Kimberly Ross reports: Sometimes pro-life marketing gets it wrong, but a new video, from the group Choice42, gets it right …
… A few days ago, Choice42 released this deliciously sardonic video entitled “The Magical Birth Canal.” It is a searing take on the pro-abort narrative that says life begins at birth.
Quite simply, it is brilliant …
… Something within that canal confers humanity on a life that has been human from the moment of conception. But pro-aborts prefer to think of the unborn as a mass of tissue not worthy of protection. Read the rest of this entry »
John F. Kennedy lowered taxes, opposed abortion, supported gun rights, and believed in a strong military. And he was a proud Democrat. But would he be one today? Author and talk show host Larry Elder explains.
…On Thursday evening’s edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club, came on the show to talk about how his organization’s environmentally-focused message relates to other liberal talking points that the club has taken a stance on since Brune has been in charge.
“Well, it helps to address the number of people we have on this planet. We feel that one of the ways that we can get to a sustainable population is to empower women to make choices about their own families.”
— Michael Brune
Carlson asked Brune how the club taking positions on immigration, transgender bathrooms and abortion correlate to the organization’s mission of protecting the environment. Brune was particularly emphatic about the club’s decision to wholeheartedly support the baby-killing machine known as Planned Parenthood.
“Well, it helps to address the number of people we have on this planet,” Brune told Carlson.
Carlson’s shocked face after hearing that sentence come out of Brune’s ignorant word-hole was nothing short of priceless.
“We feel that one of the ways that we can get to a sustainable population is to empower women to make choices about their own families,” Brune continued.
“Why would the Sierra Club, if it’s concerned about population effect on the environment — and you should be, in my view — why would you be agitating for more immigration?”
— Tucker Carlson
Carlson was clearly confused about Brune’s stance, considering that just a minute before, Brune had talked about how deporting illegal aliens from the U.S. would be a human rights violation.
Carlson pointed out to Brune:
Given that, that that’s your position, which is a position, then the United States population has pretty much doubled in the last 50 years. It’s now at about 225ish million, so doubling in the last 50 years is a pretty quick rate of expansion. Most of that has come from immigration, as you know.
Then Carlson hit Brune with a question that called out the hypocrisy of the Sierra Club’s stance on the two separate topics. Read the rest of this entry »
President Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court is a victory for Americans who are fed up with corrupt judicial activism. The judicial branch needs as much draining as the rest of the federal government swamp. President Trump avoided the temptation to nominate yet another politician to the Supreme Court. It is good we have a nominee who has a demonstrated record of applying the rule of law rather than legislating from the bench. The U.S. Senate should swiftly confirm him.
In Michele Gorman’s January 27 profile piece on Neil Gorsuch for Newsweekmagazine, Fitton provided the following:
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, tells Newsweek that Gorsuch fits the Scalia mold, which Trump has promised to adhere to in his replacement nominee. “I think conservatives would consider him to be an exciting pick. I think it’s fair to say he’s a leader in terms of conservative jurisprudence and I think he quickly would become a strong voice on the court for his constitutional approach to decision making,” he says.Read the rest of this entry »
Carlson: He (Gorsuch) wrote in a book about ethics, “All human beings are intrinsically valuable and the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong.” Do you believe that?
Swalwell: All human beings are intrinsically valuable. However, Roe v. Wade says that a woman has a right to make a decision about her own healthcare.
Carlson: I’m not asking you about Roe v Wade. I’m asking you to assess what he said here…as a general statement. ”All human beings are intrinsically valuable,” you agree with that. The second part is, “The taking of human life by private persons is always wrong,” do you agree with that or not?
Swalwell: The most personal decision a person can make is a woman with her a doctor about her own body and a person who is terminally ill about whether they want to die in peace and he [Gorsuch] has chosen that the government should intervene.
Carlson: Will you answer my question? “The intentional taking of of human life by private persons is always wrong.” Now if you can’t agree on that…
Swalwell: The Constitution says…”
Carlson: I’m not talking about the Constitution. What do you think…I’m not talking about women’s rights. “The intentional taking of human life by private persons.” That’s what he said, and I want to know whether you agree with that statement or not.
Swalwell: What he has shown in his legal career…
Carlson: (Laughs) Are you really afraid to say that the intentional taking of life is wrong?
Swalwell: No, of course not. I was a prosecutor and I prosecuted people for intentionally taking life.
Carlson: But you won’t agree with this because you are afraid of the abortion lobby, like “Woo, you are anti-abortion if you are against the taking of human life.” I mean, come on!
