President Obama had a penchant for voting "present" when he was an Illinois senator. He did this, many suspect, to have little on which future political opponents could point to as a radical position if (when) he decided to run for higher office. One vote on which Obama tipped his hand was an infamous vote against a ban on what is called "partial-birth abortion" and then went a step further: He opposed a bill to protect the life of a newborn human being that survived an abortion. Let's be clear here. A partial-birth abortion is a grisly (and medically unnecessary to save the life of the mother) procedure where the about-to-be-born, fully viable and fully-developed baby's head is allowed to pass through the birth canal and before the baby is fully delivered, the skull is punctured and the brains are literally sucked out with a vacuum. No baby can survive this. But sometimes during a regular abortion, the baby somehow survives and is born alive. Obama thought that if the intent was to abort and destroy this innocent life, then it was permissable to finish the job even after the baby was born. The old legal argument that legally a person is not a "person" until born is ignored. I should think that even the most ardent Obama supporter would consider this repulsive. Now President Obama holds the highest office in the land and is dictating the nation's health care law and cleverly masking his latest mandate that religious organizations pay for birth control in noble language like "woman's health," "preventive care," and "reproductive services." The implication being that anyone who opposes it is against women's health. Even the Roman Catholic Church is not opposed to birth control when used for medical reasons. But pregnancy is not a disease. In pushing his radical social agenda, Obama is so convinced of his righteousness, none of this matters. He considers the church has a fringe view and the First Amendment is just a bump in the road.
Shelby...Man's Best Friend
Monday, March 19, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Let's Buy Her Pills
A few random thoughts about the current flap over mandatory birth control for women paid for by employers:
One of the more lame liberal arguments is that not providing free birth control restricts access to birth control.
Nobody is advocating "restricting access" to birth control. Period. Forcing all employers to pay for something -- especially with no opt-out for religious institutions and businesses -- does not constitute access restriction. Think of it this way: The Second Amendment explicitly guarantees Americans' right to bear arms. This right has been affirmed by two recent Supreme Court Decisions. Let's say some gun advocates launched a hypothetical campaign to impose a federal mandate forcing all employers pay for their employees' guns, would it be fair to say that opponents of that effort were "restricting access" to firearms? Of course not. This is sophistry.
Birth control pills, if used for medical reasons are usually covered by employer insurance. The Georgetown student-activist used a medical example to make her case but this is a red herring. What she really wanted was free birth control for her social lifestyle. If she can go to Georgetown, wear nice clothes, drive a car, drink booze on the weekends, and fly all over the country to testify at congressional hearings, let her buy her own birth control pills. On second thought, perhaps, in her case, the public should buy her birth controls pills. The thought of her genes being passed on to make another generation of fire-breathing libs is not pleasant.
One of the more lame liberal arguments is that not providing free birth control restricts access to birth control.
Nobody is advocating "restricting access" to birth control. Period. Forcing all employers to pay for something -- especially with no opt-out for religious institutions and businesses -- does not constitute access restriction. Think of it this way: The Second Amendment explicitly guarantees Americans' right to bear arms. This right has been affirmed by two recent Supreme Court Decisions. Let's say some gun advocates launched a hypothetical campaign to impose a federal mandate forcing all employers pay for their employees' guns, would it be fair to say that opponents of that effort were "restricting access" to firearms? Of course not. This is sophistry.
Birth control pills, if used for medical reasons are usually covered by employer insurance. The Georgetown student-activist used a medical example to make her case but this is a red herring. What she really wanted was free birth control for her social lifestyle. If she can go to Georgetown, wear nice clothes, drive a car, drink booze on the weekends, and fly all over the country to testify at congressional hearings, let her buy her own birth control pills. On second thought, perhaps, in her case, the public should buy her birth controls pills. The thought of her genes being passed on to make another generation of fire-breathing libs is not pleasant.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
"We Don't Need No Education" Pink Floyd
Our education system is not working. Our children, the future of our country, are being propagandized by liberal teachers and professors. No wonder so many parents are opting to home school or send their children to private schools. No wonder the NEA (liberal teacher's union) hates the concept of school vouchers. No wonder our students go to college as (naive?) little conservatives and graduate radicalized little flame-throwing liberals. No wonder Obama got elected 3 years ago. Is this a non-reversible trend?
Unfortunately for traditional America – the one that values independence, free market capitalism and limited government – too many aging radicals from the 1960s and ‘70s have found their way into government school classrooms.
Some, like Bill Ayers, found a home in the hallowed halls of higher academia. Today he collects a pension from the very government he vowed to destroy just a few short decades ago. Others, like Robert Roth, set their sights on K-12 education.
As these former Abbie Hoffman wannabes matured a bit, they realized they had to – in the words of modern-day radical Van Jones – drop the radical pose to achieve the radical ends.
So they don’t call for warfare and setting bombs anymore. They don’t call press conferences and vow to kill the pigs or topple American imperialism.
Their new goal is to alter traditional American culture by indoctrinating the young students in their charge. They spending precious class time teaching our children about their vision of America, which would be equal to all other countries; where the efforts of motivated individuals are sacrificed at the temple of forced collectivism; where the laws are driven by moral relativism and truth that comes in shades of gray.
