 | ||
| I of course don't agree with Lynda Bell's Right to Life group's positions, she is the National Delegate for the Group and a former President, but the group DOES NOT GENERATE |
Oops, spoke too fast. Found some mean, nasty stuff on their website:
Planned Parenthood is one of the most powerful and insidious organizations active on the American scene today. In this expose, George Grant shows that the legacy of Planned Parenthood have been racism, sexual abuse, murder, and the general corruption of the church, society, civil government, and the media. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, is regarded as a saint by the pro-death forces in America but Grant shows that in reality she was anything but a clean person. She was a racist who wanted to cut down the birth rates of minority groups. This is the book on the abortion holocaust in American today.
Oh, well I stand corrected: Please select read more to see more stuff written about how Choice foes can win elections (this link was found on The Florida Right To Life, Inc. site):
What this is, it took me awhile to figure it out, they are saying to the Right to Life/Anti Choice activists, if you do these things the CHOICE candidate will win. The following is their recipe for failure by Anti Choice activists:
1 Fall in love with yourcandidate
We encourage pro-lifers to get
involved in campaigns. Their active
participation and volunteer activities
can help a pro-life candidate build a
strong campaign. It also puts the pro-
lifer in contact with the candidate so
that if he/she wins, a relationship can
be built and strengthened.
Too often pro-lifers get so excited about their candidate
that if he/she loses to another pro-life candidate (especially
in a primary), the pro-life grassroots person becomes like
the child who lost a game – he takes his toys and goes home.
He doesn’t support the pro-life candidate who won and
won’t volunteer in the campaign or work to get others to
vote for that candidate. Pro-life candidates need the active
support of all pro-lifers and, all too often, without that full
support, a pro-abortion candidate wins.
2
Believe that your candidate
is the only “real” pro-life
candidate in the race
and bash other pro-life
candidates.
In a primary where there are
several pro-life candidates, pro-life
individuals select the candidate they
think is best. Then, unfortunately, some
pro-lifers attack other pro-life candidates as not being “pro-
life enough.”
If, for example, another candidate has a 20-year pro-life
voting record, they pick out the one or two votes that he
didn’t vote right on and attack him as not being really pro-
life. By doing this, the pro-lifer demoralizes other pro-lifers
and weakens enthusiasm for the pro-life candidate who does
win the primary. The pro-abortion candidate will, of course,
take advantage of this.
Because some pro-lifers have attacked the successful
pro-life candidate, the pro-abortion candidate will use that
in pro-life circles to hold down support for his opponent.
Ironically, at the same time, the pro-abortion candidate is
going to other voters, attacking the pro-life candidate as a
“radical pro-life extremist.”
3.
Support a really nice candidate
who is pro-life but has no
chance of winning
Millions of unborn children’s lives are
at stake. That’s why the viability of a
candidate must be considered when we
decide who to vote for. There are some
wonderful pro-lifers who may even be
active in our chapters, who decide to run
for office.
However, if they can’t gain enough support to be a
viable candidate,
they need to be encouraged to step aside
for a candidate who can actually win and take action to
protect unborn children.
4
Expect the candidate to
sound like a Right to Life
chapter chairman
People who are not directly involved
in the pro-life movement are not going
to be as articulate or well-versed on all
the pro-life issues. They may not know
about the abortifacient properties of
RU 486 or understand the ins and outs
of the Mexico City Policy.
Unless there has been some prior discussion with active
pro-lifers, some candidates may not realize that there are
certain “code words” that are interpreted differently by the
pro-life community. Just because the wrong word comes out
of his/her mouth doesn’t necessarily make the candidate a
phony.
Sometimes a truly pro-life candidate can be tripped up
by the media, confused, ill-informed, misquoted, or quoted
out of context. Give him a chance to explain what he really
believes.
Many candidates are against abortion because they have
a religious background that tells them abortion is wrong, or
they have a natural instinct that wants to protect the babies.