Swalwell: A woman has the right to make her own decision about her own healthcare.
Carlson: Do you think it is the taking of human life? Abortion?
Swalwell: I think that right now…before viability, a woman should be able to make her own decision. After viability, in the case of her own psychological health, in the case of rape or incest, she should also be able to make that decision.
Carlson: Okay, but is it the taking of human life?
When the Grand Jury indicted abortion doctor Dr. Kermit Gosnell in 2011, it wrote: “This case is about a doctor who killed babies… What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy—and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors… Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.”
Filmmakers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer (FrackNation, Not Evil Just Wrong) have spent the last few years investigating the case and raising money for a feature documentary about the man they call “America’s biggest serial killer.” Now, in Gosnell, McElhinney and McAleer report their shocking findings, taking readers inside the grisly case the mainstream media hesitated to cover. What really happened in Gosnell’s Pennsylvania clinic? And perhaps more importantly, how did Gosnell get away with infanticide for decades?
Sean Davis writes: Forget the war on babies. The abortion industry has a new enemy: ultrasounds. In a bizarre and rambling 2,600-word feature piece published on Tuesday, The Atlanticwriter Moira Weigel took a sledgehammer to basic science and then did her best to vacuum its brains out before anyone could figure out what just happened.
“Weigel’s war on science, common sense, and life-saving medical technology is not aimless, though. Her real enemy is legislation that would criminalize abortion once an unborn baby’s heartbeat can be detected. Her logic is straightforward. If it’s illegal to kill a healthy, unborn baby after her heartbeat is detected, simply deny that she has a heartbeat.”
The article’s headline is bad enough—”How the Ultrasound Pushed the Idea That a Fetus Is a Person”—but its subhed is the real work of art: “The technology has been used to create an ‘imaginary’ heartbeat and sped-up videos that falsely depict a response to stimulus.”
“Ultrasound made it possible for the male doctor to evaluate the fetus without female interference,” Weigel declares. Are female doctors banned from or incapable of doing an ultrasound on a pregnant mother? What about X-rays, MRIs, or CT scans? Are those marvels of modern technology that have helped to diagnose and cure countless diseases and physical maladies since their inception? Or are they evil technologies that merely enable peeping mandoctors to cast their eyes into the inner recesses of a woman’s body? Read the rest of this entry »
‘You cannot be a credible young person these days without being a victim.’
Katie Hopkins writes: You cannot be a credible young person these days without being a victim. Or even better a persecuted minority. Or the gold standard – discriminated against.
Even if you blatantly have to misappropriate a cause because the most challenging thing you’ve fought is genital warts.
The Clinton campaign was a perfect example. She was one big ol’ bitch in a pant suit, barking to any American who felt like the underdog; female, gay or Hispanic. Preferably all three.
“No it is not you daft trout. Your life is devoted to trying to position yourself as chief cheerleader for every man-hating opportunity there is.”
She believed she could win on the victim ticket alone. Sod policy! If you were angry at the hand your were dealt at birth, she was the unlikely champion of your cause. A posh white woman who was the WAG in the White House now obliging her supporters to hold posters saying ‘I’m with her’ – when, as it turns out, she was never going anywhere. Except down.
“Posing for pictures. Then calling out the guy on photo-shop for trying to make the images a little less frightening. Being overweight and trying to celebrate it, like diabetes type II is the new feminist frontier.”
I discovered exactly the same types when I went to the Jungle at Calais to assess the migrant situation there.
“I expect she wakes up every day wishing she was black, so she could truly own that cause too.”
By far the most heavily represented group (after angry single men from Somalia) were rich white kids enjoying a bit of charity tourism so they could stick it on their CV. Kids without a struggle, misappropriating the migrant one, so they could pretend to be Bob Geldof.
Writing on Instagram, Lena Dunham apologized and said she had made a ‘sizeable’ donation to an abortion charity
Now Lena Dunham – one of Hillary’s biggest and (since the result) freaked-out celebrity fangirls has had her very own posh white woman moment. Wanting to be front and centre in the fight for abortion rights, she bemoaned, ‘I have never had one, but I wish I had’.
Perpetually outraged types took this vital opportunity to be outraged once more.
‘I can’t even imagine how offensive Lena Dunham’s comments are for women who have actually has to go through with an abortion’, tweeted one man, playing to the offended crowd.
Actually son, not that offensive because we are too busy trying to have sex with our husbands more than once a month, getting smear tests and trying not to pee when we sneeze to notice.
