Category Archives: Planned Parenthood

Bookworm Beat 5/7/19 — the Vanishing Conservatives on Social Media edition

There are reasons for you to be very afraid of the social media crackdown on conservatives (even fringe ones), plus other scary stuff in today’s world.

Democrats prepare for 2020 by silencing conservatives.  If I had to identify the scariest news today, it would be Twitter’s purge of conservatives, which follows closely on the heels of Facebook’s purge of conservatives. These social media outlets, which hold power unimagined at any past time, are using that power to silence non-Progressive dissent.

When it came to Facebook’s most recent purge, I won’t argue that Alex Jones is an unpleasant, possibly slightly demented character. Others, though, are merely vocal not-Leftists, such as Paul Joseph Watson, whose platform is Alex Jones’s InfoWars, or provocateurs, such as Milo Yiannopoulos. As a sop to “equality,” Facebook also finally shutdown arch anti-Semite (and Democrat friend) Louis Farrakhan, whom two major Leftist media outlets promptly identified as “right wing.”

Other than Farrakhan, both Twitter and Facebook do not appear to have gone after Left wingers. Most conspicuously, they continued to ignore Left wing “news” sites that, for two years, promoted the biggest hoax in American political history or blue-checked Lefties who revel in fantasies of murdering Trump or slapping around conservatives, including the innocent Covington School boys, whose only crime was to wear MAGA hats. These same social media behemoths have also left alone Hamas sites that advocate for Israel’s destruction and the genocide of her people; and unhinged Leftists sites that screech hysterically about toxic whites, masculinity, straight people, etc., all in the most vile and violent terms.

Moreover, currently both Facebook and Twitter seem comfortable providing a platform for Pennsylvania State Representative Brian Sims, who proudly posted video of himself verbally harassing an old lady praying outside a Planned Parenthood clinic and then went on to promise to pay anyone who would dox three pro-life teenage girls.

When called on his behavior, the out-and-proud Sims doubled down on the hateful rhetoric, all of which seems to have escaped Twitter’s eagle eye for “hate speech”:

Speaking of Pennsylvania, do you recall Facebook closing down the social media account showing a school recital in which darling little American Muslim children joyously recited lines about becoming martyrs to take back the Al Aqsa mosque, all while beheading perfidious Jews in showers of blood? If you recall that, you recall more than I do. Of course, the Muslim American Society Islamic Center in Philadelphia (MAS Philly), the group that posted the video, did say that it erred in posting it, so I guess that was enough. Neither Facebook nor MAS Philly seemed troubled by the video’s genocidally anti-Semitic content, never mind the child abuse it displayed.

Given the prominence social media has in American communication, it’s fairly obvious that Twitter and Facebook both want to prevent a repeat of 2016. Their silencing of conservative voices, while doing nothing about the vile content emanating from those affiliated with the political Left, is their way of achieving that goal.

I’ve already harped on the fact that California’s open primary silences conservatives completely during November elections. This happens because California’s Leftist majority means that only Democrats show up on the ballot for state and federal offices. In other words, when voters are paying attention, the only voices they hear are Leftist ones.

My preference is for these social media outlets to be declared publishers. After all, they clearly exercise control over content. If these social media sites are identified as publishers, they can be sued over content. Then, sue them into oblivion or into even-handedness, one or the other. Failing that, the government is going to have to step in . . . and that’s never a good thing.

Why are gays and lesbians so stridently anti-abortion? One of the things Brian Sims’s behavior highlights is that, when it comes to abortion, gays and lesbians are on the front lines. On my real-me Facebook page, the most vicious posts attacking pro-Life people are from gay men, with lesbians following at a close second. (I grew up and lived for decades in the Bay Area, so I have/had a lot of lesbian and gay friends and acquaintances.)

I find peculiar the fact that people whose preferred form of sexual congress cannot result in pregnancy are the ones loudest and most aggressive in their loyalty to abortion on demand up to and including the moment a baby is born.

Is it hostility to procreators?

