Mitt Romney claims to be pro-life, though the record of his entire career in public life says otherwise. This naturally leads people who know the facts to expect that his actions as President will follow his well- established pattern of talking in one direction while walking the opposite way. Yet and still some ignorant or pathetically gullible moral conservatives have fallen prey to the notion that his decision to choose Paul Ryan should reassure pro-life voters who quite logically conclude that this will be the case.
Using the Obama bogeyman to good effect, the elitist faction’s propagandists have some of these folks so thoroughly terrorized that their brains have seized up. They are no longer capable of rational thought. However the rest may want to consider the implications of the Romney/Ryan campaign’s statement about Todd Akin’s stand against murdering innocent children conceived in the course of a forcible rape. “Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan disagree with Akin’s statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape,” the statement read.
Two things are especially noteworthy about this statement: 1) It does not focus on Todd Akin’s alleged “gaffe”– his use of the term “legitimate rape.” (Maybe the campaign staff were unwilling to belie their own intelligence, unlike many others in the elitist faction’s media claque.) 2) It uses the occasion make it clear that a Romney/Ryan administration will leave in place the legitimacy which the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions purport to confer on abortion in the case of rape. ( I say “purport to confer” because they cannot actually make lawful that which violates the God-endowed unalienable right to life.)
Ironically the Romney/Ryan campaign’s statement aims to do precisely what Todd Akin’s statement did not do, i.e., confer legitimacy on an act (the intentional and specific destruction of innocent human life) that human beings can never legitimately undertake. But there’s something even more ironic. The Romney/Ryan campaign issued the statement in order to distance itself from Todd Akin’s principled stand against murdering innocent children conceived in the course of forcible rape. But it is well known that Paul Ryan takes the same position as Akin: “…as a Congressional candidate in 1998…Ryan said he opposed all abortion except in cases where the mother’s life was in danger. And last year, Ryan co-sponsored federal legislation called the “Sanctity of Human Life Act” meant to “provide that human life shall be deemed to begin with fertilization.”
If this episode is any indication of Paul Ryan’s likely role as Vice-President, it indicates precisely what sensible people would expect. Ryan’s name and pro-life reputation will be used to lend a false air of pro-life credibility to actions that repudiate the pro-life views and actions on which his reputation is based.
I have often argued that the main difference between Obama and Romney is that Romney hides his Obama-like features behind a conservative façade. Ryan’s function is and will be to add a touch of conservative realism to that façade.
“My what big principles you have,” said Little Red Riding Hood.
“The better to fool you with,” replied the big bad wolf.