Coauthored with constitutional lawyer Ken Klukowski, The Blueprint is a clear, concise and urgent plea for conservatives to defend their constitutional rights. Yet truth and justice transcend politics, so The Blueprint is really for all Americans of good will.

As everyone knows, health care was a key issue in Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s campaign for president. In February 2007, Klukowski and his wife, Amanda, went to Obama’s speech at George Mason University in Virginia. Among other things, Obama said, “I dream of an ER where you can go and you won’t be turned away because you don’t have the right insurance.”

“Suddenly, I heard a feminine voice I know very well shout out ‘That’s a lie!’” wrote Klukowski. “I turned, eyes wide, to see my usually friendly wife with anger in her eyes and fists clenched.”

You see, Mrs. Klukowski is an emergency room physician. She knows that according to federal law, namely the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, hospitals cannot refuse to treat any person. Dr. Klukowski witnessed it firsthand. Some 70% of the patients she treated during her residency had no health insurance.

“So no one is turned away from an ER for not having medical insurance,” said Ken Klukowski. “Barack Obama is too intelligent not to know that, yet he said it anyway to get a reaction out of the crowd (that cheered wildly at his vow to end the non-existent, cold-hearted refusal to treat uninsured people in emergency rooms). It’s the worst form of demagoguery. Obama set up a straw man and then knocked it to the ground to the adoring cheers of his onlookers.”

As Blackwell and Klukowski explain, the U.S. Constitution limits the federal government’s powers to military and national security, diplomacy with foreign countries, and regulating interstate and international commerce. So the fed has limited jurisdiction and the states have general jurisdiction, which empowers them to make laws according their constitutions.

However, as they discuss, a number of U.S. presidents, including FDR and George W. Bush, laid the groundwork for Obama to almost entirely strip Americans of our liberties. This is anything but boring and tedious. It is essential to our survival and essential to the restoration of our free nation. Thus, Blackwell and Klukowski spell it out in a comprehensible, quick read.

Blackwell told Sean Hannity that the “Constitution is the big boulder in the road” that prevents President Obama from “growing our government at an alarming rate.” I beg to differ.

Countless Americans are already alarmed. The Blueprint demonstrates the unchecked powers of Obama’s unconstitutional czars, threats to free speech, government takeovers of private industry, his plan to pack the courts with judicial activists and so on.

Dare we forget the White House email urging citizens to turn in their family, friends and neighbors who questioned government health care?

To the authors’ credit, The Blueprint named Elena Kagan as a probable nominee to the Supreme Court, so the appointments or nominations of others named in the book are likely.

In brief, Blackwell and Klukowski urge us to know our rights and unite with everyone dedicated to this cause. Elections are fast approaching and the results will affect us for the rest of our lives. Read The Blueprint soon—read it before you cast your next vote.

Mark Boal (left) and Kathryn Bigelow directing The Hurt Locker. (Summit Entertainment (c) 2008)

Jim O’Neil, executive director of the EOD Memorial Foundation of Niceville, Florida, endorsed this film. As a retired master explosive ordnance disposal technician and chief warrant officer for the U.S. Navy, his praise doesn’t come lightly.

“This film is intense, but the world is intense,” said O’Neil. “EOD techs don’t give a flip about the political reasons for bombs; they just care about saving lives. These are people who voluntarily take that long walk into uncertainty.”

Director Kathryn Bigelow co-produced The Hurt Locker with screenwriter Mark Boal, Greg Shapiro and Nicholas Chartier. Bigelow’s previous films include Blue Steele, Near Dark, Point Break, Strange Days, and K19: The Widowmaker.

What’s her take on the bomb squads? “The fact that these men live in mortal danger every day makes their lives inherently tense, iconic, and cinematic,” Bigelow is quoted in the production notes. “And, on a metaphorical level, they seemed to suggest both the heroism and the futility of the [Iraq] war.”

“Futility”? We’ll get to that later.

Mark Boal’s background is journalism, and impressive at that. He co-wrote In the Valley of Elah, which was hailed by movie reviewers as an anti-war movie.

However, that film was based on his Playboy article, “Death and Dishonor,” the tragically true story of an Army veteran who found out that his son didn’t deserve to join the Armed Forces. (While I hate Playboy, Boal’s article is free online and it actually gives a little credence to the old excuse that some men buy this magazine for the writing.

In 2004, Boal went to Bagdad and embedded with an EOD squad; then wrote “The Man in the Bomb Suit,” also for Playboy. That story was about an Army staff sergeant who had disarmed the most bombs in Iraq.

Boal said, “It made a deep impression on me. When I got home, I thought ‘people have no idea how these guys live and what they’re up against,’ and then later I started thinking about it dramatically and doing a fictional story about men who voluntarily work with bombs.”

He said “hurt locker” is slang for mental or physical pain. Then he added, “I’ve heard people say, ‘When the bomb goes off, I’m gonna be in the hurt locker.’”

