Signed onto this letter asking for the restoration of strong, longstanding pro-life provisions in the Republican platform:

July 12, 2024 

Dear Republican National Convention Delegates: 

For the first time in decades, the Republican Platform retreats on life. Pro-life Americans are rightly outraged and gravely concerned. 

As drafted, the platform removes long-standing Republican promises on life, from prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortion to a Constitutional amendment to specific protections for unborn babies. 

Since 1976, the platform has supported a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution.

Since 1980, the platform has called for ending taxpayer funding for abortion. 

Since 1984, the platform has affirmed that the 14th Amendment already protects unborn children.  Beginning in 1996, the platform condemned partial-birth abortion. 

In 2004, language was added to protect babies born alive following failed abortions. 

In 2012, language was added to protect pain-capable babies. 

In 2016, language was added opposing federal funding for embryo harvesting. Since the Reagan Revolution, the party has spoken with an unambiguous voice – Republicans stand for life. 

Today, that promise has been watered down and ultimately compromised. As you gather in Milwaukee for the Republican National Convention, the eyes of conservatives across America are upon you. As delegates, ensuring a strong platform is your responsibility. You are the grassroots conservative leaders, entrusted by the conservatives of your states, to represent their values at the national level. 

This is the last opportunity to restore the Republican Party’s strong pro-life platform. You can restore the RNC’s pro-life platform. 

We encourage you to support the Platform Committee’s Minority Report, amendments that strengthen the pro-life resolve of the platform, and to vote down any platform that weakens the party’s pro-life stance.

Sincerely,

[List of signers]

 

 July 9, 2024

Kamala’s way in 

OPINION:

“At Essence, Black Democrats rally behind Biden and talk up Kamala Harris” (web, July 7) quotes Antjuan Seawright, a Black Democratic consultant, as declaring that if President Biden drops out of the race, choosing “anyone other than Kamala would be malpractice — and it would tear the party apart.”

As more and more elected Democrats urge Mr. Biden to withdraw and party leaders convene to plot alternatives, the president retreats into the defiant delusion that marks dementia. Most recently he insisted that only “if the Lord Almighty comes out and tells me” to get out of the race, “I might do that.”

While Mr. Biden debates whether to obey a voice from heaven, rest assured that Vice President Kamala Harris and other party leaders are not waiting for a sign in the sky to scheme Plan B.

Every day that the polls worsen and the election approaches, the appeal of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution becomes more alluring. The amendment provides that “Whenever the Vice President and a majority of [the Cabinet declare] … that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”

Leading up to that moment, Ms. Harris and her co-conspirators would begin systematically leaking to the media more and more evidence of Mr. Biden’s cognitive chaos. A parade of party leaders would report that a clearly detached-from-reality Mr. Biden has irrationally rejected their pleas for his withdrawal or resignation.

And then, in collusion with Cabinet members promised a role in her upcoming administration, Ms. Harris would be able to seize by political fiat the office she never could reach through the popular vote and secure for herself the nomination of the party.

Copyright© 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. 

 

Tuesday, May 7, 2024

OPINION:

With South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem now dogged by her own publicized poor judgment (“Noem defends her shooting of chicken-killing dog,” web, May 2), who should rise to the top of Donald Trump‘s vice presidential candidate shortlist? Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo‘s experience, steadiness, faith and conservative principles make him the most qualified and reassuring choice.

Mr. Pompeo‘s resume includes a Harvard Law School degree and tax law experience, a U.S. Army career as a captain, entrepreneurial endeavors, a congressional career and loyal service as the former president’s Central Intelligence Agency director and secretary of state.

The choice of Mr. Pompeo would reassure the pro-life and evangelical communities that Mr. Trump‘s second administration will have a strong voice urging support for the value of human life and protection of religious freedom. Mr. Trump and Mr. Pompeo can hammer home the fact that Democrats insist on legalizing abortion right up to the point of birth — a position deplored by most Americans and adopted by only a handful of countries, including China, Vietnam and North Korea.

Choosing Mr. Pompeo would prove both principled and pragmatic, as it would solidify and energize the former president’s base while attracting independents who value experience, stability and strength in foreign affairs at a time when our adversaries are advancing.

Mr. Pompeo‘s solid conservative credentials would reassure ideological conservatives that a second Trump term would steer our careening nation back toward limited government, fiscal responsibility, a strong national defense and judicial constitutional restraint.

While coalescing conservatives and the faith community on whom his election depends, choosing Mr. Pompeo would provide Mr. Trump with a Renaissance man upon whom to depend for counsel and support.

JONATHAN IMBODY

Mechanicsville, Virginia

 

March 29, 2024

Clinton abused powers on abortion drug

COMMENTARY

OPINION:

While the Supreme Court analyzes the technical legal standing of pro-life doctors to sue the Food and Drug Administration over the chemical abortion pill mifepristone, the case holds the potential to highlight the health dangers to women posed by the drug and its politically prompted approval (“Supreme Court justices weigh rolling back use of the abortion pill,” Web, March 26).

When I worked with these doctors and pro-life advocates in 2002 to help draft the original “Citizen Petition” complaint against the FDA‘s politically tainted fast-tracking of the drug, we noted that the “FDA's violation of its standards and rules have put women’s health and lives at risk.” We detailed how the FDA waived its own rules in fast-tracking the drug (such as not requiring testing on minors). The FDA also developed a drug regimen inconsistent with clinical trials. Transvaginal ultrasounds that can date a pregnancy and rule out dangerous ectopic pregnancies, for example, while employed in the U.S. clinical trial, were not required under the FDA's regimen.

We also revealed the intense lobbying for the drug by the Clinton administration, first to bring what was then a French abortion pill to the U.S. and then to fast-track its approval by the FDA.

We highlighted the disturbing fact that “President Clinton reportedly wrote to [French abortion pill manufacturer] Hoechst asking the company to file a new drug application with the FDA—an unprecedented situation in the pharmaceutical industry—which Hoechst intransigently refused to do.” Undeterred, the Clinton administration, with Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala leading the campaign, worked feverishly to get the drug’s patent rights transferred to an American company, which then hired a Chinese manufacturer to produce the drug.

Ultimately, the FDA illegitimately and perversely deployed Subpart H—a fast-track mechanism developed for rapid approval of drugs for life-threatening illnesses such as HIV—to approve a life-ending abortion drug.

Whatever the court decides regarding the legal standing of pro-life doctors in this lawsuit, nothing will change the dangers posed by the drug to women or the dangers posed to the American public by a politicized FDA.

JONATHAN IMBODY

Mechanicsville, Virginia

 

Oblivious Biden

Published in The Washington Times, June 18, 2022

By Jonathan Imbody

As polls indicate that roughly only one in three Americans approve of his performance, President Biden has responded incongruously with self-congratulatory rhetoric. The inverse relationship between the president's popularity and pronouncements is striking:

As inflation races past income and families choose between eating or driving, Biden responds blithely, "Look, here’s where we are. We have the fastest growing economy in the world. The world. The world."