Is it the fact that they live in essentially child free worlds and therefore have no empathy for babies?

Is it that, when gays and lesbians are politically Left, they hew to the extremes of that ideology?

Honestly, I don’t know. What do you think?

Jews, Israel, and the Democrat presidential candidates Here are two stories, that are definitely related. The first is that 42% of American Jews, when polled, complained that Trump is too pro-Israel:

Roughly four-in-ten (42%) say they think Trump is favoring the Israelis too much, while a similar share (47%) say he is striking the right balance between the Israelis and Palestinians. The rest either say he is favoring the Palestinians too much (6%) or they don’t know (4%).

Daniel Greenfield, who brought this poll to my attention, sees a bright side:

On the bright side, this means that about 53% of American Jews are pro-Israel.

He makes another, even more important, point about those anti-Israel Jews (all of whom, I guarantee you, are products of American institutions of higher indoctrination and anti-Semitism):

Many don’t like the Jewish State and their idea of being Jewish is watching Woody Allen movies or, for millennials, Broad City.

In other words, these are Jews in name only (“My last name is Goldberg, I vote Democrat, I fast on Yom Kippur, I hate Trump, and Israel is a Nazi nation.”).

The other, related, story is that, after Hamas in Gaza (territory without any Israeli control or oversight) rained over 600 rockets down on Israel, killing four Israelis, not a single Democrat party presidential candidate spoke up.

Indeed, the only Dems who seemed willing to mention the issue were Representative Ilhan Omar (D. Somalia) and Representative Rashida Tlaib (D. Palestine). Ilhan Omar bemoaned that “cycle of violence” as if the facts weren’t that Israel did nothing until she’d been hit by hundreds of missiles. Tlaib, meanwhile, who is ostensibly an American politician, mourned what was happening to “our Palestinian people.” Not “the Palestinian people” or “our allies {as if!) in Palestine,” but “our Palestinian people.” I honestly can’t decide whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing that these two women are in Congress. On the one hand, they’re way too close to the levers of power. On the other hand, ordinary Americans can finally see what conservatives have been worrying about for years.

One of my Democrat Facebook friends, who is deeply concerned about Israel’s well-being and about rising anti-Semitism around the world, noted the Democrat primary candidates’ silence. He urged people following his Facebook feed to contact these candidates to complain. Because I don’t believe people can be harangued into agreeing with you, I confined myself to pointing out that, even if pressure caused these Dem pols to issue a belated pro-Israel statement, it was worth remembering that their initial instinct was to remain silent. I hope that thought fell on fertile soil.

I think we will see some Jewish migration to Republicans and even more Jewish migration away from Democrats. (That is, the latter group won’t be able to bring itself to conservativism, but will no longer be able to tolerate both open and covert anti-Semitism in the Democrat party.) The numbers will be small, but every vote — or lack of a vote — counts.

I’m personally ambivalent about Jews joining the Republican party. If their only reason for being there is to support Israel, but they remain Leftist in all their other values, they will do to the Democrat Party what Leftists did to red states when they fled high tax states for low tax states — they turned those states blue and promptly imposed in those states the same policies that had them fleeing their states of origin in the first place. Rush describes those people as locusts, and he’s right to do so.

My real preference is for disaffected Jewish Democrats just to sit out the 2020 election — or, even better, to cast a single protest vote for Trump and then do nothing.

Trump may have China’s number. To my great surprise, the New York Times published an opinion piece that says, not that Trump is an idiot in his dealings with China, but that Xi Jinping may have been the one who let the glory days of the Obama years go to his head. Yi-Zheng Lian argues that, while former Chinese premiers made nice with American presidents, Xi Jinping got increasingly aggressive in his policies, whether in trade, intellectual property theft, or attempts to expand China’s military and economic reach.

Lian says that Xi’s overreach happened because he became president in 2012 when China was still enjoying a great “economic miracle,” as compared to America’s ongoing recession. What Lian tactfully ignores is that Xi became Chinese’s president when Obama was America’s president — and the latter was always willing to back down and sell out.

