Tuesday, March 27, 2012
So why, may you ask, has the use of the wand to obtain a sonogram prior to an abortion received so much attention and anger from the left? The answer given by Alvarado, Hart and others is that…wait for it…it’s an “intrusive” procedure. Other than medical (chemical) abortions, which can only be performed during the first 49 days of gestation and only account for between 13-17% of US abortions, every method of abortion is an invasive procedure. From suction aspiration where a plastic tube is inserted into the cervix and the suction literally rips the fetus apart, to a suction/D&C where a curette (a thin metal rod with a knife-sharp loop at the end) is inserted into the uterus and is used to dismember the fetus which is then suctioned, to D&E where forceps are inserted into the uterus to forcibly dismember the fetus, abortions are intrusive! And in up to 8% of chemical abortions suction aspiration must still be used. So to recap, it is supposedly asinine to think that a woman going in for an extremely invasive procedure (abortion) should have to undergo a trans-vaginal sonogram first while keeping in mind that the trans-vaginal sonogram only applies to gestation periods up to 10 weeks in most cases.
The article goes on to state that Texas lawmakers did not use the specific term trans-vaginal sonogram in their bill. Which maybe they didn’t, but they also didn’t refer to abortions as trans-vaginal fetus dismemberment and removal procedures which technically they could have.
And it gets better. Some of the responses to this article, as well as the comments from the likes of Stewart, delve further into issue of the sonogram law in general with opponents claiming that doctor-client privacy is being violated. No where in this or similar bills are there provisions to make public the results of the sonogram or the choice the woman makes afterward. It would seem that prior to an abortion that the doctor would have the obligation to divulge all pertinent information about the procedure. After all, doctors thoroughly go over x-rays, CT scans and MRI’s with the patient prior to performing any other medical procedure, why should this be any different?
But somehow the left wants you to believe that this is different because the government should have no place in women’s health affairs, that is of course until the left demands the government to force insurance companies to pay for contraception and other “family planning options”. The lack of logic and continued hypocrisy of the left’s argument would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
To be sure, I'm all for having a discussion about how healthcare should be administrated in this country. Personally, I advocate local and private administration rather than a federal single-payer system, and I think history, evidence, and fiscal reason support my preference. But sure, let's have the conversation about the merits of boths paths, and lawfully implement changes without circumvention of the Constitution. Looking at you, Democrats that support ObamaCare.
But where I take particular issue is when some among the American left argue that the lack of a federal birth-control mandate constitutes a GOP-led "War on Women."
Before using these words in the future (as they have little value beyond being an emotional trigger, anyway), read this amazing and informative article by Robert Fisk. It may offer perspective on some other cultures and ideologies that truly wage war upon women. I will suggest reading it all (full link below), as it is a global epidemic that warrants far more attention than it is given, but for those pressed for time, here is an excerpt that particularly affected me:
"[A] young woman found in a drainage ditch near Daharki in Pakistan, "honour" killed by her family as she gave birth to her second child, her nose, ears and lips chopped off before being axed to death, her first infant lying dead among her clothes, her newborn's torso still in her womb, its head already emerging from her body? She was badly decomposed; the local police were asked to bury her. Women carried the three to a grave, but a Muslim cleric refused to say prayers for her because it was "irreligious" to participate in the namaz-e-janaza prayers for "a cursed woman and her illegitimate children"."
Now, remember that Rush Limbaugh is known far and wide as a misogynist of the highest order for saying that Sandra Fluke should buy her own birth control and for calling her a slut. Then, think about the fact that events like this are quietly happening every single day in other nations, most often in predominantly fundamentalist Islamic ones, without the slightest mention of condemnation by the American left.
And then, reflect on how incredibly ridiculous this GOP-led "War On Women" nonsense really is.
Found at: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-the-crimewave-that-shames-the-world-2072201.html
** Above image courtesy of Global Post. Hat tip to Dr. M. Zudhi Jasser for providing this article.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Selwyn Duke at American Thinker offers a startling and absolutely dreadful glimpse inside this Kansas City school where a white child was doused with gasoline and immolated last week. The two assailants were black, and were reported to have been saying, "That's what you deserve, white boy!"
Selwyn Duke reports, based upon documented interviews:
While this crime is making headlines, Coon [mother of child that was attacked] states that it was merely the horrible culmination of continual racial harassment her son had to endure at East High... I've learned that Coon's son is not alone. Other white students also report a pattern of racial harassment at the high school at the hands of their peers -- and, shockingly, their teachers.This is far from the only example of the staff's propensity to instill racial hatred, and I would definitely suggest reading the whole thing, found here. But what really caught my attention was this bit:
Two of these victims were the twin 14-year-old daughters (first names withheld upon request) of Karin Wildeisen. Ever since their family relocated from Texas, they had endured racial animosity in the Kansas City school system and inappropriate behavior by staff, which included teachers laughing while boys humiliatingly manhandled the girls and a teacher slapping one of them on the backside. But there was far worse to come.
The twins started coming home and talking about the goings-on in an advanced-English class taught by a teacher Wildeisen identifies as Ms. Veda Monday. Wildeisen said that her daughters told her, "There are four white kids in the class; they are being targeted racially"[...]
