Tag Archives: abortion

THE CAMPAIGN ISSUES – WHERE EACH CANDIDATE STANDS (Part One)

I don’t think anyone would disagree with me that this presidential election campaign has been the most contentious in the history of the United States. In addition to being contentious, the campaign features candidates who are simply not well liked by the American voters. Because we live in an imperfect world, some mud-slinging is going to take place. Most people expect it and if the truth be known, most people enjoy a little bit of it. However, with this election cycle, it appears that most folks are sick of the contentiousness, but the press keeps on reporting on it, often times ignoring the actual issues.

This leads me to author this article outlining where candidates actually stand on the issues. The United States of America is in bad shape. The policies of Barak Obama and the Democrats have all but destroyed this country as we know it. The economy, while growing ever so slightly, is nothing short of anemic. During Obama’s first two years in office, The Affordable Care Act was rammed down our throats using every legislative trick in the book, including threats and intimidation. The Middle East is a mess due to Obama’s foreign policy; plus, our relations are strained with our only ally in the Middle East, Israel. Relations are also strained with our other allies across the globe. In addition to the above, Islamic terrorist attacks are taking place in the United States and the current administration, continues to refuse to address the problem head-on, and considers the problem the result of gun violence.

If elected to the presidency, Democrat nominee, Hillary Clinton plans to continue in the steps of the Obama administration in leading the country. Republican nominee, Donald Trump, has different ideas, acknowledging the country is in bad shape and needs a new direction.

The following will serve to compare and contrast the differences between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on the issues most important to the American people.

Obamacare

Donald Trump: Obamacare should be repealed Health insurance should be allowed to be sold across state lines. Premiums should be tax deductible. Allow Health Savings Accounts for individuals. Block grants to states for Medicaid instead of cost sharing.

Hillary Clinton: Expand Obamacare with three free sick visits before the deductible kicks in. Tax credits for premiums and out of pocket expenses over 8.5% and 5% respectively. Expand Medicaid through 100% matching funds to states for three years and more funding for enrollment programs.

Immigration

Donald Trump: Build a wall on the Mexican border and get Mexico to pay for it. Allow legal Immigration. Triple the number of ICE officers, deport all criminal aliens, defund sanctuary cities, end birthright citizenship, and increase the prevailing wage for H1-B visas.

Hillary Clinton: Supports the Dream Act and a path to legalization for illegal immigrants which includes learning English and paying fines. Toughen penalties for hiring illegal immigrants. She voted for a fence along the Mexican border and supports Obama’s executive action.

Abortion

Donald Trump: At one time was pro-choice, but now is pro-life. He is favor of outlawing abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or life of mother. Is supportive of non-abortion services provided by Planned Parenthood.

Hillary Clinton: Is a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade and does not oppose restrictions on late pregnancy abortions. Feels that judges should protect women’s rights. Was rated 100% by NARAL. Vehemently opposes defunding of Planned Parenthood.

This concludes part one of the series on where Donald Trump and Hillary stand on the issues. Over the next few days, I will continue the report on how these two presidential candidates differ. The website, diffen.com provided the information for this article. Thank you diffen.

Facebooktwitter

A DIVIDED REPUBLICAN PARTY – IS THAT SO BAD?

You cannot tune into political commentary without hearing about the divided Republican Party. Republicans admit it and Democrats use it against the Republicans. Fellow Republicans admit the party is divided and are hoping that its members will re-united before the November 2016 presidential election and elect a Republican president. The Democrats are using this so-called divided Republican Party to get more votes for Democrat candidates.

Is a divided Republican Party all that bad?

In the past, I have authored several blog posts illustrating the differences between Democrats and Republicans. In review, Republicans believe that items/issues should be handled in the private sector or the lowest level of government possible; whereas, Democrats believe in a stronger more centralized government. Republicans and Democrats – What’s the Difference

Is a divided Republican Party so bad?

Yes, the Republican Party has it’s disagreements. Smart people generally do.

Republicans frequently use the term, “government over-reach” to indicate areas in which the federal government has taken control over individual freedoms and areas once controlled by states or the private sector. Don’t you think that it would be natural for individual Republicans to disagree on what may constitute “government over-reach?”

