Image 01

Posts Tagged ‘Abortion’

Republicans in the Bedroom

Monday, July 18th, 2011

Have you ever noticed that too many Republican candidates are sticking their noses into American bedrooms? Now normally I lean to the Republican side of the fence but they are pissing me off on two issues. These two issues are always hot topics come election time so I decided to get them out of the way now. Once again, as always elected officials in the federal government are busy fighting over issues that should be handed off to the states to decide. The Republicans are so focused on what the American people are doing, its almost as if every household in America is having an orgy. Imagine that, elected officials bending the American people over, who would have thought? These elected federal officials will waste our time and money arguing over abortion and gay marriage aka civil unions. Really? How about we focus on jobs, the national debt, healthcare, and the other important things we need to worry about. How about we find away for America to stand on her own two feet again and stop leaning on China.

Attribution by pdstahl (CC)

First, lets talk about the abortion issue. If many Republicans had their choice all abortions would be illegal no matter what the reason for it. While I personally would never want my wife to have an abortion unless it was needed to save her life or if she was raped. Now, if she was raped I can positively say that when I would find the SOB that did it and I would be the judge, jury and executioner. He would be found guilty, sentenced to death, and the execution would happen within minutes of the sentencing. I can promise that it will be a very slow and painful death with no chance of a stay in execution. I’m sure the liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and other whack jobs will be all over me for that but hey oh well. Anyways, abortion is an issue that the states need to decide. While I would never want my wife to have one, it is nobody’s business if we do. Just like if you and your spouse and or significant other decide to have an abortion what business is it of mine? It’s not and I would expect you to tell me to butt the hell out of your business much like I would tell you if you got into mine. The federal government allows each state to decide many of their own gun laws, but the gun in a man’s pants along with the target in a woman’s pants have to be protected by condoms called the federal government. I can honestly say that is one prophylactic I wouldn’t trust. How about we change, “Uncle Sam Wants You” to “Uncle Sam Wants In Your Pants.” Its kind of catchy or it could be mistaken for a bad porn movie. How about the federal government worry about their jobs while the State officials worry about their. Then again, the federally elected officials will also be the ones collecting their pay checks when they deny social security checks to America’s senior citizens, another way the federal government is bending the American people over. The federal government needs to realize there are state governments for a reason. In fact, in my opinion the state elected officials are more in tune with the wants and needs of their constituents then any elected official to the federal government. Before we wrap up the abortion issue I need to get one more thing of my chest. To all of those that have two or more Pro-Life bumper stickers on your car. We get your point! One bumper sticker tells us your opinion on the matter, you don’t need more than one. Also, you may call it murder but have you ever even seen a murder? If not I will gladly invite you to any inner city and I will drop you off there. Be warned, when I tell you to get out I am not stopping at the stop sign. I will slow down to a safe departure speed for you to exit the truck. Once your out you are own you own and I’m not looking back. Next time I see you will be on the 6:00 PM news.

On to my second complaint about Republicans in the bedroom. Let’s talk about the whole gay marriage thing or as some states are calling it civil unions. First, in my opinion there is no such thing as a gay marriage. To me a marriage is a union between a man and a woman. That’s it, no changing a word to make it politically correct after 100′s of years. This reminds me of an old saying my uncle use to use when is was growing up, “The funny thing about that little white speck on the top of chicken shit. That little white speck is chicken shit too”. Yes I know, that same line was in the movie Pure Country but I remember as a little kid hearing my uncle say it and not understanding until I got older. If you want to call them civil unions that’s fine and for this article I will call them just that. While I am personally against civil unions its not my choice. It should not be the choice of the federal government either, it should be the decision of each individual state. Once again, the decision should be made by the elected state officials based on what the citizens of that state want. If the citizens of Pennsylvania don’t want civil unions then our elected officials should vote against it. If the residents of California want to have civil unions, well then their elected officials need to act in a manner that speaks for the people, not their personal opinion. This is just another case of Uncle Sam trying to butt into each states business. Kind of like the big brother syndrome. If big brother doesn’t like it then you better not do it but if big brother wants it well you better hop to it before he gets mad. This all comes at a time when many Republicans are looking to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Remember, this was even sign into law by a Democrat President. Yes, President Wild Willy Billy Clinton signed this law. Just an added note for humor, President Clinton signed this law about a year and a half before the media broke the story of Wild Bill, Monica, and the stained blue dress.

