Trump Defends Planned Parenthood

Remember Donald Trump's fairy tale about how he was now pro life at the GOP debate? How he knew a couple who were considering abortion but decided against it, and now that kid is a 'superstar?'

Well, today on Hannity, the real Donald once again revealed himself:

Hannity threw a few softballs at Trump, but also pressed him a little on specific policy proposals for Obamacare, the economy, and even Planned Parenthood.

And Trump kind of surprised Hannity by defending them, saying that abortion is only a “fairly small part of what they do” and overall they do a great service for women, so “we have to look at the positive also for Planned Parenthood.”

Why yes! Our taxes should definitely continue to fund trafficking in baby body parts.

I pretty much said everything I had to say about Trump's candidacy here.

He's there to ensure that his friends the Clintons get back into the White House, just like Ross Perot did in 1992. Trump ias this year's Ross perot

Obama: 'Killing Babies To Harvest Their Organs Is An Atrocity'

 

Yes believe it or not, the president actually said that..except he was talking about Africa to Africans, not America.

President Barack Obama told a group of young African leaders on Monday that harvesting organs from humans that are killed as part of an African ritual was “craziness” and a “cruel” tradition that needed to stop. He warned of dehumanizing marginal groups of humans and of the problems that arise when “you are not able to see someone else as a human being.”

In a wide-ranging question and answer session with members of the Young African Leaders Initiative [YALI], a woman from Kenya said “Persons with albinism in Africa are being killed and their body parts harvested for ritual purposes. My request to you is to raise this issue with heads of state of African countries to bring these atrocities to an end.”

Obama decried the practice and went on to encourage the young people to do everything in their power to fight on the behalf of vulnerable humans.

'Cruel traditions?' 'Protecting the vulnerable?' Has our president not seen the recent videos of Planned Parenthood apparatchniks wheeling and dealing over the body parts of aborted babies...with special emphasis on selling the organs of 21-16 week-old babies whom already have a nervous system and can feel the pain of being ripped from the womb?

In fact, he hasn't. According to his spokeshole Josh Earnest, the president chose not to watch the videos. Hardly surprising, since when the president was a state legislator in Illinois, he fought tooth and nail for infanticide...fighting against legislation that would have mandated that babies whom survived an abortion attempt receive medical care. That was too much even for the radical pro-abortion group NARAL to stomach.

What an obscene hypocrite our president is.

(H/t, Molly at the Federalist)

The UN Reveals Its Cowardice And Hypocrisy By Attacking The Catholic Church

 

A UN Human Right commission has attacked the Catholic Church and the Vatican concerning its canon law, policies and teachings.

The report, published today by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child harshly criticized the Church for its teachings on abortion, contraception and homosexuality as well as the Vatican's policies on dealing with pedophile priests in a report whose tone can only be defined as frenzied and aggressive.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is one of 10 U.N. bodies that monitor implementation of the core U.N. human rights treaties, and its 18 members include academics, sociologists and child development specialists from around the globe.

The treaty the committee is supposed to be monitoring is the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, the key U.N. treaty on child protection, which the Holy See ratified in 1990. Apparently the committee simply decided to get into issues of abortion, contraception and homosexuality, none of which are covered by the treaty just because...or perhaps at the urging of various pro-abortion and pro Homosexual marriage activists.

The report blasted the Vatican and claims that it "systematically" adopted policies that allowed priests to molest children over decades, and it called on the Holy See to open its files on pedophiles and bishops who concealed the abuse.

"The committee is gravely concerned that the Holy See has not acknowledged the extent of the crimes committed, has not taken the necessary measures to address cases of child sexual abuse and to protect children, and has adopted policies and practices which have led to the continuation of the abuse by, and the impunity of, the perpetrators," the report said.

That would be news to the almost 400 priests that have been defrocked and tossed out of the Church, the ones who justifiably have done or are doing jail time and the Church officials who paid out hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation to the victims, leaving several dioceses in the US either bankrupt or teetering on the edge.

But wait, there's more. The committee calls on the Church to change its policies to allow abortion and contraception, make sex education, including access to information about contraception and abortion mandatory in Catholic schools and to accept gay marriage and same sex adoption.

Now, I am not a Catholic, and to be honest, I have my own issues with the Catholic Church as an institution based on its history, its policies toward the State of Israel and other topics we need not delve into here. But I don't have to be Catholic to recognize the abject cowardice and hypocrisy on display here.

While I might not agree totally with the Church's stance on abortion, it is the supreme irony to me that a committee charged with monitoring the rights of children would issue a report biased towards abrogating the one right that is the source of all the others - the right to life.

By demanding that the Catholic Church change its religious doctrines on homosexuality, contraception and abortion, the UN committee is essentially saying that the Catholic Church is to be singled out from all other religions as one that sanctions bigotry, intolerance and hatred.And here I thought Jews and Israel had that particular space reserved where the UN was concerned!

But let me see..is the Catholic Church the sole offender here? Or even the worst one?

Islam is absolutely rotten with anti-semitism and it is religiously sanctioned in the Qu'ran, and the Hadiths. Mohammed even told his followers that 'At the Last Hour' (the Muslim equivalent of the Jude-Christian Day of Judgement)that the rocks and trees were going to call out to Muslims to come and kill the Jews that were hiding behind them. The genocidal Hamas uses that particular religious exhortation today in the Martyr's Oath which every member swears.

Nor is this just scripture or ancient history. Sharia law as well as all 4 major Islamic fiqhs (schools of jurisprudence) essentially consider Jews and Christians non-people with their right to life dependent of the whim of Muslims who rule over them.Severe persecution of Christians by Muslims is a well-documented fact in our modern world, and the silence of the majority of Muslim clerics is deafening.

