Since almost no one uses a fax machine to receive our "Notes" any more, we have decided to re-name this communiqué to more accurately reflect its method of transmission: hence, E-Notes is now the name for this email missive. Recent Gallup and other polls show that a majority of Americans now consider themselves pro-life. So if you know of others who might like to receive E-Notes, please forward it to them and have them click on this link to become a subscriber.

There will be a number of important Congressional races coming up where we will have endorsed strong pro-life candidates. We would like to be able to let YOU know if there is such a candidate running in YOUR Congressional district. So, we are asking you to please click on this link to give us your address so that we can send emails specifically geared to our endorsed candidates' districts. Thanks in advance for helping us with this important project!

And Let's Also Target Those Who Are Anti-life!

You remember Florida Governor Charlie Crist, who used to be a Republican, even claiming on his website to be pro-life as he began his run for the U.S. Senate. Crist, who was losing in polls to GOP pro-life challenger Marco Rubio, has decided he's not a Republican after all and is running as an "independent." His so-called pro-life credentials were totally destroyed when he recently vetoed the bill which would have opted Florida out of taxpayer-funded abortion and would have given women the option of having an ultrasound prior to an abortion. And then — surprise! The reference to Crist being pro-life has been removed from his website! The respected Family Research Council has launched a radio ad campaign with 47 stations across Florida. (Hear the ad at www.stopcharlie.com) Unfortunately, recent polls show Crist ahead of Rubio. The presence of Crist as an Independent candidate means that Republican votes will be split and could benefit either "turncoat" Charlie or the Democrat candidate. All pro-life Floridians should rally behind Marco Rubio in the November 2 election.

Meanwhile, out west in Nevada, Sen. Harry Reid, the U.S. Senate's Majority Leader and the very symbol of what's wrong with Washington, D.C., has a real fight on his hands in November. Pro-life state legislator Sharron Angle is poised to put Harry into retirement, having won a come-from-behind victory in a three-way GOP Primary. Though he claims to be "pro-life," Reid's actions to push through Obamacare with its pro-abortion provisions coupled with other pro-abortion actions, belie that claim. Sharron now has the support of 88% of Republicans, whereas Reid can only count on 68% of Democrats, according to recent polls. The early endorsement of Sharron by Eagle Forum and the hard work of the tea party activists were large factors in this political upset. Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly reports that Sharron is a long-time Eagle who received a Fulltime Homemaker Award in 1987 and an Eagle Award in 1994. How sweet it will be to replace Reid with a truly conservative, pro-life advocate, Sharron Angle!

The hearings on President Obama's pro-abortion Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, are rapidly approaching, and even more evidence of her far-left leanings is surfacing. Yet there is still enough material written by or to her which has not been released that the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary are considering boycotting those hearings until all the requested materials are made public. Even without the balance of the material, it is evident that this nominee is an extremist in her views.

• HUMAN CLONING: As a top policy advisor to President Bill Clinton, Kagan advocated a "ban" on cloning which only prohibited the use of cloning aimed at the live birth of a baby, not cloning which creates and then takes human life for research purposes, known as "clone and kill" procedures.

• INTERNATIONAL LAW, NOT CONSTITUTION: As Dean of Harvard Law School, Kagan led the reform of Harvard's curriculum to emphasize International law and to de-emphasize American Constitutional law. Pro-lifers are aware of the pernicious nature of international law regarding the "right" to abort pre-born children.

• RESTRICT PRO-LIFE FREE SPEECH: Kagan's first case (which she chose to take to the Supreme Court above other potential cases that better served the public) was one in which she argued for strenuous limits on pro-life groups, among others, and their ability to inform pro-life people about political and legislative happenings.

• OVERTURNING STATES' PRO-LIFE LAWS: Some pro-lifers fear that Kagan would impose a "governmental motive test" to invalidate state and federal pro-life laws. Rather than relying on clear legislative language and intent, Kagan's article in the Chicago Law Review focuses not on the legislative intent, but rather the "governmental motive" — looking for "bad motives" which the Court could use to find state laws (such as those regulating abortions) unconstitutional.

These extreme views, coupled with what AL Sen. Jeff Sessions calls "the least legal experience" of any Supreme Court nominee for the last century, provide clear evidence that we must keep the pressure on our Senators to refuse to confirm Kagan. Can our country survive an inexperienced Supreme Court jurist appointed by an inexperienced Chief Executive?