It’s why half of us only find out we are pregnant when we can’t fit into our jeans and our boobs start leaking unexpectedly.
But I don’t need Lena Dunham to see abortion as a cause. And I certainly don’t need her on womb patrol any day of the week.
‘My life is and always will be devoted to reproductive justice and freedom,’ said Lena.
(Comments start at 13:36 mark)
No it is not you daft trout. Your life is devoted to trying to position yourself as chief cheerleader for every man-hating opportunity there is.
Posing for pictures. Then calling out the guy on photo-shop for trying to make the images a little less frightening. Being overweight and trying to celebrate it, like diabetes type II is the new feminist frontier.
Scalia was just the latest newsworthy guest to visit the celebrity hideaway that covers 30,000 acres near the Chinati Mountains. Mick Jagger, Julia Roberts and Tommy Lee Jones have also partaken of its scenic vistas and luxury accomodations.
MARFA — John MacCormack reports: A first-time guest to the Cibolo Creek Ranch, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was animated and engaged during dinner Friday night, as one of three dozen invitees to an event that had nothing to do with law or politics, according to the ranch owner.
Just hours later, he would be found dead of sapparent natural causes, which media outlets were reporting Sunday was a heart attack.
“He was seated near me and I had a chance to observe him. He was very entertaining. But about 9 p.m. he said, ‘it’s been a long day and a long week, I want to get some sleep,” recalled Houston businessman John Poindexter, who owns the 30,000-acre luxury ranch.
When Poindexter tried to awaken Scalia about 8:30 the next morning, the judge’s door was locked and he did not answer. Three hours later, Poindexter returned after an outing, with a friend of Scalia who had come from Washington with him.
“We discovered the judge in bed, a pillow over his head. His bed clothes were unwrinkled,” said Poindexter.
“He was lying very restfully. It looked like he had not quite awakened from a nap,” he said.Scalia,79, did not have a pulse and his body was cold, and after consulting with a doctor at a hospital in Alpine, Poindexter concluded resuscitation would have been futile, He then contacted federal authorities, at first encountering a series of answering services because he was calling on a weekend.
…The flow of donations to Second Amendment advocacy groups will almost certainly rise, and gun violence — which has fallen considerably over the past 20 years of gun ownership expansion — will not be addressed.
“Perhaps Obama’s most destructive legacy is the mainstreaming of the idea that if Congress ‘fails to act’ it’s okay for the president to make law himself.”
But more consequentially — and this may be the most destructive legacy of the Obama presidency — is the mainstreaming of the idea that if Congress “fails to act” it’s okay for the president to figure out a way to make law himself. Hillary’s already applauded Obama’s actions because, as she put it, “Congress won’t act; we have to do something.” This idea is repeated perpetually by the Left, in effect arguing that we live in direct democracy run by the president (until a Republican is in office, of course). On immigration, on global warming, on Iran, on whatever crusade liberals are on, the president has a moral obligation to act if Congress doesn’t do what he wants.
“If President Bush had instituted a series of restrictions on the abortion industry — since it has a loud, well-organized, and well-funded lobby that wants to make abortions ‘effortlessly’ available — without congressional input, would that have been procedurally okay with liberals? You know, for the children? I don’t imagine so.”
Perhaps Obama’s most destructive legacy is the mainstreaming of the idea that if Congress ‘fails to act’ it’s okay for the president to make law himself.
To believe this, you’d have to accept two things: 1) That Congress has a responsibility to pass laws on the issues that the president desires or else they would be abdicating their responsibility, and 2) That Congress has not already acted.
In 2013, the Senate rejected legislation to expand background checks for gun purchases and to ban certain weapons and ammunition, and they would almost certainly oppose nearly every idea Obama has to curb gun ownership today. Congress has acted, just not in the manner Obama desires.
“Is it really is the work of ‘citizenship’ to cheer on a president who single-handedly constrains Americans from practicing one of their constitutional rights?”
“Change, as always, is going to take all of us,” Obama theorized the other day. “The gun lobby is loud and well organized in its defense of effortlessly available guns for anyone. The rest of us are going to have to be just as passionate and well organized in our defense of our kids. That’s the work of citizenship — to stand up and fight for the change that we seek.”
Get it? You can be with the loud and reprehensible gun lobby who supports allowing criminals to obtain guns “effortlessly,” or you can stand with the kids. Your choice!