Now, not only are China’s economic chickens coming home to roost because of its over-extension, Xi is facing a president who rightly views China as an economic and military threat. Additionally, rather than backing down, Trump is slowly but surely pushing China into a corner.

No wonder then that Steve Bannon, who may be unpleasant but is nobody’s fool, thinks that yesterday (Monday) was the most important day in Trump’s presidency:

“I happen to think that today [Monday] was the most important day of Donald Trump’s presidency,” Bannon told Dobbs. “He’s president of the United States because of the rejection of working-class people and middle-class people, about the managed decline of our country at the hands of people like Hillary Clinton. The Clinton global initiative, the whole Clinton apparatus. These globalists and elitists were very comfortable with the managed decline, particularly vis-a-vis the rise of China. And Donald Trump confronted that, particularly in the upper Midwest. This is the reason he won states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio. People understand […] the factories went to China, the jobs went to China, and the opioids came in. So I think that Trump understands that tariffs are more than taxes. They’re more about self-empowerment of the working class.”

Not only does Trump understand this, Bannon said, but he also explained it very well. “Today he said that […] ‘I’m not going to do this, you’re not gonna come back and retrade us. I’m going to hit you with the tariffs.’ And I think this is a very big week in American economic history,” he added.

In this regard, Bannon explained, it’s important to keep in mind that the pressure on Trump to be soft on China has been enormous. “The IR department of the Chinese Communist Party, the Investors Relations department, is Wall Street, the lobbyists of corporate America. The pressure on President Trump has been relentless, and it’s all the Fear Project.”

If you like seeing Leftists viciously attacked in the media, then you must read Kyle Smith’s preemptive strike against New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, who is apparently planning to run for president:

Like an insecure college student trying on various personalities in an effort to capture the attention of the cutest girl in Postcolonial Gender Politics — now a preppy tennis player, now a tortured Goth guitarist, now an angry male feminist — de Blasio keeps trying to repackage himself, unable to perceive that it is the contents that people don’t like.


De Blasio is not just a snoozy, groundhog-murdering buffoon who causes the city embarrassment on a par with the New York Knicks or JFK Airport. He’s also a skeezy money grubber who borrows tricks from his former boss Hillary Clinton (for whom he served as campaign manager in 2000). He has a tendency to set up noble-sounding activist groups that by miraculous coincidence attract dollars from entities wishing to grease the wheels with City Hall.


What’s most salient about de Blasio is the sheer scale of his incompetence: Without even an “Oops,” he just shuttered his disastrous “Renewal” program, which torched three-quarters of a billion dollars on failed educators who were happy to cash the checks and delivered approximately zero results. De Blasio’s New York City Housing Authority — the outfit that runs all those charming housing projects — is so unspeakable (mold, rats, lead paint, unsafe elevators, leaky pipes, etc.) that the city was forced to accept oversight from a monitor appointed by Ben Carson’s Department of Housing and Urban Development. That’s right: The mayor bungled one of his central duties so badly that it’s now under the control of the administration of . . . Donald J. Trump.

What should really shake up the few sane people still loyal to a Democrat party is that de Blasio, with all his faults and failures, fits perfectly into the current Democrat party presidential candidate line-up.

Not all children’s deaths are equal. I sometimes get the sense the Progressives’ “compassion” is circumscribed by political need. For example, think of Democrats on the border issue: They’re all about “the children, the children, the children,” except that they don’t seem to care at all that, with the flood of people crossing our southern border, children are being rented out to create temporary families for asylum claims. These children are merchandise and, I suspect, get handed over to sex traffickers when their utility is over.

Moreover, many of the complaints about “the children, the children, the children,” don’t seem to be rooted in fact. For example, Sheriff David Clarke (ret.) wrote an article pointing out that three “cause célèbre” dead children all died from illnesses unrelated to the U.S. border. Each death was a tragedy, but none had political weight, so the media and their pro-immigrant fellow travelers had to lie about or obscure the reasons these poor children died.