Homosexuals? Don't even ask. The Qu'ran mandates that they be killed 'with cruelty'. Let alone disrespected, they're routinely hanged in Iran and many other jurisdictions under Muslim rule.

And Islam does not permit either abortion or the use of contraception either, although sharia does allow wife beating, winks at honor killings and female genital mutilation, counts a woman's testimony as worth one quarter of a man's and requires two male Muslim eyewitnesses in order to prosecute a man for rape, no matter what other evidence there is.

I could go on, but I think you get the point.

So why single out the Catholic Church? Could this be it?



Because of course, if anyone did call Islam out the way this UN committee just called out the Catholic Church...there could be unpleasant consequences:



The people on this committee, those whom aren't themselves Muslims or from Muslim countries are scared witless of Islam, and the Church is a far easier target. This way, they come across as properly doctrinaire, politically correct Lefties 'speaking truth to power' when all they really are is morally bankrupt cowards turning their backs on the very people this UN commission was designed to protect.

And while I'm at it, has this committee ever issued a scathing report like this on the practices of UN peacekeeping forces,particularly in Africa? Rapes, child molestation, forced prostitution in exchange for food and other humanitarian supplies and other abuses are serial in nature.

The UN's record is far worse the Catholic Church's when it comes to disciplining those under its banner and making restitution to its victims. Yet, aside from generic statements from the UN about looking into this sort of thing when it surfaces and occasionally sending the worst offenders back to their home countries, silence.

Of course, that says quite a bit in itself, doesn't it?

Supreme Court Upholds Texas Abortion Law

The Supreme Court of the United States today upheld the abortion laws passed by the State of Texas by a 5-4 vote.The majority refused to set aside a federal appeals court’s order permitting the law to take effect on October 31.

The law, opposed by Planned Parenthood and of course a number of Democrats was voted into law by a two thirds majority by the legislature in Texas after a number of Dr. Gosnell type abortion 'clinics' surfaced in the state. Th new law, in an effort to stop these chamber of horror sites from operating requires that any doctor in the state who is going to perform an abortion have professional privileges to admit patients to a hospital within thirty miles of the site where the abortion will take place.

A federal judge in Austin, District Judge Lee Yeakel, (a Bush appointee, so this was hardly partisan politics at work) had ruled last month that this requirement was unconstitutional, saying that it put a “substantial obstacle” in the path of women in Texas to terminate a pregnancy. The Fifth Circuit overturned that order, and cleared the way for the law to become effective while the Fifth Circuit is reviewing the constitutionality of the law.

Needless to say, Planned Parenthood is upset. They and and several other Texas abortion clinics said in their lawsuit to stop the measure that it would force more than a third of clinics in the state to stop providing abortions...and that meant that there was a lot of Federal money st stake for them.

I fail to see how merely requiring an abortionist to have admitting privileges in a hospital (which means he or she has gone through a certain amount of vetting) restricts anyone from having an abortion. And a clinic should have admitting privileges to a hospital within 30 miles in case something goes wrong.

Not only that, but as Justice Scalia argued successfully, this is a huge assault on federalism.

Odd how the Left absolutely salivates at the idea of restrictions and regulations on everything and anything except to right to kill babies on demand.

This isn't over yet, but it's a good precedent, and will effect laws in Tennessee and Utah, the other states enforcing their laws on admitting privileges as well as similar laws under temporary court injunctions in Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, North Dakota and Wisconsin.

Of course, there's always Albuquerque, New Mexico, where a bid to ban abortions performed after 20 weeks unless a woman's life was at stake was defeated 45% to 55% after a well financed campaign by Planned Parenthood and others.

By 20 weeks ( 5 months) a baby has a fully developed nervous system and can feel the excruciating pain that results from having the skull punctured by surgical scissors and the brains vacuumed out to collapse the head as the baby is ripped from the womb. That's the usual method by which late term abortions are performed.

Would People Sign A Petition to Legalize Abortion On Demand After Birth?

Of course they would, especially on one of America's college campuses...like George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. After all, if President Obama supports exactly the same kind of infanticide...


Reporter Dan Joseph says he got 14 signatures on a petition after one hour. “That is a lot for the summer because there aren’t as many people on campus,” he says in the video. I imagine he could have done even better in California, New York or Massachusetts.

And no, he didn't represent what the petition was about either. He explained that to the students he asked to sign that it was demanding lawmakers legalize “fourth trimester” abortions to “ send a message to our lawmakers that women have the right to choose what to do with their bodies and babies” even “after their pregnancies.”.

“If you don’t know what fourth trimester is, it’s after the baby is already born.” Joseph added.

You have to wonder what these students are being taught.

Pro-Abortion Democrats Use Jewish Sabbath To Try And Ram Through Amendment

In a cynical and disgusting ploy, pro-abortion members of the New York State Senate attempted to use one of the senator's Orthodox Jewish faith to keep him from voting against a pro-abortion amendment.

The Jewish Sabbath begins at approximately sundown and extends until approximately Saturday sundown. Jews whom observe the Sabbath are forbidden to work or travel or during that time, and will schedule their lives and business so as not to violate this prohibition.

One of the Senators is pro-life Brooklyn Sen. Simcha Felder, an Orthodox Jew who is a Democrat but caucuses with the Republicans.

Here's what happened on June 28th, a Friday:

Pro-choice Democrats in the state Senate plotted to ram through an abortion-rights amendment during the Jewish Sabbath to prevent pro-life Brooklyn Sen. Simcha Felder, an Orthodox Jew, from casting a vote, critics charged.

The controversial June 28 deliberations put Felder in a quandary. If he left Albany to observe Shabbat, the abortion proposal had a chance of passing. But if he stayed, he would be violating religious observance.

“The Democrats were counting votes. They were waiting for Simcha to leave. They thought they were going to get away with that,” said Deputy Senate GOP leader Tom Libous.

