Posts Tagged → abortion
Abortion is now the issue?
Suddenly abortion is the political issue on Election Day?
Strange how it took yet another fake issue like this to galvanize a certain voter base. I myself was more bothered by Biden calling all Trump supporters “garbage” last week, than fake hype about “Trump will take away your abortion.” On the one hand, we are talking about at least 150 million Americans who, according to various personalities on the far Left, are “deplorables,” or “garbage,” or “extremists” because a bunch of moms and dads went to school board meetings. On the other hand, how many women (we know how to identify women now, don’t we!) get abortions every year? Not that many.
Abortion is not mentioned in the US Constitution because it was considered a horror in the 1780s. No one clamored for a personal freedom to kill babies back then, except savages. So when the US Supreme Court recently returned abortion policy back to the states where it had always been and always belonged up until Roe v. Wade, a lot of Americans cheered. Because it made sense: On the one hand we have Kamala Harris saying she is going to take away our guns, which are explicitly protected by the Second Amendment, and on the other hand Kamala Harris is also talking about free abortions for everyone, men, women, children, babies, including up to old age…and abortion/ murder of born people is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution.
Because to kill a breathing person is murder.
Kamala has a huge disconnect on the Constitution, she is at war with the Constitution, and Americans need to be protected from her. The Constitution is what protects We, The People from a government gone rogue.
President Trump made it clear he supported moving abortion policy back to the states, and that is where it will remain. What is the point of pursuing it further? Trump knows that it is a lose-lose political issue, and he also knows that it is an issue of changing hearts and minds, not forceful legislation.
Abortion as a political issue is a question about how the hell Americans ever became enamored of it. How it morphed into being called “health care,” the little human a “piece of protoplasm,” and the actually born alive baby…just left to die on a stainless steel table somewhere, which is infanticide/murder. How coarse!
I am married, and I have daughters, and I have a mother, and I understand women wanting control of their body. But the definition of abortion has moved way way beyond anything a civilized culture ever contemplated. This is no longer about control of one’s body, it has become control over the cold blooded execution of someone else.
This subject is not going to be solved with laws. Just like it is already against the law to murder and rape people, and yet lots of murders and rapes happen, especially with Kamala’s wide open borders. It all comes down to frame of mind, state of mind, culture, values, family, and yes, church/temple. These have to be addressed and changed at the street level, inside homes. Laws are not going to change people.
Trump has repeatedly said he has no desire or ability to deal with the abortion issue any longer. And while I agree with him on fact, I think that is a shame, because the one thing we need on this subject are people in leadership roles appealing to our better natures, to our hearts and minds. Freedom is the ability to protect yourself, not to murder someone.
Janelle Stelson vs Scott Perry for Congress
We have a real contest for the congressional seat here in Southcentral Pennsylvania, currently held by Scott Perry. Former Republican, now-Democrat Janelle Stelson is the Democrat Party nominee to challenge Scott Perry, and how this will end is anyone’s guess.
Years ago, I met Janelle Stelson a few times in social settings, mostly arranged by her then-fiance. We met for dinner or lunch once, in Hershey, I think, and then at a Pennsylvania Environmental Council awards dinner in Harrisburg, where we sat together. Might be a third time, but my memory is hazy about things that happened earlier today, let alone meetings years ago. Point is, I have met Janelle and have a feel for her as a person.
My impression of Janelle Stelson: She is obviously a very attractive woman, poised, and often charismatic, and as a former reporter she has lots of experience in front of the studio news cameras. She is also very smart, very bright, highly articulate.
I do recall her political opinions running Moderate Republican. Like pro business, pro free markets, pro gun rights. She also held some liberal views on abortion and what I used to consider moderate views on environmental quality, but which have now (like so many other political issues) skewed hard to the far Left.
In sum, Janelle Stelson was a really impressive and enjoyable person to meet. Had she remained a moderate Republican, she would have been really attractive as a candidate. However, Janelle decided to toss all that moderate stuff over the side of the boat she was in, and become an arch Leftist Democrat. I do not really understand this choice, nor do I really believe it, or even respect it. Janelle’s decision to become a Democrat, and a very liberal one at that, who is way out of step with Central Pennsylvania voters, reeks of political opportunism.
