Commentary:

The Ogonowski question: Should pro-family activists support a candidate for Congress who is pro-choice & pro-gay because he's a Republican?

(SEPT. 9, 2007) In the special 5th district Congressional election Oct. 16 to replace Marty Meehan, Jim Ogonowski has become the darling of many Massachusetts pro-family activists. They've been raising money for him, organizing for him, and flocking to his campaign. They see a chance to elect a Republican among the currently all-Democrat Massachusetts Congressional delegation in the relatively conservative 5th district.

But wait. There are a few uncomfortable details that no one's talking about. We confirmed the following by phone calls to Ogonowski's campaign headquarters:

• Ogonowski is pro-choice, although he supports parental notification and is against partial-birth abortion.
  
• He supports changing the military's policy to allow homosexuals to serve openly without the "don't ask, don't tell" rule. (This despite the fact that Ogonowski is a 28-year military veteran!)
  
• He supports the establishment of homosexual "civil unions" - state-sanctioned look-alike "marriages" -- although he opposes actual same-sex marriage. (The staffer told us that this is Ogonowski's way of "compromising".)

In the September Republican primary, Ogonowski was endorsed by the left-wing Boston Globe, which described him as "refreshing." Read the Globe's endorsement here:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/28/endorsements_in_the_5th/

We have also spoken with Ogonowski's staff to invite him to appear on the MassResistance radio show to explain his positions. They said they'd get back to us. We hope he'll do it but we're not holding our breath.

A lot of you might say that Democrat Nikki Tsongas is probably worse on all the issues we care about, which we don't deny. But you also can't deny that these days a Republican in Congress who wants to change the military's policies on homosexuality, who supports abortion, and who supports homosexual civil unions is more dangerous than a Democrat who does.

But also this kind of "compromise" and "take the lesser of two evils" is pretty much what conservatives have been doing for the last 60 years, and look where it's gotten us. The Left doesn't go for such nonsense, which is probably why Ogonowski was so eager to please them and doesn't worry about us.

It rarely occurs to conservatives these days, as someone once said, that the lesser of two evils is still evil.

Our position is that you'll never get the right candidate elected unless you vote for him. That's why we're endorsing Constitution Party candidate Kevin Thompson. There's no better feeling than to pull the lever for someone you really want in there.