They will do what’s right when they’re elected, but that
doesn’t mean they will be comfortable or articulate talking
about the killing of unborn babies.
Remember, words are
nice, action is better.
5
Expect the candidate to
always make abortion the
major issue in the campaign
A November 2008 post-election poll
by The Polling Company
TM found that
34% of voters said abortion affected
the way that they voted. Of those,
25% said they voted for the pro-life
candidate and 9% said they voted for
candidates who favored abortion.
While it is a distinct advantage for candidates to be
pro-life and does make a difference in the outcome of an
election, it also means that 66% of the voters had other
issues that were more important to them. In order to win, a
candidate has to focus on many issues that will appeal to a
broad variety of voters.
It is the job of the right to life movement to inform the pro-
life community about the candidate’s position on abortion. It
is the candidate’s job to reach a cross-section of voters on a
broad range of issues.
When abortion is discussed in the campaign, the candidate
must clearly and directly articulate his/her pro-life position.
However, to expect the candidate to always make abortion
the major issue in the campaign can be a sure way to lose
an election.
6
Vote for a third-party or
independent candidate who
has no chance of winning.
When a general election is
between a pro-life candidate and a
pro-abortion candidate representing
established parties, there will be times
when a third-party or independent
candidate will get into the race,
claiming to be the “real” pro-lifer. He will attack the pro-life
candidate who has a real chance of winning and get other
pro-lifers to do the same.
This is a sure strategy to elect the pro-abortion candidate.
Pro-lifers who support the third-party or independent
candidate, to the detriment of the pro-life candidate who
could win, may feel like they have not compromised their
principles – but if they succeed in indirectly helping to elect
a candidate who will allow the killing of unborn babies to
continue, they have compromised away something far more
important – children’s lives.
18 comments:
She must be following in the footsteps of the dim one (Bruno), paranoid & desperate. He filed early for his re election too. She'll have buckets of special interest money coming in no matter if she filed today or six months before the election. She's a lobbyists dream because she's so stupid and doesn't question anything.....Well, at least we'll get to see our tax dollars at work from her office slush fund for her campaign! The questions she doesn't know is which PAC already has a candidate she doesn't know about who hasn't filed! She won't have the last laugh, the voter's will when she'll be proven a one term commissioner like she was a one term very bad mayor! Let the games begin - she must not have gotten the message about the County leaning left while she heads further in to tea party no mans land!
We need someone potent to run against her
I was thinking of running against her...except I am not in the district.
Can we get some suggested names to run against her? I'll be happy to start a "recruit to run" someone against her in support for anyone else. No matter what get your checkbooks out for donations she'll be heavily funded. Bell has got to go!
3rd anon if you think you can win rent a house in Dist. 8 now to get started. That's what Larry Feldman did against Evelyn Greer when he ran against her for school board because his house was not in the district.
I am not surprised that she is running again. She is power hungry, mean and nasty. Isn't there anyone who could run against her? Whoever it is would get a lot of support.
Hopefully our local newpaper & stations are paying attention to any air time they give Bell for whatever she does from this point forward under = time for an opposition candidate. I'm pretty sure there are quite a few who will be keeping track if they don't. Is Bell under investigation for that Mortgage nonsense or the CRA? She should be in jail as far as I'm concerned. Where's the local main stream media on those issues? hmmmmm
Whom ever runs against her, needs to be prepared to live with strong retaliation poured on their heads if they lose. Their family and friends will dumped on and attacked by bell and her minions. They will not doing business with the county or getting their potholes fixed, either.
Lynda hates me
this I know,
For the Bible
tells me so.
Natacha Seijas went to Lynda Bell house with Terry Murphy, her chauffeur, at around midnight to celebrate their shared victory on Lynda's campaign. Don't expect Seijas will be doing that again.
Lynda Bell is opening and filed early to run so that she can get money to scare off her opponents. Or anyone thinking of running against her.