Well, not exactly your choice. As a reactionary, I wonder is it really the duty of “citizenship” to cheer on a president who single-handedly constrains Americans from practicing one of their constitutional rights? If President Bush had instituted a series of restrictions on the abortion industry — since it has a loud, well-organized, and well-funded lobby that wants to make abortions “effortlessly” available — without congressional input, would that have been procedurally okay with liberals? You know, for the children? I don’t imagine so.
“With respect to Planned Parenthood, obviously my heart goes out to the families of those impacted. I mean, Nancy, I say this every time we’ve got one of these mass shootings. This just doesn’t happen in other countries.”
— President Obama in Paris, 19 days after the Bataclan shootings and 10 months after the Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris
Maloney cited mammograms as an example of “life-saving services provided by Planned Parenthood” in a statement decrying efforts by “anti-choice extremists” to defund the organization.
“To the best of my knowledge, not any [Planned Parenthood clinics] have mammogram machines,” Richards said in response to a question by Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R., Wyoming.).
REP. CAROLYN MALONEY: When you read this, there are certain things that jump out. All of the signatories are men, none of whom will get pregnant, or need a cervical screening for cancer, or mammograms, or a Pap smear, or other life-saving services provided by Planned Parenthood.
REP. CYNTHIA LUMMIS: Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being with us today. My first question is, how many Planned Parenthood clinics have mammogram machines?
CECILE RICHARDS: There aren’t any Planned Parenthood clinics—I believe, to the best of my knowledge, not any have mammogram machines at their facility.
Maloney appeared to react with surprise when Lummis asked Richards about Planned Parenthood’s provision of mammograms. Read the rest of this entry »
The funds would be divided among thousands of government-backed health centers.
(WASHINGTON) —Alan Fram and Andrew Taylor report: A divided House voted Friday to block Planned Parenthood’s federal funds for a year, as Republican leaders labored to keep GOP outrage over abortion from spiraling into an impasse with President Barack Obama that could shut down the government.
“In the face of these videos, with all the alternatives women have for health, why would you want to force your constituents to pay for something so evil?”
— House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy
The House used a nearly party-line 241-187 vote to clear the legislation, which stands little chance of enactment. Senate Democrats have enough votes to block it, and for good measure the White House has promised a veto.
“Some of their members are willing to risk women’s lives just to score political points. Enough is enough.”
— Debbie Wasserman Schultz,
Yet Republicans are forging ahead, sparked by secretly recorded videos showing Planned Parenthood officials discussing how they obtain tissue from aborted fetuses for medical research.
Those videos have helped mushroom the longtime political fight over abortion into a prominent issue for next year’s elections. They’ve also refueled Congress’ always-emotional clashes on the subject, with Friday’s debate featuring a poster-sized photo of a scarred, aborted fetus and accusations from each side that the other was simply trying to drum up campaign donations.
“In the face of these videos, with all the alternatives women have for health, why would you want to force your constituents to pay for something so evil?” said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.
The bill by Rep. Diane Black, R-Tenn., would shift Planned Parenthood’s federal payments to the thousands of government-backed community health centers, which Republicans said would treat the group’s displaced patients.
Democrats said those clinics are already overburdened and often distant from women who need them. They said the true GOP goal was to whip up conservative voters with bills that would result in diminished health care for women.
…according to Politico, Hillary Clinton is likely to make Republicans’ opposition to Planned Parenthood a staple of her campaign: “What will matter for the Republicans a year from now is that each candidate stood on the stage and said they would defund Planned Parenthood,” Clinton’s communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, told the outlet, “[and] would even favor shutting down the government in order to defund Planned Parenthood. That is what’s going to stand out from this debate, and that’s what is going to matter a year from now.”
Today was the day we learned that some number approaching zero of reporters have actually watched the @ppact videos.
Good. It should stand out. Fiorina delivered a powerful statement that highlighted — perhaps for people who had never given it a thought — the spirit of barbarism that animates an organization that receives taxpayer dollars. Perhaps that is something unwitting Americans ought to think about.
Let’s have this fight. It’s long past time that Planned Parenthood’s unchallenged status as the sine qua non of women’s health care be challenged. Why not talk about how Planned Parenthood, despite its vague “women’s health” rhetoric, does not provide services such as mammograms?
Why not give Planned Parenthood’s $528 million subsidy to the 9,000 local Community Health Centers that provide women with a wider range of services (such as mammograms), that are more responsive to local health needs, and that don’t provide abortions? Secretary Clinton: Why not? Read the rest of this entry »
8-28-15 – Greg Gutfeld got into it with Geraldo again who says he wants to amend the second amendment or something. But what put Gutfeld over the top was Geraldo’s hypocrisy, wanting to take away guns to prevent murder when on the other hand he doesn’t care about dead babies.