Just the other day I had a brief online discussion with a person who was very “anti-Obama” and while he didn’t indicate that he was a Republican, I think he probably is. This person, however, is a proponent of the president’s new overtime directive whereby certain salaried professionals, those making $47,000 or less, must be paid overtime by employers when they work more than 40 hours per week. I think this directive is “the plague” and will be a giant leap in destroying corporate America. This gentleman and I, both Republicans, disagreed.

The abortion issue was another issue in which Republicans were quite divided on, especially in the eighties and nineties. Many, many discussions ensued over abortion and still do today. However, with modern technology indicating that an embryo takes on many human characteristics immediately upon fertilization, the dialog of pro-choice versus pro-life is not as lively because many Republicans have converted from pro-choice to pro-life.

Democrats, on the other hand, simply and without apparent consideration, fall in lockstep with anything  the Democrat party leaders (the president, congressmen, and other party officials) declare. If it includes growing the government, raising taxes, especially on the rich, and deviating from any traditional moral behavior, the Democrats all fall in lockstep. There maybe one or two so-called conservative Democrats still left in Congress; Democrats like former Georgia Senator, Zell Miller, but for the most part these Democrats are a dying breed. Many such as Alabama Senator, Richard Shelby, have switched to the Republican Party; while many have passed away.

In addition to the fellow who felt that Obama’s overtime ruling was a good thing, I’ve had many discussions with Republicans on healthcare, the environment, abortion, gambling, taxation, affirmative action, LGBT rights, etc. A number of these Republicans have disagreed with me on many of these issues.  Also, there are many Republicans out there who will tell you that they are fiscal conservatives, but social liberals. This is common among many gay and minority professionals here in the south.

Republicans are not always going to agree with their presidents either. There were a few things where I differed from Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush. That’s because I think, I reason, I research, and I’m my own person, a unique individual.

Democrats/liberals/progressives will continue to shed a negative light on a so-called divided Republican Party and claim that Democrats are always united. Sometimes I wonder just how many Democrats actually agree with everything Barak Obama has done as president. There are those Democrats who do and readily admit to worshiping him.  I call those folks “Obama zombies.” Do other Democrats really feel that we need to immediately eliminate the use of fossil fuels and flip over to the more expensive and less “green energy?” Are they okay with the demonization of the nation’s law enforcement? Do they feel that the actions of the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter organizations in their protests are a good thing? Are they also okay with destroying a person’s life just because he or she believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman? I say we’ll never know the answer to these questions because many Democrats sit silent on these matters refusing to respond to questions. And when forced to respond, they become shrill and start hurling their usual bogus accusations at Republicans.

Facebooktwitter

HOW MANY LIES CAN LIBERALS TELL

If I didn’t know I was reading liberal rag, Politicus USA, I would have thought the article I was reading was talking about liberals. Politicus USA indicates in the first paragraph of an article, entitled “With a Stroke of His Pen, President Obama Renders Hobby Lobby Ruling Obsolete,” written by Rmuse and published on July 13, 2015, that in 21st Century America, evangelical Republicans are those who demand it is “their way of the highway.” WHAT? This is pure nonsense. It’s liberals that always demand their way and most the time get it. If there’s a close election between a Republican and a Democrat, most always the Democrat wins. There’s always that box of ballots in the trunk of some car with just enough votes cast for the Democrat candidate, and the ballots from military overseas didn’t arrive in time to be counted. Republican Scott Brown winning the Senate race in Massachusetts to replace the late Senator Edward Kennedy, giving the Democrats a 59-41 majority in the Senate, should have been the end of ACA. However, the Democrats used every legislative trick in the book plus threats and intimidation to pass ACA. They were not going to be denied. I could sight many more examples of Democrats demanding and getting their way, but that’s not the subject of this post.

