Deal breaker

OK, let me make one or two more arguments while I can.

I don't listen religiously to the Glenn Beck program, and, when I do listen, don't agree with everything he says. But a couple weeks ago, he made an emphatic point that made me pick up my ears, since it relates directly to the notion that we ought not be paying for tax-funded abortion. Trouble is, Beck doesn't seem to realize the importance of his own point.

The context of Beck's animated sermon was an on-air phone conversation with a political candidate from Texas. Beck asked this gubernatorial hopeful for her position re. the "911 truthers", those who believe that the 911 attack was an inside job, the work of people within the U.S. government. When the candidate demurred from specifically denouncing these theories, Beck reacted with suitable outrage.

Beck's arguments went like this: If this candidate really believes there to be some truth to the notion that government forces were responsible for that mass murder, then she can not credibly pretend to have any other more pressing political concerns. If our government were actually engaged in the deliberate extermination of innocent people, then that government is evil. Not mistaken. Not corrupt. Evil. And that would be a deal breaker. No other political issue would matter. Beck asked pointedly: If you believe these theories, why wouldn't you work with all diligence to expose such evil? Why would you pay another nickel in taxes to such an evil government?

Just so, Mr. Beck. Just so.

Blog changes coming

Speaking of dilatory, the pace of blog posting has fallen off of late, hasn't it? There are some reasons for this. For one thing, I've been spending time recently doing winter chores, digesting flytes, following up on other web-related pursuits, catching up on domestic and mundane duties, etc. For another, I haven't been inspired to write much; perhaps just running out of things to say. Only so many ways to frame the argument that pro-lifers ought not fund the very thing they regard as murder.

A third reason is that this blog will soon have to undergo a technical alteration. In a few weeks, Blogger will no longer support ftp publishing, which is how this blog has been published up until now. The following options are available:

1. I could migrate this blog away from "prolifestrike.org/blog" to a Blogger-owned server. This would leave the blog intact, but screw up any bookmarks, etc. Notwithstanding Blogger assurances, this option seems to have great potential for headaches during the transition.

2. Switch to Wordpress or other blog publishing facility. Same potential for headaches.

3. Close the blog. Visitors could still read the blog articles and their comments, but could not post new comments, and no new articles would be added. Am leaning toward this option.

4. Do my own publishing, sans Blogger, Wordpress, or any third-party software. Transition headaches as above, but no threat of future third-party hurdles. Comments would be via an amateurish, homegrown facility similar to the site's "Contact" page feedback form. Could employ this option right away, or at some future time after choosing option 3.

Meanwhile, normal Blogger comments are still working. So, if anyone cares to weigh in on this, feel free to leave a comment.

NOTE: Assuming option 3 or 4, at some point in March 2010 you may no longer be able to post comments to this or earlier blog articles in the normal Blogger fashion. You may always use the "Contact" page form to offer any feedback.

NOTE 2 (posted March 8, 2010): Blogger has extended the cutoff date to May 1, 2010. I plan on making the necessary changes here sometime before that.