In this movie, all performances are captivating. From the moment Jeremy Renner comes onscreen as the new squad leader, Staff Sergeant William James, he gets under my skin – then earns my admiration and affection — and annoys me yet again because I never know what he will do, nor does anyone else

Boal said, “He’s a fictional character, but I did certainly meet soldiers who willing to take extraordinary risks. And you have to realize that the film takes place in a very specific time, 2004. It’s not representative of the entire war.”

At one key point in the film, I am baited into longing for James to have peace. However, he smiles to a song by the rock band Ministry; which is frightening to me, but energizing to Bigelow.

“As a filmmaker,” she said, “what’s very interesting is to either go against what you see or go with what you see. But we had really entered the soldiers’ psychology, especially that soldier, so that was the choice that I found to be most relevant.”

As the character Sgt. J.T. Sanborn, Anthony Mackey commands immediate respect, but in the heat of combat, he is tempted to do something evil.

Brian Geraghty in The Hurt Locker. (Summit Entertainment (c) 2008)

Brian Geraghty’s character, Specialist Owen Eldridge, is supposed to be searching and weaker than the other two, but he surprises everyone.

Bigelow and Boal should be proud of the film’s intimate documentary feel. They shot it in Jordan, recreating war-torn Bagdad with some 10,000 photos and eyewitness accounts. They also hired refugee Iraqi actors to play Iraqis. Consequently, when James sweats bullets in his 100 lb. bomb suit, everyone — whether ally, enemy, or moviegoer — sweats bullets too.

On the other hand, certain characters lack depth. For example, most of Boal’s Iraqis seem menacing and no one shows gratitude for the bomb squad’s lifesaving work.

Boal explained, “In 2004, American troops, from the bomb squad specifically, did not have a lot of interaction with the Iraqi public. There were not a lot of translators to go around. Nobody I met in Camp Victory — no American I’ve ever met there spoke Arabic.

“This isn’t about the diversity of opinions in Iraq,” he said. “That would be a great subject for a movie that someone should do. But The Hurt Locker is about the daily life of bomb squad soldiers.”

Furthermore, only one man, a Muslim, has faith.

Boal said, “One of the characters had that component. It was actually based on one of the soldiers I talked to there [in Iraq]. He was very religious and he kept an image of the Virgin Mary in his helmet. But two characters ended up on the cutting room floor, him, and me as an extra. [Laughs].”

As we wrapped up the interview, I asked both filmmakers why people should see The Hurt Locker.

Boal said, “I hope people enjoy it because it’s meant to be the kind of movie you enjoy. At the same time, it’s got some substance to it and maybe it can be thought-provoking and people will come away with some appreciation of what’s going on over there.”

Bigelow said, “Perfectly put. I would just add to that even though it’s set at a particular time, I hope it will remind people that there are still men in harm’s way. If the movie does that, it would fulfill one of our ambitions.

The Hurt Locker certainly honors our heroic bomb disposal squads, but it doesn’t prove that the Iraq War is futile. Instead, as retired Master EOD Tech Jim O’Neil said, it proves that “sometimes the news isn’t the bomb. Sometimes the news is the silence.”

(The Hurt Locker is rated “R” for violence and profane language.)

This film couldn’t be more timely as our good brothers and sisters in Iran struggle valiantly to triumph over evil.

The Stoning of Soraya M. was originally written by the French-Iranian journalist Freidoune Sahebjam. Iranian-American Cyrus Nowrasteh and his wife, Betsy Giffen Nowrasteh, adapted the book into a screenplay, and Cyrus directed the movie as well.

The film is set in 1986, as Freidoune Sahebjam (Jim Caviezel) is driving through Iran and his car breaks down outside Kupayeh. A bus picks him up and tows his car into town, where Freidoune meets Hashem (Parviz Sayyad) the mechanic, who is depressed and refuses to work until the next day. Later, Freidoune will know why, but he must get to the border by nightfall, so he overpays Hashem to get the job done.

A woman in black traditional dress approaches Freidoune, asking if he speaks English. She is Zahra (Shohreh Aghdashloo), the aunt of Soraya M. (Mozhan Marnò).

The mayor, Ebrahim (David Diann), and the mullah, Sheik Hasson (Ali Pourtash), rush in to chase “crazy” Zahra away and sheepishly welcome the stranger who is dressed in western garb. Freidoune tells them that he must work, so they press him. What does he do? Where does he come from? And will he dine with them?

As Freidoune sits alone in a café, Zahra is able to sneak past a watchman to throw the journalist a bloodstained fabric swatch and a hand-drawn map to her home. When he arrives, she says, “Start your machine. Voices of women do not matter in here. I want you to take my voice with you.”

Despite what you may have read elsewhere, The Stoning of Soraya M. isn’t about so-called women’s rights or any of the other buzz words thrown around by political operatives. Nor is it some screed against Islam or Iran per sé.

Zahra died three years after she met Freidoune Sahebjam, and last year, at the age of 75, he died. Now, because of them and everyone who made The Stoning of Soraya M. into a film, we have another compelling proof of the law that is written in our hearts. So, will you take Zahra’s voice with you?