“We’ve got to do everything we can … to make sure that we don’t allow this to happen.”
Early on in the six-minute interview, Love wiped a tear from her eye as she said: “This is not about a right or left issues; this is about right or wrong.” And she choked up when Dobbs went into detail on how many abortions are conducted.
“We’ve got to do everything we can … to make sure that we don’t allow this to happen,” Love said, tears rolling down her cheek.
Love wears many firsts. The first black female Republican elected to Congress. The first African American to be elected to Congress from Utah. And on Wednesday night, she potentially added another: The first time since her 2014 election she has shown why Republicans should legitimately be excited about her star rising. Read the rest of this entry »
…In the fifth video from the Center for Medical Progress, a woman identified as Melissa Farrell, director of research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, discusses contributing to the organization’s “diversification of the revenue stream” and the potential to “get creative” with conditions for procurement needs. The video was reportedly filmed this past April at a Planned Parenthood facility in Texas.
“Just depending on the patient’s anatomy, how many weeks, where it’s placed in the uterus…we’re going to potentially be able to have some that will be more or less intact, and then some that will not be.”
— — Melissa Farrell, director of research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast
“Just depending on the patient’s anatomy, how many weeks, where it’s placed in the uterus … we’re going to potentially be able to have some that will be more or less intact, and then some that will not be,” she said.
“If we alter our process and we are able to obtain intact fetal cadavers, then we can make it part of the budget, that any dissections are this, and splitting the specimens into different shipments is this. I mean, it’s all just a matter of line items.”
— Melissa Farrell
“But it’s something that we can look at exploring how we can make that happen so we have a higher chance,” she adds.
“And we’ve had studies in which the company, or in the case of the investigator, has a specific need for a certain portion of the products of conception and we bake that into our contract, and our protocol, that we follow this. So we deviate from our standard in order to do that.”
— Melissa Farrell
“And we’ve had studies in which the company, or in the case of the investigator, has a specific need for a certain portion of the products of conception and we bake that into our contract, and our protocol, that we follow this. So we deviate from our standard in order to do that,” the Planned Parenthood official says in the latest video.
“If we alter our process and we are able to obtain intact fetal cadavers, then we can make it part of the budget, that any dissections are this, and splitting the specimens into different shipments is this. I mean, it’s all just a matter of line items,” she adds later. Read the rest of this entry »
“Do you have any idea what year it is? Did you fall down, hit your head and think you woke up in the 1950’s or the 1890’s? Should we call for a doctor?”
Senator Elizabeth Warren has criticized members of Congress who want to defund Planned Parenthood. Warren was speaking after covertly recorded videos released by the Center for Medical Progress showed Planned Parenthood officials discussing the costs associated with fetal tissue extraction. That footage, roundly criticized by both parties, set off a political firestorm…(read more)
Melaney Linton, president of that clinic, said in written testimony that one individual was shown an area where tissue is processed after an abortion. She said the video ‘will be difficult for many people to see.‘
While testifying before a committee of Texas lawmakers, Paxton would not divulge details or discuss how his office got the footage, which has not been publicly released.
“The unveiling of other covertly recorded videos released this month by an anti-abortion group, showing Planned Parenthood officials discussing procedures for obtaining tissue from aborted fetuses for research, has put the organization on the defensive.”
He also didn’t specify where the video was filmed, but Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast says actors pretending to be from a health research company toured its Houston clinic in April and talked to staff members. Melaney Linton, president of that clinic, said in written testimony that one individual was shown an area where tissue is processed after an abortion. She said the video “will be difficult for many people to see.”
“Texas is among a handful of Republican-controlled states that have launched investigations, while GOP leaders in the U.S. Senate say they will vote to bar federal aid to Planned Parenthood.”
But Linton said the clinic did not break any laws and defended skipping the hearing by the Texas Health and Human Services Committee.
“This committee has made it abundantly clear that it has no desire to hold a responsible, fair, fact-driven hearing. It is clear that this committee cares more about political gamesmanship than the truth,” Linton said in a statement. Read the rest of this entry »
‘All the great world religions contain a complex system of beliefs regarding the nature of the universe and human life that is far more profound than anything that liberalism has produced.’
SALON: You’re an atheist, and yet I don’t ever see you sneer at religion in the way that the very aggressive atheist class right now often will. What do you make of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the religion critics who seem not to have respect for religions for faith?
