Sandra Fluke vs. Her Libido

Social Justice Lawyer Sandra Fluke

My guess is that Sandra Fluke will never ever work a day in her life. After a seemingly never ending ‘Career’ in academia, she is now running for state senate in California, where, she will never work a day in her life unless she turns to gun running (now there’s good work if you can find it). The Flukester recently wrote a op-ed piece for column for the Washington Post were she shrills in her title “the Supreme Court, a potential catastrophe for women’s rights”

Yes a catastrophe if the American corporations win the pending Supreme Court case that would allow them to not fund 2 out of 47 options for birth control. Oh the humanity, how will women’s health ever recover from such a draconian verdict? Here is the first paragraph of her column (emphasis mine):

A pair of potentially catastrophic cases will be argued before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. These cases are brought by privately held, for-profit corporations that are arguing their religious convictions should preclude them from offering employees the health insurance required by law. Specifically, these private employers don’t want to allow their employees’ insurance to cover some forms of birth control because, contrary to medical and scientific evidence, they believe some birth control causes abortions.

She goes on to go from the ridiculous to simple hyperbole.

Depending on the court’s rulings, the cases’ outcomes could deny millions of women coverage of any or all forms of birth control, limiting women’s ability to control their reproductive health, plan their pregnancies and manage their lives.

Yes and the studies have shown this to be, er, not true. The truth is that More than 99% of women aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method with the vast majority not asking their employer to pay for it! What Ms. Fluke is trying to say is that contraceptives are a woman’s right and should be subsidized by someone else. While the ultimate truth of the matter is, the act of sex is 99.999% an elective activity. By her argument, Is she suggesting that women cannot control their libido? Wait scratch that I don’t want to get into trouble like Governor Huckabee did.

The point is that Fluke is a liberal and being such, she cannot control her impulse to her intrinsic messianic delusion that she sees as  her duty to force her views upon everyone, including those of us who don’t want it. Her ‘duty’ is purely imaginary and born out of vanity not  public spirit. Her impulse isn’t altruism either it’s just her insatiable appetite to bend the public to her opinion.

Liberals solution for black unemployment?

Sign Language for Abortion

Just kill them all.

I found this last week from CNS News and I’ve been struggling with how to present it. It’s easy to poke fun of Liberals especially when they have the auto-blog writing machine that is Joe Biden. But this really pisses me off. According to the CNS News article there are more African-American induced terminations (abortions) than live births (emphasis mine) in 2012 in New York City:

The numbers show that in 2012, there were 31,328 induced terminations (abortions) among non-Hispanic black women in New York City.  That same year, there were 24,758 live births for non-Hispanic black women in New York City.  There were  6,570 more abortions than live births of black children.

In total, there were 73,815 abortions, which means the 31,328 black babies aborted comprised 42.4% of the total abortions.

42.4% of all elective abortion were performed on Black Women! That is an amazing number given that the entire black population is only 19.4% in New York City. And, the fun doesn’t stop there. Not content with just killing blacks, Planned Parenthood, where the vast majority of these ‘procedures’ take place, has set its site on Hispanics as well. According to the CDC, 73% of all abortions were performed on minority women when you include Hispanics:

Black and Hispanic abortions combined, 54,245 babies, is 73% of the total abortions in the Big Apple in 2012.

The number of non-Hispanic white abortions was 9,704, and the number of Asian and Pacific Islander abortions was 4,493.

It has been my experience that actions speak louder than words. Planned Parenthood, continually insists that their function is ‘Women’s Health’ - e.g. mammograms preventative medicine etc.  But it is clear to anyone who will look at the data that their true function is to carry out what their illustrious leader, Margaret Sanger, set as their goal 80 years ago.

Just for comparison sake let’s take a look at Planned Parenthood’s own website. Here’s their  mission statement from their website(emphasis and snarky comment mine):

Planned Parenthood believes in the fundamental right of each individual (with the exception of the unborn), throughout the world, to manage his or her fertility, regardless of the individual's income, marital status, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or residence. We believe that respect and value for diversity in all aspects of our organization are essential to our well-being. We believe that reproductive self-determination must be voluntary and preserve the individual's right to privacy. We further believe that such self-determination will contribute to an enhancement of the quality of life (again with the exception of the unborn) and strong family relationships.