“I told Simcha, ‘They’re waiting for you to leave.’ They didn’t care. It was extremely insensitive,” Libous added.

Felder agreed it was wrong to have a conscience issue like abortion brought up on or just before a religious observance.

“I was told that they [the Democrats] were waiting for me to leave,” Felder said. “I was pretty dumbfounded why the vote couldn’t take place a day or two before the Sabbath.”

What Senator Felder did next was to phone his rabbi and ask for advice. And his rabbi reminded him that since this was a matter of life and death, he was compelled to stay and cast his vote.

When the Democrats saw that Felder wasn't leaving and they also wanted to adjourn for the day, Senator Jeff Klein, head of the four-member Independent Democratic Caucus, finally brought the amendment up for a vote at 4:50 p.m.

Felder voted no, the bill failed to garner the 32 votes needed to pass and Felder then raced to get home before the Sabbath started.

What's most disgraceful is that the plot to keep Felder from voting was probably hatched by a non-observant secular Jewish Democrat, who knew just enough about Jewish law to understand that Felder would have to leave without voting because he was Sabbath observant - but not enough about Jewish law to understand that the saving of human life supersedes that.

(H/t, The Lid)

Late Term Abortion Supporters In Texas Chant "Hail Satan!"

This is creepy even to someone like me, whose by no means wants abortion outlawed.

Outside the Texas state capitol in Austin, a Christian woman, an obvious pro-lifer is speaking about her beliefs vis a vis abortion ...and at some points she's almost drowned out by late term abortion fans chanting 'Satan!'.

The capitol of Texas where the legislature meets is located in Austin, which is quite different from most of Texas and is known by most Texans as 'Austin-tatious'. Leftist loons abound.

Since the reality of what late term abortions actually consist of surfaced in the Gosnell trial, a number of states have passed laws limiting late term abortions.

In Texas, where a local Dr. Gosnell clone surfaced recently, the House State Affairs Committee passed a pro-life bill to ban abortions in the state after 20 weeks of pregnancy and hold abortion facilities accountable for obeying health and safety laws. The law is set to got to the state senate, where it will probably pass, although there have been the usual rabid demonstrations from the Democrats, whom I suppose at this point we could call the party of abortion.

I have no problem with limiting abortions to 20 weeks ( FIVE MONTHS) unless the mother's life is endangered or there are other special circumstances the law provides for. The other provisions, which are going to limit the number of abortion clinics has good points and bad points. It will eliminate butcher shops like Dr. Gosnell's but it will conceivably make it more difficult for some women in outlaying areas to terminate a pregnancy.Planned Parenthood, of course, will still be around.

On the other hand, there's always the option of traveling a bit or simply being more cautious about getting pregnant, and it's also a fact that no hospital is going to refuse to provide and abortion for someone without means or who is the victim of non-consensual sex.

But to hear people who favor abortion on demand chanting 'Satan!' ? That puts things in an entirely different perspective. If this is what it's come to...

UPDATE: Well, well...it appears that a number of these protesters are being shipped in and paid for their loathsome efforts.

Abortionist Gosnell Convicted On 3 counts Of First Degree Murder

 

There was a verdict today in the trial of abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia. While original reports claimed that the jury was hung on two counts, in the end, Gosnell was convicted on 3 counts of first degree murder in the deaths of three babies. He was convicted of third-degree murder (involuntary manslaughter) in the 2009 death of patient Karnamaya Mongara, a young mother, and acquitted for lack of evidence in the death of one baby.

Gosnell was also found guilty of numerous lesser charges, including multiple counts of violating Pennsylvania’s informed consent law and twenty-one counts of abortion of unborn babies over twenty-four weeks gestation.

According to witnesses, the verdict appeared to surprise and anger both Gosnell and his attorney, Jack McMahon.

He could receive a sentence of death or of imprisonment for life. The sentencing part of the trial will convene next week.

The media, except for FOX News and the local Philadelphia news pretty much refused to cover the Gosnell story in any depth.In fact, the New York Times, in its brief mention didn't even use the term 'baby'.

Apparently, a lot of the Left is only interested when children die in a way that can be spun to support their agenda. Otherwise it's move along, nothing to see here.

Unmourned, Unloved and Politically Inconvenient

"First MOLOCH, horrid King besmear'd with blood
Of human sacrifice, and parents tears,
Though, for the noise of Drums and Timbrels loud,
Their children's cries unheard that passed through fire
To his grim Idol - John Milton,Paradise Lost

Tophet is Moloch, which was made of brass; and they heated him from his lower parts; and his hands being stretched out, and made hot, they put the child between his hands, and it was burnt; when it vehemently cried out; but the priests beat a drum, that the father might not hear the voice of his son, and his heart might not be moved. - Rashi, 12th century commentary on Jeremiah 7:31

There was in the city of the Carthaginians a bronze image of Cronus (Moloch) extending its hands, palms up and sloping toward the ground, so that each of the children when placed thereon rolled down and fell into a sort of gaping pit filled with fire.- Diodorus Siculus,Bibliotheca historica 49 BC

In ancient times, there was a god worshiped in the Middle East called Ba'al, Moloch, Milkh, or Tophet among other names among the Canaanites,Phoenicians and Carthaginians whose attributes were similar to those of the Roman Saturn or the Greek Cronos. Its rites included the murder of children by tossing them into the fire built within or next to the idol.

In Leviticus 20:2-5, G-d enjoined the Jews never to give any of their seed as a sacrifice to Molokh, and that anyone who did would surely die because "I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go astray after him."


There's a trial going on in Philadelphia today in Philadelphia that merits notice in this context.



Dr. Kermit Gosnell ran an abortion clinic in the city and is accused of a number of horrendous crimes, according to the Grand Jury report:

"This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy - and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors."

"The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels - and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths."

