Questionable Judgment

My wife received a fundraising letter from Conservativepetitions.com and Phil Sheldon. The letter was sent in regards to Randall Terry, the founder of Operation Rescue who recently lost a lawsuit to NOW and the ACLU for his pro-life activism. As they believe that Randall Terry endured the court battle on behalf of the entire pro-life movement that the pro-life movement should restore all that has been taken so that we can "help Randall for the battles that lie ahead".

I have a serious problem with this. The organization that Terry found, Operation Save America (formerly known as Operation Rescue) in February of 2000 released a statement disassociating itself from Mr. Terry and warning Christians against supporting him. The letter, which you can read here was not full of hate or anger but written in a Spirit of true sorrow as Terry had fallen.

Randall Terry has continued to raise funds and ask people for money for his various endeavors while many in the pro-life movement gladly shell out their money to support his causes. What he never makes mention of is the fact that he has divorced his wife without cause and married a former aide. In addition to this, he was censured (i.e. the protestant version of ex-communication) from his church in upstate New York.

Terry called his successor at Operation Save America "a Judas" for revealing what Terry had done. Still many have continued to support him. I donated to Randall Terry's 1998 Congressional Campaign and purchased a copy of his Leadership Institute tapes but I'm not supporting him or his future endeavors.

The problem of this man having any "battles ahead" is obvious. He has no moral authority from which to speak. As Reverend Patrick Mahoney observed, "There is 100 percent agreement in the pro-life community that Randall not be at the lead on any issue that impacts our movement. Our movement is rooted in biblical ethics and morals. He has too much baggage. The issue becomes him."

I have to question the judgment of the people who prepared that letter as well as those who signed it. Randall Terry is a huge hypocrite. This man is supposed to be an advocate for the family but left his wife and family because "the music was gone". See this New York Times Article for more.

The only argument to be made for giving money to Randall Terry is that he has worked and suffered for the pro-life and pro-family movements. Indeed he has. While violating minor laws, Terry was a strong voice for the pro-life movement. Give him credit. He inspired hundreds of people to get off their rear ends and become active in the pro-life movement. While Terry was often extreme and at many times he was extremely wrong, he was a man of principle who fought for his beliefs.

However, lets face reality we're not sending this donation back in time to the plucky, energetic pro-life leader who takes on Jacque Sturges Pornography but rather the conman who has for the past three years downplayed and hidden his profound change in theology and personal character from his supporters, those who would be least likely to accept it.

I don't mean to imply that a divorce or a single personal failure should disqualify one from receiving any support from the public. Indeed, President Reagan himself was divorced, although he didn't initiate it and it wasn't because the music had died. And you can find numerous people to use as examples.

Terry is different than these others for one simple reason. His entire political life and most of his crusades are based on moral issues. I'm not the only one who sees the irony of a divorced man married to someone more than a decade younger than he going to Vermont to save the family from the danger posed by homosexuals. This is not a youthful indiscretion, this is not old news, this is a recent and major lapse of moral judgment for which Mr. Terry remains totally unrepentant.

In a final insult to Cindy Terry and her children, the letter urges the recipients to make out their checks to the Terry Family Trust. If we're honest, we know that the first Terry family was abandoned by their father in 1999.

The men who signed the letter included Alan Keyes, Dr. Frank Pavone, and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tx). I give them the benefit of the doubt. Randall Terry's problems are not common public knowledge and they may have simply reacted to a request for help from a former pro-life leader who has been wrongly robbed by leftist organizations and liberal courts without researching his most recent activities.

However, these men owe us, their constituency, a better effort than that. As leaders, many people depend on their judgment and opinions. Some people may have sent some money to Mr. Terry and if they had known what type of life he's been living the past few years, they would have refused to support this embarrassment to the pro-life community with their hard-earned money.

Adam Graham was the Montana State Coordinator for the Alan Keyes Campaign in the Year 2000.

How do you know a Politician's lost it? When they start attacking media personalities that oppose them. When the most powerful Democrat in Washington picks a fight with the most listened-to talk show host in America, you know that the Democrats are in trouble.

This also tells us something key about the popularity of President. One reason Rush is a target is Bush is too popular to take on while Dennis Hastert would be difficult to demonize and Trent Lott is extremely obscure to most Americans. Limbaugh is an easy target but a ridiculous one. He doesn't make policy, indeed, he has often opposed administration policies on a number of points.

However, truth or substance doesn't matter to Daschle. He just needs a target, a symbol to unite the Democrats against. This isn't going to work and if in two years, the Democrats are still attacking Rush Limbaugh, they'll be weaker at the national level than they've been in more than 70 years.

In an ideal world, I'd prefer Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court Chief Justice as well, if for nothing else than for the age issue. Scalia isn't exactly a Spring Chicken. If Thomas took the reins of this court, he could continue in his post a good 20 years. Judge Thomas has said he won't go through another confirmation hearing after his "high tech lynching" in 1991. So I'd probably prefer Justice Scalia over the other possibilities.

I'd like Judge Starr on the court, he's definitely earned it, but appointing Starr is just asking for a Borking.