|2011 A.D.: Why Don't Democratic Candidates Show Visible Support of Their Beliefs?|
|Written by Dan Curry|
|Friday, 14 October 2011|
2011 A.D.: Why Don't Democratic Presidential Candidates Show Their Open, Unashamed Support For Their Views?
What does politics have to do with the Christian? As little as possible. But if it is one of the vehicles through which your Lord's kingdom is being attacked, and if you have an item called 'your vote' through which you can try to thwart that attack, should you let your voice be heard? If Jesus says "Love your neighbor!" and your neighbor is being slaughtered in the womb, should you not protect your neighbor?
Sadducees and Pharisees were almost like political parties since their government was a faith based one. In about A.D. 30 they made the wrong political choices concerning who would lead them (rejecting Jesus of Nazareth, God's Son), and God destroyed their nation 40 years later, leaving them scattered for about 1900 years. Your 'political choices' are sometimes noted in Heaven, it seems.
So, our 'Political Choices' can matter greatly. With another election cycle approaching in America, it seems like a good time to merely suggest to Democrats that they write to their favorite candidates for President and cheer them on, encourage them if you will, to place television ads in which they are shown openly and whole-heartedly endorsing things that their eventual election will certainly (and purposefully) provide support for - or allow the continuance of - in our society.
Surely the Democratic candidates for President don't want to deceive voters into supporting God-hated atrocities that those voters wouldn't have cared to support if they had only seen the character of the thing with their own eyes, in detail......would they? Would Democratic candidates truly wish to ... 'dupe' their supporters?
So, why don't candidates from the Democratic Party openly and irrefutably associate themselves, in a TV commercial, with the actual atrocities that they are offering to be the protector of? Presently it's as if they are terrified to be seen standing by these God hated things as they actually occur. I offer the term 'woman's health care' in lieu of 'baby abortion' as an instance of how they even try to verbally disassociate themselves from these ugly things, which they champion in exchange for votes, as they pursue their thirst for political office and power via running for office. Sterilized language...an old favorite of the party of Demons.
Darn it, if slaughtering babies is a fine form of woman's health care and a Democratic Party plank (however hard they may struggle to cloak the act in language that sounds less deranged and blood thirsty) then why can't we see a television campaign ad where these Democratic Candidates are standing in the same room at the same time that the act is being performed, looking on with smiley faced approval? Perhaps even cheering the doctor for doing such a savagely fine job?
I have thought of a motto to introduce this new 'truth in advertising' policy that I hope the Democratic Presidential candidates (and all other Democratic candidates as well!) will adopt. It could be called:
"If it's a plank, don't leave it blank!!" or even "Why not be seen at the scene?"
Which commercials might be impacting ones? Well, here is a short list of potential political ads I could picture being impacting:
"The Democratic Presidential candidate stands at the abortion bedside, looking down with benignly engrossed interest as the entire procedure is performed for the world to see on film, and maybe, somewhere during the start of the procedure, he could lean over and tell the woman how brave she is being as they take care of this inconvenient fetus that has so hampered her life of fornication. He could refer to it as a painfully inconvenient lump of fetal cells, and sympathize with her.
Then when the baby has been butchered and extracted from the woman, he can show his understanding of Democrat thinking by saying "Oh, look, it's a baby!" because it is outside of the woman now, so it has turned into a sweet helpless little human. Then he could pick it up and look at it closely and say "Oh no....it's dead! Someone has killed it." And he could look at a 'Feigning Human Emotion' decision tree flow chart and study the portion explaining that if it is an unwanted fetus, then it is sad the mother had to put up with it, so you sympathize with the mother, but if it is a fetus that the family is anxiously awaiting, then you act like it's a little miracle in the mother's tummy. He would have to choose the 'unwanted fetus' option in this case, so he would be directed to feign sympathy for the unwilling mother's struggle against this invader fetus.
And when it's being killed, since he's on the part of the flow chart pertaining to unwanted fetuses, he could lean in for a close shot, and grab the cringing woman's arm in support as the little invader is hacked to death or has it's brains sucked out (case depending, of course).
