Posts

6428092287_1632eb4035_b

What the Media Sycophants Won’t Tell You About Murkowski’s Primary Victory

At first glance Lisa Murkowski’s Republican Primary election victory seems pretty impressive. But it is anything but the grand comeback story the Establishment media would have you believe.

Consider the competition.

Paul Kendall, local political activist, conspiracy buff, and self-acclaimed expert of all things futuristic. Nobody considers him a serious candidate, and I mean nobody. Yet he received almost 8% of the vote. No campaign, no advertising, a website that still reads “under construction” the day after the election. He wouldn’t even respond to media questions about his campaign platform.

Thomas Lamb, blue collar worker, Air Force veteran, local blogger, unsuccessful candidate for the Alaska State House, and all around good guy. But his campaign consisted of a few scattershot radio ads and social media. He garnered between 5-6% percent of the vote.

Bob Lochner, a veteran and former mechanic who works on the North Slope. He didn’t have a traditional campaign, and spent a grand total of about $20K, reportedly most of it on signs, pocket Constitutions, and campaign expenses. Unlike his fellow challengers, Bob had the good fortune of being from the Mat-Su Valley where the highest concentration of conservatives in the state reside. He garnered a very respectable 15%.

All good men I’m sure, but the obvious truth is that Lisa Murkowski didn’t have a legitimate challenger. Still almost 29% of the electorate from her own party wouldn’t vote for the sitting US Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chair in a state whose lifeblood is the energy industry, and that doesn’t include those who voted and chose to leave the Senate portion of their ballot blank.

So what do the numbers really say? I’m glad you asked.

Lisa Murkowski decided to run against her party’s nominee in the last cycle, ostensibly because only a small number of Alaskans voted for the nominee and that sample wasn’t representative of the state. Joe Miller’s 55,878 votes were only 11.5% of registered voters at the time. So maybe she had a point?

Well, neither of Alaska’s sitting US Senators have ever won that many votes in a Republican primary, nor represented that much of the electorate in a general election. (Dan Sullivan received 44,740 votes, 9% of registered voters in 2014.

In 2004 Lisa Murkowski won a contested primary with – wait for it – 45,710 votes, just 9.98% of registered voters.

Fast forward to 2016. With 99.8% of precincts reporting, Lisa Murkowski cruises to an overwhelming landslide victory with 71% percent of the vote – drumroll – and a grand total of 35,208 votes, just 6.8% of registered Alaska voters.

And that was after she spent an astonishing $4.6 million, or over $130 per vote!

Not since 1974 when Alaska dominated by Democrats and Mike Gravel was a sitting United States Senator has a Republican nominee won less votes. Joe Miller’s 32% second place finish in the three-way 2014 primary garnered more votes.

Clearly, by Senator Murkowski’s standards, this is not a legitimate outcome, and clearly isn’t representative of the Alaska electorate.

Perhaps Alaskans deserve another choice in the general election. After all, isn’t that the gospel according to Lisa Murkowski?

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

418523552_1280x940

Lisa Murkowski’s Stealth War on Traditional Values

When Lisa Murkowski ran for State House in 1998, it was in the context of a strong Republican push for a new amendment to Alaska’s State Constitution defining a valid marriage as existing between “one man and one woman.” The soon-to-be State Representative said she supported that effort.

In every subsequent election cycle, including those since her appointment (by her father) to the United States Senate, Murkowski has continued to claim she’s a pro-traditional marriage candidate. Until now.

What has gone mostly unreported and largely unnoticed is her evolution on LGBT issues since joining the Senate.

Though Murkowski supported a Democrat hate crimes expansion for sexual orientation air-dropped into a Defense Authorization bill in 2009, incidentally holding our service men and women in harm’s way hostage to the Left’s radical social agenda during a time of war, only after her 2010 re-election did she come out of the closet to openly support the LGBT agenda.

Immediately after the 2010 election, she joined Democrats to vote for the repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. And again Murkowski used the military as a social science laboratory.

This vote came less than two months after telling Alaskans on state-wide television that she couldn’t take a position on the legislation, owing to the fact that results from a field study soliciting feedback from military personnel hadn’t come back yet.

But that was before the election. Shortly thereafter the study came back. An overwhelming majority of our active duty service men and women opposed the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” She voted for it anyway. It was all a sham. Murkowski had her own agenda.