Reading Sheriff Clarke’s article made me realize that I’ve seen almost nothing in the American media about Anders Holch Povlsen’s children. If you’re saying “Anders Holch who? And why his children?” you’ve made my point for me.

Asos is a huge British online fashion and beauty retailer. Its founder, however, is a Danish billionaire, Anders Holch Povlsen. He and his family — Povlsen, his wife, and his four young children — were in Sri Lanka for a vacation a little while ago. They stayed at a very nice hotel. Well, it was a very nice hotel until Muslim terrorists blew it up, along with several churches on an ill-fated Easter Sunday.

That explosion killed three out of the four Povlsen children: Alfred, Alma, and Agnes. Only little Astrid remains. You can see the surviving Povlsens’ overwhelming grief in this photo essay about the funeral, where they had to watch three of their children get carried away in little, white, flower-covered coffins.

Normally, you’d think the media would be all over a story about the deaths of three out of four children in a billionaire’s family. Imagine if they had died in a car accident or while marching in a pink pussy hat parade. We would have seen non-stop coverage, along with hand-wringing, about unsafe cars (a green world without cars would be better) or about the incredible evil of alt-right people.

But that’s not how these children died. Instead, they died quite politically incorrectly at the hands of Muslim terrorists. Their deaths, not being politically useful, have been ignored as much as possible.

Remember, if it doesn’t fit the narrative, it doesn’t exist.

If the only thing Trump did was change the federal judicial bench, he will have been the most important, consequential president in our lifetimes.

I say this because an Obama appointee just couldn’t bear to imprison for an extended period a young man who, at age 18, decided he wanted to blow up a whole bunch of people in the name of Allah. Fortunately, Adel Daoud confided, in between happy giggles, his plan to an undercover FBI agent, rather than a real terrorist. That’s why, when Daoud pushed the detonator on a car bomb outside a crowded Chicago bar, nothing happened.

But for Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman, an Obama appointee, Daoud’s utterly evil intent didn’t matter. What mattered was that he was a poor, lost little boy:

Coleman said Daoud was uniquely immature at the time, when he was 18, noting how Daoud is heard giggling almost constantly as he brainstorms attacks to avenge what he saw as the West’s war on Muslims.

At an impressionable age, the judge said the “awkward young man with few friends” was immediately drawn to the 38-year-old FBI agent who first met with Daoud. Daoud promptly began tossing out ideas to impress the agent posing as a terrorist, once suggesting they mount an attack with “flying cars” packed with explosives.

“He continued to do what teenage boys do … talk big,” Coleman said.

Somehow that “big talk” translated into big action, because Daoud actually pushing what he thought was a detonator button. Coleman, though, was moved most by his giggles. Seeking to make things better for this poor little baby, Coleman gave Daoud the lightest sentence possible.

Thomas Lifson, who wrote about this story, explains:

All of that happened on 2012, and after years of incarceration while the case was prosecuted and he was tried, yesterday Daoud was sentenced to 16 years in federal prison, not the 40 years the prosecution asked for, with the six-plus years he has spent in jail credited against the sentence. In addition, he will concurrently serve (in other words, no extra prison time) for two other crimes: hiring an assassin to kill the informant who turned him in and the attempted murder of an inmate who he thought had insulted the Prophet Mohammed.

Next time you look at Trump in despair because he tweeted something that offended your sensibilities, think of Judge Coleman and ask yourself if you want more of her or fewer of her on the federal court. If you think her judicial sensibilities are too Progressive, just be grateful for Trump. Imagine what the federal bench, all the way up to the Supreme Court, would have looked like with four years of Hillary.

(Speaking of the Supreme Court, who believes that Justice Ginsburg is effectively fulfilling her responsibilities on that body? I’m not arguing that she’s dead; I just wonder if she’s functional.)