And that scares me.
By definition, political opportunists are not settled people. They are not being forthright. They are subject to the whims of political tides and political machines, instead of captaining their own ship. And as I have received copious literature from Janelle’s campaign, my impression is that she is simply seeking power. Sorry Janelle, but I have to say Yuck. Had she remained the thoughtful moderate Republican, and challenged Scott Perry in the primary, I would have had total respect for her.
Scott Perry has been in political office a very long time. He and I ran in separate but congruent primaries at the same time in 2012, I for state senate and he for congress, and we shared a stage together several times in that process. At the time he was a state representative in the PA House. Scott has always been ambitious, which I have no real issue with. But I do have an issue with career politicians of either party, and I think this is the one criticism Janelle has leveled at Scott that is real.
However, on balance, I prefer a damned career politician I know, and mostly agree with, to someone like Janelle whose campaign is being run by one of the arch Leftists out of Washington DC, and whose financial support comes from the far Left. If she is elected, Janelle looks like she will be a puppet of the far Left, to which I say No Thank You. America cannot afford more of that, and Central Pennsylvania has never embraced that kind of extremist philosophy.
And no, Janelle, Scott Perry does not advocate for zero abortions, goodness gracious. What a silly allegation. Man, political campaigning really brings out the worst in people, the biggest piles of horse carp…any lie to win, I guess. Yuck.
I hope that Scott Perry wins this race, and then retires from politics. Maybe take a role in the next Trump administration. Hand the baton on to some other citizen who has not yet had an opportunity to serve in elected office. No more stepping stone step ladders for wannabe careerists, this congressional seat should be open to someone new to politics.
Yes, Scott has been a leader of the anti-establishment anti-DC Swamp Congressional Freedom Caucus, which has been refreshing, but in my mind, all congressmen are like milk in the refrigerator…they just need to be drunk up when they are fresh, and poured out when they have been there too long.
I voted for Scott Perry already, but I sat and looked at the ballot a good long time before I colored in his name. Oh, the things that could have been with Janelle, had she remained Republican and not joined the ever-farther-lefter Democrat Party of Lenin and Stalin and Marx.
Who knows, maybe Janelle Stelson will win and happily surprise us with her more moderate personality and high intelligence, but I doubt it. I felt safer betting on and voting for the person I already know and trust, and that was Scott Perry.
One dad’s Father’s Day question to young Americans
Hi kids. Today is Father’s Day, a card company-inspired day for Americans to spend money on things like cards and gifts. It is a blatantly commercial event, but in the grand scheme of things, there are worse things to celebrate than fatherhood. Like an entire month dedicated to a person’s private sexual practices. I can make a strong case for June being Gardening Month.
Along with Motherhood, Fatherhood has been the guiding idea of the healthy and safe human family for probably close to a hundred thousand years: Physical protection from predatory animals and humans, life guidance in a world full of pitfalls and confusion, passing on skills and knowledge in a competitive world where making a living to stay alive and out of poverty is not easy. In short, fathers have been the other half of a successful family since the dawn of our species.
So don’t forget to call, email, text, or send a card to your dad today. Show some appreciation, even if your dad is occasionally foolish, an assh*le, selfish, whatever. The truth is, this man created you (with your mother), and you are here only because of him. Your life exists because of him.
So, in my role as a dad I have a question for the young people in America right now: Why are any of you supporting the main source of uncertainty that you face in the world’s greatest nation?
America went from a powerful and successful economy in 2020 to a continued and purposeful self-destructive free-fall from 2021 to today, with high inflation that eats away at the value of the Dollar in your pocket, fewer and fewer jobs, fewer good jobs, higher fees and taxes, millions of illegal invaders pouring over our borders who impose huge costs directly on you, and a huge amount of uncertainty now facing you.
There is just one source for all of this uncertainly: The political Left, which includes the mainstream media, academia, the government schools, the teacher’s unions, government bureaucracies, and the Democrat Party.
