for Life endorsed Jane Norton specifically because she wasn't 100% pro-life! This was a key race for them... and they lost. Personhood won.

Another key victory was in the Governor’s race, where we now know there will be two candidates on the November ballot who support Personhood – Dan Maes and Tom Tancredo. Scott McInnis... there were always doubts on our side...

In the 6th State Senate District... Ellen Roberts is the most pro-abortion Republican in the Legislature today... It’s best if the pro-abort winner is “their pro-abort” (i.e. a Democrat) not “our pro-abort” (a Republican), because that will make it easier to put a pro-lifer into that seat in 4 years. [CRTL agrees with Ed Hanks and adds that: Our mass murderer is never better than their mass murderer.]

Despite his claims, Ryan Frazier... 7th Congressional District... is not pro-life...

Nevertheless, three of the seven candidates for districts in Congress are on record as supporting Personhood – Cory Gardner, Doug Lamborn and Mike Coffman...

In the State House, a critical primary in a three way race was won by pro-Personhood Chris Holbert, who... beat a pro-abortion opponent with lots of money...

Another State House primary was won by pro-Personhood Ray Scott over his opponent who was widely believed to be pretending to be conservative, and who refused to sign on with Personhood.

In the State Senate, two Personhood candidates defeated their opponents. Kevin Grantham in Pueblo and Canon City won against a pro-abortion opponent. And in Pueblo itself Vera Ortegon won easily against her opponent who... had rape & incest exceptions.

Overall, 11 out of 19 Republicans running for the State Senate this year are pro-Personhood, and there may be more we don’t know about, or who will sign on later. And in the House, 17 out of 65 candidates are on record as supporting Personhood, but probably twice that actually do, and just haven’t gone on record.

Compared to just 2 years ago, there are probably twice as many candidates for the Legislature who are supporting Personhood and most the Republicans at the top of the ticket (Senate, Governor, Congress) are supporting Personhood now whereas very few did so just 2 years ago.

The whole game has changed with regard to Personhood. With these key Republican figures supporting Personhood, it’s likely Amendment 62 will also do much better at the ballot box in November. [CRTL note: In 2008 CRTL mailed out thousands of voter education cards that exposed "pro-life" candidates who opposed personhood.]

See Ed Hanks' full report at lookingontherightside.com.

RELATED NEWS: CRTL has a long memory and has seen many election cycles where Republicans campaign in the primary as conservative pro-lifers, and then they become moderates in the general election, and then they govern as liberal pro-aborts once in office. With the encouraging primary results in, Leslie Hanks, Colorado Right To Life's sponsor of the personhood Amendment 62 stated, "Unlike Jane Norton, Ken Buck says he wants to protect all unborn kids, even the child fathered by a criminal. Now if Ken Buck stands strong, we'll stand with him. And Scott McInnis lied about not even being a member of Republicans for Choice, when in reality he led them promoting abortion. In contrast, Dan Maes was first to endorse Colorado's personhood Amendment 62, and we see Dan as a man who will keep his word to protect every child."

* Work with Bob Enyart for Amendment 62 Passage: Come on out with Bob Enyart Wednesday evenings (including TONIGHT!) at 5:30 p.m. and Saturday mornings at 7:30 a.m. to have a great time (see details) distributing Amendment 62 Talking Points literature...

Today's Resource: According to Brian Enyart, "My brother's best Bible study resource is Hermeneutics: Tools for Studying the Bible. Learn how to use tools of interpretation as you study the Bible. And as importantly, Bob will discuss the principles involved for prioritizing these hermeneutics and how to decide which tool to use in which instance. So you can join Bob's Hermeneutics Seminar via CD and it's almost like you are there. Just click here to enjoy our Bible seminar including the same notes handed out to the attendees and see the slides Bob displayed during this great event at Denver's historic Brown Palace. So you're invited to try out Bob Enyart's Hermeneutics teaching just by clicking or by calling the BEL studio at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278)!
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
So, how many of these candidates you suppose are aware Enyart's a monarchist?

He sure does get excited about getting people elected...:think:
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
so what do you do when the U.S. Supreme Court finds it unconstitutional?

"When?" Not "if?"

If you're so confident that the Republican Supreme Court appointees are anti-personhood, why do you constantly promote electing Republicans who promise to appoint more of the same?

Do you think personhood is unconstitutional?


If personhood were truly unconstitutional, then the Constitution would need to be amended. But it isn't.

Now, that doesn't mean the Supreme Court would judge rightly on the matter. After all, abortion is unconstitutional, yet we had Roe v. Wade because the (mostly Republican) Court at that time denied the personhood of unborn. Republican appointee Justice Harry Blackmun, wrote the majority opinion for Roe v. Wade:
"The appellee and certain [pro-lifers] argue that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."​
So let's go about establishing the personhood of the unborn. Do you oppose this strategy? If so, why?




(Deja vu. I wonder if I'll get a response this time around.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top