PAGLIA: I regard them as adolescents. I say in the introduction to my last book, “Glittering Images”, that “Sneering at religion is juvenile, symptomatic of a stunted imagination.” It exposes a state of perpetual adolescence that has something to do with their parents– they’re still sneering at dad in some way….
“I think Stewart’s show demonstrated the decline and vacuity of contemporary comedy. I cannot stand that smug, snarky, superior tone. I hated the fact that young people were getting their news through that filter of sophomoric snark.“
I’m speaking here as an atheist. I don’t believe there is a God, but I respect every religion deeply. All the great world religions contain a complex system of beliefs regarding the nature of the universe and human life that is far more profound than anything that liberalism has produced.
“Now let me give you a recent example of the persisting insularity of liberal thought in the media…”
We have a whole generation of young people who are clinging to politics and to politicized visions of sexuality for their belief system.
“When the first secret Planned Parenthood video was released in mid-July, anyone who looks only at liberal media was kept totally in the dark about it, even after the second video was released…”
They see nothing but politics, but politics is tiny….But this sneering thing! I despise snark. Snark is a disease that started with David Letterman and jumped to Jon Stewart and has proliferated since.
“It was a huge and disturbing story, but there was total silence in the liberal media. That kind of censorship was shockingly unprofessional.”
I think it’s horrible for young people! And this kind of snark atheism–let’s just invent that term right now–is stupid, and people who act like that are stupid….
“The resistance of liberals in the media to new ideas was enormous. Liberals think of themselves as very open-minded, but that’s simply not true!”
I think Stewart’s show demonstrated the decline and vacuity of contemporary comedy. I cannot stand that smug, snarky, superior tone. I hated the fact that young people were getting their news through that filter of sophomoric snark….
“Liberalism has sadly become a knee-jerk ideology, with people barricaded in their comfortable little cells. They think that their views are the only rational ones, and everyone else is not only evil but financed by the Koch brothers.”
As for his influence, if he helped produce the hackneyed polarization of moral liberals versus evil conservatives, then he’s partly at fault for the political stalemate in the United States….
The resistance of liberals in the media to new ideas was enormous. Liberals think of themselves as very open-minded, but that’s simply not true! Liberalism has sadly become a knee-jerk ideology, with people barricaded in their comfortable little cells. They think that their views are the only rational ones, and everyone else is not only evil but financed by the Koch brothers. It’s so simplistic! Read the rest of this entry »
Chris Stirewalt writes: Hillary Clinton was asked by a New Hampshire newspaper about the scandal surrounding her longtime political benefactor, Planned Parenthood. Clinton allowed that she had “seen pictures” from the videos that depict officials from America’s leading abortion provider talking in ghoulish terms about harvesting the organs of aborted babies. Clinton said what she saw was “disturbing” and touted her own efforts in her prior White House stint to reduce the number of elective abortions conducted each year. But Clinton, who is under pressure to return donations from Planned Parenthood, stopped short of criticizing the group. Read the rest of this entry »
Planned Parenthood has come under congressional scrutiny after the release of two stealthily recorded videos that showed officials discussing how they provide aborted fetal organs for research. Read the rest of this entry »
“I’m aware of those matters generally from the media, and from some inquiries that have been made to the Department of Justice, and again at this point we’re going to review all the information and determine what steps, if any, to take at the appropriate time.”
— Attorney General Loretta Lynch
Peter Sullivan reports: Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Wednesday her department is going to review all information surrounding the controversial videos of Planned Parenthood officials taken by an anti-abortion group.
“I’m aware of those matters generally from the media, and from some inquiries that have been made to the Department of Justice, and again at this point we’re going to review all the information and determine what steps, if any, to take at the appropriate time,” Lynch said when asked about the videos at a press conference.
Republican members of Congress have been calling on the DOJ to investigate whether Planned Parenthood is in violation of the law after the first video, showing members of the group discussing fetal tissue, surfaced.
MARK HALPERIN: Governor, I’d like to ask you a couple of questions about Planned Parenthood. There’s a controversy swirling around that you’ve weighed in on. First, I’d like you to say, does Planned Parenthood do anything, provide any services that you think are valuable, and if so what are they, and second, why are you so troubled by this video?”
RICK PERRY: Well, Planned Parenthood does give some services which I would suggest are good for women’s health, but —
HALPERIN: Which ones, Governor? Can you be specific on that?
PERRY: Oh, I think some of the cancer screenings, some of those types of screening are obviously good for women’s health. But when you look at the overall picture of what they do, they are, they’re in a business that people of Texas have a conern about.