Rmuse goes on to write that there is no greater example of Republicans having it their way than the religious Republican crusade to control women’s reproductive health; or better put, to force every woman in American into being perpetual birth machines. According to Rmuse, a popular evangelical talking point to support their demand for control over American women was they would not tolerate any woman, married or single, having “consequence free sex.” Then Rmuse stated that restricting birth control was the religious right’s method of punishing women who failed to tow the evangelical line and remain celibate of perpetually pregnant. The above is some of the most outrageous garbage that I’ve ever read that was authored by a liberal and as a political blogger, I’ve read a lot of garbage.

In Hobby Lobby v. Burwell, the United States Supreme Court ruled that: “As applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Health and Human Services regulations imposing the contraceptive mandate violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. HHS’s contraceptive mandate substantially burdens the exercise of religion under the RFRA. The Court assumes that guaranteeing cost-free access to the four challenged contraceptive methods is a compelling governmental interest, but the Government has failed to show that the mandate is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. That’s a mouthful and makes you think.

Rmuse rants and raves in this article and I have to admit that this unenlightened oaf had some trouble ascertaining what he was talking about. But it does appear that the author of this article believes that companies should provide all forms of birth control, including abortion, to its employees. He or she (I can’t tell by the name) also states that religious fanatics, and particularly Republican religious fanatics, are at the forefront of the war against any woman who believes that they have a right to choose when they give birth. How can this writer say such things with no basis?

First of all, there were only four types of birth control that Hobby Lobby did not want to cover: abortion, the morning after pill, IUDs, and one other. These forms of birth control kill the fertilized egg/ovum or the fetus. The other types and there’s a long list, including birth control pills, diaphragms, sponges, etc. are covered by Hobby Lobby’s insurance contract. Somehow, this writer translates an employer’s desire to cover a long list of birth control methods except for four into a war against women where religious fanatics, including Republicans want to restrict women’s reproductive right, forcing them to become birth machines or celibate. WHAT A CROCK!

I went to the Huffington Post for information on what was rendered with the current President’s pen stroke because Rmuse was so outrageous in his statements. According to HP, the Obama administration on Friday, July 10, issued its final rules for employers who morally object to covering birth control in their health insurance plans. The accommodation insures that all employed women, unless they work for a place of worship, will still have their birth control covered at no cost to them, even if their employers refuse to cover it.

So, the current President found a way around the Supreme Court ruling with his pen. He changes the law without going through Congress. So what else is new? We don’t have a President of the United States anymore, the current President is a dictator. He justifies his actions by indicating that he’s only doing what is best for the country because the Republicans in Congress won’t pass pieces of his socialist agenda. Well, I got news for you, current President! That’s not how this country works. We have three equal branches of government, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. The changes you made with your pen needed Congressional approval. Of course, the liberals area all in favor of it. But wait until we get a Republican president and he or she does the same thing?

WANT TO SEND A LIBERAL INTO A RAGE? Just make comments to the effect that this administration, particularly the current first lady, in her quest to emphasize living a healthy lifestyle, encourages us to watch what we eat and exercise regularly. In other words, we should demonstrate some discipline and restraint when it comes to what we eat and how we treat our bodies overall. But when it comes to sex, just do it with anyone or anything whenever you feel the urge. We’ll provide you with birth control, antibiotics, and even abortion. If you’re trapped in a body that clashes with your hormonal desires, we’ll take care of that also.

In this post, I’ve attempted to cover some of the lies that liberals tell and showcase their rants and raves. I’ve also tried to demonstrate how the current President has become a dictator who ignores the U.S. Constitution and does whatever he thinks is right or good for the country, even though our government is not set up in that fashion.

However, I don’t believe that the current President, with his pen, feels that what he does is best for this country. His job, after being elected President, is to destroy this country, taking it down to the level of a socialist/communist nation. And he’s doing just that.

Facebooktwitter

MAY 2015 LIBERAL TRAVESTIES

According to Blue Nation Review, the New York Times has reported that more premature babies are surviving after being delivered as early as twenty-two weeks. Jesse Berney, author of the article I’m about to dissect, indicated that this was a good thing because more mothers with complicated pregnancies are having the children they want. “They want” being the key words.

Mr. Berney, though, goes on to indicate that some (I’m presuming she’s talking about us unenlightened pro-life oafs) will use this news to attack abortion rights.