In Fireproof, Cameron stars as Captain Caleb Holt, a brave firefighter who saves strangers from peril. Nevertheless, after Caleb nearly dies while rescuing a child, he says, “The newspaper called me twice wanting an interview. Seems I’m a hero with everybody in the world, except my wife.”

Fireproof is the third feature film written by brothers Alex and Stephen Kendrick of Sherwood Pictures in Albany, Georgia — a project of Sherwood Baptist Church where they are pastors, producers and directors. Their last film, Facing the Giants, was panned by some critics, but popular among Christians. Fireproof has a few moments characteristic of low-budget independent films, but it should duly impress everyone. It’s got gripping action, adventure, love and comedy.

Stephen Kendrick said, “We’re not going to Hollywood trying to win an Academy award. We are in the trenches, working with couples on a day-to-day basis.” So, instead of the usual fiction where boy-meets-girl, they sleep together, quarrel and somehow end up together, Kendrick said, “We decided that we wanted to take the audience on a journey of what’s really going on in marriages right now.”

Cameron makes it easy to admire the Capt. Holt, who leads his men with valor and good humor. At home, however, Caleb has spiritually abandoned his wife to obsessions such as Internet porn. When she wants a divorce, Caleb’s father (Harris Malcom) challenges him to “The Love Dare,” a 40-day rescue plan for his marriage. Since Caleb thrives on challenge, he accepts the dare.

Despite the beauty of the plot, it has overtones that the husband is more to blame than the wife. However, as Caleb humbles himself to Catherine (Erin Bethea), obviously both spouses are responsible for their marriage. Day after day, Catherine turns a cold shoulder to Caleb as he nobly tries to rekindle her faith in him. Worse yet, she betrays him to her coworkers.

Thus, Kendrick explained, “The initial reaction is that people care about Caleb ’cause he’s trying, but Catherine is hardened. But we said, let’s be as real as possible and then, ultimately, at the end of the movie, does the audience care about them getting together?”

Kendrick has noticed that wives usually take the first steps to salvage troubled marriages, but often husbands are oblivious. He stated, “There is a male tone in our movies to help men. Alex and I are very passionate about that as we’re working with men… If the men are willing to step up and be men and pour back into the relationship — that is one of the keys to saving marriages.”

Even though this movie deals with widespread crises such as addictions to porn, Fireproof is artfully made so that adults get the big picture and children don’t lose their innocence. After all, Kendrick said, “We know that this will end up in the DVD library of families and, during nap time, a seven year old may get it out and watch.”

Former teen idol Kirk Cameron walked away from typical Hollywood productions long ago, but the role of Capt. Holt is perfect for him in so many ways.

In real life, Cameron starred as Mike Seaver in ABC’s sitcom Growing Pains. Despite the adoration of millions of fans, 17-year-old Cameron was empowered through humility. At the height of his fame, young Cameron the atheist wondered, “If I die today and find out there’s a god, is He going to be impressed with my celebrity like everyone else?” That question changed everything in Cameron’s life.

He said, “It’s a whole convoluted web of twisted things in the entertainment industry. And when you try to take a stand, there’s a cost to it.”

That cost includes the challenge of romantic roles. Cameron said, “I love my wife. I promised to love and cherish her to the exclusion of anyone else. A lot of actors will justify a lot of stuff in the name of art. I don’t feel that way, so I won’t kiss any other woman other than my wife. I’ve had that conviction for years. And in this movie, there’s that touching and romantic scene where Caleb and Catherine come to some resolve in their marriage and Chelsea came in and played the role of Catherine in silhouette. How can you do a movie about marriage and your life without holding true to that?”

Indeed, Cameron has had that conviction for years. Once he became a Christian, Cameron wanted no part in leading anyone to sin, so he fought to remove sex scenes from Growing Pains — and often he won. Consequently, some ‘where are they now’ TV retrospectives mock Cameron as if his beliefs ruined the sitcom. Therefore, Cameron wrote his memoirs, Still Growing. Among the fascinating details, for 17 years Cameron has been happily married to Chelsea Noble, the actress who played his Growing Pains girlfriend, and they have six children.

Now Cameron is so committed to Fireproof that he volunteered his talents like the rest of the actors in this ego-free indie production. He said, “Love is not a feeling, it’s a commitment. Love is a promise and love is an action… What struck me most about Fireproof is they hit the bull’s eye on the issues that people struggle with in marriage. I think that people are going to say, ‘I’ve been there. That’s me. That’s my life. That’s my relationship on several different issues.’”

Cameron’s instincts were proven true by my friend Linda, a divorcée who saw a pre-release screening with me. As both of us wept at the conclusion, she said, “That’s exactly how it is.”

In the end, people do want Caleb and Catherine to triumph in love. As Cameron said, any man would “give his right arm” to hear what Catherine eventually tells her husband and it is profound in its simplicity — so profound that grown men cried too.

There is much more to the story of Fireproof: Never Leave Your Partner Behind. Whether you are married or single, this DVD would be a fine addition to your home movie collection.