Not to mention all of the censorship, the attempt to control your words, your thoughts, your freedom to spend your money the way you want, your freedom to travel when and how you want. I could go on, but there is just one source for all of this effort to control everything you do and think and say: The political Left.
You say that abortion is your number one issue? Why? What on earth makes you feel empowered about ending the life of another person on demand, on a whim, without any thought or consideration? Don’t you think this is a weak approach to a literal life-and-death issue?
Did your parents treat you like a whim and just tear your little body apart and flush you down a drain? No, because you are here reading these words, probaby because your Father and Mother valued you and your presence on Planet Earth as a living human.
And if you think abortion is a constitutional issue, well, that has been dealt with in recent years. You can choose to live in a state that supports abortion on demand, if that is what is most important to you. As a dad, I find this a confusing motivator, but each to her own…just how many abortions do you plan on having?
For the constitutionally uneducated, abortion is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, mostly because abortion was frowned upon for the vast amount of human existence. Especially in 1787, when the Constitution was being ratified. Children (like you, who were not aborted and are therefore reading these words here and now) were almostly always welcome, not seen as burdens.
But the argument can and has been made that abortion involves some self-rule over one’s body, because the Constitution blocks the government from having unfettered access to your person, place, and things, and it is hard to argue with that on principle. And so abortion has become legal in many places. This is the Yin and Yang of a dynamic America.
Consider how your perception of abortion rights compares to the general mainstream media discussion of self defense and firearm rights, which the Second Amendment expressly says “...shall not be infringed...” while in Pennsylvania our state constitution says the right to own and carry firearms “...shall not be questioned...” Universal abortion rights are presented as absolute and unquestioned, despite being found nowhere in our founding documents or debates, while the mainstream media complex constantly presents private citizens owning guns as completely up for debate, even though this is an actual right expressly enshrined in our founding documents.
This has been a bit of a digression from our initial question above, but the point has to be made, especially for young people: How you perceive yourself and your rights and your freedom and opportunities is largely influenced by the far-Left that has a death grip on academia, schools, and media.
As a loving dad on Father’s Day today, I encourage the young people who have stumbled upon this essay to really consider your future. Think hard and long about the causes of your scary future and the bedrock support most of us get from our family and dad. The political Left and its primary agent, the Democrat Party, is at war with family, with motherhood, with fatherhood, with your economic future and your personal freedoms and choices.
Everyone else is extending a helping hand to you. This essay is my way, as a loving, caring and understanding father, of helping you young people get your bearings. You know this, and you should vote like you know this.
To all the dads out there: Today we all salute you, and thank you, for doing your best to help guide us through our life.
My body, my….self…?
My sense is that abortion was the issue of this week’s mid-term election. After all, all of the digital online advertising I received about Fetterman, Shapiro, and Mastriano was about that one issue. And Democrat Party poll workers confirmed their own belief that abortion would galvanize their voters. It seems to have worked, and fended off what was touted as a “red wave” of conservative response to failed governance in Washington DC.
My mind wanders back to 1972 or 1973, when I was a young kid, but old enough to become self aware. My hippie parents had the Our Bodies, Our Selves book laying out in the living room. When no adults were around I would look at this book and marvel at the array of hairy women parading their naked bodies in it. At an early age, then, I determined that naked woman was good, hairy was not good. One idea that sticks in my mind (having long ago eradicated the book’s “natural” images from my memory banks) is the novel concept that a person’s body is their own.
I think freedom-loving Americans can emphatically agree on this, that a person’s body is their own and nobody else’s. Where Americans diverge from one another is what is our body? Is it just the living, walking adult body, or does that also include young humans growing inside of it?
Reasonable people can and should debate this subject, and if pro-Life advocates want to make headway politically and culturally, then they have got to do a much better job explaining their perspective on when human life begins, why it is sacred, and how abortion-on-demand is not a my body, my self policy issue, but rather an “our bodies intertwined together” humanity issue. They must do a much better job, as this week’s election results demonstrate (assuming no election fraud occurred, which in some states is once again already obvious and in-your-face to the point of training voters to regularly accept it from one political party).