It will be interesting to see who gives and contributes to Lynda Bell's reelection.
We all will have more to talk about.
Lynda Bell is opening and filed early to run so that she can get money to scare off her opponents. Or anyone thinking of running against her.
It will be interesting to see who gives and contributes to Lynda Bell's reelection.
We all will have more to talk about.
I think she filed because she's delusional & paranoid about her re election. The typical suspects will donate to her like Cemex, Bercow, Mayol, Lennar, et al. One has to wonder if she's going to use her church members as volunteers again or if she's going to say anything about same sex marriage. The early donors will probably be her friends & family package. Any cash donations will probably be coming from the Redland Hotel, and that's just a guess. As to intimidating opposition one can only hope she flips out as badly as Rivera so she can be gone with the wind!
Word on the street is she has Gimenez's fundraiser working for her.
Gimenez has enough problems then to affiliate himself with Bell. Campaign people work for whoever pays them they don't work for free. Being Bell is going to take in tons of special interest money any campaign person no matter who they worked for in the past would be working for whoever could pay them the most and that probably would be Bell. The bottom line though are the voters. Bell has not been a good representative of her district at all. Her record of meddling in incorporated areas is second to none for a commissioner at a county level and her petty ordinances, voting record & so much more will bury her beyond belief no matter how much tax money she uses from her office slush fund to advertise her "goodness". This will be the funnest race to watch to see just how low the lowest denominator in public office will go, at that would be Bell. I'd be looking for a federal prosecutor now because she won't play by the rules and will most certainly mis use her office and position and staff if history is any lesson here.
Filing and raising money early won't make a difference in her re-election prospects. The electorate is weary of her dreadful, meddling, and retaliatory behavior and her support of ludicrous issues such as pink slime and front-yard chain link fences. Folks want a real commissioner; not some peculiar, laughable excuse for one.
Her treasurer's reports will be scrutinized and used against her. Her meager legislative record will be used against her. A viable candidate will emerge that will send her home.
Bell is a pathetic political aberration that needs to be replaced with someone with good intentions. The District 8 community must pull together to rid itself of her.
Bell is a ding-dong, but the guilt by association with Right to Life is wrong. And the criticism by Right to Life of Planned Parenthood Margaret Singer is accurate. Singer favored birth control and eugenics to reduce the population of blacks and the poor. Nice heroine.
THE SANGER YEARS
Planned Parenthood dates its beginnings to 1916 when Sanger, her sister, and a friend open America's first birth control clinic in Brooklyn, New York. In Sanger's America, women cannot vote, sign contracts, have bank accounts, or divorce abusive husbands. They cannot control the number of children they have or obtain information about birth control, because in the 1870s a series of draconian measures, called the Comstock laws, made contraception illegal and declared information about family planning and contraception "obscene."
Sanger knows the tragic toll of such ignorance. Her mother had 18 pregnancies, bore 11 children, and died in 1899 at the age of 40. Working as a nurse with immigrant families on New York's Lower East Side, Sanger witnesses the sickness, misery, and death that result from unwanted pregnancy and illegal abortion. The clinic she opens provides contraceptive advice to poor, immigrant women, some of whom line up hours before the doors open. Police raid the clinic and all three women are convicted of disseminating birth control information.
Undaunted, Sanger founds The Birth Control Review, the first scientific journal devoted to contraception. She also appeals her conviction, which leads to a new, liberalized interpretation of New York's anti-contraception statute. In 1923 Sanger opens the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau in Manhattan to provide contraceptive devices to women and collect accurate statistics to prove their safety and long-term effectiveness.
That same year, Sanger incorporates the American Birth Control League, an ambitious new organization that embraces the global issues of world population growth, disarmament, and world famine. The two organizations subsequently merge, and later become Planned Parenthood® Federation of America, Inc. (PPFA®).
Okay read the factcheck.org skinny on Sanger:
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/11/cains-false-attack-on-planned-parenthood/
Post a Comment