TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~  
Body Control
Tom McLaughlin
.
Abortion: The People Are Catching On
by William Murchison
spectator.org } ~ So. When the U.S. Supreme Court numbered abortion among our precious constitutional rights, we expected everlasting bliss? Anything but the present knock-down, drag-out over Roe vs. Wade and its prospects for survival?.. I mean, we’re stunned to see state legislatures moving to outlaw abortion? Why? On what grounds? America is presently absorbing a major political science lesson; to wit, a social revolution commenced and overseen by a coterie of philosopher kings — Platonic guardians, you could say — is a non-starter. Won’t work. We generally don’t do business that way in America. Roe vs. Wade was a notable exception to the seemingly odd notion that the governed and those who govern them should work hand in hand, so as to maximize consent and minimize anger of the sort deadly to peace and unity. You negotiate rivalries, see? You don’t turn to a body of semi-Solomons, saying, tell us what’s right — we’re too dumb to figure it out for ourselves. It’s been more than 46 years since Roe. Ah, the changes we’ve seen! Back then we still conversed with telephone operators. The odor of lighted cigarettes enveloped commercial airliners, and the Nixons were our presidential royalty. Forty-six years has not rendered America amenable to the divinations of seven intellectually polished law school graduates — two colleagues dissented — who revealed something previously unsuspected by the dumb peasants. An expectant mother, the court majority said, enjoyed the constitutional right to decide whether or not to give birth. As for any constitutional rights the baby might enjoy — we surely have gleaned by now here we have an entirely different matter! Up to 1973, the several states had spoken to the matter of abortion through elected legislatures and the weighing of competing interests. The great majority of state laws emphasized protection for the not-yet-born as opposed to solicitousness for the mother’s choice. At that, nothing was engraved in marble, with guards on hand to shoo away proponents of change. The self-liberating ’60s produced a growing clamor for liberalization of the abortion laws. Gov. Ronald Reagan of California signed in 1967 the California Therapeutic Abortion Act, enacted on the grounds that the law forbidding abortion except to save a woman’s life was in fact responsible for 18,000 illegal abortions — during many of which the mother non-white in four fifths of the cases died. Nor, in any case, was the law regularly enforced. The new law allowed abortion for protection of the mother’s health, as well as for pregnancies due to rape or incest...   https://spectator.org/abortion-the-people-are-catching-on/?utm_sour...  
.
The Answer to the Abortion Debate 
Has Existed in the Constitution All Along
by William Sullivan
americanthinker.com } ~ We should begin by stating the obvious:  Roe v. Wade was an errant ruling by the Supreme Court, and one which has rightfully earned “public opposition and academic criticism”... because  the “Court ventured too far in the change it ordered and presented an incomplete justification for its action.” That’s not my framing of the mistake made in the Roe decision, mind you. Those are the words of none other than Ruth Bader Ginsburg, uttered in 1985. And as late as 2005, even she acknowledged that “in 1973, the law was changing. Women were lobbying around that issue. The Supreme Court stopped all that by deeming every law – even the most liberal – as unconstitutional. That seemed to me not the way the courts generally work.” Anyone who harbors an ounce of honesty must admit that these statements by the famously progressive justice are accurate. As MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos recently observed: We have known since the ‘70s that Roe v. Wade stands on a weak foundational basis. Whether you’re pro-life or pro-choice, Roe v. Wade is really about, do we have an individual, fundamental – do women have a privacy right in the Constitution that overrides state legislatures’ abilities to make laws affecting abortion? The bottom line is, that even if you are pro-choice, [sic] the right to privacy does not exist, either in the history or the text of the Constitution, which is why Roe v. Wade has always been ripe to be overturned. MSNBC Host Joe Scarborough, rather than being aghast at such a heretical observation, told Cevallos that his comments are “interesting” because “Mika Brzezinski and I were talking about it” after the news of Alabama’s new restrictive abortion legislation broke, he said, and even Scarborough’s constitutional law professor, “who was very progressive,” said, “though I agree with the conclusion of Roe, it’s a terribly written case, and its logic is baffling at times.” Its logic was certainly baffling to Justice Byron White, who observed in his dissenting opinion in 1973 that the Court had “simply fashioned and announced a new Constitutional right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invested that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.”...
.
‘There is no more denying 
the existence of a Deep State’
by Connor Mannion
mediaite.com } ~ Fox News’ Jeanine Pirro exclaimed that the ‘Deep State’ is about to be exposed, citing recent comments from Attorney General Bill Barr...  about investigating the origins of the investigation into Russian election interference. “We are not going quietly into the night. Grab your popcorn, Junior Mints or whatever makes you happy,” she said at the top of her open Saturday night.  “The real show is about to begin. This will be true reality TV. No scripts, no rehearsals, just a gang of criminals pointing fingers at each other to save their own hides. A version of true crime and reality show Survivor. The deep state exposed.” “I told you more than a year ago, for the director scumbag-James Comey was the head of his own crime family,” Pirro continued on. “He ran the upper echelon of the FBI like an organized criminal enterprise.” Pirro accused former FBI director  scumbag-James Comey and deputy director  Andrew McCabe of being “leakers,” and trying to pass the blame onto other people. Pirro also mentioned Barr’s appointment of U.S. Attorney  John Durham to investigate the Russia probe, praising the appointment saying “indictments are his stock and trade.” “The amazing part of all of this is that there is no more denying the existence of a Deep State,” Pirro said. “All of these people compromised by their political agenda to destroy Donald Trump,” Pirro further opined while praising Barr for his comment hitting back at critics of his testimony to Congress...   https://www.mediaite.com/politics/jeanine-pirro-says-the-deep-state...  
VIDEO at the site.
.
The Naked Hypocrisy of CAIR's Hussam Ayloush
by Steven Emerson
investigativeproject.org } ~ Oh boy, was Hussam Ayloush ever mad! Asked to condemn Hamas in 2013, Ayloush called the question "unacceptable" and lashed out at the questioner... saying it was "very shameful" and "proves that you have nothing but bigotry in you."Ayloush, who runs the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Los Angeles office, said "as a civil rights organization, we're not here in the business of being dragged into the Middle East affairs and the conflicts of the Middle East. We are an American organization." The question was rooted in CAIR's ties to a Hamas-support network in America, ties that prompted the FBI to cut off outreach work with CAIR more than a decade ago. Ayloush knew that, but it was easier to browbeat the questioner than to try explaining away those connections. So don't ask him or his bosses at CAIR about the Middle East. Ayloush was very clear. That's not their business. Unless there's a chance to take a shot at Israel. That's very different, as Ayloush showed Sunday. Rather than feeling "dragged into the Middle East affairs and the conflicts of the Middle East," Ayloush blasted Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti because Garcetti, during a visit to Israel, endorsed the decision to move the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem...
.
Making Sense of Iranian Escalation
by Behnam Ben Taleblu