To be fair to the pro-Life anti-abortion voters, advocates, and candidates like Doug Mastriano, a lot of Americans felt like the two-year Covid1984 plandemic was one gigantic official assault on the idea of Our Bodies, Our Selves. A lot of voters this week showed up to vote against the unconstitutional government overreach, official lies, official illegalities, and government personnel self-enrichment that characterized the past two years of Covid1984. They thought other Americans felt the same.
Draconian lockdowns to the point of absurdity (lone sea kayakers being surrounded by heavily armed police boats and arrested for violating a “public health code,” sunbathers sitting totally alone on a beach, and married couples sitting alone in their car at scenic overlooks being similarly mistreated by aggressive police officers etc.), pointless and highly damaging school closures, useless mask requirements, and dangerous fake vaccine requirements that are now yielding an enormous number of vaccine-caused injuries and deaths, all and every aspect of the Covid1984 experience was one huge pile of Our Bodies, Our Selves books being symbolically burned by government staffers and leftist political activists in a joyous ceremony to mark the end of the idea that your body is yours and yours alone, and to emphasize that the government, their government, can do to you whatever it wants whenever it wants.
Conservative voters and candidates mistakenly thought that leftists would be consistent in their body sovereignty thinking, that everyone else felt the same (logically consistent) as conservatives about this disaster, and that they would vote accordingly.
And this is the confusing part of this my body, my self as a public policy issue and debate subject. On the one hand we have a lot of Americans who were and still are being severely damaged by the government’s purposefully bad handling of Covid1984, and they are pushing back. (Despite the Biden DOJ’s designation of them as “domestic terrorists” for merely speaking out in official taxpayer-funded venues.)
And on the other hand we have a lot of Americans who think that not only is the government’s brutal and useless Covid1984 overreach into your body and your body choices great public policy, but that the use of crushing government coercive force to implement it and force you to comply or be destroyed was just great, too. And yet a lot of these same people are the pro abortion Our Bodies, Our Selves believers who were animated enough to show up to vote this week.
This is confusing because it is inconsistent. Choice should be choice…right?
If you spend time reading this blog, then you already know I am not enamored of liberal/ leftist thinking, because I cannot make it make sense. And to be fair, most leftists and liberals I speak with about this are quite honest about it: They don’t care about logic, reason, or being consistent. They want their political issues the way they want them, and to hell with your criticisms.
In a democratic nation and in a Western Civilization based on logic, reason, debate, and persuasion, we have a conundrum here. Americans are talking right past each other, and not just about our bodies being sovereign from outside forces. Americans are failing to communicate with each other on a whole array of political and cultural topics. I am firmly on the side of reason, logic, and reasoned debate being at the center of our governance process, and so I stand firmly with the dreaded “conservatives.”
But I will say this to the conservatives, like governor candidate Doug Mastriano: If you are going to make the elimination or regulation of abortion your main public policy goal, then you had damned well better explain it to the public very carefully, frame it in context of the 2020-2022 Covid1984 government assault on Americans’ bodies, and you had better not do any interviews where snippets of your public statements can be used to paint you into a corner. At least half of America is not able or willing to discuss this subject, and to them only the axe-murdering abortion of a helpless and sacred child is their singular and joyous right; what the government does to their bodies the other 99% of the time is the business of the government and none of their own. They are not thinking clearly about this, and candidates must work hard to connect the abortion dot to the Covid1984 dot for future voters. Or don’t work on it, and shut the hell up about it.
And I will also say this to the liberals/ leftists: Your apparent worshiping of abortion as an act, to the point of killing the living, viable child at birth, makes you look like a primitive bloodthirsty death cult. This is not civilized behavior by people who advocate for myriad other intrusive government policies “if it saves just one child.” So long as you inhabit this childish shadowland of disconnected and strongly contrasting public policies, your fellow Americans will understandably deride you as foolish children who actually hate children.