More from the website this under ‘History and Successes’:

Planned Parenthood is rooted in the courage and tenacity of American women and men willing to fight for women's health, rights, and equality. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, is one of the movement's great heroes. Sanger's early efforts remain the hallmark of Planned Parenthood's mission:

·         providing contraception and other health services to women and men

·         funding research on birth control and educating specialists and the public about the results

·         advancing access to family planning in the United States and around the world

Women's progress in recent decades — in education, in the workplace, in political and economic power — can be directly linked to Sanger's crusade and women's ability to control their own fertility.

Golly, that makes Ms. Sanger’s sound as if she should be canonized, right? Let’s take a look at what Saint Maggie actually said at the time she founded the baby killing factory that is Planned Parenthood (emphasis mine):

The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.

[We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities.  The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

And one point on that last quote. Since 1966, Planned Parenthood has given The coveted Margaret Sanger award to those who they see as moving their movement forward. In that year they gave out 4 awards and one was to the Reverend Martin Luther King. Looks like they are checking all the boxes to me.

Think I’m kidding about Planned Parenthood? Here is an article quoting a former employee describing the horror she encountered while working for PP. Here’s some of what she had to say:

"It was a money-grubbing, evil, very sad, sad place to work. I was always getting in trouble for talking too long to the girls, asking if they were sure they wanted to do this," Anderson said.

"You have to have so many [abortions] a month to stay open," she said. "In our meetings they'd tell us, 'If abortions are down, you could get sent home early and not get as many hours.'"

Anderson said she saw many women pressured into abortions they did not want, and detailed a number of instances in which minors were taken to the facility without a say or full knowledge of what they were facing.

"One young girl came in with her mom. She was about 16. Her mom had made the appointment. That's not supposed to be how it works. It's supposed to be the patient who makes the appointment. I checked her in, and she thought she was there for a prenatal checkup. The mom was pushing it. She blindsided her own daughter," she said.

And the horrors weren’t confined to the pre-procedure consultations.

Anderson also recalled one doctor at the facility talking to aborted fetuses, and recounted him saying, "Come on, little arm, I know you're here! Now you stop hiding from me!"

Want more good news?  Guess who helps fund this house of horrors?:

Planned Parenthood reported receiving a record $542 million in taxpayer support in fiscal 2012, marking a steady increase in government funding despite Republican-led efforts at the state and federal levels to cut off that stream. 

The funding figures were included in the abortion provider's annual report released Monday. The numbers showed roughly 45 percent of Planned Parenthood's budget now comes from taxpayer dollars.

That’s right folks, almost half of their budget comes from me and you. So when looking at it in its totality it is evident that Margaret Sanger’s legacy is alive and strong. Her mission to kill the undesirables, at least in New York, is nothing less that astonishing in its efficiency.

The kicker is that the black community continues, year after year, to vote for their own extermination.  In New York alone, the black birth rate is not even enough to keep up with population growth. How Liberals keep convincing these people to vote for them is truly beyond me.

Exit Question: Why, oh why, isn't the NAACP filing charges against the federal government for funding this organization?

Once again government is the answer

I found this report over at the Royal Society's web site called: People and the Planet Report. The purpose of the report is to emphasize the precariousness of the planet as it relates to population growth and the scarceness of resources and how badly the resources that do exist are poorly distributed. But the best part is their recommendations on how to avoid the looming catastrophe that awaits us (emphasis theirs):

Recommendation 1

The international community must bring the 1.3 billion people living on less than $1.25 per day out of absolute poverty, and reduce the inequality that persists in the world today. This will require focused efforts in key policy areas including economic development, education, family planning and health.

By 'international community' they mean the dysfunctional UN of course. But more importantly the 'reduce the inequality that persists in the world today' should give you the real purpose. You guessed it income redistribution on a global scale.

Recommendation 2

The most developed and the emerging economies must stabilise and then reduce material consumption levels through: dramatic improvements in resource use efficiency, including: reducing waste; investment in sustainable resources, technologies and infrastructures; and systematically decoupling economic activity from environmental impact.

'Investment in sustainable resources' read: the same pixie dust Obama and the greenies have been pandering for the last thirty years.

Recommendation 3

Reproductive health and voluntary family planning programmes urgently require political leadership and financial commitment, both nationally and internationally. This is needed to continue the downward trajectory of fertility rates, especially in countries where the unmet need for contraception is high.

Sandra Fluke would be so proud - international governments paying for other people to have sex without consequences!