fdd.org } ~ Tensions are escalating with the Islamic Republic of Iran. On May 12, a flurry of press reporting claimed that four oil tankers – two of which were operating under a Saudi flag...
 were subject to “sabotage” near a major international waterway. In the aftermath of the incident, unnamed American officials told the press that this was the work of Tehran or its proxies, while others went on record to clarify US-Iran policy. Reporting by CBS News as of May 15 reveals that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo believes that Washington will know the answer to who was directly responsible for the attacks “in the coming hours and days.” The attacks allegedly took place near the western edge of the Gulf of Oman close to the port city of Fujairah, in the United Arab Emirates. Fujairah lies south of the Strait of Hormuz, which is a major international transit route for oil tankers and commercial ships traveling to and from the Persian Gulf. The four tankers reportedly targeted were operating under the flags of Saudi Arabia (Amjad, Al Marzoqah), the United Arab Emirates (A.Michel), and Norway (Andrea Victory). Images circulating in the press as evidence of the attack almost exclusively showed the Andrea Victory, which had a hole blown into its hull where it meets the waterline. According to military investigators that spoke to the AP, there were holes in each vessel, each of which were reportedly “5- to 10” feet. The Drive has  reported that despite a statement from Saudi officials about “significant” damage, there is no photographic evidence of the alleged wreckage on the two Saudi tankers – only one of which was reportedly carrying oil. Reportedly, pro-Iran outlets had been the first to claim that there had been several explosions in the port of Fujairah last Sunday. While those reports were later disproven, select Iranian officials, such as the Chairman of the Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, used reporting about the explosions to say “the security of the south of the Persian Gulf” was akin to “glass.” The cryptic nature of the reporting last Sunday, even in English among the Western press, which continued to reference the notion of “sabotage” or an “attack” on the tankers without any clear details or descriptions, added to the confusion. Through process of elimination, it is possible to narrow down the sort of attack on the Andrea Victory in the high-likelihood that it came from Iran or an Iran-backed proxy group given what is known about Tehran’s strategies, capabilities, and intentions, as well as assistance from open-source reporting as the story developed. This process of elimination leads to and seconds the conclusion that independent analysts and unnamed US authorities have more recently put forth:  that “mines” were used, likely by a team of Iranian military divers...
.
.
.
Body Control
Tom McLaughlin
 