[This story was first published by SperoNews.com prior to the movie's theatrical release in September 2008 and has been updated for the DVD release.]

Verastegui said, “I am endorsing Sen. McCain for president because of his commitments to end abortion, protect traditional marriage and fix immigration law.

On Gov. Palin’s leadership, he said, “I love her. She’s a great role model for women.”

Verastegui has spoken at several McCain-Palin rallies. In Miami, the capital of Latin America and the first U.S. city where Verastegui lived, he campaigned for John McCain with McCain’s Senate allies Joe Lieberman and Mel Martinez, as well as Florida’s former governor, Jeb Bush and Governor Charlie Crist.

Verastegui said, “There I was, just an actor from Hollywood, not even a politician.

“I said more than 45 million babies have been killed by abortion in America and more than 200,000 Latino babies are killed by abortion each year. I told everyone that we need to put an end to this and, when I finished, I went to John McCain and I said, ‘Senator, thank you for your commitment to life. I’d like to give you something.’ I gave him a Miraculous Medal blessed by Pope Benedict XVI and he was amazing. He said, ‘Thank you so much! Look what I have here in my pocket.’ Then Sen. McCain took a medal out of his pocket that he carries everywhere and it was a Blessed Mother Teresa medal. He said, ‘Eduardo, now I am going to keep both.’

Verastegui also gave McCain’s wife, Cindy, a Miraculous Medal. He said, “I was touched when I found out that the McCains adopted one of their daughters from Mother Teresa’s orphanage in India. There is nothing more beautiful than to give children homes with families who will love them. I hope that one day that I can do the same.”

Verastegui gives out Miraculous Medals because he believes the Blessed Mother promised Saint Catherine Labouré that “all who wear it will receive great graces.”

As Americans prepare to vote, many think their country is in crisis and Verastegui agrees. Therefore, he said, “It would be a disaster if Senator Barack Obama is elected president.”

Verastegui believes that unless Americans elect a president who will defend fundamental human rights, no one can expect a sound economy, health care or national security, including immigration reform.

Thus, he said, “Obama speaks about ‘change,’ but what change are we talking about? Fidel Castro spoke about change in Cuba. Hugo Chavez talks about change in Venezuela. A lot of other charismatic dictators promised change, but look what happened to their countries.”

Verastegui explained, “Obama’s change agenda is very, very dangerous. This is a historic moment. Whoever wins the presidential election will affect this country and the world for decades.

“Obama doesn’t represent the values of our Latino community. He has never done anything for us. He doesn’t know who we are.”

Verastegui mentioned his amigos and filmmaking partners, Alejandro Monteverde and Leo Severino, who exemplify the American dream. Monteverde became a U.S. citizen; married former Miss USA Ali Landry; and Bella won the Toronto Film Festival’s People’s Choice Award. In 2007, President Bush recognized him as a Mexican immigrant who achieved success through innovative sacrifices, education and work. Severino is the son of modest Colombian immigrants who concentrated on his studies, then excelled as a Hollywood attorney and eventually established Metanoia Films with Verastegui and Monteverde.

Discussing abortion, Verastegui said, “Alejandro, Leo and I can make hundreds movies like Bella and they will save many babies, but it’s never going to be as powerful as a president nominating judges who observe constitutional law.” McCain is committed to nominating constructionist judges, so Verastegui emphasized that “we are just one Supreme Court justice away from overturning Roe v. Wade.”

However, Verastegui warned that Obama threatens to codify the Roe v. Wade decision by signing the proposed Freedom of Choice Act, which would strip Americans of their right to protect innocent human lives, even from the savagery of partial-birth abortion, during which the abortionist pulls a baby from his mother’s womb, stabs his skull and vacuums out his brains.

Verastegui is pleased that McCain supports the protection of traditional marriage through state amendments legally defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

To the contrary, Obama told LGBT activists, “But my job, as president, is going to be to make sure that the legal rights that have consequences, on a day-to-day basis, for loving same-sex couples all across the country, that those rights are recognized and enforced by my White House and by my Justice Department.” Obama wants to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act and this implies that he intends override the traditional marriage laws passed by numerous states.

On immigration, Verastegui tells voters that McCain took a big risk in Congress for Latinos while Obama abandoned them. Due to popular demand, McCain revised his reform policy. His presidential proposal includes security for U.S. citizens and innovations that would allow migrant workers to legally enter America according to market demands for their skills. Knowing the concerns of Latinos, Verastegui said, “McCain told me that he will reform the law so that it upholds human dignity of all immigrants and protects their families.”

Verastegui concluded, “The right to life is the most important thing to me, so I want to do whatever I can to support the best candidates. That’s why I support McCain-Palin.”

Eduardo Verastegui produced videos about Obama’s policies in English and Spanish. They are online at http://www.obamamustsee.com/ and http://www.durarealidad.com/.

Until November 2, citizens of 179 cities in 47 of the United States and the District of Columbia are enrolled in 40 Days for Life, peacefully praying outside abortion locations to end the holocaust. In the Canadian cities of Ottawa and Halifax, pro-lifers are publicly praying as well.

