Here are two links to sites claiming you can be pro-life and for Obama. Raise gullibility shields now.
Oct 31 2008
Taxing Credulity
Not exactly a scintillating read, but a sober summary of the candidates’ positions and differences on taxation. The first few graphs: (much more, with supporting charts and text, at the link)
Either Republican Senator John McCain or Democratic Senator Barack Obama will have to make very important decisions on tax policy when he takes office in January 2009. First, the U.S. economy will be recovering from the financial crisis and is already predicted to grow less than its usual rate of 3.3 percent over the last 50 years.[1] Second, President George W. Bush’s tax cuts will expire in 2011, and the President must decide how to extend or make permanent some of the tax cut provisions.
Senator McCain will make the Bush tax cuts permanent, with the exception of the estate tax. McCain credited the Bush tax cuts with helping the economy recover after the 2001 recession.
Senator Obama, on the other hand, will extend the Bush tax cuts only for those taxpayers who earn less than $250,000 a year—he has deemed the rest of the people “rich.” Senator Obama will also enact new tax increases on these rich individuals as well as a series of targeted tax credits for lower-income individuals. Senator Obama believes that the current tax system is not progressive enough and that higher taxes on the rich should be used to give money to low-income individuals or those who do not work at all, such as retired people, reduce the deficit, and reduce the size of Social Security’s shortfall.
In other words, Obama isn’t planning merely to return to the higher taxes under Clinton for “the rich”, he plans to tax them even MORE than Clinton’s Democrat congress voted in 1993, when Clinton “discovered” that he couldn’t keep his campaign pledge to lower taxes for the middle class after all. One can’t help but wonder if Obama will discover that “the rich” are those making more than $50K-$70K per year, when his staff really crunches the numbers.
Those windmills are going to be expensive.
Oct 30 2008
Yes on Proposition 4
You’ve seen the ads, trying to make us feel scared for the fate of a young woman who has to ask her parents if she can have an abortion. We’re supposed to believe she’ll be abused, maybe both physically and emotionally, and will instead seek an illegal abortion or (gasp) have the child.
Here is a short summary, by a radical foe to Prop 4, under the title HELP needed to defeat anti-choice Prop 4 in CA — no, No, and NO again! [UPDATED]
Proposition 4 is another bad anti-choice proposal: either parental notification or an automatic child abuse investigation if the young woman doesn’t want to notify her parents and can’t find a judge to approve. And if she is able to find a judge, the judge then has to declare her mature enough, and the judges have to make annual reports, county-by-county, on how many abortions are approved for young women each year.
Omitted at the “no on 4” site above (a typical one) is any serious discussion of how the current law aids child molesters, by making it easy for them to intimidate their victims into quietly aborting the evidence. Yes, it is possible that some parents will not respond well when told their daughter is pregnant. But it is certain that current law is used to enable child molesters and statutory rapists (predatory males taking advantage of young girls), and allow them to continue undetected.
To the Left, abortion is a hyper-privileged “right” that trumps every other consideration. ANY abortion performed on a minor is prima facie evidence of the crime of statutory rape. Yet the current law provides no mechanism for reporting the possible crime. And it isn’t just a possible but rare crime… Very large numbers of minor girls who become pregnant are made so by men who are NOT minors. No one is suggesting the frequent prosecution of minor boys for having sex with minor girls, although this still fits the definition of statutory rape. But even when the “father” is a minor, isn’t this a serious enough issue to require some parental participation in decisions surrounding the situation?
When the “father” is NOT a minor, it’s a crime, pure and simple. The parents need to be involved in any decision about an abortion, and any other actions that may result.
Of course, to the Left, sex is NEVER a crime, short of violent rape and pedophilia…
Current law does not let a minor child get an aspirin at school, get a tattoo, etc., without parental approval, signed, sealed and delivered. The only reason abortion is an exception is because it is that hyper-privileged “right” (some would say “rite”) that the Left thinks is necessary to keep the sexual revolution in full swing.
I don’t expect this discussion to matter to anyone on the Left. But if you’re on the fence at all, consider what a BAD idea it is to make law affecting everyone on the chance that someone will react badly, when the alternative is the perpetuation of ongoing abuse and the diminishment of the family, as well as the failure to protect young girls from predatory males.
And consider the aborted baby, who choose none of this, but was unjustly killed to allow someone to hide from their deeds.
UPDATE: Current law contains a preposterous contradiction.
If a public official or health care worker, teacher or counselor, school staff member or adminstrator detects any hint of abuse of a minor, that person is required by law to report it to proper authorities (with significant penalities for non-compliance). That “hint” could be a suspicious looking bruise, a comment that suggests sexual abuse by a “step-father” or “uncle” or “family friend”, etc. Yet when the proof of sexual abuse of a minor is presented in the person of a pregnant teenager, the question is often not even asked, and the parents are not required to be consulted before an abortion is done, if the victimized girl is unwilling to tell them herself. It can happen again and again with the same teenager, and no one is required to follow up on who is making her pregnant.