tommclaughlin.blogspot.com } ~ Alyssa Milano wants women to be in control of their own bodies. Everyone should be, although it does get more difficult with age. I’ve added Milano to a list of “celebrities” of whom I had never heard until they made news by saying something stupid. I don’t know what she was famous for before her recent attempt at rallying American women to stage a sex strike in protest of legislation passed in a few conservative states that would virtually eliminate abortions. The irony seems lost on her, but seeking an abortion is a sign that women have not been in control of their bodies and got pregnant when they didn’t want to.  
Even when I was a leftist, I knew abortion dismembered human babies and I was always firmly opposed to it. “Then don’t have one!” was the knee-jerk answer from pro-abortion lefties I debated, “but don’t stop a woman from getting one.” That’s been the legal status quo of abortion ever since 1973 when the US Supreme Court passed Roe Vs Wade, which claimed that somewhere in the Constitution is a woman’s right to abortion. Having read that document many times while I taught civics, I know abortion is not in the Bill of Rights. The twisted legal gymnastics that Harry Blackmun wrote in Roe is among the most labyrinthian since the Dred Scott Decision. That was reversed in a subsequent court and Roe Vs Wade may be as well, Allysa Milano’s sex strike notwithstanding.  
My taxes don’t pay for abortion, I’m told — not directly at least. Some tax money goes to Planned Parenthood which does more abortions (about 1000 a day) than anyone in America, but the pro-abortion lobby insists the money pays for mammograms — but Planned Parenthood doesn’t do mammograms. And now, Maine Democrats have passed a bill that will make me pay for abortions and Democrat Governor Janet Mills is expected to sign it very soon. What can I do about that? Nothing, except continue to object. As far as I know, Catholic hospitals in Maine will not be forced to perform abortions as they are under Ireland’s new law.  
Because my mother was active in pro-life politics early on, I learned decades ago exactly how abortions are done at various stages of pregnancy right up to birth. The procedures are appalling, especially photographs of the results — pieces of dismembered babies that are unmistakably human. Most Americans have little idea of how abortions are done and pro-abortion activists desperately want to keep it that way. Transparency is abortion’s enemy. The “Pro-Choice” side doesn’t want women to see just what it is they’re choosing.  
When I see print-outs of ultrasounds on refrigerators, I wonder how it must feel for women who had abortions to look at them. Do they get a lump in their throats when they congratulate the expectant parents who proudly posted the image? Technology has improved so much that the latest ultrasounds are vividly realistic. For decades, the abortion lobby has been lying to millions of women, convincing them that what is being aborted isn’t a human being, but just a lump of tissue.  
All Democrats running for president support abortion and the issue looms larger than it has in the past several election cycles. Four months ago, when Virginia Democrat Governor Northam commented on an abortion bill he would be asked to sign, we got an unvarnished view of how most Democrats think, and infanticide doesn’t repulse them at all. Northam, a pediatrician no less, said: "If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen under the bill he supported. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”  
 
The discussion would be about whether the now-fully-born infant would live or die. This month, during debate on the Alabama law outlawing abortion, Democrat state legislator John Rogers said: “Some kids are unwanted, so you kill them now, or you kill them later. You bring them into the world unwanted, unloved, then send them to the electric chair. So you kill them now, or you kill them later.”  
Such blunt talk by Democrats used to be only behind closed doors, but times have changed. Voters who were tired of the abortion debate hear this and think: “Wait, I thought it was just a lump of tissue, not a baby. What are they saying? Isn’t it murder to kill a baby?”  
If Roe is reversed, I’ll still have to pay for abortions in Maine. The issue will again be decided at the state level, just as it was prior to 1973 — and Maine women won’t likely join Alyssa Milano’s sex strike.  

Views: 8

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

SICK: Anderson Cooper Says Demographic Decline Of White Americans Is “Exciting”

“It’s an exciting evolution.”

Embedded video

[Click To Watch]

CNN’s Anderson Cooper said during an interview with Univision anchor Jorge Ramos that he found the demographic decline of white people “exciting”.

“The idea that, you know, whites will not be the majority, I mean, that’s — it’s an exciting transformation of the country, it’s an exciting evolution and you know, progress of our country in many different ways,” said Cooper.

Ramos agreed that whites becoming a minority in America was inevitable and a positive development.

The Judge@V8POW

Anderson Cooper barely able to contain his excitement about Whites becoming a minority.

Not thrilled about being replaced in the country your ancestors founded: you're a "Supremacist"

Understand White People, you're already in a race war.

“There’s nothing really they can do against this incredible demographic revolution. And in 2044, everyone is going to be a minority,” he said.

The media has repeatedly asserted that even raising the “conspiracy theory” of “the great replacement” or the demographic decline of white people puts you on a par with mass shooters and terrorists.

However, it’s apparently completely fine to talk about the issue so long as you proclaim the demographic decline of whites to be a positive thing.

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service