Armed with a rosary, Miraculous Medals and DVD copies of his latest production, Dura Realidad, which means Hard Truth, Verastegui and his friends approached seven women as they stood in line to enter the aforementioned abortion office.

John Anthony Hernandez, coordinator of 40 Days for Life Los Angeles, witnessed Verastegui’s talent and skill. He said, “The words just seemed to flow from Eduardo and his companions who showed them the pro-life film, Dura Realidad, and directed the mothers to the LAPS [Los Angeles Pregnancy Services] center for help. He also handed everyone a Miraculous Medal and told them the beautiful story behind the medal and God’s great love for us.”

Verastegui told the women that he did not judge them. He said he knew they were suffering and he cared about them, but they were not alone. Verastegui warned that abortion causes sterility, and breast and uterine cancers. He said, “Now you’re making that decision, so let me just share with you what they don’t share with you inside. For example, I was at an abortion clinic that in the last three years more than 12 women — young ladies — have died. They don’t tell you that.”

Verastegui explained, “I was counting all the women lined up for an abortion. It was all Latinas and African Americans. And I said all I want to do here is to share with you a video on the hard truth about what is going on inside [that place]. And ya know what? By the grace of God, four babies were saved this morning.” All of the women wept while watching his video, but he doesn’t know what three of them decided.

At http://www.durarealidad.com/, Verastegui appeals to his people in Spanish. He inquires, “Did you know that minority children are being aborted at more than double the rate of white children?” He tells why abortionists target Hispanics. Then, introducing the segment showing abortion victims, Verastegui says, “Perhaps you question whether it is necessary to show a video like this, and my answer is the same that they give in schools about showing movies of the Nazi holocaust… [Teachers] show them because the Nazi holocaust represents a terrible evil that words alone cannot describe.” In conclusion, Verastegui discusses how Barack Obama’s “inhuman” policies would endanger everyone if Obama is elected president.

CNA TV provided English subtitles and posted the video on YouTube.com, minus the victims segment. Soon Verastegui will release an English-language version of this video.

He said, “Most of the registered Latinos who are voting are voting for Obama. Why is that? He doesn’t represent our values: respect for life, traditional marriage or even immigration reform.

“Americans and people around the world need to know about Obama,” Verastegui continued. “If he is not going to defend the most innocent, then who is he going to defend? If someone is not willing to take a risk for the most innocent, which is babies, what can I expect from that person? He will not defend me. He will not defend you. That’s what inspired me to put something together.

“I want people to know the truth about Obama,” said Verastegui. “And I pray to God and I don’t judge anyone, but there is objective truth on this issue: It is wrong and we need to make sure that everyone knows [abortion] is not a subjective thing. It’s never okay to kill an innocent person.”

As Americans say, Verastegui puts his money where his mouth is. His foundation Manto de Guadalupe builds homes for the poor in Latin America, and helps mothers in crisis there and in the U.S. Verastegui is alarmed that nine abortion centers exist along just one mile of L.A., so he will open a pregnancy resource center among them.

He said, “You wanna hear something really, really funny? Here’s what happened at the end. All the nurses from the clinic — some were African Americans, some were Latinas — came outside.” The next thing Eduardo Verastegui knew, eight nurses wanted someone to take pictures of them with him. Instead, he gave each nurse a Miraculous Medal and his DVD. They didn’t want to watch his DVD, but promised to do so simply because he requested it. He told them, “I’m going to be here next Saturday and we’ll take a picture next Saturday.” Then the security guard confronted him, asking, “What are you doing here?” Verastegui countered, “What are you doing here, my friend?”

After our conversation, Verastegui left for Bella premiers in Costa Rica, Guatemala and Panama. Bella is also scheduled for release in Brazil, Hong Kong and Spain.

On Saturday, October 4, look for Eduardo Verastegui with the Los Angeles contingent of 40 Days for Life.

[Copyright Anita Crane 2008]

On the one hand, signatories of Roman Catholics for Obama ’08 claim, “We are real, honest-to-goodness, practicing Catholics who embrace and call attention to Catholic Social Teaching…”

This is unbelievable given Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-IL) record, especially his infamous crusade against the Illinois version of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which was passed and signed into law before he made it to Congress.

Yet, like Obama, many of his nominally Catholic endorsers have violated the most fundamental human rights taught and defended by the Catholic Church because, as the Church defines it, they cooperated in abortions and human embryonic stem cell research. These evils are so grave that the Vatican’s Cardinal Angelo Amato called them “terrorism.”

One of Obama’s Catholics, Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius (D), was personally and publicly informed by Kansas City’s Archbishop Joseph Naumann that she disqualifies herself from Holy Communion and she should “take the difficult political step, but necessary moral step, of repudiating her past actions in support of legalized abortion.”

If there is any doubt about Catholic teaching on these matters, the Catholic bishops of Kansas summarize it well in their guide for voters.