And Mark, let me ask you, You looked at that video and you’re good with it?
HALPERIN: I think the video raises a lot of questions and you and others have raised them.
PERRY: It does indeed. And I think you just answered the question for us. Thank you.
SCARBOROUGH: …the video, obviously troubling because you had a member of Planned Parenthood, I guess, talking about, what? Possible financial compensation for tissue donation from aborted fetuses and talking specifically about how they tear the fetuses apart so they can save this tissue for harvesting? It’s — you hate to say it this early in the morning, but taxpayers are paying for this type of service. Mark, talk about this really quickly, since you brought this up.
HALPERIN: Well, look, leave the politics aside for a second, there are obviously still a lot of ethical issues, medical ethical issues still around from discussions we’ve had back when President Bush was still in office on stem cell research and other things. But the comments made in this video are troubling to a lot of people, not just Republicans, and I don’t think for Governor Perry and for others it’s a partisan issue, really. Read the rest of this entry »
…While the media usually rush to flood the zone on news stories — for a few weeks our media were obsessed with stories surrounding the Confederate flag, for instance — there has been a stunning blackout on this news story. Six hours after the news broke, here is how major media reported on the expose of Planned Parenthood:
In the video, Nucatola is at a business lunch with actors posing as buyers from a human biologics company. As head of PPFA’s Medical Services department, Nucatola has overseen medical practice at all Planned Parenthood locations since 2009. She also trains new Planned Parenthood abortion doctors and performs abortions herself at Planned Parenthood Los Angeles up to 24 weeks.
“We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part…”
— Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Senior Director of Special Resource Recycling
Nucatola admits that Planned Parenthood charges per-specimen for baby body parts, uses illegal partial-birth abortion procedures in order to get salable parts, and is aware of their own liability for doing so and takes steps to cover it up.
The footage shockingly depicts the top medical official at the Planned Parenthood corporation munching on her salad while she discusses the sale of body parts of unborn children victimized by abortions. She brazenly describes how the heads of unborn babies killed in abortions command top dollar.
The buyers ask Nucatola, “How much of a difference can that actually make, if you know kind of what’s expected, or what we need?” “It makes a huge difference,” Nucatola replies. “I’d say a lot of people want liver. And for that reason, most providers will do this case under ultrasound guidance, so they’ll know where they’re putting their forceps. The kind of rate-limiting step of the procedure is calvarium. Calvarium—the head—is basically the biggest part.”
Nucatola explains, “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
“And with the calvarium, in general, some people will actually try to change the presentation so that it’s
not vertex,” she continues. “So if you do it starting from the breech presentation, there’s dilation that happens as the case goes on, and often, the last step, you can evacuate an intact calvarium at the end.” Read the rest of this entry »
The judges, lawyers and law students were instructed to assess legal problems designed to gauge their political bias
Jacob Gershman reports: You often hear from liberals and conservatives that judges are too political, that, instead of calling balls and strikes, they allow their own ideological, political or religious views to steer legal opinions.
A new study says judges, at least ones sitting on state benches, are more objective than they get credit for. The report, forthcoming in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, says judges by and large are able to exercise professional judgement and reach consensus on disputes that polarize the general public.
“The experimental results furnished evidence strongly at odds with the conclusion that judges are influenced by political predispositions when they engage in legal reasoning.”
The study, which took more than two years to conduct, included about 1,500 subjects: 253 judges, 225 lawyers, 250 law students (from five schools including Harvard and Yale), and 800 adults members of the general public.
“Judges of diverse cultural outlooks—ones polarized on their views of the risks of marijuana legalization, climate change, and other contested issues—converged on results in cases that strongly divided comparably diverse members of the public.”
The judges, lawyers and law students were instructed to assess legal problems designed to gauge their political bias.
One sample scenario involved a police officer accused of violating a disclosure law that makes it a crime for a government official to intentionally leak confidential investigatory information about a private citizen.
There were two versions of that scenario — “prochoice” and “prolife” — and subjects were randomly presented one of them.
In the first, the officer supplied information to a ‘family planning’ abortion facility about a job applicant who secretly belonged to an anti-abortion group. In the “prolife” version, the officer leaked information to an anti-abortion family planning center about a job applicant who secretly belonged to a prochoice group. Read the rest of this entry »
It’s a shocking embarrassment given the fact the national Democrats had been promoting the event as a prebuttal to Paul’s big speech here, his first since announcing earlier this week he’s running for president of the United States.
