Soft drinks

I think that the New York City soda ban is beyond absurd.  It is disappointing to see how many people can’t see the downsides of having the government try to control things like that.

But I do think that sodas should only be used as treats — even the diet kinds.  Brown water and chemicals are just not a smart thing to put in your body on a regular basis.  Drink coffee if you want the caffeine.

I realize it would take a little discipline, but if people tried drinking water instead for a few weeks they’d be amazed at the impact on their health and their wallets (drinks are probably the highest margin things on restaurant menus).

I think these are effective ways to get people to reconsider what is in their soft drinks (more here):

 

 

Ah, now that’s Communism!

Seriously, it is another great example of how Communism and unions really work.  The leaders make big $$ and live in luxury while the little guys live in squalor.

Via OWS Money Man Spent Night Before “Day of Action” in Five-Star Hotel:

The $700-per-night W Hotel Downtown last week hosted both Peter Dutro, one of a select few OWS members on the powerful finance committee…Dutro, 35, one of only a handful of OWS leaders in charge of the movement’s $500,000 in donations, checked in on Wednesday, the night after police emptied Zuccotti Park.

While hundreds of his rebel brethren scrambled to find shelter in church basements, Dutro chose the five-star, 58-story hotel, with its lush rooms and 350-count Egyptian cotton sheets. He lives only a short taxi ride away in Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn.

“I knew everything was going to be a clusterf–k in the morning,” he told The Post, alluding to Occupy’s own disruption plans. “How would I get over the bridge when they were shutting it down?”

The tattoo artist-turned-Occupy money man took the elevator up to the fifth-floor welcome desk, where a disc jockey spins tunes and guests enjoy a vista of the growing freedom tower.

He said he spent $500 of his own money to get the room because he wanted a good night’s rest ahead of the cause’s two-month ceremony the next day and raucous post-raid protests.

How many people think he was really going to spend his own money on that hotel?

Another item in the “I’d put a parent warning label on this post, except . . .”

The public schools want to teach this to your kids!  Sometimes the topics I address are so graphic that I’m tempted to edit them more.  Then I remember that not only does the Liberal establishment want to mention the topics, they want to teach your children that they are normal, safe and something they are expected to do.  And they won’t just mention the topics, they’ll tell your kids how to perform them.

This is the liberal-dominated education system in action.  See If It Weren’t Public School Doing It ….

“New York City 11-year-olds will soon be learning sex education from workbooks that include instruction on “mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral and anal sex, and “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant.”

The shocking revelations were uncovered in “recommended” workbooks reviewed by The New York Post. . . .

One of the preferred resources for students is Columbia University’s website, “Go Ask Alice,” the Post reported. That site includes discussions on topics ranging from “doggie-style,” oral sex with braces, fetishes, and “sadomasochistic sex play.””

The New York Post reports: “Starting in the spring, the DOE will require one semester of sex ed in sixth or seventh grades and one in ninth or 10th.

It says schools can pick any curriculum but recommends the widely used HealthSmart and Reducing the Risk programs and trains teachers to use them.”

Seriously, if any random stranger tried to talk to kids about stuff that schools teach in sex-ed classes, parents would be calling the cops. It’s just downright creepy to teach this kind of stuff to sixth-graders.

Why did Nancy Pelosi’s district get almost 1/5 of the latest Obamacare waivers?

Or here’s a better question: Why is anyone getting waivers?  See the perfectly titled If Obamacare is so great, then why do so many Democrats get waivers? « Wintery Knight. (Emphasis added)

According to the Daily Caller, 204 waivers for a provision of ObamaCare were approved last month — bringing the total waiver count to 1,372. Out of that April number, 38 of the waivers “are for fancy eateries, hip nightclubs and decadent hotels in” the Democrat’s hard-left San Francisco district.

The waivers, which the administration began granting only months after the bill was passed and signed, let employers avoid terms of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that require health care insurance plans to carry at least $750,000 in benefits before being exhausted.

This requirement, found in the thousands of pages that make up the ObamaCare bill, is too costly for many businesses that can afford to provide health coverage only through less comprehensive plans.

The owner of Tru Spa, one of the San Francisco businesses granted a waiver, told the Daily Caller both ObamaCare and new local laws have “devastated” businesses in the region.

The hypocrisy doesn’t end there:

While Pelosi’s constituents are being protected from her party’s health care wreckage, another Democratic constituency is being taken care of, as well.

A coalition of groups operating under the name wheresmywaiver.com says that “50.26% of waiver beneficiaries are unionized, despite union workers only making up 11.9% of the workforce.”

The Service Employees International Union, whose former President Andy Stern was one of the most frequent White House visitors before he was named to President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, has been well-represented on the waiver list.

So have the teacher unions.

Organized labor, of course, is a heavy donor to Democratic candidates and was among the groups that pressed hard for Congress and the president to ram ObamaCare through the legislature and into Americans’ lives.

If ObamaCare is so vital to our national well-being, why are these unions and employers in a heavily Democratic district seeking relief from the burdens it imposes?