One day, Monday allegedly showed an explicit film involving portrayals of whites lynching blacks and then, reports ex-Texan Wildeisen, "in front of the class attacked my daughters, telling them that 'everybody from Texas is ignorant rednecks'" and that all white people were "responsible for Jasper because [their] skin is white." This reference is to an atrocity in Jasper, TX, in which three white men murdered a black man in 1998.
Melissa Coon had been complaining to the school's administration about her son's harassment repeatedly -- only to be ignored and stonewalled -- repeatedly. At one point an administrator told her that her son could have a transfer only to another district school but said that Allen would have "more problems there" and that he should stay at more "racially diverse" East High (which has no more than 20 white students).
This administrator admits, and accepts wholesale, the notion that a white child will be the target of racial hate when surrounded by black students. I'm not saying he agrees that a white child should be the target of racial hate when surrounded by black students. I'm saying that the administrator is confessing that a white student being the target of racial hate when surrounded by black students is a reasonable expectation, and if the child were to become more outnumbered by blacks, he would be in greater danger.
This blows my mind. I went to school in New Caney, TX, among the "ignorant rednecks" this teacher described. We had a very small minority of black students when I attended (the exact number unknown, but less than 10 among 1600 or so students). Not once do I recall any organized racism against any one among them by either students or faculty. The irony, of course, being that we "ignorant rednecks" are far more tolerant than the "English" instructor that teaches her students hate rather than prose.
Yet we have become numb to the indifference by the media and the Department of Justice in reporting and prosecuting cases of black-on-white violence. There is something sinister in America today, and deeper than we want to believe. East High in Kansas City is the proof. There, racial hate is organized among students and faculty and is acceptable classroom material. And the administration even seems keenly aware that the ratio of black to white students is a metric used to set expectations of violence and hate, such that the more white students are outnumbered by blacks, the more likely they can expect such things.
Yet all of this had flown under the radar until two black kids poured gasoline on a white kid and set him on fire.
But sadly, this incident, too, will likely be short-lived in the public discourse. Mr. Eric Holder of the DOJ once said America's refusal to address issues of race makes us "a nation of cowards." You are right, Mr. Holder. And if you choose not to prosecute this case and investigate these incidents, count you among the most cowardly.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
I, like much of America, was shocked and saddened this morning to hear about the passing of Andrew Breitbart at the young age of 43.
Meteoric is perhaps the only way to describe Andrew Breitbart's ascension into conservative prevalence, and the magnitude of his reporting has rocked the very foundation of progressivism. But perhaps what I will remember most of him is his courage in the face of an enemy bent on destroying him.
As a conservative, I have found his fearlessness immeasurably refreshing. He pulled no punches and minced no words in describing the political tactics of the American left. In a world where it had become normal for conservatives everywhere to bite their tongues in reverence to political correctness- in Hollywood, politics, media, schools, and workplaces across America- Andrew Breitbart spoke harshly and openly about the sinister agenda to inject progressive ideological planks into American culture through the media's slanted manipulation of facts.
This, as anyone can imagine, made him a reviled figure to the American left. But when the left spewed venom at him for his efforts, he did not cower- he reveled in it. As Jonah Goldberg notes, and as I know well as a follower of his on Twitter, it was normal for him to retweet the most incendiary attacks he would receive. Of this, Goldberg says, "it was his Wheaties. It's what he had for breakfast."
And his death has not stopped the flow of venom. Just this morning, I read a tweet from a woman,** self-described as a proud "wine-sipping liberal," directed at the deceased Breitbart, that reads: "I hope Satan fucks you in the ass with his flaming cock. Rot in hell!"
Where we all might wince at the unmitigated hate in this comment, there is a part of me that wants to smile. This woman, who would likely claim her ideology is predicated upon intellectualism and tolerance, has, with this crass and insensitive comment, proven to the world that she, like so many "wine-sipping liberals," possesses neither intellect nor tolerance. Social media has given her a length of rope, and she thoroughly hung herself. This was Breitbart's passion- to enjoy the spectacle of progressive self-destruction- and I have no doubt that had Breitbart been able to read the tweet, he would have smiled and happily retweeted it, knowing that it only reinforces his opinion of the left, and further exposes them for what they are.
But there is no escaping what an incredible loss the world, and conservatism in particular, has suffered. In efforts to explain what we are to make of that, I would offer these insightful words from Thomas Lifson of American Thinker, found here:
Breitbart had a zest for political combat. He reveled in being a polarizing figure. He had a genius for getting the goat of the opposition and never apologized for his swashbuckling style of journalism.
In the ancient world, opposing kings preparing for war would send out their champions to engage in single combat, sometimes to decide the outcome of the conflict, more often to indicate which side God was on. Andrew Breitbart was a conservative champion. But instead of riding out to meet a single warrior, he gladly sallied forth - sometimes alone - to combat the entire left. Along the way, he picked up many allies - and made many enemies. Win or lose, it seemed that most of the time, God was indeed on his side.
But if "A man's greatness can be measured by his enemies," so, too can it be judged by his friends. Don't listen to the prattling left today. Simply remember a man, made for his time, unique in his abilities, who left us for a far, far better place.
Rest in peace, Andrew, my friend whom I never met. I wish your family comfort, and offer my undying thanks for what you have given the world.
** The author of this tweet may be found here, should you wish to offer her a thought.