He's been charged with 7 counts of first degree murder.

The illegal part of what Dr. Gosnell did is worthy of reflecting on.

According to his former clinic staff, at least 100 living babies were murdered moments after Dr. Gosnell (or in some cases, his unlicensed assistants) ripped them out of the womb.Pennsylvania law forbids abortion in most cases after 24 weeks (the end of the second trimester). His standard method of killing the children was snipping the spinal cords, what one of his assistants described as 'a virtual beheading.' Dr. Gosnell frequently used drugs to induce labor so as to deliver the babies faster and make the killing process easier. One of his assistants in testimony described 'fetuses and blood flying around everywhere.'

Dr. Gosnell has also been charged with the murder of a 41-year-old Virginia woman who died from an overdose of anesthetic drugs, possibly administered by another unlicensed 'doctor'.

Several women patients were badly injured, according to the report. One was left simply lying there after her cervix and colon were torn in the process of trying to pull a baby out of her womb so it could be 'dealt with'. Another, only 18 years old, was not given proper care after her uterus was punctured and had to undergo a hysterectomy. Others actually contracted venereal diseases, painful infections and other complications because of the unsanitary conditions, where rusty and outdated machines, dirty, unsterilized instruments and filthy surroundings.

When the police finally got around to investigating Dr. Gosnell's clinic because of a tip he was illegally 'proscribing' drugs, they found fetal remains "stored throughout the clinic - in bags, milk jugs, orange juice cartons, and even in cat-food containers."

So what Dr. Gosnell is being charged with, actually, is performing late term abortions (illegal in Pennsylvania but not in a number of states), keeping a sloppy and unsanitary shop, allowing unauthorized and unlicensed personnel to perform procedures and administer drugs and the injuries and at least one murder that resulted from that.

Had he worked for, say, Planned Parenthood in a clean, up-to-date environment with licensed assistants in a state like California that allows abortion on demand for any reason no matter how far along the pregnancy is, he would have been doing essentially the same thing without any problems.

What Dr. Gosnell was doing to babies is not that much different than other doctors when it comes to late term abortions. They are merely more skillful and using better equipment.

The usual process is to puncture the baby's skull and use a hose to suction out the brains and collapse the skull so it can be pulled out of the womb.

Two questions immediately come to mind for most people hearing about this for the first time.

This carnage went on literally for years. Didn't anyone complain to the authorities?

Yes, as a matter of fact, they did. The Departments of Health for both the City of Philadelphia and the State of Pennsylvania had received reports of what was going on in Dr. Gosnell's infanticide factory. Even after one of Dr. Gosnell's own employees quit and went to the state board and filed a formal complaint on what was going on, nothing was done.

When Dr. Gosnell applied for membership in the National Abortion Federation, the professional association of abortion practitioners because of the referrals that were possible, an inspector visited the clinic and turned him down - but made no report to the authorities on what she found there.

In the end, it wasn't the murder of babies or injuries to women that got Dr. Gosnell closed down, but a tip to the police that he was illegally proscribing drugs. Even then, he was allowed his freedom for a number of weeks, which gave him time to destroy most of his records.

Why?

And once this became a news story, why did the dinosaur media refuse to cover it? Under the classic journalism formula of 'if it bleeds, it leads' this should have been a major news story on the alphabet networks, the New York Times,the Washington Post, every major outlet you can think of. Why did they ignore it?

The picture below, courtesy of Breitbart is a photo of the empty 'reserved media section' at the Gosnell trial last week.

 

After the conservative blogosphere began hammering on this and Kirsten Powers, a Democrat and self professed liberal who works for FOX voiced outrage over the media's ignoring the Gosnell trial in a column that went viral, the Dinosaur media reluctantly began covering the story, with the Washington Post belatedly admitting that they perhaps 'should have covered this earlier' and finally assigning a reporter to the trial.

There are a number of reasons why the Pennsylvania authorities were reluctant to investigate Dr. Gosnell, and why the media steered clear of this story, and they're connected.

The dinosaur media, as even Dave Weigel of Slate admits, "are, generally, pro-choice. Twice, in D.C., I've caused a friend to literally leave a conversation and freeze me out for a day or so because I suggested that the Stupak Amendment and the Hyde Amendment made sense. There is a bubble."

These same, overwhelmingly Leftist journalists are generally rabidly anti-Second Amendment. So a one off situation where a mentally ill malcontent murders his mother, steals her guns and is somehow let into a school supposedly under lock down procedures tomurder others is a headline story, a cause celebre' and a trigger for massive legislation whereas a Philadelphia doctor who murdered hundreds is something to be ignored. It's all about the agenda and what serves it.

The same thing applies to a bureaucracy in a state that has a strong 'pro-choice' lobby. They're reluctant to be seen shutting down an abortion facility unless the abuses are so blatantly obvious they can't be ignored.

Another aspect of the Gosnell case that merited it being studiously ignored by the media (and I've yet to see it mentioned anywhere) is its connection with President Obama.This president has a clear record as a vigorous advocate of denying babies who survive an abortion medical care. His stance on the matter was more radical than even NARAL's. and the proper name for this is infanticide. Isn't that  pretty much what Dr. Gosnell is accused of, murdering viable, fully formed babies outside the womb?

Even worse from the standpoint of the media and abortion-on-demand advocates, Planned Parenthood, whose primary source for their multi-million dollar income according to their own budget is abortion and the Federal funds that cover it seem to agree with that, as this snippet makes clear.

I actually feel for this woman. She appears to know that what she's defending is morally wrong, but also knows that as a Planned Parenthood spokesperson she's being paid to advocate for it. And her discomfort is obvious.