I think many people will agree that these issues are state issues. Each state should have the right to make laws for the people by the people right? It is obvious that big brother doesn’t like it’s little brothers are making their own decisions. For those of you that have an interest in American history, let us think back to our history classes. In 1860 when President Lincoln was elected many southerners believed that the government was growing to strong. The southern states and its citizens felt that the federal government had no right to tell them how they lived. The people of the south believed that if they remained part of the United States the North would control them. Therefore many states in the south decided to leave the United States. Big Brother didn’t like this and when they were told to leave Confederate land and refused an eviction noticed was served. Thus leading to the Union aka the North aka the Inited States to wage war on the newly formed Confederate States of America. While this is still a debate today as to whether states can or can not secede, we will leave that for another article. It all comes back to states rights. It doesn’t matter what the issue in debate is, the federal government continues to over step its boundaries by not allowing the states to govern themselves. The United States is made up of individual states, therefore the states must be able to govern themselves in a manner that represents the wishes of the people. The federal government needs to worry about the issues facing the nation as a whole. With this said, I feel the only proper way to end this article is with these two words, “Deo Vindice”!

TwitterTechnorati FavoritesStumbleUponFacebookDeliciousDiggShare

Santorum v. Sharpton – Political death match

Tuesday, January 25th, 2011

As a Pennsylvanian, I’m probably a little more familiar with former Senator Rick Santorum than people from other states. Most notably, I remember clearly the night he lost his seat, and the derision that followed because he became fairly emotional on camera, apparently crying. As a campaign worker, I felt genuinely sorry for his staff that night, primarily because of his tears. It is one thing for a politician to shed tears because of a tragedy. But doing so due to a lost election can be deadly to future political aspirations.

stopsign

Lately I have been getting highly annoyed with party politicking to the point where loyalty is given simply because of party affiliation. Both sides are guilty of it, and nothing makes my blood boil more than when I see people crucified for pointing out deficiencies in politicians (truthfully, not mudslinging lies.) In spite of saying that, I have no doubt that I will end up with at least a few people who will claim that I am a RINO yet again, or worse for saying this, but Santorum honestly needs to give up on politics because he is not made for it.

Beyond the emotional nonsense, there is a troubling fact that his major accomplishment outside of serving in the Senate was to write the book “It Takes a Family.” Since it was simply a response to Hillary Clinton’s book of similar title, it begs the question whether or not Santorum is capable of thinking purely for himself without the aid of another person’s work as a road map.

Normally I go to the horse’s mouth with source material, but in this case, I am sticking with TPMDC’s coverage of Santorum battle with Rev. Al Sharpton, if for no other reason, because it focuses on precisely what I think went terribly wrong with the whole affair. Santorum seems to have a little trouble thinking on his feet. His initial comments that landed him on the Hannity show in the first place were insensitive and misguided at best. More troubling is the fact that he really couldn’t pull himself out from under the situation, even when Hannity threw him a life line.

One of my specialties in political campaigns was coaching candidates on managing public speaking events, interviews, and most importantly, debates. If I had been working for Santorum in that last capacity, I would have been the one in tears after the Sharpton argument. When Hannity stepped in with the statistics on race and abortion, I would have been jumping up and down off-stage, motioning with everything in me for Santorum to run with them, and would have grabbed anything I could get my hands on to write the same. Well, maybe not, since I probably wouldn’t have left Hannity to bring out those statistics in the first place – Santorum would have walked in with them on hand.