In 2012, she publicly advocated for Anchorage Proposition 5, a measure that sought to codify special rights for homosexual and transgendered persons, endangering personal privacy and religious liberty.

In June of 2013, Murkowski made national headlines by offering a full-throated endorsement of same-sex marriage, claiming to have “evolved” on the issue. Ironically, Barack Obama used the same terminology just a year earlier to explain his turnaround on the same issue.

In November 2013, Murkowski voted for the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), the LGBT lobby’s top legislative priority and a bill religious liberty activists believe to be an imminent threat to the First Amendment.

When the US Supreme Court’s 5-4 Obergefell decision came down, Lisa Murkowski hailed it as “the right [decision].” All four conservative Justices on the High Court denounced the decision as an activist intervention.

And earlier this year when President Obama overstepped his Constitutional authority to issue an edict allowing transgender students to use the bathroom of their choice, Lisa Murkowski was silent, despite her much ballyhooed campaign rhetoric about “fighting federal overreach.”

What is most striking about Murkowski’s silence is that the US Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions issued a letter of rebuke stating: “It is not appropriate for a federal executive agency to issue ‘guidance’ for every school as if it were the law. Article I of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the exclusive right to make laws.”

Lisa Murkowski declined to join the Majority in protesting the Administration’s lawless action. So much for “fighting federal overreach.” Apparently, good standing with the LGBT lobby is more important to Senator Murkowski than the US Constitution. Silence is consent.

If you believe in traditional values, don’t be deceived. Lisa Murkowski is part of the war on traditional values.

Mark Twain once famously quipped, “No man’s life, liberty or property are secure while the legislature is in session.” He was clearly talking about politicians like Lisa Murkowski, who is an imminent threat to our First Amendment religious liberties.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Lisa_Murkowski_in_kuspuk

Pro-Life Alaskans Should Reject Murkowski’s Pro-Abortion Extremism

There appears to be some confusion among pro-life Alaskans on whether Lisa Murkowski is pro-life or not, but there shouldn’t be. From her earliest days in the United States Senate, it has been abundantly clear where she stands on the sanctity of human life.

In 2003, she voted for a Sense of the Senate Amendment concerning Roe v. Wade that affirmed the Court’s decision, stating: “The decision of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade was appropriate and secures an important constitutional right, and such decision should not be overturned.”

In 2012, the Senator reaffirmed her support for the High Court’s decision, stating that “abortion in this country has been deemed legal, and the right to a safe and legal abortion has been confirmed by the courts, and I stand by that.” She even went so far as to accuse the Republican Party of a “War on Women.”

Murkowski has a consistent record of voting to confirm judges who will uphold Roe v. Wade as “the law of the land.”

But the worst of it is not just that Senator Murkowski supports abortion on demand and demonstrates a reckless disregard for the sanctity of human life, but that she has been one of just a handful of Republicans to fight for taxpayer funding for the nation’s largest abortion provider. This, despite the fact that Planned Parenthood has been repeatedly exposed as a lawless organization that protects sexual predators, discriminates against girls through sex selective abortions, and even supports illegally harvesting and selling aborted baby parts.

She has voted on multiple occasions for a controversial measure to appropriate federal funds for embryonic stem cell research, a policy that allows human life to be destroyed in the name of progress.

Murkowski has also repeatedly voted against the “Mexico City Policy,” a measure enacted by President Reagan to bar US taxpayer dollars from going to foreign non-governmental organizations that perform or promote abortions. President Obama struck down the law by executive order in 2009, a decision protected by Lisa Murkowski and the Democrats, most lately in June of 2015.

So don’t buy Murkowski’s empty rhetoric about support for the federal Hyde Amendment, in this case more appropriately tabbed the federal Hide Amendment. She does in fact support federal funding for abortion, despite overwhelming opposition from a strong majority of the American electorate.

Last fall the Republican Senate had an historic opportunity to vote on a late-term abortion ban. And while it seemed to enjoy wide public support, Senator Murkowski was a no-show for the vote. The Democrat Senate Minority was able to easily defeat the measure.

Make no mistake about it, there is no question where Lisa Murkowski stands on the Constitutional Right to life. She is a pro-abortion extremist. That’s why she has enjoyed the electoral support of Republican Majority for Choice and Planned Parenthood.