Does this book also apply to the victims of bad government policies on Covid? If not, then there is no body sovereignty for anyone
Three more, very brief, thoughts about Roe v. Wade
With the US Supreme Court addressing the policy question of abortion by simply returning it to the fifty states to decide themselves individually (and not in any way ending all abortion ever), a lot of silly hot air has been exuded in response over the past two weeks. And also a lot of terroristic death threats against the US Supreme Court justices have been made, too, by the usual “we represent all peace and love and justice” people. Some of these threats being made right outside their homes, and some while the Justices are eating at Morton’s Steak House in DC. You know, only the real basic elements of democratic process at play….at least according to the Biden Administration, which refuses to implement the federal law that categorically prohibits people from protesting or picketing outside the homes of judges. Because of threats n stuff.
So all this activity inspires yours truly to add three more real simple, brief thoughts on this subject:
- Everyone reading this…be thankful…you were not aborted,
- Proponents of unlimited abortion on demand have become unbelievably callous about human life and body autonomy, even while simultaneously demanding that Americans/ Canadians/ Europeans automatically, unconditionally, unquestioningly submit their bodies to mysterious government injections and body movement passports and chip implantations to force our physical compliance with government bureaucrats. Is there any logical consistency among these human death cult people? Do you guys ever think through your policy positions? Do you value logical consistency?
- The intellectual wackiness and slovenly behavior of the pro-abortion-all-the-time advocates is so extreme that even satire about it is actually funny: Meet Satan.
Abortion activist Satan specifically thanks the useless, spineless Republicans and their leader Mitch McConnell (Source: Babylon Bee)
Roe v. Wade was never about abortion
Like so many other far-reaching court decisions, or laws, or executive orders emanating from Washington, DC, Roe v. Wade was originally cast publicly as something it actually wasn’t.
Yes, on its face Roe v. Wade was about abortion, the termination of human life while still inside the mother’s body. But in fact, the way the court’s decision was structured, it was the exuberantly creative legal theory behind the Roe decision that was most important. And it was that legal theory that laid the ground work for so much of the openly political activist behavior we see emanating from way too many judges and federal bureaucrats across America.
Roe v. Wade was decided within a time of great social turmoil and cultural change, and a lot of the contemporaneous political activism pressure from the Left is visible in Roe. Especially the twin evil sisters of moral relativism and intellectual relativism. One example is the in-artfully creative use of the word “penumbra,” a sort of shadowy shadow that reputedly lay over so many different amendments to the US Constitution that clearly listing them all was just too tiring to Roe’s authors. Yes, the Court majority invoked aspects of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and went on to stitch together a pseudo- logical framework for legal decision (then using the 14th Amendment) making that is still with us today.
Vagueness as a reason for heavy handed policy is now the Left’s standard. “Because we told you to do it” is the way that is spelled out.
Every professor who taught me constitutional law was a liberal, and every single time any one of them delved into Roe, a smirk was on their face. Lots of eye rolling and chuckling accompanied these professors’ analysis of the poor legal reasoning behind the decision. Which meant to me then, and even more so now, that no one with real constitutional law training believed Roe was a legitimate legal decision based on actual logic, law, and fundamental constitutional principles. Rather, all the liberals who exulted in Roe did so because it backdoor-attained a policy goal they could not achieve through the legislative process, and because it established a mush-headed standard for all future legal decisions.
So today, some fifty years after Roe v. Wade-type legal analysis has wafted its way throughout the legal profession, the courts, and the bureaucracy, we see the ultimate and inevitable result of such a “creative” legal approach: Although the Second Amendment says crystal clearly that citizens may both keep and publicly bear firearms, and that this right shall not be infringed, a zillion policy makers and courts blatantly ignore 2A’s plain wording and just start throwing anti-gun policy ideas into the pot. These judges give no respect to what the Constitution actually says; rather, they use their court rooms purely for writing policies that fit their political views. Same goes for ATF bureaucrats.
I blame Roe v. Wade for where our court system is now. And where it is now is not just political policy shops in black robes, but we have defiant leftist activists in black robes, who simply ignore the Supreme Court’s precedents and make their own damned ruling. Even if their damned ruling is totally contrary to a US Supreme Court decision from just weeks or months ago. This approach is junk law, and it calls into question the entire field of jurisprudence. It highlights in just one more way how the Left is hell bent for leather to implement its political policy goals, at whatever cost to America’s legal and cultural fabric.