Now that this story is in the public eye, abortion on demand advocates are attempting to spin it by saying that Dr. Gosnell's little shop of horrors is what women will be facing if abortion is criminalized.But the fact remains this was a legally licensed abortion clinic in good standing, no one is talking about criminalizing abortion per se and that what we're talking about here is something very different. Again, had Dr, Gosnell been working for Planned Parenthood in a state that allows abortion later than 24 weeks in a clean shop with licensed assistants, nothing would be said.

What's bothering a lot of people whether they admit it or not is what this says about our culture.

At Dr. Gosnell's trial one of his 'assistants', Adrienne Moton sobbed as she recalled snipping the necks of at least 10 babies after they were delivered, just as Dr. Gosnell had instructed her.

One of the babies who was murdered was so developed and healthy - the 'nurse' estimated his age at 30 weeks - that Dr. Gosnell joked that that the baby was so big he could have walked to the bus stop.


On another occasion, she testified that she killed a baby delivered into a toilet by cutting its neck with scissors. Asked if she knew that was wrong, she replied, “At first I didn’t.”

For thirty years, our culture has been instructed to think of children in the womb no matter how advanced in gestation as mere blobs of tissue rather than viable, living human beings. Is it any wonder that at first Adrienne Moton had no second thoughts, no qualms about what she was doing, that she had to think about it for awhile?

At this point, we get to the ultimate issue.

And it's not enough to mouth a slogan like "I'm a liberal and pro choice."

Is a six-month-old child in the womb not a person with a right to life? Obviously in some cases, say, where the mother's life is in danger, there's a different priority.

But if we have a healthy mother and a healthy child in the womb conceived through consensual sex who is a viable baby, if a six-month old child in the womb with a fully developed nervous system and able to feel pain when they're ripped from the womb and beheaded is 'not a person', if that child's choices should be arbitrarily taken away for someone else's convenience, then that is neither liberal nor pro-choice if we look at a dictionary and see what those words actually mean.

Dr. Gosnell made a choice, to run an abattoir disguised as an abortion clinic. So did the women who went to his clinic. These women could have made the choice to procure a legal abortion anytime up to 24 weeks, and if they were poor the State of Pennsylvania would have paid for it. They chose not to. Or they could have chosen to allow the child to live, and put him up for adoption to a loving family.Again,they made the choice not to.

The choice they made instead involved taking away the choice of a defenseless human being who wanted very much to live. Do people whom call themselves 'pro-choice' support that choice? Are we as a culture at a point where we support that choice?

If the answer's yes, than we are no better than than the worshipers of Moloch, hurling children into the flames. And we will deserve no better than to ultimately share their fate.

Hypocrisy Cubed - Sen. Dianne Feinstein Calls NRA 'Venal'

 

Here's Senator Feinstein on CNN Sunday:

"The NRA is venal. They come after you, they put together large amounts of money to defeat you," she said on CNN's "State of the Union." "They did this in '93, and they intend to continue it."

But what about another extremely venal group, a billion dollar plus organization that does exactly the same thing called Planned Parenthood?

Just last year, Planned Parenthood proudly terminated the lives of 333,964 Americans...one every 94 seconds. The overwhelming majority resulted from consensual sex.

A significant number of those abortions are late term, where an infant with a full nervous system fully capable of feeling pain has the warmth and comfort of the womb abruptly violated when the child is killed by having surgical scissors driven into his or her skull and then having the brains sucked out to collapse the head so the unwanted child can be removed.

Yet Senator Feinstein, like the president, would never refer to Planned Parenthood in the sort of terms they use towards gun owners or the NRA - because a big chunk of the $542.4 million in taxpayer dollars Planned Parenthood reports it received last year went right back into the campaign coffers of Democrats who favor abortion-on-demand, including the late term process I describe above. Like Senator Feinstein..who has undoubtedly received a nice chunk of change from groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL yet has the nerve to call someone else 'venal'!

At least the NRA, whatever else you think of it, raises its own money.

Needless to say, none of the talking heads at CNN or anywhere else would dream of mentioning this.

Since Roe V Wade, which somehow found a constitutional right to a taxpayer funded abortion 40 years ago, there are over 60,000,000 Americans who never lived to be able to pay the taxes to help fund the sort of cradle to grave ever expanding social welfare programs progressives like Senator Feinstein and President Obama want to foist on the country.

Ultimately, that means these programs will eventually go bankrupt, as the European social democracies are finding out. In this country, both MediCare and Social Security are already facing bankruptcy in the near future  without serious reforms or unsustainable levels of taxation.

 As someone who's not particularly an abortion hard liner (except when it comes to the process described above when the mother's life isn't in danger)  but who merely wants to government out of the business, I find this kind of political profit on the blood and souls of the unborn to be uniquely evil. But the grimmest joke of it all is ultimately on the 'progressives' who profit by supporting it.

Hagel's Nonexistent Political Courage

 

Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel's admirable military record is something he and his Democrat supporters will be sure to wave like a placard, as though that excuses everything else.

But given that, it's worth looking at Senator Hagels' political courage over the years, as Brett Stephens does in today's Wall Street Journal. Do his supporters on the left know, for instance, that he's on record as opposing abortion, even in cases of rape or incest? :

Oh, by the way, in 1995 Mr. Hagel told the Omaha World Herald that his opposition to abortion was total and made no exception for cases of rape or incest—a view that helped get him elected to the Senate the following year. He later voted repeatedly against allowing servicewomen to pay for abortions out of their own pocket, according to the left-wing magazine Mother Jones. Now that Congress has authorized the Defense Department to pay for abortions in cases of rape, it would be worth asking Mr. Hagel if he has evolved on this one, too.

Stephens also caught the same thing I did, Hagel's cowardice on Iraq:

In 2002, also when it was overwhelmingly popular, Mr. Hagel voted for the resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq. The lack of political courage is especially noteworthy here, because Mr. Hagel was, in fact, prescient in warning his Senate colleagues that "imposing democracy through force in Iraq is a roll of the dice."

