In Case I Suffer a Stroke September 2, 2008Posted by Administrator in Cultural Pessimism, Idiots, Liberal Hypocrisy, Liberal self-loathing, Pharyngulism, Politics, Pro-Life, wtf?.
add a comment
. . .I have effectively locked the blog. Only approved observers (that pretty much being me) can view the4 blog, as I do not want students from my teaching blog accessing this one.
No more Pharyngula lurkers. Boo hoo hoo.
But, some quick commentary on the Sarah Palin for Veep choice, and the Left’s quick condemnation of her.
Comment 1: She’s inexperienced. File this under WTF? I mean, look at Obama’s experience.
Comment 2: Palin’s 5th child, Trig, is actually born by her daughter, Bristol. This is how the LEftie’s manage this one:
122. What many here don’t understand. It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH.
The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet:
Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.
If people start to think that there might be something fishy with Palin’s last kid (if hers), then that’s FINE. One more doubt (whether tied to reality or not) is another hesitation at the ballot box.
GET WITH THE PROGRAM PEOPLE. The “rising above it” bullshit has served us so well in the past, hasn’t it?
If you have problems with the story, then STFU and get out of the way of Dems who are engaged in MODERN POLITICAL WARFARE. Go tend your garden or some other pedestrian task, because the “concern trolls” are not helping shape the message.
OK, then. Truth, beauty, nevermind. Start a meme, no matter how Out There, and expect the voters to latch on.
Nice. I keep hearing how the Dems are the ethical party.
Then there’s the fact that Bristol IS pregnant. Comments from everyone’s favorite idiot, Little Paul Myers:
The issues here should not be “OMG her daughter is pregnant out of wedlock”, but “What are the candidates proposed policies for dealing with the issue of teen pregnancy?” That Palin’s daughter is pregnant should not be of any concern to either campaign; that Palin’s policies of an active maintenance of reproductive ignorance are manifest failures is.
But you ARE turning it into an issue, Little Paul, when you bring the two together like that.
She’s pro-ignorance and anti-civil rights all the way, opposing gay marriage, sex education, and reproductive rights for women. No surprise at all, I know. Here are some answers that jumped out at me:
2. Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?Why or why not?
SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.
She wants kids to be taught only what the parents believe, which is a disaster for education. It dictates that the next generation can be no wiser, barring exceptional effort from the kids themselves, than the previous. This is an angle to give religion a trump card over science, and jingo priority over history, by making it easy to prevent kids from being exposed to reality.
Right. We now see that Little Paul believes that the State is the only being responsible enough to raise kids. Oy gevalt.
11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
See Question 2 above. Do we really want stupid people dictating what people should learn?
No. That’s why we want PARENTS in charge of education. not you.
Here’s another answer from Palin that suddenly has more significance:
3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
Now, are you ready to hear this?
Sarah and Todd Palin say their 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant.The couple said in a statement released by John McCain’s presidential campaign that Bristol will keep her baby.
I’m flummoxed. Here’s another personal issue that is none of the voters’ business, that will distract the media from discussing the issues, yet it speaks directly to Palin’s support for bad reproductive and educational policy.
WTF is this moron’s problem? She is for abstinence-inly education. Her daughter then gets pregnant and wants to keep the baby. And again, he claims this is no issue to be discussed publicly, then he does just that.
Asshole. Brainless asshole.
The Rumble I would pay to see. . . April 7, 2008Posted by Administrator in Blogging, Pandamansanity, Pro-Life, Smart People.
add a comment
. . .would have the generally awesome Rachel Lucas in one corner and the pestiferous, pathological Amanda Marcotte in the other. I really think Lucas would -in some combination- beat the living physical shit out of Marcotte and destroy Marcotte’s arguments.
Couldn’t say which would come first, though.
Lucas on abortion:
But the second reason I see abortion as anathema to how I want to live my life shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s read this site for long: personal responsibility. To me, the vast majority of abortions (in the U.S., that’s all I’m talking about here) are a direct result of an utter failure to behave in a rational, responsible, thoughtful fashion.
If you don’t want to be pregnant, then don’t get pregnant.
a whole LOT of abortions are done on grown women who are not in poverty, who weren’t raped, and who have no medical contraindications to pregnancy. They just don’t want to be pregnant.