And why would Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner, whose brilliant thought process led him to say “the bill and I are one,” ask for a waiver for his hometown of New York City?

UPDATE — Detroit: The petri dish of Liberal politics, education and unions

UPDATE: As you probably read recently, Detroit has a 47% illiteracy rate.  Forty-seven percent!

Ideas have consequences.  Please watch Steven Crowder’s analysis of Detroit and how the policies that ruined it are spreading to the rest of the country.  Democrats have had a virtual monopoly on inner city politics, education and unions for over 50 years and today’s Detroit is the result.  I think that all Liberal members of Congress should have to live there for a year — with the same un-Constitutional gun control laws they want to force on others.

Climahypocrites

Turns out that the average citizen and the late Ted Kennedy have something in common: Plenty of talk about wanting solar but not in their backyard.  There’s a word for that: Hypocrisy.

Everyone loves solar, right? Well, until someone puts the panels up

The general public is all for renewable energy — in theory, anyway. But recent renewable projects have raised hackles because of their alleged conflicts with wildlife, damage to Indian spiritual sites, and elevated earthquake risk. And now, objections to green energy based on their, well, ugliness are popping up in New Jersey and Nevada.

Residents and politicians in Ridgewood, Wyckoff, and several other posh suburban towns just outside New York City are attacking local utility company PSE&G for putting up solar panels. Specifically, in an attempt to double the Garden State’s solar capacity, the company has been installing 3-foot-by-5-foot solar modules on utility poles. And the reactions are less than positive: “It’s just horrible,” said Ridgewood’s Deputy Mayor Tom Riche, according to an article in The Record, of Bergen County, N.J. on Sunday.

And that’s the issue in a nutshell: people want cleaner, cheaper, more stable energy, yet, they don’t want to see it. Consider the Cape Wind Project: Ted Kennedy fought it for 10 years, because the wind turbines would be in view of his family compound, and be in the yachting area. He was all for “green” energy, just not stuff that affects him.

via “Solar Rocks! As Long As I Don’t Have To See Those Ugly Panels!” : Stop The ACLU.

A terrific summary of politics in the U.S.

Via Oleg Atbashian Founder of ‘The Peoples Cube’: “The Current Truth About Socialism and The Unions” at Ironic Surrealism v3.0 -

America is capitalistic and greedy yet have of the population is subsidized.

Half of the population is subsidized yet they think they are victims.

They think they are victims yet their representatives run the government.

Their representatives run the government yet the poor keep getting poorer.

The poor keep getting poorer yet they have things people in other countries can only dream about.

They have all this stuff people in other countries can only dream about and yet they want America to be like those other countries.

I especially liked this one: “Their representatives run the government yet the poor keep getting poorer.”  Just look at inner cities and their schools.  Democrats have had virtual monopolies on their politics and education for over 50 years and what do they have to show for it?  Detroit, anyone?

It is always interesting to get the perspectives of those who lived under full-fledged Communism.  If only we had history classes in public schools that taught the truth about what Communism does to people.

Oleg Atbashian is a writer and graphic artist from the former USSR. Born and raised in Ukraine, he used to be a teacher, a translator, a worker, a freelance journalist, and at one time a propaganda artist, creating visual agitprop for the local Party committee in a Siberian town. In 1994, he emigrated to the USA hoping to live in a country that was ruled by reason and common sense. Ironically, he now lives in New York City. He is the creator of  ThePeoplesCube.com, a satirical website where he writes under the name of Red Square.

Planned Parenthood: “Killing 41% of NY City babies is not enough, so we need to attack pregnancy care centers!”

OK, the title is more of a paraphrase than a quote, but consider this:

On March 2 the New York City Council passed a hostile bill forcing pregnancy care centers to post signage that they do not commit abortions.

This despite the recent release of NYC health dept. statistics revealing that 14.5% of all US abortions are committed there annually, making it the nation’s abortion capital, and that 41% of all of Gotham’s babies are killed by abortion, with the number spiking to 60% of all African-American babies.

So the abortionists and the pro-abortion NY City Council have to go after crisis pregnancy centers.  They ignore PP’s infamous hiding of statutory rape and underage sex trafficking, of course, but have plenty of time and money to go after their enemies who might just persuade people against killing their unborn children.  They sure do fight for their market share!

Please see What “truth in advertising” signs should abortion clinics be forced to post? for some clever ideas on how to make the best of this.  Hey, if pregnancy centers have to put up signs, let’s add all sorts of things to them!  And why not force Planned Parenthood to put up honest signs about what they do and don’t offer?  Here’s a list of mine plus some from the comments section there.

Planned Parenthood will:

  • Crush and dismember your unborn child — for a large fee, of course.  Hey, we don’t give those away for free.
  • Hide statutory rape — no worries if you are 13 and your boyfriend is 28!  You can totally trust us on this one, and we — er, uh, our enemies — have the video and audio to prove it.
  • Hide underage sex trafficking, even for kids stolen from other countries.