In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that states cannot ban abortion before the point of viability, the moment a fetus could survive on its own outside the womb. That line, however, was not made totally clear. The article goes on to indicate that general medical consensus has set that point at twenty-four weeks. She then laments that with babies being delivered as early as twenty-two weeks living, who knows what technology will be developed in the coming years to push the viability line back even further.

I have known people who are pro-choice and anti-abortion. Some on the right think you can’t be that way, but do differ. In other words, they think that abortion at any point in gestation is murder, but a woman should ultimately have that right. Others think that until brain waves and a heartbeat can be detected that the cluster of cells is not yet a human being and could be aborted.

In Roe v. Wade, the viability line was not set and while I’m no expert on Roe v. Wade, that most certainly was a good thing. Not setting this line would allow for new medical developments. It sounds like Mr. Berney just wants more abortions to take place. She’s scared of pushing back the viability line, indicating that the line shouldn’t be the determining factor in abortion laws. Instead, a much simpler approach can be taken, just trust women to make the choice about when they want to carry a pregnancy to term; and while she doesn’t say it, it appears that she thinks that a woman has the choice to abort a fetus, no matter how far along in the gestation period she is. Mr. Berney ends the article with saying, “Just trust women, and things will turn out fine.”

Over the years, I’ve had pro-choice Democrats say to me, “You Republicans desire less government interference in your lives, but you insist on interfering with women’s lives when it comes to abortion. In my younger days, I would respond as follows, “Well, you are against the death penalty for egregious criminals who have destroyed the lives of other people, but you want to kill innocent lives, lives that haven’t done anything to anyone.”

Now days, I go further back from the laws of our land to Biblical teachings. God created woman with the capacity to bear children and populate and re-populate the earth. With that, comes a responsibility to nurture a child created by her, both in the womb and outside the womb. This most certainly doesn’t mean that all women must bear at least one child; nothing of the sort. It means that as a woman, you have been given the ability by God to bear children. If you chose not to or if it just never happens for you, you still have the responsibility for reproduction. God gave that responsibility to you and because he gave it to you, you have that responsibility.

As I’ve indicated before, I have a stupid liberal articles folder in my favorites and when I run upon an article that I think is worthy of being in that folder, I add it to the folder. The above article met that criteria and the one I’m now about to dissect met my criteria also.

The article is entitled, “Why I Hate Mother’s Day.” It was authored in May, 2010 by Anne Lamott and appeared in salon.com, a liberal publication.

Ms. Lamott states in her article that Mother’s Day celebrates a huge lie about the value of women, that mothers are superior beings, that they have done more with their lives and chosen a more difficult path. She then states that every woman’s path is difficult, and that many mothers were as equipped to raise children as wire monkey mothers. I don’t know anything about wire monkey mothers, so what’s wrong with them? Do they abandoned or kill their young as soon as they are born? So, here we have a subliminal message that all women are somehow victims.

In Ms. Lamott’s opinion, the holiday makes all non-mothers, and the daughters of dead mothers, and the mothers of dead or severely damaged children, feel the deepest kind of grief and failure. The non-mothers must sit in their churches, temples, mosques, recovery rooms, and pretend to feel good about the day while they are excluded from a holiday that benefits no one but Hallmark and See’s.

This is a bitter article by a woman who appears to be bitter herself; and let’s face it, lots of liberals are bitter and don’t mind showing their bitterness.

My Mom’s died in 2011 and I only have one four-legged child, Twister, the cat. However, I would never think to be bitter about Mother’s Day and that there’s no one to take me out to lunch or to give me presents. For me, it’s probably a Sunday to stay away from restaurants because they will certainly be crowded. I usually cry a couple of times during the day and probably always will. But that doesn’t make me a victim, nor does it make me hate Mother’s Day.

Anne Lamott is a bitter person and is trying to impose her bitterness on everyone else. What’s really sad, though, is that some women will love this article and travel further down the road to victimhood.

Liberals seem to want to make all of us victims in one way or another. And as victims, we will turn to the Federal government to ease our pain. This is just another way that the liberal faction of this nation is using to further gain control of our lives

Facebooktwitter