Yet as the inimitable David Corn notes, "Bottom line: Hagel feared the resolution would lead to a war that would go badly but didn't have the guts to say no to the leader of his party."

In 2006, when the war in Iraq had become overwhelmingly unpopular, Mr. Hagel was on the right side of conventional wisdom. "The United States must begin planning for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq," he wrote in the Washington Post that November. Still swimming with the tide the following year, he called the surge "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam."

The surge turned out to be George W. Bush's finest hour—a genuine instance of political courage as opposed to Mr. Hagel's phony ones. It rescued the U.S. from humiliating defeat. It gave Iraq a decent opportunity to stand on its feet. It allowed the U.S. to conduct an orderly withdrawal of its forces. And it might have led to a long-term security relationship with Baghdad had the Obama administration not fumbled the endgame. Again there is no public record of Mr. Hagel acknowledging any of this.

Hagel has already made a convenient apology for gay bashing Clinton nominee James Hormel for being "openly, aggressively gay," which Hagel felt disqualified him a for becoming our ambassador to Luxembourg.

But he's never been held to account for his completely wrong stance on other items, like his support for appeasement of Iran, normalizing relations with Hezbollah, Syria's Basher Assad and  Hamas or the other items Stephens mentions above.

But...Hagel  has certainly been consistent through the years when it comes to his animus towards Israel.No doubts there.

That's precisely why he was nominated by President Obama to be Secretary of Defense, and you won't see him apologizing for any of it - although we can probably expect a few pro forma remarks about a 'commitment to Israel's security'.

Hagel's supporters on the Left probably love his stance on Israel, Iran, Islamist terrorism and the Middle East in general.Are they prepared to swallow his views on abortion along with it?

On 'Meet The Press', Newt Gingrich Destroys Democrats And Tom Friedman On Abortion

Newt Gingrich was on 'Meet The Press' Sunday and in one short segment destroyed the Democrat position on abortion.

He touched all the bases...reminding people that President Obama voted three times to allow doctors to kill babies who survive an abortion, slapping the media around for concentrating on Tod Aiken getting off the ticket for one stupid and ridiculous statement he apologized for while giving a sitting vice president a pass for expressing outright racism, and attacking in detail the radical Democrat party platform plank calling for abortion on demand, including partial birth abortion when there are no issues about non-consensual sex or the mother's health involved.

As a bonus, he makes Pravda-on-the-Hudson's resident idiot Tom Friedman look like an absolute buffoon when Friedman mouths off about being a 'planned parenthood Democrat' and then retreats behind a whining 'I'm here as a journalist' when Gingrich challenges him with some facts.

An absolute smackdown.

I'm not crazy about Todd Aiken, but Newt Gingrich has a legitimate point.Aiken won the primary, the voters of Missouri shouldn't be disenfranchised and the double standard on Aiken as compared to democrats like Joe Biden and others is ludicrous.

It's a pity Newt's personal predilections and record aren't on a par with his debating skills

A Tale Of Two Stupid Remarks..And How The Media Treats Them

Missouri's New GOP Senate Nominee, Todd Akin was asked in an interview whether he supported abortion in the case of rape:

"If abortion could be considered in case of, say, a tubal pregnancy [which threatens the mother’s life], what about in the case of rape?" asked KTVI host Charles Jaco, in a clip that was disseminated by Talking Points Memo. "Should it be legal or not?"

"It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that's really rare,” Akin said, referring to conception following a rape. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let's assume that maybe that didn't work or something, I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child."

Aside from the blather from the usual cartoon characters, there's no doubt this was an ignorant remark. Pregnancy from forcible rape does indeed happen, it's not all that rare and it's why many doctors routinely give rape victims a 'morning after' pill to try and prevent conception. One can only imagine the trauma of a woman seeing that kind of horrendous nightmare in her life reflected daily in the face of a child she lives with.

Akin, to his credit, realized what an idiotic thing he said and apologized.

"In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it's clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year", he said.

I consider Akin's remark to be just as offensive and ignorant as Joe Biden's recent remarks in faux black 'dialect' saying that Republicans want to put blacks in chains.

The sole difference is that Joe Biden never apologized, and in fact, the Obama Campaign went out of its way to say they found no problem with what he had said.

Astoundingly, the very left leaning Boston Globe was the only major media outlet who made a public call for Biden to apologize. No one castigated the Obama campaign.

I wonder what the media reaction would be if Mitt Romney and Pauyl Ryan said they had no problems with Akin's remarks? You know what would be going on. Of course, the GOP candidates did nothing of the kind.

Yes, there's a double standard. It isn't exactly news anymore, but a classic example like this is worth pointing out.

'A Million Souls Up In Heaven' - A Must See Video

This one courtesy of my good friend Tom White over at VA Right. It will definitely stop you in your tracks and make you think - unless your heart is made of stone.

President Obama Demands All Bow To His New Religion

The Founders of our beloved Republic were by and large religious men who acknowledged the role of divine providence in the miracle of their achieving independence in a free land of their own.

But they were also men who had come from a place racked with war and religious bigotry because of the institution of state religions, so they wisely included as one of our primary freedoms the edict that Congress would make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

The establishment and free exercise clauses, as they're known, were not intended to 'make a wall between church and state' as Thomas Jefferson's famous letter is frequently misinterpreted, but to keep America's governing classes from making laws elevating one religion over another and making it the official state religion, as the Church of England was.

President Obama's new Health and Human Services diktat requiring Catholic institutions to purchase healthcare for their employees that includes birth control, sterilization and abortion drugs and operations is a huge and egregious violation and dilution of these First Amendment rights. It is little different from requiring Muslim establishments to buy from companies producing pork products and alcohol.

It degrades freedom of practice to freedom to worship, and they are two very different things.