Helping out a friend. I just learned that Garry Hamilton, husband of master blogger Terresa Monroe-Hamilton, is being treated for cancer. And as is the case with cancer treatments, the experience is awful and expensive. Our thoughts and prayers can help the personal awfulness of it all and your donation to their GoFundMe campaign can help the expense. So, if you’ve got any spare change lying around, please send it their way.

The post Bookworm Beat 5/7/19 — the Vanishing Conservatives on Social Media edition appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

Dr. Seuss is in Leftist cross hairs, but conservatives shouldn’t rush to his support

With the Left now gunning for Dr. Seuss, it’s tempting for conservatives reflexively to support him — but they may want to think twice about doing so.

I’m sure that you’ve already heard that, per the most recent Leftist purge of pre-woke people, ideas, and books, a new study states that Dr. Seuss (aka Theodor Seuss Geisel), probably the most famous children’s book writer in America, has now landed on the naughty list:

“[This study reveals] how racism spans across the entire Seuss collection, while debunking myths about how books like Horton Hears a Who! and The Sneetches can be used to promote tolerance, anti-bias, or anti-racism,” Katie Ishizuka and Ramón Stephens write in their February 2019 report, “The Cat is Out of the Bag: Orientalism, AntiBlackness, and White Supremacy in Dr. Seuss’ s Children’s Books,” as part of St. Catherine University’s Research on Diversity in Youth Literature.

They continue: “Findings from this study promote awareness of the racist narratives and images in Dr. Seuss’ children’s books and implications to the formation and reinforcement of racial biases in children.”

The study continues by explaining that some of the most iconic characters relay the troubling messages of Orientalism (the representation of Asia and Asian people based on colonialist stereotypes), anti-blackness and white supremacy.

“Notably, every character of color is male. Males of color are only presented in subservient, exotified, or dehumanized roles,” the authors write as part of their findings. “This also remains true in their relation to White characters. Most startling is the complete invisibility and absence of women and girls of color across Seuss’ entire children’s book collection.”

I know that conservatives will be tempted to cling more tightly to Dr. Seuss’s books now that he’s persona non grata on the Left, but I’m not sure that’s a good idea. I know he’s dead, but the fact is that, whether you’re coming at him from a leftist or a conservative perspective, he wasn’t that great a care and pouring more money into his estate may end up feeling as wrong for you as it does now for the lefties. Here are a few interesting points about Theodor Geisel the man, and Dr. Seuss the writer:

First, Geisel was a lifelong Democrat.

Second, Geisel was a typical Democrat racist in the years leading up to and during WWII. His early drawings showed blacks as savages and, especially during WWII, Japanese as evil (a view shared by most Americans after Japan’s unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, throughout the horrific war years in the Pacific, and upon learning about the torture the Japanese visited on POWs).

Third, Geisel was also an objectifier of women. After all, he wrote vaguely erotic stuff in his early years.

Fourth, to be fair to Geisel, all children’s books before about the 1970s, except for the exquisite The Snowy Day by Ezra Jack Keats’ (whom I always thought was black and just discovered was Jewish and white), unthinkingly focused on white kids. Whites were the vast majority in America and, outside of major urban areas and the less populated South, most people didn’t even have minorities in their frame of reference. This narrow frame of reference, combined with focusing on the most massive part of the mass market, meant that children’s book authors probably excluded minority characters without malice. They just did….

Fifth, still being fair, the most memorable Dr. Seuss books still read today are heavy on non-human characters. Sure, the kids in The Cat In The Hat are white, but who remembers them? It’s the non-human Cat and the non-human Things 1 and 2 that linger in people’s memories. Likewise, books such as Yertle the TurtleGreen Eggs and HamThe Grinch Who Stole Christmas, and Hop on Pop, are about non-human characters.

Sixth, Geisel came to regret his early racism. His most significant allegorical work about racism was Horton Hears a Who, first published in 1955.