Pro-life Alaskans should reject Murkowski’s pro-abortion extremism and vote for a pro-life alternative in Tuesday’s Republican primary.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

48414424_1280x960 (1)

Whoppers, and Whopper Tellers.

I had to laugh. Really, I had to.

I was listening to a Lisa Murkowski campaign ad and I heard this: “Her word is her bond.” I suspected this wasn’t true so I did some digging. I found that she can really tell some whoppers.

Like the one in 2010 she told to the Penninsula Clarion: When asked if she would support the winner of the Republican primary (she was running against Joe Miller for the senate seat her dad, Frank, gave her.) “Murkowski said she respects the electorate and would support whoever wins.” Well, we soon found out that wasn’t really going to happen. In fact, after losing that primary to Miller she decided to run a write-in campaign and eventually defeated him in the general election with the help of…well… a lot of Liberals. No surprise there of course since she is quite the Liberal herself. But that whopper is kinda right in your face, isn’t it?

And then there’s the whole issue about how her thoughts on things… really important things… evolve. I’m not talking about someone who in mid-life decides that Jiff is better than Skippy. I’m not even talking about someone who as a lifelong Green Bay Packer fan “evolves” into a Minnesota Vikings fan. (This is not possible of course, but I think you get the point.) No, I’m talking about marriage. You know, that institution that is the very foundation of civilized society. Well, in October of 2010, she told a newspaper from the Anchorage Archdiocese, The Catholic Anchor:

“I believe marriages should be legally defined as between one man and one woman. I have voted in support of efforts in the Senate to enact a Constitutional amendment that would have limited marriage to one man and one woman only.”

But just three years later she wrote this in an op-ed:

Like the majority of Alaskans, I supported a constitutional amendment in 1998 defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, but my thinking has evolved as America has witnessed a clear cultural shift. Fifteen years after that vote, I find that when one looks closer at the issue, you quickly realize that same sex unions or civil marriages are consistent with the independent mindset of our state – and they deserve a hands-off approach from our federal policies.

Are you starting to get the picture that when Lisa Murkowski tells us something we probably should wait at least a couple of years to see if she really means it. I mean, what is she going to “evolve” on next. Is she going to support some tax scheme on the energy sector that suggests that global climate change is caused by your SUV? Or, say the federal government under President Hillary decides that your AR-15 in the closet is a threat to national security so you had just better turn it over to your local Federales… will Senator Lisa “evolve” on the Second Amendment? We really don’t know, do we? In fact we don’t know where she will stand on anything because she is prone to telling whoppers as she “evolves.” And we all know what the Good Book says about that, and I quote; “Never trust a Whopper Teller.”

Finally, in another ad Senator Murkowski makes the claim she is the “Conservative Voice for Alaska.” The reality is that by any standard the good senator is the second most liberal Republican in the Senate. We have a name for these kind of Republicans, RINO (Republican In Name Only). She’s so liberal Mark Begich wanted to use her in his campaign ads the last time he ran in 2014. She didn’t like that one bit because she knew she had to run…in Alaska…in 2016…right now.

You see, the Republican Party has always stood for those principles which have made America what it is. It was created to fight slavery. It stood against the Progressivism early in the last century that Woodrow Wilson sought to impose on America. And it supported the Civil Rights Movement when nearly all Democrats held fast to Jim Crow.

Senator Murkowski doesn’t agree with most of those principles articulated in the GOP platform. Indeed, she scorns them. She fights for taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood even after we learned it was selling the body parts of aborted children. What kind of seared conscience can make that argument?

I guess she believes she is a Republican and a Conservative because she fights to have more ice-breakers built, or strives to have our natural resources developed, or advocates for a strong national defense or even because she wants the pipeline filled. Well just remember, Senator Mark Begich, the flaming Liberal that he is, fought for those very same things. At least he was always honest with us when he claimed to be a Liberal.

The problem I have here is that far too many politicians have the nasty little habit of telling us one thing when they want our vote, but then doing something completely different after we elect them. But the even greater problem is that we don’t do our job as citizens. That is, we don’t hold the Whopper Tellers to their word. We just let them tell us whoppers and then we put them back right back in office, over and over. We let them tell us they are with us…that they are somehow conservative…when they are not. We let them “evolve” when really they are just telling whoppers.