On the other hand, John McCain 2008 strategists established the National Catholics for McCain Committee, co-chaired by Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) and former Oklahoma governor Frank Keating (R).

Nevertheless, a growing number of Catholics are upset because the McCain campaign attempts to court us with flyers declaring that he has “a stellar 25-year pro-life voting record in the Congress.”

In reality, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) voted for embryonic stem cell research both times ESCR bills were passed by Congress – and the only reason that our federal tax dollars do not currently fund this type of terrorism is because President George W. Bush vetoed the bills.

Thus, scientists, physicians and pro-life leaders have been educating Sen. McCain’s campaign managers about stem cell research, but they wonder if the facts are getting through to him.

Inside McCain’s Campaign

In the interest of disclosure, I am registered Republican.

That said, I am not a member of Catholics for McCain, but I accepted their invitation to join a July 30 conference call conducted by Gov. Frank Keating and McCain’s Catholic outreach director, Josh Lynch.

Consequently, I was able to ask the first question, stating upfront, “As a Catholic journalist, I think that Catholics and all people deserve an explanation for certain claims that are made by the McCain campaign.”

I cited Sen. McCain’s votes for embryonic stem cell research and inquired, “So, why does the Catholic outreach pamphlet say that John McCain has a stellar pro-life voting record in Congress?”

In brief, Gov. Keating said that the pro-life claim applies only to Sen. McCain’s record against abortion; Keating and Lynch urged us to compare McCain’s record to Sen. Obama’s pro-abortion record; they said that we can count on McCain to nominate good judges; and Gov. Keating thinks that the embryonic stem cell issue “is going to go away” because of “the skin cell” technology.

Stunning Science

Gov. Keating was referring to the experiments by scientists who had “reprogrammed” adult skin cells into “embryo-like” stem cells and released articles on their findings last November.

One scientist was Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University in Japan.

The other scientist was James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin, who some call “the father of embryonic research.”

While many were celebrating these supposedly ethical breakthroughs, Theresa Deisher, scientist and founding researcher of AVM Biotechnology in Seattle, revealed several problems in the March-April 2008 issue of Celebrate Life.

She said that kidney cells from an electively-aborted human fetus were among the ingredients used by both men. While Deisher explained that there are moral options to obtain the same reprogramming result, she saw no victory in that result because “Reprogrammed adult cells display this embryonic characteristic: they form fatal tumors in adults.”

David Prentice, senior fellow for life sciences at Family Research Council and coauthor of FRC’s Adult Stem Cell Success Stories 2008 Update, also evaluated Yamanaka’s and Thomson’s trials.

He said, “Even when they overcome the problems of using fetal tissue to make iPS cells, the cells still won’t help anyone. Only adult stem cells are helping people now and only adult stem cells will help people in the future. It’s all about the patients.”

James Sherley, a medical doctor and a senior stem cell scientist at Boston Biomedical Research Institute, confirmed that embryonic stem cells are incompatible with anyone other than the embryonic persons to whom they belong.

He said, “While embryonic stem cell research advocates argue that we should make use of ‘extra embryos,’ the bitter, bitter irony is that human embryonic stem cells cannot be used at all because they form tumors and lack essential properties needed to maintain mature tissues. Thus, it is a waste of taxpayer dollars to fund human ESCR.”

Sherley further stated, “Human embryonic stem cell research is equivalent to abortion because, in both cases, innocent human beings are killed.”

Policy Contradictions

Despite Gov. Keating’s hopes, the embryonic stem cell research agenda has taken on a life of its own.

On the July 30 call, Paula Westwood, executive director of the independent organization Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati, expressed distress about McCain’s stem cell policy.

Afterwards, Westwood reacted to Gov. Keating’s explanations in detail.

She said, “It is inconsistent for John McCain to claim to be pro-life and not protect human embryos from experimentation and death. Claims that McCain is ‘orthodox pro-life’ in opposing abortion, but that embryonic research is relatively new and thus need not be seriously addressed are unacceptable.”

At Ohio hearings, Westwood witnessed that stem cell researchers are more interested in unlimited public funding for their experiments than they are in helping patients with legitimate treatments. She knows of privately-funded cloning and ESCR, and she fears that the U.S. will follow Britain in passing a license to make human-animal hybrids.

“Whoever is elected president,” said Westwood, “Congress is poised to override the Bush standard and push for federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research that involves the deaths of countless human beings — in addition to those who are already dying in private research.”

Even James Thomson admitted these crises, but he tried to justify them with a contradiction in terms.

In the Dec. 3, 2007 Washington Post, Thomson wrote, “Discomfort with the notion of extracting stem cells from embryos is understandable… [But] we hope Congress will override the president’s veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.”

Then again, Paula Westwood said, “Americans should protect innocent human beings at every stage of development and ability, and we need a president who realizes this.”

Invitation for Input

On July 30, Josh Lynch pointed out that John McCain is a cosponsor of the U.S. Senate’s proposed Human Cloning Prohibition Act and he called for Catholics to e-mail their concerns.