In case you don’t know it, when a lower court openly defies the Supreme Court, the entire court system is thrown out the window. We then have nothing but anarchy.
So, when the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade two weeks ago, it was not surprising to see the Left melt down, as if their ability to kill babies had in fact been fully deprived of them. After all, when a person sees every branch of government as nothing more than a policy shop devoid of logical process, then everything becomes about winning or losing the policy war. Here the Left feels they have lost, when in fact, all this recent Court decision did was turn the issue over to the various states (No, Barack, there are not 57 states). Where actual voters get to choose how they want their state government to address what should be a sensitive subject.
(The same 1960s and 1970s people who had just protested against American soldiers as “baby killers” in Vietnam then became the biggest champions of killing babies…go figure).
To its proponents and supporters, Roe v. Wade was never really about abortion or babies, it was about introducing a weak-minded, unprincipled, grab-what-you-can “by any means necessary” approach to forming government policy. And in fact one of the main reasons I left my US EPA policy job in Washington, DC, was because I personally witnessed many regulations and rules being formed exactly this way, where (liberal/ Left) agency staff would literally just imagine a bunch of shit and put it in the regulation or rule. Justified or no, or extra cost to industry and consumers be damned. It is a terrible way to run representative government. But it is the way that Roe taught liberals and Leftists to think about government.
As a proponent of good government, where transparency and accountability are everyday occurrences for the taxpayers, I am glad that Roe is gone. Now the politically difficult part of democracy is upon all of us: Figuring out how many babies people can kill, when, and where. Based on my principles, I would expect this democratic process to follow a certain logic path. But we are not dealing with principles here, but rather a passion on the Left for absolute control. And they don’t like losing control. Or thinking hard. Or debating issues with evidence and cross-examination and due process.
Should be interesting going forward.
As if Liberals couldn’t look worse…congrats
Liberals in recent years have staked out strange policy positions totally the opposite of where their political party (Democrat) held even ten or twenty years ago. Many of their policy positions seemed so odd as to be almost eccentric or naively cute, like the ever-evolving global cooling\ global warming\ climate change business, or opposing voter identification requirements, or elevating once-private sexual practices into cult status complete with public displays of religious fealty (like obviously cross dressing in order to be noticed).
Then the party embraced hatred of Jews, policy positions calling for the end of Israel, mass civilian disarmament, socialism and wealth redistribution, post-birth infanticide posing as “abortion,” and an almost giddy and unembarrassed claim on American blacks as de facto slaves forever to the Democrat Party.
As a result, a whole movement (#walkaway) has begun an exit out of the Democrat Party, not because it is no longer the party of JFK, who today would be one of the most outspoken and conservative Republicans in politics. Rather, many Americans are now becoming former Democrats because the party today is not even close to the party of Bill Clinton. Someone who has been a Democrat for thirty, forty, even fifty years cannot possibly recognize the current political party as the one she or he started with. The differences between now and then are night-and-day stark.
So if one wondered if the Democrat Party and its liberal political allies could achieve even greater outlier status, more bizarre policy positions against the basic interests of Americans, even greater distance from where the party was just a year or two ago, well, your curiosity has been answered by the very immediate events surrounding the demise of terrorist mastermind Qasem Soleimani and his sponsor, Iran.
As of this morning, every single Democrat politician is taking the side of Iran and the deceased Soleimani, and criticizing the side of American safety and security. It demonstrates that if President Donald J. Trump does something, anything, the entire Democrat Party immediately has a hysteric meltdown with false outrage and Looney Tunes accusations about it, even if it greatly damages America. They are so opposed to President Trump that they are now openly embracing America’s sworn enemy, Iran, and in their own defense Iranian officials are literally re-stating the exact words spoken by Democrats in America.
America’s enemies take heart from this, because they can use the Democrats to undermine America from the inside, and weaken us.
Former president Barack Hussein Obama bragged that he was “pretty good at killing people,” after he began using American drones to target anti-America terrorists. Including the most revered austere religious leader Al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old born-in-Denver American citizen son, who were having lunch together when Obama’s Hellfire missile made a mess of their food and everything else. Nobody anywhere on the Left criticized this act, nor any others Obama did; certainly not Democrats, and very few Republicans, except a couple concerned about US citizens being deliberately bombed by American bombs.