But then once it's been dragged out of her body and hence has become a baby, he could look at the portion of the chart which explains which emotion to feign if you come upon a dead baby, and I suppose it would say something like "Express surprise, shock, and great sadness, for it had so much potential, so much of life to look forward to, and who knows what it might have contributed to humanity, but all that is now gone! Tears recommended." So he could express the appropriate Democratically approved feigned human emotion for 'finding a dead human baby' as the camera pans in close so that everyone can see how properly wired he is.
Then, to end it all on a high note, he can give it a little bitty "Oh, you poor dead baby!" kiss (politicians do kiss babies, you know) and that would show that he understood, as a Democrat, that your feelings of tenderness towards a baby ought to start flowing once it's cleared the magic envelope of the mother's body.
And then he could bag it.....they have those red bags for bio-hazard trash...and he could tell one of those little husband-wife jokes that play so well at political speeches, like "Well, if there's one thing my wife has taught me, it's who's job it is to take the trash out!" Then he could chuckle, heft the little bag, congratulate the Doctor on a job well done, tell the mom (oops ..ex mom) to be sure to vote for him, and walk off screen as if to go to the dead baby dumpster.
His/her (any candidate of either gender could adapt this material to suit their needs) voice could then be heard saying "I'm... "fill in the name" ... and I support this abortion supporting political ad." Straight, upfront, no waffling...it would surely be viewed in a favorable light by those who are well informed about the ugliness of abortion, yet really do embrace it anyway. And that's the votes they are after, right?
Gay marriage? Maybe they could be present at a gay marriage, and then give both newlyweds a congratulatory kiss on the mouth (or just the one that is playing the gender role opposite that of the Democratic candidate. Or wait, maybe it would be more appropriate to kiss both, since the premise is that a woman is OK and a man is OK for both a woman or a man.) Then he could turn to the camera after having kissed them both on the lips (just a congratulatory peck) and say, "I don't necessarily like to kiss someone of my same gender on television, but just to show my honest support for the practice, I wanted to let the potential voters see me do it. Thank You!" Now that would be very forthright!
Or gays in the military? He could do one of those surprise overseas visits, with a camera crew, and just walk in naked among a group of showering military ladies (if he's a guy candidate) or showering guys (if it's a lady candidate) and he could say "I just wanted to show the world how OK it really is to have to shower with people who are sexually attracted to a person of your same gender." I'm attracted to these (males/females) yet I'm showering with them, and the world is still spinning just fine. So don't be afraid to send your (sons/daughters) to the military just because of a few little rule changes! It's a brand new world order that we're ushering in!" If the surprised group of showering nation-defenders screams, he can just laugh and throw suds, like it was all part of the plan!
He or she could go, unexpectedly and with a film crew (but with the Principal's approval) to a typical second grade school class room somewhere in America, put up a poster with the name 'Jesus' or 'God' on their class room wall, and then he could say "Why is that horrible thing on your wall? Is it appropriate to have names like those on an American classroom wall?" He could look around at their little faces and then, with a grave and very very serious tone of voice he could say "Those are bad bad names for school children to have to see each day! Who wants to help me tear this terrible poster down? Because (he raises the voice a little for affect) it is inapropriate for young children to be taught about God and Jesus in public schools funded largely by Christians!!" Then his face could soften into a winning smile, and he could show his or her playful side as he asks "Who's going to help me tear this down and stomp on it?!!??" And the fade out could be of the Democratic Candidate and the children sanitizing the class room of those hated names.
Anyway, there are other possible scenarios, but the point is, wouldn't it be a fine and brave new world if Democrat's campaign commercials displayed them openly showing their enthusiasm for the things that the Democratic Party so furtively supports, or so deceitfully glosses over. Why shouldn't our public figures go public with what they figure it would serve them well to politically support? Otherwise, it can seem like you're sort of ashamed to be associated with the thing you're supporting, right? Why not be seen at the scene? Don't the voters deserve that much?
|Last Updated ( Friday, 10 May 2013 )|
|< Prev||Next >|