Roundup

Best. Pro-life ad. Ever. Don’t worry, it isn’t graphic.  But if you think the message is harsh, the reality is a million times worse.  Make it viral, please!  HT: Jill Stanek

 

“Only they’re not bunnies.” Priceless.  Hey, if they were bunnies, it would be illegal already.

Ask your Congressional representatives to de-fund PP now.  It isn’t just the abortions, it is the serial hiding of statutory rape and sex crimes.  Don’t listen to the fear-mongering about the other services they provide.  There are many places that can provide those that don’t commit the atrocities that PP does.

Barely twenty-four hours after her inauguration as America’s first woman chief executive, President Sarah Palin announced today that Attorney General Mark Levin has been instructed to stop defending Roe v. Wade and abortion in a wave of fresh lawsuits filed in federal courts around the country.

~Jeffrey Lord, American Spectator, February 24

From Jill Stanek’s quote of the day.  Those cheering Obama’s refusal to do his job and support the Defense of Marriage Act have no idea what precedent it sets.

Wisc. and Ind. Democrats: Union Cash Driving Democrats to Run and Hide

By far unions are the largest donors that Democrats have all up and down the line from local and state to federal. Unions spent over 50 million dollars on Barack Obama’s campaign back in 2008 and they spent another 50 million for the 2010 midterm elections.

Most specifically public employee unions are Democrats biggest supporters.In the last week of the 2010 election, for instance, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) spent over a million dollars to help elect Democrats. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) spent almost $400,000.

So when these Democrats run away and try to hide in a neighboring state it is because their biggest donors are demanding that they “do something.” And since Democrats in these states have lost all power due to the will of the voters, they feel that their last ability to stop legislation that hurts donor’s interests is to shut down government.

There is no parallel for this in the actions of Republicans who have spent decades as powerless onlookers in state government. No blocks of Republicans have run away like cowards to nearby states to avoid doing their jobs. Republicans have been essentially powerless in the face of unions since World War II yet in that almost 80-year span where Democrats have been in the pocket of Big Labor no blocks of Republicans have wallowed in such childish petulance. Republicans continued to go to work in their state capitols despite being virtually powerless to affect unions.

The insidiousness of media bias — Democrats, Media Keep ‘Birther’ Story Alive

The nagging issue of “Birthers” raises a chicken/egg question: It is an issue that lingers of its own accord, or does it linger because the media won’t let it go away?

Republicans appearing on cable to talk about important issues of the day — unemployment, the national debt, Egypt, Wisconsin, etc. — can bet the “Birther” question will come up. And there appears to be nothing a Republican can do to satisfy an interviewer on this question. It is not enough to state a belief in the president’s Christianity, or that one takes the president at his word. In question after question, interviewers call on Republicans to condemn, repeatedly, rumors they neither believe nor spread; then they condemn the condemnation for not being condemnatory enough.

And so the issue keeps coming up. It’s self-perpetuating. Twice in the past week, George Stephanopoulos has asked Republican guests on Good Morning America about it. David Gregory routinely does the same on Meet the Press.

I saw this comment that was trying to refute John’s excellent response to a HuffPo fluff piece by a false teacher promoting pro-gay theology:

Christians loudly opposing homosexuality are being really interrested in the personal sins of others, are they not? Or is it only a few particular sins, that they happen to be blameless for themselves? So, the question arises, are they doing what their religion demands of them? Wether christians should be good and forgiving people or should they be on the lookout for their “neighbours sins”? Is it really what Jesus demanded of them? If that is a part of being a christian, I am especially happy I am not one. It must be a burden to try and watch for ones fellow man, for him not to “sin” in his bedroom…

My response to the commenter:

Go check your history.  Was pro-gay theology the dominate view of the church for 2,000 and then these awful conservatives came along to try and change it?  Did both Christian and non-Christian cultures always celebrate (oxymoronic) “same-sex marriage” and then conservative Christians decided to change that?

Of course not.  The apostate pro-gay theologians brought it up and part of their playbook is acting like we’re the ones obsessed with it.

And when one of the logical consequences of making sexual preferences into civil rights is that young children will be forced to learn that these perversions are “normal,”  that is definitely worth fighting.

Lara Logan, Islam and Women’s Rights – Why the media silence on the Islamic gang-rapes?  Too scared to mention it?  Doesn’t fit in the the PC-memes?  Why aren’t the feminists going insane over this?  More from the Wintery Knight about the Koran’s teachings on this.

Roxanne On that whole “teachers work long hours during the school year” thing — Nice.

All Teachers Unions Must Fall, Not Just Wisconsin’s – just read it all.  Great overview of how awful they are and why they should be illegal.