Americans see this dichotomy. They know that Soleimani was an arch terrorist who had killed hundreds of American soldiers, as well as thousands of American allies, thousands of Iranian demonstrators, and plenty of non-combatants from the Middle East to Africa to South America. Soleimani was not a good human being, Iran’s government is the embodiment of evil, and yet the Democrat Party has openly taken their side.
The Democrat Party has thrown all Americans under the bus and tossed a few Iranian IED bombs in for good measure. It is as if our lives simply do not matter, and criticizing the president, at great cost to American safety and security, is all that does matter.
At some point, normal Americans have to say “This is not my political party any longer. The Democrats no longer represent me or my beliefs.”
And those people who do continue to embrace the Democrat Party, despite the party’s latest act of treason and anti-America lunacy, are making a bold statement that they just do not care what other Americans and the rest of the civilized world think, that they have a greater loyalty to a political party going over a cliff than to the good nation that employs them, protects them, feeds them. This is a big achievement, because Liberals have been slowly drifting away from an American identity for years, and in just one week Liberals have gone into warp speed and into a distant galaxy where no normal person can see or recognize them.
US President John F. Kennedy: 1962, Democrat Party leader…2020, Far-right-wing Republican and pro-America patriot. What happened?
The Angry President, The Angry Citizen
Reports across the media spectrum describe Obama as “angry,” because the US Senate shot down lousy, unconstitutional proposed legislation yesterday. Guns are bad, goes that silly narrative.
If Obama is so angry about lousy policy, is he willing to get into the current trial of Dr. Gosnell, the Philly abortionist who professionally killed (murdered) perhaps dozens of children born fully alive, many of whom were crying or making other sounds associated with childbirth as the sharp objects were inserted into their skulls?
The same trial that the mainstream press has steadfastly refused to cover from Day One, as if that refusal to report itself is not a clear indication of an active agenda to suppress information and facts contrary to the beliefs and values of the reporters supposedly leading the charge for a more transparent America.
The disgust I feel for Dr. Gosnell is only slightly more than I feel for a president who refuses to acknowledge what his policies have lead to in Philly. In fact, it makes me plain angry. Guess I am in good company, or lousy company, as it may be judged…
Militia
Militia
By Josh First
January 3, 2013
[PHOTOS ARE COMING]
Along with other beautiful stained glass windows dedicated to free speech and religion, “Militia” is just another large, elaborate stained glass window in the Pennsylvania State Capitol building (photo above).
This window’s prominent place in the Capitol is no accident, as the free citizen militia were fundamental to being an American citizen, and formative in founding the nation. After all, it was a free citizen militia (photos below) that was so determined to hold on to their liberties (now yours) that they literally faced down the world’s greatest super power, shooting only when they saw the whites of their hardened enemy’s eyes.
Like the other rights in the Bill of Rights, belonging to the militia is an individual right. No central or national army can supplant it. It is the exact purpose of the citizen militia to act as a counterweight to a centralized army or National Guard. As the Second Amendment so clearly states, you can’t belong to a militia unless you are armed with a military-quality arm, that you own and keep in your possession, as the original militia did.
Militia is not the heavily regulated, structured, centralized Army or National Guard of today; well-regulated meant muster rolls were kept. Militia was always a grass roots, citizen-led counterbalance to national governments, whether of Britain or the new United States. Unless the National Guard reports only to the local citizens or state governors, then it is not the heir to or the modern representation of the founding militia. The militia were and must remain separate from the central (national) government and its standing army.
The Bill of Rights does not describe governmental rights. All ten of its amendments describe and reserve citizens’ individual rights and liberties, and set limits on government power. Who creates a “Bill of Rights” that grants the central government the “right” to make an army and disarm the citizens? The fact that Americans have owned firearms since the beginning demonstrates the clear intent of the Bill of Rights. Whether or not some of today’s Americans are aware of, or comfortable with some Constitutional rights and obligations, they exist nonetheless. This is who we are. It’ll take a Constitutional amendment to change the Second Amendment, if you don’t like it. And changing it could lead to a second civil war, because the Second Amendment guarantees all the other amendments, and, like the Revolutionary War militia, free citizens are still willing to fight for their liberties.