By the end of that conference call, Gov. Keating said, “We need your guidance and advice.

“I know there’s disagreement — we had several callers who were concerned about McCain’s support for embryonic stem cell research. I’m against it. I’m not panicking on the subject because I think John is warm and wonderful and humble and open and right down the line on the rights of the vulnerable. I think we’ll get there,” he said.

Well, here we are now. In his Catholic outreach brochure, Sen. McCain claims to be “a man of compassion who fights for human rights worldwide” and “a pro-life Reagan conservative ready to lead America as president on day one.”

How can we believe that or his promise to “cut taxes and eliminate all wasteful spending,” unless he commits to vetoing embryonic stem cell research?

The e-mail address for McCain’s Catholic outreach staff is Catholics@JohnMcCain.com.

On the downside, I was disappointed by the lack of character development and the story. After all, Noëlle is painfully misleading about the Catholic faith. Yet when I spoke with David Wall, he disarmed me by saying, "Don't take this in a negative way – if I had to join a church, it would probably be the Catholic Church."

Of course, I had to reply, "We want you!" Then Wall and I discussed his film.

The Noëlle synopsis goes like this:

Father Jonathan Keene – a cold, impatient Catholic priest – arrives in a tiny fishing village the week before Christmas to do what he does best: shut down a dying parish. But things take an unexpected turn as he becomes entangled in the various lives of the village's eccentric characters, including their beautiful librarian, the childlike priest he is displacing and the magical experience of Mrs. Worthington's legendary Christmas party, where everyone is welcome and anything is possible.

The family of Wall's wife is Catholic and their witness gives him respect for the Church. Even so, crucial details about Catholic faith and traditions were overlooked. Consequently, not one Catholic acts like a Catholic. For the purpose of this review, we'll concentrate on the three main characters.

Father Simeon Joyce, the parish pastor and only priest in the village, is woodenly played by Sean Patrick Brennan. According to Wall, in real life Brennan is a devout Catholic. In the film, however, Fr. Joyce fails to command respect. Instead, he drinks and dances at the local pub. Therefore, everyone disregards his sacred office and calls him by his first name. Moreover, Fr. Joyce's celebration of Mass is no Mass at all. He introduces Fr. Keene to the small, dwindling and aged congregation as a "hit man" sent by the archdiocese to shut down the church. Then Fr. Joyce continues:

Maybe he's right. Maybe we are dead. Look around. Glass. Marble. A stone mother, her cold child. A dead man on a cross. We're nothing but a mausoleum.

So, the character that Wall intended to be childlike actually comes off as an apostate. In reality, the climax of Mass is the consecration and reception of the Holy Eucharist, which Catholics believe to be the Real Presence of Jesus Christ – body, soul and divinity – under the appearance of bread and wine. Regardless, the two priests decide that staging a living crèche outside the church on Christmas Eve could bring fallen-away Catholics back to the parish and this becomes the occasion for Fr. Keene to pursue a certain woman.

Indeed, Fr. Keene pursues the only female parishioner under 60 to play Mary, the Mother of God. She is Marjorie Worthington, the single librarian, played by Wall's wife Kerry. While most parishioners are ninnies, Marjorie is too smart to assent to the Gospel and the faith. She tells Fr. Keene of her disbelief in the virgin birth of Jesus, her opinion that priests have "a problem with women" and her affection for "Simeon," because he doesn't act like a priest. Nevertheless, Wall was careful to keep this unbelieving character, who attends Mass for the sake of her grandmother, away from Holy Communion. The best moment of the film is when Marjorie reveals that the sight of Fr. Keene, as a priest, was a saving grace for someone else.

Eventually, Fr. Keene learns that Marjorie is having a sexual affair with a despicable cad. When Marjorie agrees to play the Blessed Virgin, Fr. Keene breaks the seal of her grandmother's confession by blurting out why he thinks Marjorie's unfit for the part. Then, he further betrays his vows by telling Marjorie's secret to Fr. Joyce.

The theme of Noëlle is supposed to reach its climax at Grandma Worthington's annual Christmas Eve party, but I was confused. There, the two priests are erratic as they interpret various conflicts and signs, but neither discerns the truth about God, the sacraments, real love or fidelity. One priest says that the party is his idea of the Church and peace on earth. By then, we know that he wants a parishioner's healing to justify him. Both dance with Marjorie and prepare to renounce their vows for her. Then one explains to Marjorie that he never wanted to be a priest; he became one out of guilt for having his own preborn child aborted. Afterwards, the post-abortive father, forever a priest, is granted a plausible apparition of forgiveness. Sadly, Wall then has him stumble to the wrong conclusion.

In one scene, it appears that Fr. Keene spills the Eucharistic blood and leaves it unattended. However, Wall explained that the priest never consecrated the wine.

David Wall made Noëlle to open the eyes and break the hearts of those who are numb in apathy. Wall said that he didn't intend for this film to be about religion, but it is. If he learns about the sacraments, maybe he will make a masterpiece. For, as Karen Mahoney tells us in her story "How I recovered from abortion," God is absolutely faithful to us.