We do have a choice of course. On August 16th there is a Republican primary where we can vote for someone else who might actually be a Conservative, and who just might tell us a few less whoppers.

If that doesn’t work for you try voting for a Libertarian. Either way, it’s time to end the whoppers, and the Whopper Tellers who tell them.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

48414424_1280x960

This Liberal GOP Senator Votes With Obama More Than Any Other up for Re-Election

Lisa Murkowski may not be a household name outside of her home state of Alaska, but she is known within the halls of the Senate for being among the most liberal lawmakers with an “R” by her name.

In 2010, she barely won re-election, taking a plurality of the votes in a three-way race, but Alaskan Republicans are watching with increasing angst, though some have given into resignation, as no viable conservative candidate has stepped forward to challenge her.

Roll Call reported that Murkowski in the last session of Congress was second only to Sen. Susan Collins of Maine among Republicans most likely to vote with President Obama, doing so 72 percent of the time.

Alaska’s senior senator scored below nearly all her Republican colleagues in the Heritage Action Scorecard of votes with 33 percent. The average for GOP senators was 59 percent, with Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio coming in at 100 and 90 percent, respectively. Murkowski also falls near the bottom of the American Conservative Union (the sponsor of CPAC) rating for all GOP senators (slightly above Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk), and was given an “F” grade by Conservative Review.

Yet Murkowski knows conservatism is still important to a significant percentage of the state’s Republican Party, so as in 2010, she is billing herself, incredulously, as “The Conservative Voice For Alaska.”

Make no mistake, there is a strong conservative base within the Last Frontier’s GOP, as evidenced in the presidential primary results earlier this spring. Cruz won the state in a upset, taking 36 percent of the vote, followed by Donald Trump with 33.5 percent, Rubio with 15 percent and Dr. Ben Carson with 11 percent. In other words, non-establishment Republicans accounted for at least 80 percent of the primary vote total in the state.

“People have been really grumbling about Murkowski,” since the 2010 race, said Bill Keller, who was the co-chairman of Cruz’s campaign in Alaska.

The Kenai Peninsula resident said the main thing that the senator has going for her, in the eyes of some Republican Party leaders in the state, is that she is the chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee; however, that carries little weight with Keller.

Keller finds it unacceptable the manner in which she flouts the state party platform, which is pro-life, pro-family and anti-big government.

Among the votes she has taken that anger pro-life Alaskans are to fund Planned Parenthood, to affirm Roe v. Wade as the “law of the land” (in a sense of the Senate resolution), and to strike down the Mexico City policy (first instituted under Ronald Reagan), which barred federal dollars from being used to fund abortions overseas.

For Dave Bronson, who serves on the board of the Alaska Family Council, it is not just Murkowski’s liberal votes on social issues that upset him, it his her support of “fixing Obamacare.” He pointed to a recent op-ed penned by the senator for the Alaska Dispatch, in which she wrote, “I will not ease up on my efforts to fix this unworkable law.”

“’We need to repair this thing and make it workable for Alaska.’ That’s a real insight into her thinking,” Bronson said. “She thinks Obamacare is workable and fixable. To a social conservative, libertarian like me, the whole notion of it is repugnant … because it compels people to do certain things. She thinks, tinker on the edges and all of the sudden magically Obamacare will work.”

Her 2010 Republican challenger, Joe Miller, hit Murkowski on this very issue, charging that the senator’s mindset was entirely in the wrong place regarding Obamacare. He pointed to a statement she made to a local news outlet that year shortly after the controversial law’s passage, indicating it was a work in progress. “Repealing this is not the answer, in my opinion,” she said.

In a 2009 town hall in the public debate leading up to the law’s passage, the senator also tipped her hand, when she told the audience she would not rule government run healthcare. “We have government-run healthcare now,” adding, “What we have to have is a government-run plan that actually works.”

Bronson said that Obamacare is in fact failing Alaskans. Like residents in many other states, the exchange offers residents few choices, and the costs keep going up. UnitedHealth Group announced it was leaving the market. Humana recently announced plans to pull out too.

Bronson stated that he would like Miller to challenge Murkowski again, seeing him as one of the few with the statewide name recognition and the moxie to do it.