Let’s talk more about that supposed potential change to the Constitution.
Gun prohibitionists are now pursuing an orgy of unconstitutional laws that exponentially grow government intrusion and end citizenship as defined since the birth of America. Do gun prohibitionists and anti-gun politicians really believe that freedom-loving Americans will just roll over and “turn them all in,” as US Senator Dianne Feinstein so casually says? I guarantee you a massive, defiant, and probably violent dissenting reaction across the nation in response to such an effort, if not an outright armed rebellion. Political elites like Feinstein and their fellow urbanites have little contact with “fly-over country,” so they do not know, care, understand, or respect the views of their fellow citizens there.
Statists, like Feinstein, whose greatest goal is a big government involved in citizens’ lives from cradle to grave, are deaf and blind to the kind of vehement resistance now brewing among tens of millions of citizens. Many, many Americans feel and see the America they knew and loved being transformed into an unrecognizable juggernaut aimed at controlling citizens’ lives and erasing their liberties. Seething beneath the surface of daily life is an increasing, simmering frustration and mistrust. It’s one thing to beat them at the ballot box. It’s another thing altogether to aim to disarm them.
These citizens know that the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen. The more the government does, the less the citizen can do. To them, government is a direct threat, not a solution.
Gun control already exists in overbearing quantity; new laws that would take away guns from law-abiding Americans are exactly the kinds of unconstitutional assaults on individual liberty that the Second Amendment was designed to repel and that the citizen militia was created to address. Using democracy to achieve undemocratic results has been the method of extremists from both Left and Right; with the latest wave of proposals, gun prohibitionists reveal their own extremism.
Draft resistors, anti-government dissenters, and assorted protests have been historic hallmarks of one part of the electorate. Will Second Amendment-rights activists have to carry their God-given guns on a Million Man March to Washington, DC, carrying today’s equivalent of the 1776-era military-grade musket, the AR-15, to get their point across?
Pro-abortion activists have long stated matter-of-factly that legally prohibiting abortion won’t end abortion, and that those who want one will seek it out, legal or not, safe or not. Well, folks, tens of millions of Americans are about to have that equivalent experience with their guns, taking them into the back alleys, yards, and woods, where they will have them, despite whatever the government may say. Such defiance is what created America. Let’s hope it doesn’t end up re-creating it.
Adam Lanza’s insane massacre of school children in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, is so painful, so emotionally scarring that I will never be the same person I was the day before it occurred. My three children are as gentle, innocent, defenseless, and precious to me as those children were to their parents, and the thought of losing mine or theirs in such a cruelly violent way is too much to contemplate. My heart aches for the Sandy Hook parents. My fury rises at the incompetent parole board that unleashed murderer William Spengler to murder again, this time the brave firefighters who rushed to douse his arsonist blaze in Webster, NY. Blame enough to go around, but the actual problem-solving is hard.
Let me try: Does Hollywood really have an unfettered, unaccountable right to use its power of suggestion to continually encourage cruel, unchecked violence across America? During the recent Benghazi debacle, weren’t we told that the First Amendment doesn’t necessarily confer a right to make a movie that might incite violence? Thus, if Hollywood wants to continue marketing sadistically happy murder carnage from Django Unchained and the equally moronic Gangster Squad, why don’t all movies and video games with a modern gun in them have to pay a 50% ‘violence mitigation fee’ on each ticket sold? Use that money to put armed guards in schools, gratis Quentin Tarantino and Sean Penn.
In sum, disarming innocent citizens will not succeed, at least not without forcing millions into long-neglected, perhaps forgotten, well-regulated militias to defend their rights. Using emotional crises to immediately demand sweeping new laws is irresponsible. Can cooler heads prevail? Let us hope and pray so.
Stay in the conversation at www.joshfirst.com and on our Facebook page.
The Militia:
You, the citizen, are still the militia. America is yours.