And once again, we see this president bypassing Congress and flouting the Constitution using the mechanisms of the executive order, the regulatory shibboleth and the appointed cabinet officer and czar.

When President Obama first came out with this policy,he expected it would simply be implemented without any fuss, which gives you a clue as to the personality of the man we allowed into the White House.

Another clue to who this president is and how he really views America and its people is that, after seeing the outcry from people of all faiths, he expected them to accept an 'accommodation' giving them the appearance of granting them back some of the rights they already own outright by lying to them that it will be the insurance companies who will be required to provide these products and services 'for free'.

President Obama continues to think that everyone is stupid except him. Catholic institutions will still be mandated to pay insurance premiums under ObamaCare no matter what. If insurance companies are forced to provide birth control, sterilization and abortions as a part of these policies it won't be 'for free' but will simply be rolled into the overall cost of the premiums - which these Catholic institutions will be paying anyway.

What the president is doing is demanding that both insurers and insured play a game of Let's Pretend that the cost of the policies is really higher than it is - because it includes these 'free' items. President Obama simply demands that people on both ends of this legally mandated transaction simply lie about it.

I admit to getting a small amount of malicious amusement out of this, because a lot of the Catholic hierarchy and many Catholics in America largely supported ObamaCare after getting assurances from this President that of course, he wouldn't expect them to have to fund things like abortions. They should have known that a president whose position on abortion has consistently been even more radical the NARAL's would lie to them with a smile. You have to wonder what former congressman Bart Stupak, a Catholic who provided the final votes on ObamaCare thinks of his decision now. He delivered the bloc of anti-abortion Democrats in exchange for a worthless executive order from Obama promising that no federal funds from ObamaCare would go to pay for funding abortions. Just as I wrote back then, the 'Executive order' might as well have been written in disappearing ink.


President Obama's cynical and deceitful 'accommodation' has just one purpose. It is yet another lie designed to give divide Catholics and to give permission to those Catholics who wanted to vote for President Obama anyway a little cover.

Thankfully, most of America's Catholic Bishops seem to understand what an assault this is on their faith and have rejected President Obama's cynical ploy.

It's up to their co-religionists and the Church to remind Catholics who once again take this president at his word of Bart Stupak and all the other untruths used to bring us to this point. If President Obama is re-elected, he will cheerfully trash this accommodation just as he's trashed the others.

The Democrats are composed of various self interest groups, many with interests and issues that are opposed to each other. But the one group no Democrat has ever gone against and survived for very long is the abortion lobby.

The simple reason for that is because abortion on demand is a sacrament for the Left and thus not just a part of President Obama's ideology. It's a vital part of a new secular religious doctrine, a state church, and thus establishment of religion as well as a trashing of free practice not just for Catholics but for all faiths, who will be subordinate to the new Leftist pantheism just as they always have been under all statist regimes. Make no mistake.. that is exactly what President Obama is putting in place, and neutering the First Amendment is an important and necessary step in that process.

This goes far beyond the question of abortion or birth control or the Catholic Church. It sets a precedent for gutting the entire First Amendment if it's successful.

It's the horrendous tip of a hidden iceberg designed to sink our freedoms.

Lyin' Hypocrite Of The Day....

That would be Senator Frank 'Greasy Fingers' Lautenberg ( D-NJ) talking about the House Republicans' proposed "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act."

"I’m the proud father of three daughters, two more that my wife brought to our marriage, six granddaughters. My wife brought two more to the marriage. So we got a full house of healthy and well-being young women. I don’t want politicians making decisions for them when it comes to their health and well being.”

Oh, by the way...speaking of politicians making decisions for other people's health and well being, Lautenberg voted for ObamaCare. Of course.

Like many Democrats, Lautenberg is solidly against other people having choices on things like whether to own firearms,where their children may go to school, whether they're forced to buy government mandated insurance or whether they are required to pay for government 'services' they may be morally opposed to.

In fact, like most of the Left about the only choice Lautenberg favors is the right to choose whether to kill an inconvenient baby in the womb.What a great Dad!

(via memeorandum)

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

The Immigrant Song: the USA, abortion and the debate on illegal immigration

"On we sweep with threshing oar
Our only goal will be the western shore..."
-Led Zeppelin, `The Immigrant Song'

(Thanks to American Patrol Report for the graphic)

If there's one major issue that's certain to make people crazy in America it's the massive influx of illegal immigrants into the country, primarily from Mexico and Central America. Want to start a guaranteed screaming match? Pick your setting and either mention that `undocumented aliens' should receive full amnesty or that we have to enforce the laws, round `em all up and ship `em back across the border and watch the tension level go out of control.

What's missing from a lot of opinions expressed on this topic,of course is sanity, common sense and a sense of responsibility.

Talk to the average proponent of illegal alien rights and ask him if he likes the idea of his taxes doubling or tripling to take care of the cost of education, health care and other social services for illegal aliens; mention how the influx of cheap labor has served to lower wages for working people across the board, or talk about how illegal immigrants affect traffic gridlock, overcrowding in schools and the housing crunch and you usually get a shocked look and an `I never thought of it that way'. If you get a rational response at all.

Ask one of the round `em up and ship `em out crowd whether they're willing to pay double and triple for produce, restaurant meals, construction and carwashes, pay more for the gardener and the nanny and have more kids and less abortions and you get the same response.

Hmmmm.

Let's look at a few basic facts.

First, it's simply not true that illegal immigration is a net benefit to the USA, unless you're an employer looking to pay the lowest possible wages and zero benefits. The cost of illegal immigration to society is staggering, mostly paid by local government and far outweighs whatever social security or sales taxes are paid in. And a number of these people work off the books anyway and pay no taxes.