Planned Parenthood will not:

  • Complete Options Counseling Unless Asked
  • Complete Information on Abortion Risks & Complications
  • Complete & Accurate Prenatal development
  • Prenatal Care
  • Adoption Information
  • Pregnancy & Parenting Classes/Support Services
  • Infertility Testing & Treatment
  • Counseling & Support Services Post-Abortion
  • Post-abortion trauma counseling (because we pretend it doesn’t exist!)

Pregnancy Care Centers, on the other hand can say they do not provide abortions, but do provide the following, all for free:

  • Pregnancy tests
  • Ultrasounds
  • STD testing
  • Prenatal care
  • Parenting and life skills training
  • Post abortion trauma counseling
  • Referrals for adoption, domestic violence protection and more.

Read the whole post and the comments at Jill’s blog.

Recycling: Good for newspapers, bad for lousy pro-legalized abortion arguments

Last week I taught a session on pro-life reasoning and the biblical basis for the sanctity of life to a group of Care Net volunteers.  One of the points was debunking the canard that pro-lifers don’t care about kids after they are born.

With perfect timing, false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie (who is pro-legalized abortion and wants taxpayer-funded abortions but hypocritically mentions Jesus’ concern for the “least of these” in many of his posts, including this one) published “The G.O.P.’s Abandoned Babies”.  Apparently Charles M. Blow (is that a real name?) and the NY Times thought they could get some more mileage out of that fallacious reasoning.

The GOP – the “pro-life” party – has shown their hypocrisy on the political wedge issue of abortion with the adoption of the GOP-controlled House budget.

Some may use it as a wedge issue, but many people authentically disagree with Chuck and other pro-abortionists who believe it is completely moral to crush and dismember innocent human beings just because they are unwanted — and worse yet, that Jesus is pro-legalized abortion.

And false teacher Chuck and the author don’t anticipate the obvious counter-title: “The Democrats’ Dead Babies.”

To recap, the argument used by the pro-aborts fails in three ways (And yes, if someone is pro-legalized abortion and pro-taxpayer-funded abortion then I refer to them as pro-abortion.  I wouldn’t consider someone to be pro-choice on slavery if they thought slavery should be legal but didn’t want to own slaves):

1. Objecting to a moral evil doesn’t obligate you to take complete ownership of it forever.  Can these pro-aborts protest infanticide without having to adopt all of those children?  Can they oppose spousal abuse without having to marry all the women?  Can they oppose the (hypothetical) destruction of homeless people without having to personally house them?  Can they oppose animal abuse without having to adopt all the cats and dogs?  And so on.  It is ridiculous to claim that pro-lifers have to go along with every nanny-state proposal for those outside the womb to avoid the hypocrisy charge.

2. In addition to the irrefutable logic of item 1, pro-lifers do a lot more for the unborn with their own time and money than the pro-aborts do for the women before or after they are born.  There are more crisis pregnancy centers than abortion clinics, and most operate completely on donations (the Care Net Pregnancy Center where I am a board member refuses to take taxpayer funds).

And it is well established that Conservatives give more than Liberals, especially when you check the “giving” of people like Obama, Biden, Kennedy, etc.

So even though we aren’t obligated to help outside the womb just because we oppose abortion, we help because we want to.

3. Unless someone concedes to being truly pro-abortion (i.e., they expect women to always have abortions or raise the children with no help from the public), then the pro-choicers are obligated to adopt the children as well.  Either that, or give up espousing their pro-choice views.  After all, if you claim to be pro-choice and the women choose life, then the same care giving obligation falls on you.

—–

If false teachers like Chuck, the UCC and other pro-abortion organizations really cared about women and children they’d be funding their own crisis pregnancy centers (they couldn’t volunteer at Care Net because our statement of faith requires that they believe the Bible and hold pro-life views, among other things).  But why couldn’t they use their own money to carry out their goals and to reduce the abortions as they claim they want to?  That’s what the pro-lifers do!

Another irony in the faux compassion of the pro-aborts is that they want to spend the money of people who can’t vote or aren’t even born yet.  We have to borrow every dollar that they want to spend.  It is just irresponsibility piled on irresponsibility.

Here’s another example of the morbid irony of the false teachers pretending to hold life sacred:

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ, which has taken pro-choice positions on the issue of abortion, is also deeply concerned about life.  Our General Synod has affirmed, for example, “the sacredness of all life, and the need to protect and defend human life in particular”

You can’t claim to care about the sacredness of all life and wanting to defend human life “in particular” if you favor legalized abortion, including partial-birth abortion, taxpayer-funded abortions and if you fight crisis pregnancy centers.  But that’s the shameless hypocrisy you’ll get from them.

Don’t let people use the lousy arguments that pro-lifers don’t care about those outside the womb.  That is a recycled cheap trick that pro-aborts use over and over to silence us.  Get informed and set the record straight.  We give our own time and money before and after birth to help, whereas they support killing the unwanted with the taxes of pro-lifers and they want to confiscate your money to “give” to their pet projects.