Category Archives: Radio Commentaries

November 4, 2016 Radio Commentary

Posted on by

The Conservative Case for Trump

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, November 4, 2016 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

During the last few months of her life, Phyllis Schlafly wrote The Conservative Case for Trump. Its scheduled release was September 6th, which, providentially, was the day after her death at age 92.

In December 2015 she described Donald Trump as “the last hope for America,” because, “He will fight for the issues that we really care about and are very hot at the present time, such as the immigration issue. I don’t see anyone else who’s eager to fight.”

Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly endorsed Donald Trump on-stage during his 2016 St. Louis rally. She reasoned that “he couldn’t be co-opted by the establishment – the big business types.” Commenting further she said, “Because he’s not doing what he’s told. They like people to do what they’re told.”

Donald Trump promised to appoint conservatives to the U.S. Supreme Court. His economic plan could spark economic revival like the 1980s Reagan boom. His defense of the First Amendment would guarantee freedom of speech and religion. His plans for defense and foreign policy could cause terrorists to retreat world-wide. Continue reading →

October 28, 2016 Radio Commentary

Posted on by

What Difference Does It Make?

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, October 28, 2016 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

“What difference does it make, at this point?” was the question Secretary of State Clinton defiantly asked during a congressional hearing. The sad difference was the unnecessary death of four U.S. citizens in Benghazi.

What difference would it make if she’s elected and sanctuary policies in 340 sanctuary cities keep on protecting illegal aliens in this country? It makes a lot of difference, because sanctuary policies allow local government officials to snub their noses at federal law and refuse to work with federal agents whose job is to take illegal alien law-breakers off the streets.

Another big difference became evident when Clinton said, “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders.” That means, she would like the United States to lose its identity as an independent nation and be swallowed up into global government. If that happens, the U.S. could not be governed by U.S. laws or the U.S. Constitution.

So, what difference would it make to eliminate everyone’s gun? The difference is this: It violates the Second Amendment, but that’s okay with Clinton. She said, “I think Australia’s plan [that eliminated all handguns in a year] would be worth considering doing on a national level, if that could be arranged.” Continue reading →

October 21, 2016 Radio Commentary

Posted on by

He said, She said!

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, October 21, 2016 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

It’s our responsibility to make an informed decision when we vote for president on November 8th. To do that, we need to know what the presidential candidates are saying about the issues. Since they’ve told us what they plan to do if they’re elected, we must remember what they’ve said about these two vitally important subjects – abortion and the Supreme Court.

On the subject of justices to the Supreme Court, Hillary Clinton first approached it from a negative standpoint saying, “I would not appoint someone who didn’t think Roe v. Wade is settled law.” Her positive point was to praise the recent 5 – 3 Supreme Court decision to overturn a good Texas law to further regulate abortion clinics. Then, she made this specific promise to Planned Parenthood leaders: “As your president, I will always have your back,” reminding them that her Supreme Court nominees would be liberals, in the likeness of Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

But Donald Trump would do just the opposite. He said, “I hate the concept of abortion … I am very, very proud to say that I am pro-life. The abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood should absolutely not be funded,” adding that he might consider funding PP’s non-abortion services. He harshly criticized justices for striking the Texas law about regulating abortion clinics. The overwhelmingly important condition surrounding that outcome is this: Four justices who voted no were appointed by Democrat presidents – two by Clinton and two by Obama – the other, Justice Kennedy, a Reagan appointee, cast the fifth vote. Continue reading →

October 14, 2016 Radio Commentary

Posted on by

Question No. 3 & Judges

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, October 14, 2016 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Question No. 3 on the November ballot is the result of H.R. 1113, introduced by the House Judiciary Committee chairman on January 22nd. It passed the House by committee substitute a month later. Then, the going got tough in the Senate. The first two Senate votes fell one vote short of the two-thirds required for a proposed constitutional amendment to pass the General Assembly. The Senate voted three more times before H.R. 1113 finally passed on March 22nd, and the House agreed with the Senate version later that day. That put the proposed change on the November ballot as a question for voters to decide.

Question No. 3 is another long-winded question of 96 words asking voters whether to abolish the current Judicial Qualifications Commission and replace it with an entirely new Commission to be styled by the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Speaker of the House.

Details of the changes are provided in H.B. 808 that would regulate and implement H.R. 1113 if a majority of voters pass it on November 8th. H.B. 808 minimizes judicial participation in the appointment of Commission members. For years, seven members of the Commission have been appointed this way: The Georgia Supreme Court selects two sitting judges, the State Bar of Georgia selects three members of the State Bar, and the Governor appoints two Georgia citizens who are not members of the State Bar. Continue reading →