Recommendation 4

Population and the environment should not be considered as two separate issues. Demographic changes, and the influences on them, should be factored into economic and environmental debate and planning at international meetings, such as the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and subsequent meetings.

Sweeeet - gotta get the climate change nonsense in there!

Recommendation 5

Governments should realise the potential of urbanisation to reduce material consumption and environmental impact through efficiency measures. The well planned provision of water supply, waste disposal, power and other services will avoid slum conditions and increase the welfare of inhabitants.

This is nothing short of the collectivists' wettest of wet dreams. Gotta get everybody close together because it is so much easier to control them when they are in one place and all services will be provided by the omnipresent government.

Recommendation 6

In order to meet previously agreed goals for universal education, policy makers in countries with low school attendance need to work with international funders and organisations, such as UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, IMF, World Bank and Education for All. Financial and non-financial barriers must be overcome to achieve high-quality primary and secondary education for all the world's young, ensuring equal opportunities for girls and boys.

By and large I could agree with this in principle, however, I do have a problem with the 'non-financial barrier'. And the greatest 'non-financial barrier' that exists are the varying types of governments around the world that they suggest we help and in many cases (North Korea, China, any one of the dysfunctional African countries) are run by tyrants/dictators who have no interest in educating the masses because it will only undermine their power.

How Liberals get their way

How is it that Liberals almost always get their way? Even though what they want is almost always bad policy often leading to disastrous consequences.

We have seen this in virtually every major liberal policy in the last 100 years. For example, Johnson's war on poverty which created our current welfare state. The liberals at the time hailed the ensuing legislation as the pinnacle of human development but in reality it has literally destroyed the black community.

Most of us are rational human beings, able to look at both sides of an issue and make the right choice. So how is it that the libs get remarkably bad policy through congress? Well, if you think about it their MO has changed very little since Woodrow Wilson, and it goes something like this:

1. Create a victim (blacks, illegal immigrants, college students w/o birth control, Gaia, etc.)
   
2. Exaggerate the plight of the victim (Protests, get on friendly media, protests some more, etc.)
   
3. Find a villain you can blame the plight of the victim on (Big Oil, big banks, big coal, rich, Koch Brothers, big insurance etc.)
   
4. Demagogue the villain (Fat-cat bankers, fat-cat oil execs, fat-cat fill in the blank).
   
5. Get your way!
   
6. Rinse and repeat
   

Don't believe me? Let's take the Sandra Fluke nonsense as one example. Nancy Pelosi wants abortions. I truly believe she thinks that killing babies is good policy but let's leave that for another post. Pelosi wants free birth control right? But if she just asks for it rational folks would tell her to take a hike. So what did she do: Check out the bullet points above:

1. Got a victim? (Poor broke college student who can't afford to have sex) Check!
   
2. Exaggerate the issue? ($3,000/year for condoms) Check!
   
3. Got a villain? (Big bad insurance companies/Republicans) Check!
   
4. Demagogue the villain? (Republicans WAGE WAR ON WOMAN'S HEALTH!) Big time check!
   
5. Get your way? Well we'll see.
   

Still not convinced? Look at what the public unions are doing in Wisconsin; how about when the Dems passed Obama care. In each case they followed the same MO.

Now none of this would work if we had an electorate that paid attention. But unfortunately many of us non-liberals have jobs and kids and many other things to worry about other than what the next lame brained idea Pelosi and her pals are about to come up with. And if for no other reason this is why these folks have to go.

It's one thing to have a wild-ass idea, but another altogether when these idiots actually get in a position to make them policy.

Keep your Womb out of my Wallet!

I saw this article by Carol Shea Porter over on the website Blue Hampshire Called: The GOP Birth Control Patrol. The article itself is the usual navel-gazing alarmist drivel you expect with any left leaning feminist: 'GOP wants to control women's access to contraceptives':

Their Republican leaders' intrusion into matters that are none of their or the government's business just doesn't seem real. Would one of their top two candidates for President really rail against contraception?

This framing of the argument just exemplifies how entitled these people think they are. To barrow Obama's rhetorical tick - "Let me be clear" - No one is denying access to contraceptives. The problem we conservatives have is simply who pays for it. Porter and her ilk on one hand say it should be paid for by the evil insurance companies (which of course means that it will be their customers who actually pay for it), and then on the other she laments how the GOP wants to 'get into her business'.