Curious about Roth, I googled him and virtually the only picture I could find of him was on a 1970 Wanted poster from the Chicago Police Department. Along with Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and other radicals, Roth was a member of the Weather Underground and was wanted for his participation in the “Days of Rage” riots in Chicago.
Prior to that, Roth was a leader of the Columbia University chapter of Students for a Democratic Society. According to U.S. intelligence information made public in an unrelated court case, Roth was a leader of the SDS-led student riots at the college in 1968.
He’s a perfect example of an activist dropping the radical pose to achieve radical goals in our classrooms. And nobody seems particularly concerned about that.
Wake up, America. These people might have grayed a bit and put on ties, but they are the same old revolutionaries who oppose virtually everything that made our nation great. They are preaching their rhetoric to naïve students who believe everything they hear, just because the teacher says it’s so.
And the worst part is that Roth and friends are being paid to subvert American values with the tax dollars of hard working Americans.
Those same hard-working Americans are the only people who have the power to successfully demand that former domestic terrorists be banned from public school classrooms.
March 10, 2012
Another '60s Radical – Once Featured On PBS – Finds His Place Teaching Our Children
By Kyle Olson
3/10/2012
Some, like Bill Ayers, found a home in the hallowed halls of higher academia. Today he collects a pension from the very government he vowed to destroy just a few short decades ago. Others, like Robert Roth, set their sights on K-12 education.
As these former Abbie Hoffman wannabes matured a bit, they realized they had to – in the words of modern-day radical Van Jones – drop the radical pose to achieve the radical ends.
So they don’t call for warfare and setting bombs anymore. They don’t call press conferences and vow to kill the pigs or topple American imperialism.
Their new goal is to alter traditional American culture by indoctrinating the young students in their charge. They spending precious class time teaching our children about their vision of America, which would be equal to all other countries; where the efforts of motivated individuals are sacrificed at the temple of forced collectivism; where the laws are driven by moral relativism and truth that comes in shades of gray.
Curious about Roth, I googled him and virtually the only picture I could find of him was on a 1970 Wanted poster from the Chicago Police Department. Along with Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and other radicals, Roth was a member of the Weather Underground and was wanted for his participation in the “Days of Rage” riots in Chicago.
Prior to that, Roth was a leader of the Columbia University chapter of Students for a Democratic Society. According to U.S. intelligence information made public in an unrelated court case, Roth was a leader of the SDS-led student riots at the college in 1968.
He’s a perfect example of an activist dropping the radical pose to achieve radical goals in our classrooms. And nobody seems particularly concerned about that.
Wake up, America. These people might have grayed a bit and put on ties, but they are the same old revolutionaries who oppose virtually everything that made our nation great. They are preaching their rhetoric to naïve students who believe everything they hear, just because the teacher says it’s so.
And the worst part is that Roth and friends are being paid to subvert American values with the tax dollars of hard working Americans.
Those same hard-working Americans are the only people who have the power to successfully demand that former domestic terrorists be banned from public school classrooms.
Kyle Olson
Kyle is Founder and CEO of Education Action Group Foundation, a non-partisan non-profit organization with the goal of promoting sensible education reform and exposing those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.Thursday, March 1, 2012
Insight from Thomas Sowell
Many people are looking to the many primary elections on March 6th -- "Super Tuesday" -- to clarify where this year's Republican nomination campaign is headed.
It may clarify far more than that, including the future of this nation and of Western civilization. If a clear winner with a commanding lead emerges, the question then becomes whether that candidate is someone who is likely to defeat Barack Obama.
If not, then the fate of America -- and of Western nations, including Israel -- will be left in the hands of a man with a lifelong hostility to Western values and Western interests.
President Obama is such a genial man that many people, across the ideological space, cannot see him as a danger.
For every hundred people who can see his geniality, probably only a handful see the grave danger his warped policies and ruthless tactics pose to a whole way of life that has given generation after generation of Americans unprecedented freedom and prosperity.
The election next November will not be just another election, and the stakes add up to far more than the sum of the individual issues. Moreover, if reelected and facing no future election, whatever political constraints may have limited how far Obama would push his radical agenda will be gone.
He would have the closest thing to a blank check. Nothing could stop him but impeachment or a military coup, and both are very unlikely. A genial corrupter is all the more dangerous for being genial.
Thomas Sowell
It may clarify far more than that, including the future of this nation and of Western civilization. If a clear winner with a commanding lead emerges, the question then becomes whether that candidate is someone who is likely to defeat Barack Obama.
If not, then the fate of America -- and of Western nations, including Israel -- will be left in the hands of a man with a lifelong hostility to Western values and Western interests.
President Obama is such a genial man that many people, across the ideological space, cannot see him as a danger.
For every hundred people who can see his geniality, probably only a handful see the grave danger his warped policies and ruthless tactics pose to a whole way of life that has given generation after generation of Americans unprecedented freedom and prosperity.
The election next November will not be just another election, and the stakes add up to far more than the sum of the individual issues. Moreover, if reelected and facing no future election, whatever political constraints may have limited how far Obama would push his radical agenda will be gone.
He would have the closest thing to a blank check. Nothing could stop him but impeachment or a military coup, and both are very unlikely. A genial corrupter is all the more dangerous for being genial.
Thomas Sowell
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)