Perhaps you remember the plot: Horton hears a voice speak from a small speck of dust. He realizes that there is life on that minute speck and, despite extremely hostile action from a kangaroo and her joey, monkeys, and an evil eagle. No matter the opposition, Horton fights to save that speck and the life upon it, repeatedly saying “A person is a person no matter how small.” Eventually, the smallest of those small persons on Whoville makes enough noise that everyone in Horton’s Jungle of Nool hears and agrees to protect that speck and the life upon it.

The commonly accepted history of Horton Hears a Who is that it represents Geisel’s about face regarding the Japanese in the years after WWII (hyperlinks omitted):

Geisel began work on Horton Hears a Who! in the fall of 1953. The book’s main theme, “a person’s a person no matter how small”, was Geisel’s reaction to his visit to Japan, where the importance of the individual was an exciting new concept. Geisel, who had harbored strong anti-Japan sentiments before and during World War II, changed his views dramatically after the war and used this book as an allegory for the American post-war occupation of the country. He dedicated the book to a Japanese friend.

Seventh, what’s really funny about Horton Hears a Who is that, while you have to work really hard to see it as an allegory for Japan, which had started the war against the U.S., fought it with unabashed fury, abused POWs and civilian internees with unbelievable ferocity, and refused to surrender, it actually works effortlessly as an allegory against abortion.

I mean, it’s so obvious. That speck upon which life exists isn’t just Whoville, it’s a zygote. After all, as Horton says with numbing repetition, “a person’s a person no matter how small.” In a world dedicated to abortion, Horton is the ultimate pro-Life activist.

To that end, Horton stands up against the angry feminist and her brainwashed child (the kangaroo and joey), the Leftist mobs (whether in the streets or the state houses), and the abortionist (that’s the evil eagle determined to destroy life at all costs). Through it all, Horton clings to one principle: Life is life. You cannot parse it away simply because it’s too small to see or its voice is too quiet to hear.

Sadly, it’s certain that Geisel would resent my pro-Life spin. Indeed, true to his life-long Democrat credentials, Geisel was staunchly pro-abortion and aggressively fought against having his name associated with pro-Life projects. In other words, even as Geisel/Seuss was writing, “a person’s a person no matter how small,” he didn’t really mean it. Moreover, his widow has continued that anti-Life legacy, by being a long-time Planned Parenthood funder:

“It has been well known for years around San Diego that the Geisels were pro-abortion and active supporters of the local Planned Parenthood affiliate,” said Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullenger, who lived in San Diego for 23 years. “Many years ago, I remember seeing Dr. Seuss at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser that we were protesting. People find it hard to believe that someone who could write such amazing children’s stories could support the brutal killing of innocent children through abortion. His wife, Audrey, has been very active in her support for the abortion group over the years, and our documents prove that.”

It’s ironic, really, that both Dr. and Mrs. Seuss, whose fortune came from children’s books, so enthusiastically supported killing their customer base.

Given the facts, perhaps it’s time for everyone, both leftist and conservative, to stop buying Dr. Seuss books. He was a racist, sexist, baby-hating monster. Why in the world is he even still being published, much less being published as a beloved children’s book author? I find myself in agreement with the Lefties when it comes to suggesting that Theodor Seuss Geisel comes with way too much baggage to be a worthy author of today’s children’s books.

The post Dr. Seuss is in Leftist cross hairs, but conservatives shouldn’t rush to his support appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

Bookworm Beat 2/24/19 — the Billy Porter illustrated edition

Billy Porter’s Scarlett O’Hara attire at the Oscars thrilled fashionistas and depressed me, so it’s the lead entry in tonight’s illustrated edition.

Oscars Billy Porter Bruce Jenner Caitlyn Jenner Fred Astaire

Oscars Billy Porter Bruce Jenner Caitlyn Jenner Fred Astaire

The post Bookworm Beat 2/24/19 — the Billy Porter illustrated edition appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

John Boehner Retires: What Have We Gained? What Have We Lost?

With great delight did I receive the news this morning that the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, would be retiring. Two years ago, the great patriots of Virginia’s 7th District retired House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, but since then, John Boehner has stood steadfast and resolute against the freedom movement in America.

