The problem with liberals

I'll confine myself to just five today, boys and girls.

1. Entitlement without responsibility. Defined in terms of "rights." Otherwise known as "freedom to do anything I want and never having to deal with the consequences." And someone else will pay (taxpayers). This can be seen by non-glue-sniffers as "reinforcing undesirable behavior."

2. Racism and other dialog stoppers. Accuse someone of being racist, anti-immigrant, guilty of human rights violations, etc., in order to thwart any conversation about the actual issues.

3. Open borders lobby and "world citizens." Support unfettered, unrestricted migration into and out of the U.S., especially for the little beaners who do low-level work, and then demand and defend the invaders' "right" to all sorts of benefits, public assistance. Then offer them citizenship. Because after all, U.S. citizenship doesn't mean that much anyway. These are the sophisticates who consider themselves "world citizens" and not-so-much American citizens, because patriotism and allegiance is so passé. Until they need their country to do something for them.

4. "Reproductive Rights." This is both the "right" to have your unborn child vacuumed and/or yanked out of you for any reason, at any time, and to have as many children as you want without the means to actually pay for them. This also means excoriating someone (in an outraged manner) of suggesting that "poor people shouldn't have children." These attitudes relate to #1 above.

5. America is always wrong. Whether it be war, foreign policy, border control, you name it. All that freedom, rights, upward mobility, education, relative safety...if you can find a better place, go there.

Revolting.

I read a truly appalling article in WaPo yesterday morning about how even though the rate of abortion is generally decreasing in this country, use of RU-486 is on the rise. What’s really disturbing is that women seem to be keenly well-read about this pill, but utterly clueless or callous (probably a bit of both) about pills that prevent the pregnancy – or anything else that prevents pregnancy for that matter. Why bother, after all – you’re progressive! Just kill the offending thing – it’s easier than ever and private! What’s also offensive are some of the comments of practitioners concerning the “normalizing of abortion” and how RU-486 feels more "natural" to the user. What?!

All I can say is for shame! This isn’t modernity or power or whatever euphemisms abortionistas embrace – it’s backward and sad. Read the whole article here.

CSI - compelling, but not really all that balanced

Last night I was watching some episodes of the sixth season of CSI (the original, Las Vegas show - the others are crap), provided to me by DH Jeff. This one episode involved an organization that matched unused frozen embryos (from fertility clinics and such) to women willing to have the embryos implanted and carry them to term - i.e., adopt them. Kathryn Willows, upon meeting the head of this organization, proceeds to brow beat her with what the [Catholic] church has in the far past considered "life," i.e., way past fertilization. I thought, geeze, they're usually a bit more balanced in these shows than that...then I remembered that Law and Order (Fox) usually provides a more balanced view of various issues - not CSI (CBS). Aha.

First, if she were a real investigator, Willows would have been way out of line - her job is to get information regarding her investigation - not antagonize those with whom she disagrees (especially if she expects them to cooperate with her). Second, she then justifies her actions (huffily) to Grissom, stating how pro-choice she is (i.e., as a progressive, liberated woman, she had no choice but to brow beat the head of this backward-thinking and dangerous organization). Um, huh?

Here's what it comes down to: anyone who considers an embryo (or for that matter, any fetus who hasn't fully gestated) worthy of protection, or any consideration at all besides medical experimentation, is dangerous because this may abridge women's "right" to abort at any time for any reason. Now, this reminds me of the NOW (I think) chapter who objected to the legislation that considered a fetus murdered as a result of fatal violence done to his/her mother (re: Connor Peterson), i.e., a double homicide.

One must wonder what these folks are smoking to object to either situation. But you & I both know the rationale. Sad.

Technorati topics: entertainment, abortion

Streams of Unconsciousness

So, you thought I'd given up on my blogging life, eh? Nah.

Got a 94% on that Chemistry test - no one more surprised (and pleased) than me!

Teacher got me royally pissed (as opposed to just commonly pissed) the other morning by starting the class early with no prior notification thereof. I walked in on time to find her whisking thru her transparencies.

Now we're gearing up for another exam. Oh joy.

I've come to a realization after having bored to death a guest with a rambling diatribe about abortion, fueled by way too much wine. Yeh, I should watch the amount I drink, but more importantly, I should drop that subject permanently. There is absolutely no point in bringing it up. I have my values, they have theirs - and never the twain shall meet. But, if it were truly a personal and private choice (to kill your kid), then no red cent of mine should ever go to supporting (any) abortion (e.g., healthcare/insurance that covers abortion, etc). Your mistake, your bill. Fat chance!

War on drugs? Same thing. Just a way for our govt to spend a huge amount of (our) money and man-power for no appreciable benefit. The constant is that Americans love their drugs & will find other means of acquiring them or, they'll just make them at home. Then demand that there be all sorts of "free" rehabilitation to salvage their useless lives. Your mistake, your bill. Nope, we pay for that too.

Wars run and international policies hatched, having the effect akin to creating antibiotic resistant strains of tuberculosis by sharing your meds. We pay on myriad levels for that, believe me.

I think I'm going to try to ignore all these things, adopt a positive if self-absorbed mental state, and attempt to make enough money to go to school and continue dining out when I want. Blah. My fury at these issues and how they're dealt with serves only to give me stomachaches (I've had a lot of those lately, but I suspect partly due to the gallons of coffee I drink daily, and the consequent erosion of my stomach lining). Anyhoo, there it is. Rambling diatribe sans alcohol.

Pro-Life Dems? Who Knew?!

Thanks to Michelle Malkin, I now know that there are 1) Pro-Life Democrats and 2) an organization of them (Democrats for Life of America)!  Check out their website and Ryan Zempel's coverage (Townhall.com) of their convention dinner. 

Wonders never cease.  But kudos to them for being other than Pavlovian Dems.

Why I'm a Conservative (part 1 of an ongoing series)

Those who know me knew that I would be getting down to political business at some point. Here's the start... I choose the term "conservative" instead of "Republican" because so many so-called Republicans are just too liberal for my taste.  Oh, and these are not in any particular order.  Onward!
 
You know I'm a conservative because:
 
1.  I have a barely controlled impulse to bitch-slap the next person (esp. female) who states proudly, "I'm pro-choice!"  Now, what would that choice be, per chance?  The choice to ignore the piles of contraceptives available in this country?  The choice not to insist on condom use?  The choice to be proud of something that involves the death of a helpless human being for convenience sake?  The choice to flush your own flesh-n-blood and then whine about how tough the decision was?  The choice to march in bonehead demonstrations for "women's lives"?  Lookie here at some LOGIC - viruses are many times smaller than a sperm cell, so naturally any discussion of women's lives in this context would involve discussion of condom use to prevent HIV transmission, etc, which coincidentally would also prevent pregnancy.  So...the whole abortion-RoevWade thing is moot.  N'est-ce pas? 
 
And for the record, overturning RoevWade would not "outlaw abortion," it would result in each state deciding how they want to handle the issue.  Oh, and I didn't hear a peep of you NOW types when Norplant was taken off the market.  I guess that whole prevention thing doesn't "empower" you as much as destroying your fetus.  My bad.
 
And by the way, I'm not "Pro-Life" or "Anti-Choice" - I'm anti-abortion.  No slogans, just description.  
 

 (to be continued...)