After defeating the incumbent Murkowski in the GOP primary in perhaps the greatest upset in the 2010 election cycle, the newcomer candidate faltered in the general election, losing narrowly as the senator waged a write-in effort (as an independent) to hold on to the seat held by her family since the early 1980s.

Miller decided to give it another try in 2014, running for the senate seat occupied by Democrat Mark Begich. Miller beat expectations in the primary, finishing ahead of then-Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell, but losing to former Attorney General Dan Sullivan. The results were Sullivan 40 percent, Miller 32 percent and Treadwell 25 percent. Sullivan went on to topple Begich in the general election.

“In ’14, [Miller] ran an absolutely excellent campaign. As far as I can tell, not one misstep,” said Bronson.

Keller would also like to see Miller run, saying but for Treadwell being in the race playing the spoiler, he believes the decorated combat veteran would have won, despite being outspent over 10-to-1.

Judy Eledge, who serves on the board of the Anchorage Republican Women’s Club and is a delegate to the national convention, thinks Miller could beat Murkowski again in a primary, and the senator knows it.

She said in some ways it is the “rematch that people have been waiting six years for.” Her only question is whether Miller could win in the general election. There, she is less sanguine, sensing Alaska is drifting left of center politically, based on recent state and local election results.

So far, the Democrats have not named a challenger to take on Murkowski. In Bronson’s estimation, they do not feel the need to, given the senator’s liberal voting record. Her 2010 plurality victory was fueled in fact by Democrat voters, who knew their candidate was not viable.

What does Miller himself himself think of taking on his old nemesis again? So far he has not ruled out the possibility. The filing deadline of June 1 is quickly approaching, with the election slated for Aug. 16. The West Point graduate defeated Murkowski the first time, announcing just four months from Election Day and starting with zero statewide name recognition. It is conceivable he could do it again with just short of three months, and an army of volunteers likely ready to stand up statewide.

Fairbanks Assemblyman Lance Roberts looks back at what Miller was able to accomplish in 2010 with a sense of wonder. “It is amazing to me that he did it in a short time, and he had not had a political office before,” he said. “He did a yeoman’s job.” However, Roberts also warned that this time around, Murkowski is doing everything she can to avoid a repeat of 2010.

If Miller decides to enter the race, it will be based on the principled belief that propelled him into the race in 2010: Politicians, regardless of family name or longstanding position, should not get a pass from answering to the voters for their record. And if anything in the case of Lisa Murkowski, that record in the ensuing six years has only become more liberal.

(For more from the author of “This Liberal GOP Senator Votes With Obama More Than Any Other up for Re-Election” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Murk GOP

Frank Murkowski on Lisa: “Pay Tribute to Caesar”

Frank Murkowski on Lisa: “Pay Tribute to Caesar”:

And for your reading enjoyment, a few other articles on why Lisa Murkowski should embarrass any self-respecting Republican who supports her 2016 reelection bid:

Planned Parenthood’s Poster Child

The RINO-Traitors

RINO Waffling on Scalia’s Replacement

Murkowsky, Bringing Home the Bacon?

Joe Miller on Obama: “Bad for America”

48414424

Lisa Murkowski and RINO Allies Pass Left-Wing Bill Adopting Solyndra Subsidies, Enron-Style Accounting to Fuel Federal Housing

48414424What happens when you mix green energy social engineering with the affordable housing agenda? You get the worst elements of venture socialism that led to our economic collapse. You also get a bill from your GOP Senate pushing this very left-wing ideal of central planning.

To begin with, the Republican-led Senate is pushing a dubious energy efficiency bill at a time when they should be focusing on bold and popular conservative legislation, especially pertaining to homeland and national security. The Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2015 (S. 2012), sponsored by Lisa Murkowski (RINO-AK), uses the boot of government to promote “energy efficiency” and steer funds toward specific products and services offered by corporate cronies. It also provides subsidies and low interest loans for various forms of energy preferred by federal policy makers.

While this bill is being sold as a positive step forward because it also contains a provision expediting liquefied natural gas export applications, we are unlikely to actualize any benefit from that until we have a Republican president. In that case, we can pass an even better bill — minus the green energy social engineering.

To make matters worse, the Senate voted yesterday on an amendment sponsored by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA), which will require the Federal Housing Administration to count the projected savings from “energy efficiency” in the home towards the income of the borrower for a prospective mortgage. This “increased income” will in turn allow the home buyer to qualify for a larger government-backed loan.