However, Boehner’s departure was not without its’ costs.

The shocking move, first reported by The New York Times, means there’s unlikely to be a government shutdown next week.  Following Boehner’s announcement, House Republicans said there was agreement to pass a clean spending bill to keep the government open. Several members of the Freedom Caucus, the conservative group which led the revolt against Boehner’s leadership, said they will now support the spending bill without demands that it include language to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood. – Washington Post

Our friends in the Freedom Caucus have taken a great risk on our behalf, trading a budget showdown with Democrats over Planned Parenthood for Boehner’s seat atop the House of Representatives. If this were an establishment writer speaking to you now, I would make the argument that this is a great deal, because Obama would have vetoed a budget without abortion funding for Planned Parenthood anyway. So instead of fighting a losing battle, we win by getting rid of Boehner.

However, we aren’t merely facing future budgets. We’re facing a debt ceiling increase. It’s in the bag. The House and the Senate are going to increase the debt limit and there isn’t a damn thing we can do about it. That’s what John Boehner’s resignation cost us.

What have we gained? Hope. Kevin McCarthy may well be the next Speaker of the House, in which case we’ll find ourselves in an equally precarious position. However, McCarthy does not have the power John Boehner wielded. We could get a Congressional Session out of him during the elections where he allows Republicans to fight the battles near and dear to the hearts of Conservatives, in order to put Democrats on the defensive during a Presidential Election. Even show votes, if vetoed by Obama or prevented from coming to a vote by Democrats in the Senate, or even if killed by Mitch McConnell could get more Republicans to the polls next November.

That said, my hope is that our next Speaker of the House is not McCarthy. My impression is that he is less informed than Speaker Boehner and less honest. The Establishment, which still controls the majority in the House, should consider a more middle of the road candidate. Someone like Paul Ryan would be distasteful to conservatives, but it would not have the deleterious effect McCarthy would have – in fact, if its’ McCarthy, things could get much worse, much more quickly.

Furthermore, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz were hell bent on making Planned Parenthood a big time battle in the Senate. By 10am this morning, that ambitious effort became futile. Instead, we’re going to face more spending, more debt, less fiscal security, less debate, and the edge of the cliff becomes increasingly palpable.

I’m delighted to see John Boehner go – it was necessary. The future, however, remains uncertain; our resolve must remain resolute, our ambitions broadened, and our voices raised loud enough for leadership to hear and understand that our complaint rests, not with one man, but with a government bereft of affection for American Liberty. We did not rise seeking heads, but rather, freedom, smaller government, and a more constitutional society.

Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker

7th Planned Parenthood Video Shocker: Brain Harvested From Living Aborted Baby

This makes me sick to my stomach. The ghouls at Planned Parenthood use scissors to cut the face of a living baby to harvest the brain.

Heart breaking. Even worse, my tax dollars are funding this illegal activity.

The story is here.

Watch the video below and then go here to SIGN THE PETITION TO DEFUND THESE MONSTERS

Article written by: Tom White

38 Companies that Support Ghoulish Baby Butchers Planned Parenthood

Coca-Cola, Xerox and Ford Motors were 3 of the original 41 companies who donated to the Planned Parenthood butchers who are selling aborted baby parts for money. They are no longer donating to this abortion scourge.

But these are still supporting them. Take your business elsewhere. Below is a list with the easy ones to leave highlighted in red. Banks and even cell phone companies are much more difficult to dump than simply buying the equivalent product from a competitor. And some are charities. Easy to avoid.

The 38 remaining companies were (as of this writing):


American Cancer Society

American Express



Bank of America

Bath & Body Works

Ben & Jerry’s



Deutsche Bank





Fannie Mae



Johnson & Johnson

La Senza

Levi Strauss

Liberty Mutual


March of Dimes


Morgan Stanley







Susan G. Komen



United Way


Wells Fargo

Article written by: Tom White