I had a college friend who told me that the reason she was having her SECOND abortion was because the pill was too much of a pain in the ass to take every day at the same time. So, abortions aren’t a pain in the ass? Is that a fact? Going to a doctor, getting sedated and anesthetized, getting up on a table, having that doctor put a vacuum into your uterus to suck out everything inside, and enduring physical pain for hours or days afterward, is easier than shoving a pill in your mouth every day at the same time? Easier than making your man wear a condom covered in spermicide while you use a diaphragm? A monkey could do it. I told her that. She said, “Actually, yes, I’d rather get an abortion once a year than take the pill every day.” There are people who simply don’t think abortion is any different from birth control.
And then. there’s this:
You have to give up the idea that anyone who’s opposed to abortion is just being an oppressive misogynist dickhead because that is patently untrue in most cases. Like I said about Planned Parenthood, only the most obnoxious assholes make the news. Most pro-lifers, when it comes down it, are simply horrified at the idea of destroying a baby, even if it is inside a woman who doesn’t want it. And yeah, you can say, “Well then they should be lining up to adopt those babies!” My answer to that is, bullshit. It’s not their fault the unwanted baby exists in the first place. Just because someone doesn’t want a baby to die, which is a perfectly acceptable way to feel, doesn’t mean they should feel obligated to raise that baby as their own.
Now, Rachel is a fan of Planned Parenthood -as far as contraception goes- and she and I would part ways in terms of agreement at that point. But dammit, she’srational, so much moreso where Marcotte is just rigidly crazy in her berserk, mondo 3rd-wave feminism.
Amanda Marcotte: The Face of Evil January 18, 2008Posted by Administrator in Creepiness, Cultural Pessimism, Idiots, Liberal Hypocrisy, Liberal self-loathing, Pandamansanity, Pro-Life.
add a comment
I don’t actually think this is an issue that’s painted in shade of gray. “Shades of gray” only comes into the equation for me when actual, feeling beings are killed or forced to suffer for reasons that are understandable,* but as fetuses are unfeeling balls of flesh that have brain activity far below the sort of animals we thoughtlessly kill in animal shelters and farms every day, I find there to be no complexity. In a battle between what is still technically a feeling-free parasite on a woman’s body and a living, breathing, feeling woman, the latter wins hands down, and there’s no complexity or shades of gray there.**
Whew. Nasty, evil shit, plain and simple. Not only is this the parasite argument in its horrific splendor, but Peter Singer would marry this monstrous excuse for a woman given her explicit rejection of his specious “speciesism”.
It goes on to address the issue of the unavoidable -even for her twisted logic- of late-term abortions:
**Later term abortions are a fraction of abortions, and of those, there’s a fraction that are in the gray zone of fetal development where it might feel pain. These are undoubtably (sic) uncomfortable, but since most occur when the fetus is already dead or in literal self-defense of the woman, I still feel that there’s no reason for these abortions to be controversial.
Of course not. First, you employ the “immature nervous system/lower-than-animal/parasite argument. When you find yourself justifiably challenged on that point, simply go with the brute force approach. The mother was there first, ergo, she wins out. All the issue has to be is one of her own “mental discomfort” and the baby is literally thrown out with the bathwater, and in Marcotte’s evil cosmology, that should cause no trouble whatsoever.
The woman is a monster.
They are only controversial because anti-choicers who agitate against them lie to people by not telling them the very understandable reasons these are performed. What’s not morally gray? Lying to people to cause unnecessary suffering to others. That’s always wrong.
You’re right on one point Amanda, you trashy animal. Lying to cause unnecessary suffering IS always wrong. And YOU’RE doing the lying, saying that to abort is no issue, not a concern.
It will haunt those poor mothers for the rest of their lives.You lie to say that it should not.
Of course, if YOU ever abort, it won’t trouble you. You killed your conscience and encased the corpse in concrete years ago.
Freedom is Slavery May 11, 2007Posted by Administrator in Blogging, Cultural Pessimism, Idiots, Liberal Hypocrisy, Liberal self-loathing, Pandamansanity, Pro-Life.