At least this movie reminds us that many post-abortive parents and their family members are in need of healing and reconciliation. Thus, the Catholic Church officially welcomes them to Project Rachel. In New York, the Sisters of Life conduct retreats called Entering Canaan – Healing After Abortion. Rachel's Vineyard Ministries, established by psychotherapist Theresa Burke, Ph.D., is flourishing nationwide.

If you choose to see Noëlle, view it cautiously in realizing that God doesn't inspire people to break sacramental vows. With that in mind, consider how the faith was beautifully captured in a Christmas outreach by the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. As I recall, posters on the metro trains said, "He's not just away in a manger, He's at your local Catholic church." In other words, God Almighty reduced His majesty to the littleness of an embryo, then an infant and came here for the love of us. Likewise, today, the Lord Jesus Christ makes Himself vulnerable as He awaits us – fully present in the Blessed Sacrament – in Catholic churches throughout the world.

Davis wrote that abortion "is, frankly, one of those can't-win types of stories where people have especially strong opinions — on both sides of the issue… Some of the displeasure even comes within our newsroom."

With that, Davis nailed it. There is no gray area, middle ground or compromise on abortion. So while journalists may claim objectivity, they cannot claim neutrality.

His struggles in covering the abortion controversy came to a climax over Planned Parenthood's construction of an abortion center in Aurora, Illinois. There, residents and neighbors (including members of my family) are outraged. As the story goes, pro-lifers helped to close an abortion business in that community some time ago; but then our nation's largest abortion chain sneaked in by disguising its huge Aurora building as some benign medical office near a popular Dominick's grocery store.

At first, the Daily Herald tried to be objective. Davis said, "The story our reporter wrote for Sunday's [August 26] paper initially used the well-known terms ‘pro-life' and ‘pro-choice' to describe the combatants. But an editor at the end of the editing process realized our practice — not just at the Daily Herald, but any newspapers following Associated Press guidelines — is not to use those terms."

Consequently, the politically correct trappings became a comedy. As Davis explained, "in making the substitutions, the editor made portions of the story incorrect. The result was a lengthy correction, including clarifying the name of the group leading protests, the Pro-Life Action League, which had been inadvertently changed, too."

The AP code labels pro-lifers as "abortion foes" and abortion advocates as "abortion rights proponents," as if these terms are neutral.

As editor of a pro-life magazine, I don't have to struggle with wordplay on abortion. Our policy is to be direct. However, when I worked in mainstream media, there were certain frustrations.

For example, one of my former employers has an explicit policy against its workers voicing their so-called political positions while on duty. That's fair enough, I thought. Nevertheless, abortion proponents were boldly outspoken on the job. Some individuals further expressed hatred for the Catholic Church because it defends the human right to life for all innocent persons. One coworker, knowing full well that I am Catholic, wished death upon Pope John Paul II. Another loudly scorned actor/director Mel Gibson because he's "anti-choice" and he has more than two children. Yet another defended the practice of partial-birth abortion as often as he could. My only option was to leave that company.

Now I can publicly write the word "pro-life." In truth and fairness, that's what we call ourselves. By the way, pro-lifers don't merely oppose abortion; we combat every murderous act, such as snuffing out seniors and the disabled. Thus, AP's term "abortion foes" is incorrect.

If the term "abortion rights proponents" isn't biased, what is? After all, no one has found a natural, moral or constitutional "right" to take an innocent person's life.

Prior to "abortion rights proponents," those individuals were widely called "pro-choice." Despite or maybe because of that rhetoric, more and more people are thinking critically and pondering what the "choice" is.

However, if a news company uses terms such as "pro-choice" and "pro-choicers," it shouldn't apply double standards. In other words, it should fairly apply the terms "pro-life" and "pro-lifers" to those who oppose the choice of abortion.

Moreover, when a newspaper allows pro-lifers to be labeled "anti-choice" and "extremist" without any explanation of those claims, the publisher's stance becomes obvious.

In reality, pro-lifers are all about choice — legitimate choices that harm no one and may even help to advance our civilization. For pro-lifers, real choice is defined in "the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." So the question is: How has the bloody sacrifice of 48 million American children balanced that?

Such haunting questions explain why pro-lifers are fighting against the opening of Planned Parenthood's Aurora abortion business. At last count, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America killed 264,943 innocent Americans by abortion in just one year — and, adding insult to injury, it got government awards of $305.3 million from taxpayers like you and me. So, if journalists want to be "fair and balanced," Planned Parenthood's own numbers beg the question: Who are the extremists?

Although the Daily Herald stories on Planned Parenthood have upset some, there is reason for hope because the good people of Illinois are trying to prevent further injustice there. No matter what newspapers and TV networks say, pro-lifers nationwide will continue exposing the ugly truth about abortion in order to make our great country the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Meanwhile, Daily Herald editor Jim Davis inquires, "Have we been fair? Balanced? I leave that for you to decide, or feel free to let me know what you think."

Now, at least one reader has weighed in.