For every case of a teenage girl who really doesn’t dare tell her parents for fear of abuse (certainly rare, and for which Prop 4 offers other remedies), there are hundreds or thousands who SHOULD be telling their parents, so that their parents can protect them adequately, advise them appropriately, pursue legal action if indicated, etc.
The opponents of Prop 4 don’t care that parents may be unable to properly protect or advise their daughters, under current law. They care only that the most extreme pro-abortion laws in the world remain unchanged, so that the “right” to an abortion, on demand, for any reason, at any time in the pregnancy, remains sacrosanct. For them, abortion isn’t just a “right”, it is virtually a “rite”.
It remains to be seen if the voters will be fooled by the deceptive ads of Prop 4 opponents, implying that any noticeable number of young girls will be endangered by telling their parents, and will have no other recourse.
Oct 28 2008
Read it and weep
I haven’t agreed with Pat Buchanan about everything, not by a long shot, but in this article, he succinctly lists the likely outcome of the first year of an Obama presidency. This is not wild-eyed speculation. Rather, it’s all based on specific statements, plans, platforms, resolutions, agendas, etc., of the Democrat Party. If you haven’t heard about some of this, it’s because you haven’t been paying attention, and are lulled by the main-stream media. Every bit of it is documented as the intent of Democrat politicians now in national office, and those running for it. An Obama presidency and a filibuster proof Democrat Senate guarantees that most of what you read below the fold will happen.
Oct 27 2008
Debunking anti-Prop 8 Lies
If Proposition 8 fails, my school district will teach gay marriage and Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell knows it!
Read the whole thing. It’s perfectly clear.
Oct 26 2008
What free expression? The Left suppresses free speech on Prop 8
I am voting YES on Proposition 8 in California. It is the Proposition to define marriage as existing only between one man and one woman.
Continue reading “What free expression? The Left suppresses free speech on Prop 8”
Oct 26 2008
Yep: it really IS that scary
Christian right intensifies attacks on Obama – Yahoo! News
Terrorist strikes on four American cities. Russia rolling into Eastern Europe. Israel hit by a nuclear bomb. Gay marriage in every state. The end of the Boy Scouts.
Continue reading “Yep: it really IS that scary”
Oct 24 2008
I wish Fred could have debated Obama
From the candidate we might have had, if the early primary states had closed primaries (i.e., if you had to be registered for a party to vote for its candidate) and none were caucus states, Fred Thompson speaks eloquently:
It’s time for those of us who are concerned about our nation’s future to focus on what is at stake in this year’s elections. This is a time of great challenge for our country. We know that somewhere in the world our worst enemies either have, or are trying to get their hands on, the most dangerous weapons known to man. Small rogue nations are developing nuclear weapons and threaten our allies. Large nations are engaged in massive military buildups.
Continue reading “I wish Fred could have debated Obama”
Oct 23 2008
Get out of the kitchen
The main stream media continues to pursue its “Obama the victim” narrative, portrying him as the victim of hate in some unusual way, and consulting only left-leaning organizations and think-tanks to confirm its thesis. Of course, if they actually did due diligence and interviewed both sides equally, and compared actual research from both sides, they would discover that there is… no story! Can’t have that, and the election isn’t quite in the bag for Obama yet, and so:
An ugly line has been crossed in this presidential campaign, one in which some people don’t mind calling Barack Obama a dangerous Muslim, a terrorist and worse.
And this is somehow worse than the term Bushitler? Let’s just add up the Hitler references to Bush, and compare numbers. But, of course, that would require real research and reporting, and we can’t expect that, can we? Just count the lawyers and reporters parachuted into Alaska to defame Palin, and compare the numbers to those who have really investigated Obama’s past and alliances, and you’ll get the idea.
“To me, this all feels much worse than we’ve seen in some time,” said Kathryn Kolbert , the president of People for the American Way , which monitors political speech.
Well, yes, because this time it’s YOUR guy on the receiving end of the very kind of hatred that People for the American Way and its allies have stirred up against Bush and Republicans. Except that it isn’t, for the simple reason that no mainstream Republican organization, conservative outlet, commentator or website has used the kind of language being reported here. Rather, it’s a very small fringe of over-the-top extremists, and the Left would love to paint the entire Right as that extreme… but it just won’t wash.
Experts agree on the reasons: Obama, the Democratic nominee, is different from any other major presidential candidate in history in many ways, and people often don’t accept such change gracefully.
Come on, just say it. Obama is black, and we all know those wascally weepublicans are wacists. Oh, and by the way: which “experts”? This is journalism school mumbo-jumbo for “this is what I think, and if I phrase it this way I can pretend it’s straight news”.
Continue reading “Get out of the kitchen”
« Previous Page — Next Page »
