Lifenet
Monday, January 26th, 2009Funding Abortions Stimulates The Economy?
All sorts of stimulating funding in the Dem’s bill.
China’s One Child Policy
Monday, December 1st, 2008China’s One Child Policy
This will harm them in the end.
UPDATED:
I’m transferring this over to an actual post because it’s important. Here is what Strategy Page says:
The unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future. But beyond 2025, Russia and China face some serious demographic problems. China’s “one child” policy (to halt population growth), and the unanticipated appearance of cheap sonograms (enabling parents to determine the gender of their child while there was still time for an abortion) has caused an imbalance in the gender ratio.
There are now 115 boys for every 100 girls. Young men are having a problem finding wives. Wealthier urban males attract more women from the rural areas (where 70 percent of Chinese still live), leaving a lot of lonely, poor and angry young men in the countryside. The smaller generations means that the proportion of elderly (made wealthier and healthier by the booming economy) is skyrocketing, while the workforce is shrinking.
Both these trends are bad, and will have negative social and economic impacts. India has the same gender imbalance problem, but a growing population that contains a higher proportion of poor people than in China. Not good.
I have blogged about this before here and here and here and here. And I will repeat: Where are the feminists? Girls are the ones being aborted. Abortion is being used to kill the less desired gender. The feminists’ silence is deafening.
Planned Parenthood Christmas Gifts
Thursday, November 27th, 2008Planned Parenthood Christmas Gifts
Nothing says “I love you” like a certificate for death.
Planned Parenthood Admits Infanticide
Thursday, October 30th, 2008Planned Parenthood Admits Infanticide
Barbarism.
Obama’s Abortion Position
Wednesday, September 17th, 2008Here (h/t Ace):
Just to clarify.
And also, related: Why Sarah Palin is immoral for NOT having an abortion. No, they aren’t joking. Says Cassy Fiano:
So, I guess in this guy’s mind, we should have no Helen Kellers or Franklin D. Roosevelts; no Lord Byrons, Lord Nelsons, or Beethovens. Is that the argument? That unless you’re 100% “healthy” — and by whose standards is “healthy” defined anyway? — you don’t have a right to live? And what gives this guy the right to decide?
I grew up with my Down’s Syndrome cousin. She was as integral to the family as any chromosomally “perfect” person. The funeral home could not fit all the people when she died. She was loved and she loved. She lived on the farm and she contributed.
What amazes me is that these same people will go to any length to save a dog or get naked for PETA and will turn around and show callous disregard for human life–either flawed or inconvenient.
A note on late-term abortions: My sons were born at 24 weeks gestation. One died after contracting MRSA at the hospital. One received the best medical care and is now in 5th grade. These are children. People. The notion of having a botched late term abortion and then allowing that child to die, or actively kill the child is beyond barbaric.
Radical leftists like Obama embrace eugenics and a life inconvenienced by unplanned children. It is horrifying. What birth defect do you have that makes you unworthy? What circumstance created your inconvenient existence?
Obama’s Communistic Past: Is The MSM Failing To Report The Truth?–Updated
Tuesday, August 12th, 2008Today, Barack Obama received the enthusiastic endorsement of the Communist Party USA. Here is their hope:
If Obama’s candidacy represented nothing more than the spark for this profound initiative to unite the working class and defeat the pernicious influence of racism, it would be a transformative candidacy that would advance progressive politics for the long term.
Meanwhile, what of Obama’s connection to communism? If there were one, would the mainstream media report it? Cliff Kincaid has a must-read piece over at Accuracy in Media where he discusses the implications of the non-reporting of Edwards affair and it’s implications for the non-reporting of anything negative about Obama:
The implication of the Edwards scandal is that, if ABC News’s top investigative reporter could take Edwards’ side, without any serious checking of the facts, then other candidates may be concealing scandals and hoping and planning to get away with it. That is certainly the case with Obama, who is far more of a media favorite than Edwards ever was and has, with the help of the influential Associated Press (AP), carefully concealed his relationship with an identified CPUSA member.
