Paul's Campaign Report

We've got 'em on the run!

Well, my primary challenge against my incumbent, Republican, pro-abortion state representative is going very well. With less than five days left before election day next Tuesday, we're running radio ads, we're putting out yard signs, sending out literature, going door-to-door, making robo-calls, and attracting media attention. We have an impressive list of endorsements, we've been interviewed on the radio, we've walked in parades, and made a lot of friends.

Our local pro-life organizations have really stepped up to the plate, as well.

And my opponent is nervous. First, she put out a mailer accusing me of lying about her, but never mentioned what lie I was alleged to have told.

Now she has a new mailer in which, for the first time ever, she self-identifies as a Republican, and is trying to pass herself off as a conservative. I don't think it's going to work. The newspapers, in their coverage of this race, have been very clear that I'm the pro-life, pro-traditional-marriage candidate, and she's the social "moderate". In fact, there's nothing moderate about her social positions at all. The main local paper, in endorsing her, even called me a "thoughtful candidate." And they also got her to admit for the first time her willingness to support same-sex civil unions.

And I've learned that within two weeks after the primary, the Illinois FOCA bill will be introduced in the Illinois House again. This is a terrible bill, which my opponent voted for last year. I think the best way to defeat it this year is if the House members see that a legislator who voted for it last year lost her seat over it.

There's just one problem, and I'm sure you've guessed from the graphic below what it is. I need more money to finish this campaign.

It was the readers of this blog who came through for me first, back in July and August, when I was just getting started. Now, I need your help again.

No amount is too big, and none is too small, but there is, I'm sorry to say, a certain time pressure about the situation, a feeling of -- well, much as I hate to say it -- urgency in my appeal.

I know you're not rich, but $50 right now, from enough of you, could mean a great deal.

What do you say?

Hooray... sort of... [UPDATED]

[guest commentary by Paladin]

Remember my mixed reaction when Ted Kennedy died? The obvious "addition by subtraction" was counterbalanced by the somber reality that Ted Kennedy's soul was, by all rational reckoning, in serious peril.

And now... we have Senator-elect Scott Brown.

Please don't get me wrong. It's not morally wrong for pro-lifers to cheer his victory over the mind-numbingly pro-abortion Martha Coakley! By all means: cheer, whoop, give victory fist pumps, and--above all--breathe a sigh of (somewhat guarded) relief that the current "death bill" may have met its final match in Congress! Do so with a clean conscience!

Just don't let's get muddled about what actually happened.

Senator-elect Brown has a great many things going for him (above and beyond looks and charisma--not terribly relevant, in the moral sphere): he supports the sane idea of subsidiarity (h/t: Brian Burch, of Catholic Vote Action), he's against federal funding of abortions, and he's in favour of conscience protection for health care workers. He also has some serious shortcomings--not the least of which is his support of Roe v. Wade. The act of getting him elected was certainly a clear and unambiguous case where the principle of double effect applied; by getting him in, we took out a far greater threat to the unborn (and others)... especially given the insanity... er... liberality of Massachusetts, regarding the personhood of the unborn, at present. But let's not confuse that for an unambiguous victory for life.

What are our options, at this point? Pray for Senator-elect Brown, certainly--especially for his conversion on these critical moral issues. Deluge him with letters (perhaps while congratulating him on his victory) asking that he take steps to explore the issue of life with those who are pro-life, and who can answer his questions on the subject (e.g. Fr. Frank Pavone, etc.). Make our voices heard unambiguously in support of all human life, from conception to natural death... especially when our pro-choice neighbours hear us cheering about his election; try never to leave anyone with the impression that this was anything but the probable avoidance of a much greater evil (i.e. the current death bill being argued in Congress).

:) Mind you... it's nice to have something to celebrate, after over a year of being under almost relentless siege by the President of Death and his servants/allies! Celebrate away--rejoicing with the good and with the truth is a hallmark of perfect love, after all (cf. 1 Corinthians 13:6)...! Just don't let our eyes drop from the ball, at this critical point.


[UPDATE]

At the risk of driving some of the pro-death blogosphere trolls into overdrive, I offer this prayer in thanksgiving to God for the aversion of far worse evils than we might have seen, had Scott Brown not gotten elected:

Non nobis, non nobis, Domine
Sed nomini tuo da gloriam.

Not to us, not to us, o Lord,
But to your name give glory.

(H/T: the irreproducible Patrick Archbold, of Creative Minority Report)

Regular Guy Endorsed By Eagle Forum

I thought I might be overdue with sharing a bit of campaign news with the blog audience. We're all pretty exicted about this endorsement:

Eagle Forum of Illinois Endorses Paul Mitchell for State House Seat

January 13, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Gurnee-IL: Eagle Forum of Illinois yesterday announced its endorsement of businessman Paul Mitchell in his race for nomination to the Illinois House in the 62nd District. “I am thrilled to receive Eagle Forum’s endorsement,” said Mitchell this morning. “The Eagle Forum is not only a powerful force in Illinois, but across our nation in the effort to foster conservative values in government,” Mitchell said. “I’m honored to receive this endorsement and proud to stand with the Forum in its efforts to strengthen families, fight for life, and protect our freedoms.”

In addition to Eagle Forum, Mitchell’s endorsements include Tax Accountability (the political arm of the National Taxpayers Union of Illinois), Illinois Conservatives, the Illinois Federation for Right to Life PAC, the Illinois Center Right Coalition, and numerous others.

Eagle Forum, a national organization of citizen-volunteers, participates in the public policymaking process. The Illinois division is today headed by former Illinois State Rep. Penny Pullen. Eagle Forum was originally founded and led by the conservative icon and legend, Phyllis Schlafly, now of St. Louis, previously of Alton, Illinois.

“Various Eagle Forum leaders in our state have examined the credentials and positions of the candidates seeking this nomination,” said Miss Pullen. “This was an easy choice. Paul Mitchell is challenging one of those incumbents who need to leave office. Her embrace of the radical Freedom of Choice Act just a year ago to invalidate every restriction Illinois has enacted to curb abortion casts doubt on her judgment and the principles she uses to make decisions about legislation affecting our families. Paul Mitchell is an outstanding candidate who can be counted on by families in the 62nd District to champion their interests. We salute his outspoken advocacy of the right to life and for protecting parental rights.

“Voters can trust Paul Mitchell, and we wish him well in the Feb. 2 GOP primary.”

The Eagle Forum is on the web, here: http://eagleforum.org

Contact:
Lynn Thomas

http://paulfor62.com

caoilfhionn1@gmail.com
630-219-0126

That darn Abortion/Breast Cancer Link

[guest commentary by Paladin]

...just won't go away, will it? From the excellent Lifenews.com:

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The National Cancer Institute gained a reputation for putting politics over science when it did everything possible to deny dissenting opinion during a meeting to establish whether or not a link exists between abortion and breast cancer.

Now, the main NCI acivist who got the agency to deny the abortion-breast cancer link has co-authored a study admitting the abortion-breast cancer link is true, calling it a "known risk factor."

Scientists and educators about the abortion-breast cancer link point to a new study that shows a top NCI official may be re-thinking the refusal to acknowledge the link.

So... anyone on the "pro-choice" side, especially those who'd trumpeted the "official scientific denials" of an ABC link: what say you?