You also have to factor into the equation the $25 billion plus per year that is sent to Mexico and points south every year from America and siphoned out of our economy. Believe it or not, Mexico's second highest source of revenue after oil is remittances from expatriate Mexicans.

It's also not true that these are simply people `doing jobs Americans won't do.' There are plenty of highly unpleasant, smelly and hard labor-style government jobs that have a long waiting list to get hired - because they pay decent wages and benefits.

There's also this simple, but unpleasant fact; in a post 9/11 world, we simply can't afford to leave the back door open.

On the other side of the argument, criminalizing 11 million people, ignoring the part they play in our economy and attempting to eliminate them from American life or otherwise marginalize them is heartless, unrealistic, poor policy and ultimately doomed to failure.

And there's another tough nut to crack - illegal immigration is linked up with the abortion issue. Here's how that works:

The massive increase in abortions and the massive influx of illegal immigrants both started in the early `70's, when Roe V Wade became the law of the land. Since then, the USA has been averaging about a million abortions per year, overwhelmingly from consensual sexual relationships as a form of retroactive birth control. Do the math..that's over 33 million Americans who never grew up to work, pay taxes or pay into Social Security to help support the retirement of the very generation that killed most of them off - the Baby Boomers.

It couldn't have worked out better than if a diabolical insider with the Federal Government had planned it: let a group of people into the country illegally who will provide plenty of cheap labor and drive wages down. Business will love it. These folks'll also pay into the Social Security fund and help fund the retirement of all those Boomers, but most of them won't be able to utilize the system. And the cost of their medical care, schooling and other social welfare costs will be a problem for local governments..while the Federal Government looks the other way.

Never thought of it quite that way, did you?

And of course, nobody ever figured how high cost of all this was going to end up being...or foresaw 9/11 happening.

The key words to use in resolving this situation are Americanization and enforcement, so that the country as a whole can actually benefit from the presence of what is, for the most part exactly the sort of hard working, decent people America should encourage as immigrants. And that description fits 90% or more of the people we're talking about, who had the courage to leave a failed society and take the risk of starting somewhere new.

Here's a modest proposal to solve this problem once and for all.

The first issue that needs to be faced is enforcing our borders.

The Bush Administration and Congress need to do whatever it takes to enforce border security, even if it means militarizing the borders. In a post 9/11 world, anything less is simply unacceptable. If the US government can keep Cuban cigars out of America, it ought to be able to keep illegal aliens out of the USA..they're bigger and easier to spot than a box of cigars.

Second, we need to see realistic penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegals and laws prohibiting anyone without legal status in the US from sending a dime out of the country. The banks and Western Union will scream, since they make a fortune off it, but it needs to happen.There... I just pumped $25 billion or so into the US economy with one piece of simple legislation.

Third, we need to know who's here, and decide who gets to stay and who leaves. Give every illegal alien 45 days to go to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office and file an application, complete with their current address, fingerprints and employment information as the opening step on a path to legal status and citizenship. They would be given a special class of federal tax ID numbers and ID's that need to be stamped and renewed every 60 days to enable them to continue working while their background is checked and they undergo a health exam, with the requirement that they inform the ICE of any changes in residence or employment that occur.

Anyone NOT reporting to the ICE or not renewing his special federal tax ID number would be subject to criminal penalties followed by immediate deportation...no questions asked. Likewise, anyone who fails background or commits a crime in the interim gets imprisoned or immediately deported, as the situation warrants.

The carrot always works better when combined with the stick.

Vetting these people is a big job and will take some time, true..but better late than never. And better than another blanket amnesty or a `guest worker' program that simply assumes people will leave when they're told to. And it makes more sense than the idea that people will voluntarily pay up to $2,000 in fines for the privilege of getting in line for a green card, Senators McCain and Kennedy. I wouldn't expect out-of-touch types in Washington D.C to understand this, but it's a lot cheaper than that for an illegal alien to take a walk down to MacArthur Park and simply purchase a counterfeit green card. Especially since, due to the arcane privacy rules, nobody checks that closely anyway.

And finally, we need to streamline and reform the arcane immigration laws we have on the books..to encourage people who want to come here to do the right thing and use the system.

Next, we come to Americanization.

The problem here is that an entire subculture has been allowed to flourish that has everything to do with the further balkanizing and racially splitting American society and nothing to do with mainstreaming and integrating people...which of course is the sheer genius of how America has dealt with and assimilated the waves of immigration of the past.

There are a whole bunch of people with a vested interest in keeping this situation exactly the way it is. Either they want to exploit these people for their own political agendas or they merely want to ensure that Leaf Blower Guy, Senorita Nanny, Manuel Labor and their kids remain as a permanent,low paid underclass.

Language is a major starting point. English, like it or not,is the language of access into American life.

We need to make a major effort towards the immediate funding and expanding of free English immersion and ESL classes to anyone who wants them, coupled with a moratorium on bi-lingual education and one on ballots, driver license applications, and the like in half a dozen languages.

And I see no problem with encouraging able bodied, qualified young would-be immigrants to move to the head of the line to earn their citizenship by enlisting in our military.

To see how the language issue works, Israel is an excellent modern example.In Israel, new olim (immigrants) from dozens of countries and cultures are assimilated into Israeli society, taught Hebrew language skills and turned into Israelis by a system of government programs geared towards assimilating them onto Israeli life, including the use of ulpan courses..Hebrew language immersion that has worked successfully to mainstream immigrants from places as diverse as America, Brazil, Yemen and Ethiopia.

America used to be able to do that sort of thing quite well, until political correctness and cultural relativism came to be more important than a cohesive society that still was able to celebrate its diversity but acknowledged a common culture and language.

It's high time we got back to basics and common sense on something as basic as immigration. The majority of the 9 to 11 million people who are here without legal status are a major human resource and an asset, and it's high time we started treating them as more than the source of a cheap car wash.