Obama’s communist connection, which he failed to disclose in his 1995 book, Dreams From My Father, by referring to Davis only as “Frank” and ignoring his communist affiliation, is a far more serious scandal than an Edwards “love child.”
If you’re reading this blog, it’s likely that you use other forms of news-gathering than the traditional media. But the vast majority of Americans only recently heard about John Edward’s affair. Would they ever hear about Obama’s communist connections? In February of this year, Cliff Kincaid noted Obama’s communist mentor:
However, through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his “poetry” and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just “Frank.”
The reason is apparent: Davis was a known communist who belonged to a party subservient to the Soviet Union. In fact, the 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a CPUSA member. What’s more, anti-communist congressional committees, including the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), accused Davis of involvement in several communist-front organizations.
Trevor Loudon, a New Zealand-based libertarian activist, researcher and blogger, noted evidence that “Frank” was Frank Marshall Davis in a posting in March of 2007.
Obama’s communist connection adds to mounting public concern about a candidate who has come out of virtually nowhere, with a brief U.S. Senate legislative record, to become the Democratic Party frontrunner for the U.S. presidency. In the latest Real Clear Politics poll average, Obama beats Republican John McCain by almost four percentage points.
You have not heard about these connections in the MSM. Don’t expect to. But it is important to recognize two things:
1. Given the media climate, it is possible for a candidate to receive no scrutiny until it’s too late.
2. Obama, because he is adored by the media, will receive less scrutiny than even an average Democrat.
It is possible that in today’s biased climate, that an unexamined and inexperienced candidate could achieve the highest elected office in America and most influential leadership position in the free world. That is disturbing to contemplate.
Update:
Fausta Wertz writes and will be talking on BlogTalkRadio about Obama’s communist tendencies now–specifically his abortion position, which is strikingly like communistic regime practices.
Cross-posted at RightWingNews.com
Abortion As Social Injustice
Monday, July 7th, 2008
“Senator Obama talks about bringing hope, faith and change to American politics. We now see this is all just political ‘doublespeak.’ One of his top priorities as President would be protecting abortion rights and even expanding them. If elected, Senator Obama would become ‘The Abortion President,’ with the most extremist policies on abortion of any President in history.
“Senator Obama’s views on abortion are so radical that he even wants American citizens to pay for them. This would include Catholics, Evangelicals and all people of faith. He would also expand abortion rights through his passionate support of The Freedom of Choice Act.
David Brody says:
This is Obama’s challenge with Evangelicals. He can talk about the social justice issues all he wants and yes, it resonates to a certain extent but unless he moves on abortion (not likely) he’ll have a problem. If he shows some support for parental notification laws or the annual fetal pain bill that moves through Congress then that will help insulate him to a degree on the extremist abortion tag.
Abortion as social injustice undermines a key Democratic tenet that matter to conservative Christians: taking care of the poor and neediest and being a voice for those who don’t have one. All sorts of individuals find a home in the Democrat party because together, they have more power. But still, these people have voices and often loud mouths–which, in itself, calls into question how oppressed they truly are when everyone knows exactly what they think feel.
Still, Christians believe their mission includes clothing the poor, feeding the needy, tending the sick, visiting the imprisoned, caring for the widows and orphans, and on it goes. Jesus told his followers that “whatever you do to serve the least of these, you’ve done for me.” To a conservative Christian, it doesn’t get more “least” than a helpless unborn child.
Hope and changeyness sounds wonderful–even to evangelical ears, but upon closer inspection, it rings hollow. Democrats will find their social justice messages a tough sell when the greatest social injustice, abortion, is a central plank of their social platform. Their only hope is to try to deceive conservatives into believing that Obama really is against abortion. Which, of course, he isn’t.
Cross-posted at Right Wing News and the old Dr. Melissa Clouthier