See, I teach a unit on Animal Farm to freshmen. One of the concepts we cover is the plastic nature of language; how two different terms with significantly different connotations can nevertheless both be construed as truthful. Yet the varying connotations can be used for disseminators of information to manipulate the reactions of the general public.
The exact example from Animal Farm that I used was when Squealer, the lead media mouth for the pigs of the farm, calls a further reduction in the animals’ rations a “re-adjustment.” The animals are appalled at the idea of taking already sparse rations and further reducing them; but a re-adjustment becomes a palatable idea, and the animals take their further abuse quite meekly.
Of course, this wretched and all-too-common tactic may also be used to inflame the population.
For instance, by the foamingly paranoid Amanda Marcotte. Not one to ever to refer to abortion as what it really is, eviscerative murder, she uses such comforting, emotionally limiting terms as “choice.”
Myers injudiciously mangles the abortion issue.. . April 24, 2007Posted by Administrator in Blogging, Cultural Pessimism, Pharyngulism, Pro-Life.
. . .(imagine that) by linking to this blog post. In it, the author describes a harrowing period in his life where his pregnant wife begins such severe intra-uterine hemorrhaging that her blood pressure drops precipitously, then requiring a transfusion. Once his wife is rendered mentally inert from this emergency, he then has to grapple with the decision to perform a D&C to stop the uterine bleed (we are operating on the reasonable assumption that this was the only course available to stop the bleeding). The procedure will, of course, terminate the pregnancy.
The author then proceeds to vent significant spleen towards those that would hinder the availablility of abortion:
I sat there, wondering if I’d at least get my wife back after this. Then 20 minutes passed, and nothing. Thirty minutes. Forty. Forty five. I started to get worried and thought all sorts of horrible things that I will not put words to. Mainly, then, I start to think about the abortion debate. About pro-lifers, in particular. I think about all those meddling politicians that would want to interject themselves into everything that just happened to me, interject themselves between me, my wife, and her doctors. And then I had a strong, visceral reaction. I wanted the mutherf*****s to die. I wanted to rip off their heads and tear out their hearts, because how DARE they play politics with my wife’s life? The baby was fine until the end. I wondered if that would have meant they’d force us to let my wife bleed until almost death before they’d let us abort, because well, if she’s not near death, then it is just a ‘health’ exception, and we can’t have that! F*** them. F*** them all. They can f****** die, as far as I’m concerned. (asterisk editing by hoody)
Now, this man is describing a period in his life when he was understandably distraught at the prospect of losing his wife; compounded with his -erroneous- belief that pro-lifers would outlaw the D&C; a procedure recognized as common in maintaining the health of women. He then proceeds to use it as a soapbox to advocate for the untrammelled access to abortion.
Myers, in his typical hypocritical and fundmamentalist extremism, suggests that this man’s experience is de rigeur.
I debate that point. I would like to see some statistics that indicate the prevalence of D&C’s under the severe conditions his wife faced.
I’ll go out on a limb and say under 2% of all D&Cs are performed under similar circumstances. Most are elective, in the sense that an otherwise healthy pregnancy is terminated, claiming that the baby is “unwanted.”
I wondered if that would have meant they’d force us to let my wife bleed until almost death before they’d let us abort, because well, if she’s not near death, then it is just a ‘health’ exception, and we can’t have that!
Horsefeathers. Abortions are conducted all the time to protect the lives of mothers suffering from ectopic pregnancies. This man’s wife would certainly fit in such a category.
Hie accusation above, and by extension, Myers’ sanctimonious and disengenuous endorsement of same, is malicious, mendacious and misleading claptrap.
Mamacita on why she now opposes abortion. March 24, 2007Posted by Administrator in Pro-Life.
1 comment so far
Fine little essay.
I won’t make friends with this post. But this issue is everywhere, and this is my take on it. And I am not talking about rape or incest or any other dealings with monsters. I am talking about a woman’s CHOICE, which is: “Do I or do I not have sex with this hot guy, knowing full well what the consequences might be.” THAT’S what choice is. Pregnancy is a consequence of that choice.
And as I said, thirty years ago my opinions were the exact opposite as they are now. I changed.
I grew up.
That she did.