“State Democrats here actually undercut the stance Debbie Wasserman Schultz has taken on abortion in response to a line of questioning Paul trapped her into after mainstream media reporters attempted to trip him up on the subject.”
In doing so, the state Democrats here actually undercut the stance Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) has taken on abortion in response to a line of questioning Paul trapped her into after mainstream media reporters attempted to trip him up on the subject. In fact, two high-ranking South Carolina Democrats—the vice chairwoman of the state party and the chairman of the Charleston city Democratic Party—went on record to defend aborting babies who weigh 7 pounds, which is in many cases mere days or weeks from birth.
“More reporters were in attendance than the legitimate number of Democratic candidates in South Carolina.”
“More reporters were in attendance than the legitimate number of Democratic candidates in South Carolina,” South Carolina GOP chairman Matt Moore said in an email to Breitbart News after the event, poking fun at the Democratic Party failures in his state. “Their bench is currently thinner than the Atlanta Braves’. If they were handing out speaking fees, Hillary might have attended.”
“Their bench is currently thinner than the Atlanta Braves’. If they were handing out speaking fees, Hillary might have attended.”
— South Carolina GOP chairman Matt Moore
Paul had been scheduled to roll out his South Carolina presidential campaign at the U.S.S. Yorktown later in the day—which he did, with reporters from outlets ranging from Breitbart News, the New York Times, Bloomberg Politics, to television networks and more present, along with hundreds of supporters including high-profile lawmakers.
“It’s a shocking embarrassment given the fact the national Democrats had been promoting the event as a prebuttal to Paul’s big speech here, his first since announcing earlier this week he’s running for president of the United States.”
But the night before Paul’s speech, national Democrats—in conjunction with the South Carolina Democratic Party—called for a press conference in the Commodore Room at the Charleston Harbor Resort to bracket Paul’s speech with negative criticisms about him from the left. Usually, such matters will garner at least a little bit of press.
“In advance of Rand Paul’s official campaign launch in South Carolina on Thursday, South Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Jaime Harrison and leaders from around the lowcountry will hold a press conference at the Charleston Harbor Resort at Patriots Point to discuss the damaging impact a Rand Paul presidency would have on young people, women, the middle class, and families across the Palmetto state,” the release sent out on Wednesday evening by national Democrats with the Democratic National Committee (DNC) read. “The state leaders will highlight the fact that no matter how desperately Rand Paul tries to rewrite his record, it’s impossible for him to hide from his reckless and outdated views during his launch in Mt Pleasant, or at any other point during the campaign.”
“Several minutes later, at this point well after the start time for the press conference, Harrison—the South Carolina Democratic Chairman—said they were waiting for a few other reporters to show up.”
After RSVP’ing and checking in with plans to show up, this reporter made his way to the event to see what the local Democrats had to say and maybe ask a question or two. Arriving around 10:15 a.m., this reporter was the first—and eventually would be the only—person to show up from the entire media, and the only person to show up who wasn’t there as part of the official Democratic Party delegation despite the fact that several reporters were in South Carolina from national media outlets. The rest of the five or six people at the event were Democratic Party activists, including Chairman Harrison. Two college students, who were aligned with the College Democrats and were supposed to speak if there was a press conference, walked in and sat down in the chairs. Read the rest of this entry »
Either way, it became depressingly clear that what they weren’t thinking about was the needs of vulnerable people, mostly young women and girls, who are the victims of sex trafficking.
“The answer was no. Democrats unfortunately seem to believe that response is in their political interest.”
The stalemate over the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 has now occupied two weeks, and with the Senate next set to take up the budget, it’s unclear when — or how — the impasse will be resolved. At issue in the legislation, which had been expected to glide through the Senate with bipartisan support, is a provision — backed by Republicans and initially overlooked by Democrats — that would prohibit a new trafficking-victims compensation fund from being used for abortions save for exceptions covered by the Hyde Amendment. Democrats didn’t like the application of Hyde restrictions to funds that are not taxpayer dollars — the compensation fund was to be drawn from criminal fines — and they objected to the anti-abortion provision being in place for five years.
Mr. Cornyn responded by offering to create the compensation fund with an annual congressional appropriation drawing on the fines. Since all such appropriations are already covered by the Hyde Amendment, there would be no change in the political status quo on abortion. “Can they take yes for an answer?” asked Mr. Cornyn on Thursday, contending, “We’ve made a proposal to them to give them what they’ve asked for.” The answer was no. Read the rest of this entry »