Folks, you can’t make this stuff up. This is a mix of Solyndra, Freddie Mac, and Enron accounting all in one. Republican lawmakers are now doubling down on the same failed affordable housing social engineering agenda and are using notional and intangible green energy savings as income in order to encourage riskier loans on the taxpayer’s dime. This proposition will further distort the private market and force housing appraisers and underwriters to ascertain the voodoo-value of energy savings in the house. Overall, this amendment passed 66-31, with the help of the following 21 Republicans:

Alexander (TN)
Ayotte (NH)
Blunt (MO)
Burr (NC)
Capito (WV)
Cassidy (LA)
Cochran (MS)
Collins (ME)
Cornyn (TX)
Graham (SC)
Hatch (UT)
Heller (NV)
Hoeven (ND)
Isakson (GA)
Johnson (WI)
Kirk (IL)
Murkowski (AK)
Portman (OH)
Rounds (SD)
Sullivan (AK)
Tillis (NC)

This is a quintessential example of the problem with the Republican Party. They accuse conservatives have harboring unrealistic expectations in terms of how much government they have the ability to cut. The problem is, far from cutting any government intervention, almost every piece of legislation they pass expands government involvement in the private sector. This bill combines two of the worst federal policies — green energy social engineering and the federal housing scheme — and doubles down on the very impetus for our economic failure. (For more from the author of “Lisa Murkowski and RINO Allies Pass Left-Wing Bill Adopting Solyndra Subsidies, Enron-Style Accounting to Fuel Federal Housing” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

hqdefault (39)

Lisa Murkowski – the Most Liberal GOP Senator Seeking Reelection – Called out for Waffling on Scalia Replacement

As the fight to replace Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia heats up, the conservative grassroots are holding potentially waffling Republican senators’ feet to the fire. . .

Fourteen Republicans would have to join with the 46 Democrats in the Senate in order to approve an Obama nominee to the court. So far, 31 of the GOP senators have ruled out voting for a replacement for Scalia this year, leaving 23 who have not ruled out casting the vote, the New York Times reported.

Murkowski, who is the most liberal Republican seeking re-election in 2016, initially told reporters in Alaska last Wednesday that “I do believe that the nominee should get a hearing,” adding, “That doesn’t necessarily mean that that ends up in a vote. The purpose of the hearing is to determine whether or not this individual, based on their record … should be named to the highest court in the land.”

After receiving blowback from Hewitt and others, the senator appeared to walk back her statement the next day, posting on Facebook: “While the President has the Constitutional prerogative to send a nominee to the Senate for consent, it is left to the Senate to determine how to proceed after that. Given the timing of this vacancy, in the middle of our Presidential election, the American people will clearly be weighing in on the direction of the Supreme Court.”

She went on to urge President Barack Obama to follow precedent and allow his successor to appoint a replacement for Justice Scalia, and acknowledged the Senate does have the right to deny the nominee an up or down vote.

Hewitt accused Murkowski of waffling, implying she may not be reliable in the effort to block an Obama nominee.

(Read more from “Lisa Murkowski – the Most Liberal GOP Senator Seeking Reelection – Called out for Waffling on Scalia Replacement” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Lisa Murkowski: Planned Parenthood’s Poster Child

Last night the news broke that the US House AND Senate had voted to defund Planned Parenthood. This came as part of the Reconciliation Act and really only defers *some* funding to Planned Parenthood for one year (it leaves funding in place to kill rape conceived babies), redirecting those funds to legitimate health-care organizations. That is if, by some miracle, President Obama doesn’t use his veto power to override the law.

While we celebrate what seems to be an apparent victory, we are outraged that one of Alaska’s own delegation was part of an effort to strip even no-brainer language from the legislation. Senator Murkowski joined two other Republican Senators to add an amendment to the Reconciliation Act that would protect Planned Parenthood funds.

Though this has come as no surprise to us (after all, Murkowski has pledged her allegiance to Planned Parenthood on multiple occasions), we are still her constituents and we still have an obligation to hold her accountable.

Senator Murkowski continues to show her true colors on the issues that matter most. Her support for Planned Parenthood is something that absolutely cannot be overlooked in the next election. Here’s hoping (and praying!) that a god-fearing person would rise up to take her place in the US Senate.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.