Keeping one step ahead of the opposition, and anticipating their arguments is key to winning any debate. Santorum is a true-believer. As such, he doesn’t tend to focus on what the other side is thinking, and that leaves him floundering more often than not. More importantly, that makes him less likely to manage dealing with issues without alienating large groups of people that happen to disagree with him (in part, or totally.) Much has been said over the years about empathy being a necessary trait for a good leader. Beyond empathy is understanding and comprehension. People that become so wrapped up in their own agenda and beliefs that they fail to even see the beliefs and ideas of others are doomed to failure in politics, one way or another. They cannot even engage in the dirtier side of the game, let alone provide meaningful leadership. When there is no room for compromise, there is no action, period. Everything that politicians do is riddled with compromises, giving a little to each of the demands of the many. I am glad to see that Santorum is hanging near the bottom of at least one 2012 Presidential poll. I hope it stays that way. Better yet, I hope that Santorum rethinks his political aspirations. Given his personal belief system, I have no doubt he could find a nice niche somewhere in media.

TwitterTechnorati FavoritesStumbleUponFacebookDeliciousDiggShare

Nebraska bucking for SCOTUS

Monday, April 12th, 2010

It’s not news, and is no less reprehensible. The Nebraska legislature is finding it necessary to write law with the specific intent of ending up in front of the Supreme Court of the U.S. While crying over activist judges, and claiming the illegitimacy of legislating from the bench, they are hoping to cause precisely that on abortion. Both sides are guilty of failing to deal with situation properly – with legislation that has even the slightest chance of being considered constitutional. Sadly, in all of this, no one stops to wonder whether or not we really need to be doing this.

But, on Nebraska, I have to say that I remember better drafted pieces of legislation in our National Forensic League competitions. Beyond stating that there were teens in the 1980s capable of writing meaningful legislation, I honestly don’t know what to say. It is mired in repetition, the apparent goal is close any perceived loophole, forcing another junk science finding – this time claiming pain of fetuses – down the throats of the people to prevent women from controlling their own lives. Like all other anti-choice legislation out there, it does not address the obvious consequences of the situation. Beyond stating what penalties doctors should suffer for non-compliance, there is nothing about what the people and government of Nebraska are supposed to do with the resulting unwanted children.

And therein lies the problem. Sure, these legislators care about the fetuses – even try to get people to stop calling them by their scientific names to elicit more emotional responses from the masses. They want to state that it is wrong to inflict pain on fetuses, and have recruited psuedo-scientists to back them in their endeavor. Ironic, since at the same time, we’re faced with headlines about adoptions gone wrong. The worst part is that while they are claiming to take the moral high ground, it is nothing more than hypocritical, sadistic, unethical, unfeeling, and irresponsible posturing. The legislators have no clue about the reality of life, are incapable of understanding the concept of motherhood, and have no desire to follow through on their convictions by providing the life-long support and social programs that would be necessary to deal with an increase in “damaged” population. People from good homes, with good support systems, and no financial difficulties don’t end up seeing the women from their families going to have abortions. It’s the women without help, without money, and without stability in their lives that end up going to the abortion clinics – or they are just plain too young to deal with motherhood in the first place. (Please don’t insult yourself, and bring up the exceptions to that, because they are statistically anomalous.)

So now we get to wait and see who ends up on the bench next. Hopefully the balance will not be tipped, simply because of this sort of case. Sadly, that will leave many other cases – on important issues like financial reform, immigration, and privacy issues beyond abortion – being decided on the liberal side. And a woman’s right to choose will remain a hot button issue when it comes to judicial appointments for the foreseeable future because of the hypocrisy of the radical right-wing and its blind obsession with legislating morality. But it’s worth it, right?

TwitterTechnorati FavoritesStumbleUponFacebookDeliciousDiggShare

Secured for spam by MLW and Associates, LLP's Super CAPTCHASecured by Super-CAPTCHA © 2009-2010 MLW & Associates, LLP. All rights reserved.

Featuring WPMU Bloglist Widget by YD WordPress Developer