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Roundup

There is truly no reason for Super Glue to come in anything but single use containers.

 

Gov Christie to Teacher’s Union: ‘You Punch Them, I’ll Punch You’ — I really, really like NJ Governor Christie.  We need more plain talk and common sense. 

Monday Sarcasm and Smorgasbord — great roundup by Roxanne.  A sample:

According to the Washington Post, interfaith marriages don’t do very well.  In fact, people in interfaith marriages are three times as likely to divorce as people in same-faith  marriages.

That one should be in the “duh” category, but I suppose it is news to a postmodern “truth is relative” culture.  What could be more central to one’s view of the world than their beliefs about God?  Christians are specifically commanded not to marry non-believers.  And what an awful message  these marriages send to kids: “We find ways to agree on where to live, how to raise you, what jobs to have, vacations, etc., but God is so unimportant that we saw no reason to agree about him.”

The first of three from the Wintery Knight (I should just redirect my blog to his) — New study compares donor-conceived vs biologically-conceived children

Which group is faring the worst? The 100 percent wanted, planned, intended group. The donor offspring, overall, even with controls, are twice as likely to have struggled with substance abuse and delinquency, and 1.5 times as likely to have struggled with depression, compared to those raised by their biological parents (and these differences are significant). The adopted generally fall in between except with regard to depression in which case they were higher than both the donor conceived and the raised-by-biological.

Forty-five percent of these young adults conceived by donor insemination agree, “The circumstances of my conception bother me.” Almost half report that they think about their donor conception a few times a week or more. Forty-five percent agree, “It bothers me that money was exchanged in order to conceive me.”

Nearly half of donor offspring (compared to about a fifth of adopted adults) agree, “When I see friends with their biological fathers and mothers, it makes me feel sad.” Similarly, 53 percent (compared to 29 percent of adoptees) agree, “It hurts when I hear other people talk about their genealogical background.”

Who is really responsible for the abolition of marriage? Men or feminists? – good distinction between “equity feminists” and “gender feminists.”

The Wintery Knight asks, Why do secularists think their view should be privileged in debates?

My thoughts: In addition, the "secular only" argument fails because:

1. That pesky 1st Amendment thingy, which explicitly protects, not restricts, our rights to have our religious views inform our political views.

2. The illogical conclusion that we should vote the opposite of our religious views.  I think my religion forbids me to ask the government to put atheists in jail and take their stuff.  Must I vote the opposite of that?

3. Do the secularists complain about the theological Left and their support for unrestricted abortion, open borders, legal recognition of same-sex unions, universal health care, etc.?  Do they hyperventilate about the President’s religious advisor Jim "the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution" Wallis?  No, they generally just oppose religious views that they disagree with, which demonstrates that their tactics are more about bullying than principles. 

Book Review: The Making of an Atheist 

Philosopher James Spiegel has written a clear, biblically-informed, philosophically-astute and well-documented account of the ultimate origins of atheism. Unbelief, he argues, is not attributable to a lack of evidence for God. Rather, the problem is fixed in human rebellion against God himself, just as Paul explained in the first chapter of Romans. This book provides a much needed dimension of analysis in light of all the press received in the past few years by “new atheists” such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris.

Sir Paul McCartney, Deep as a Thimble — A few more factoids about how ridiculous Paul McCartney’s “library” dig at President Bush was. 

Let’s take a look at just a few of Obama’s greatest hits on Britain since taking office:

  • Feb. 2009: Much to the Brits dismay and embarrassment Obama summarily rejected the famous bust of Winston Churchill that sat in the Oval Office since 2001
  • March 2009: Obama canceled a traditional press conference with the British Prime Minister without explanation then, thoughtlessly gave a pack of U.S. DVD movies to the man as a diplomatic gift — Not only is the British PM nearly blind but the movies were Region 1 discs that cannot play on a British DVD machine
  • March 2009: Obama’s administration refused to return repeated phone calls from the British government to discuss policy
  • April 2009: Obama and his wife broke protocol by touching the Queen of England in a state visit
  • May 2009: Obama did not include the Queen in his D-Day memorial plans as is traditional
  • And in the worst slap yet, April 2010: Obama abandoned the British as they re-asserted sovereignty over the Falkland Islands

So what has Barack Obama done to deserve the appreciation of a Brit, anyway?

This is funny, true and a great parody.  Watch it.

The face of the mainstream media and anti-Semitism.  Seriously, she doesn’t even realize how outlandish her statements are.  Her apology was meaningless, as it was the “I totally meant it but am sorry people were offended” type.  But her reporting was totally unbiased, eh?  Glad she’s gone.  Wish we could get rid of the rest.

 

Digg This