Obama continues to hurt the economy

How’s that hope & change workin’ out for ya?

From the Herald-Times today:

Unless the Senate follows the lead of the House and votes to repeal the 2.3 percent medical devices excise tax contained in the Affordable Care Act, Cook Medical will not build any more plants in the U.S.

(Cook Medical President Kem) Hawkins said if the tax goes into effect next year, as scheduled, the private, family-owned company based in Bloomington will be forced to use revenue that would have financed expansion to preserve the jobs of current employees.

Had enough? Vote Republican.

Let’s not go overboard on the Todd Akin controversy

I have said previously that I think Todd Akin should step down and allow another candidate to take his place in the effort to unseat Claire McCaskill. And while I think the Republican Party would be better off with a different candidate, some of the hysterical freaking out about Akin’s comments (for which he apologized, by the way) has gotten silly.

Right now, Akin is the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Missouri. If he does not drop out by the deadline in September, he will be the Republican candidate in November, and Republicans should support him. Republican groups and the party establishment yanked support from Akin in an effort to convince him to drop out, but if he does not drop out some of that support should be restored.

Obviously, depending on how the race looks in late September, the level of support should be reasonable and money should be allocated in the way it can make the most impact. What Akin said was stupid and counterfactual, but right now he is our candidate and if he does not drop out he will continue to be our candidate.

What is most infuriating is this nonsense about a third party run, floated by Sarah Palin last week. That is completely irresponsible and would hand the election to the Democrats. This is something no Republican – moderate or conservative – wants to see happen. We cannot win a three way contest between an “independent” Republican, the official GOP nominee and McCaskill. The best we could hope for is having McCaskill win with a plurality.

Palin’s irresponsible suggestion of a third party run by her chosen candidate is 100% pure ego. If she supports a third party candidate, she will prove that her personal ego is more important to her than her principles.

This is not to say that third party challenges are never appropriate. If a Republican is opposed to conservative principles, a third party challenge may be necessary to give conservative voters a true choice. If a Republican candidate is corrupt, it is necessary to challenge him as well.

Neither of those is true with Todd Akin, who will be a reliable conservative voice and vote should he be elected to the U.S. Senate. While he made a boneheaded and counterfactual statement that demonstrates he is not an effective advocate for the pro-life position, there is no indication of scandal in his life.

What I find amazing is the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party on this issue, regarding the Democrats’ support of Planned Parenthood. After all, PP has been caught on tape on numerous occasions trying to cover up cases of statutory rape. City and county government in Bloomington, Indiana even gave a grant to Planned Parenthood to give birth control to girls as young as thirteen years old, despite the fact that any and all sexual contact with anyone thirteen or younger is a felony under Indiana law.

Shelli Yoder, Democratic candidate for Congress, said in an e-mail to supporters that “rape – by any definition – is forcible.” Actually, that’s not true. Statutory rape is not necessarily forcible rape and the victim may even “consent” to the sexual contact, but statutory rape is punished by law anyway (as it should be) because we as a society have determined that those under a certain age are not capable of granting informed consent.

This leads to an important question. Is Shelli Yoder saying that statutory rape is not rape? Voters of the Ninth District deserve an answer, especially given her party’s support for Planned Parenthood.

When will Democrats answer for their support of Planned Parenthood and PP’s efforts to cover up of the sexual abuse of young girls? Will the mainstream media actually cover this issue, and will media in the Ninth District challenge Yoder’s bizarre statement? Somehow I doubt that will ever happen.

Again, Todd Akin should drop out of the race so a stronger replacement can be chosen, but as long as he is the Republican candidate he should be supported by Republicans. The people freaking out need to cool off, take a deep breath and recognize this “third party” fantasy for the foolishness it is and the guaranteed defeat it will bring – and Sarah Palin needs to let some air out of her overinflated ego.

Akin and abortion in the case of rape

Abortion-rights advocates love to jump on ill-considered statements by pro-lifers in order to distract from the primary issue of abortion, and the controversy surrounding Todd Akin is no exception. But this should not be a surprise. After all, if I supported killing unborn children, I would want to distract from it too.

This is not to defend what Akin said. It was an astonishingly stupid, offensive, and anti-factual thing to say. If a U.S. Senate candidate is going to make an argument about a highly controversial social issue where highly motivated people on both sides will be combing over everything he says, then he needs to be sure what he is saying is factually accurate. That’s not what Akin did. There is no evidence that women who are raped are less likely to get pregnant. Women who are raped have about a 5% chance of getting pregnant – the same percentage as women having consensual sex without using contraception or birth control.

But let’s not fool ourselves here. The discussion of whether or not there should be an exception for rape if we restrict or outlaw abortion is a distraction, nothing more. According to the Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood) only 1% – one percent – of all abortions are due to rape. The hard cases of rape, incest and life of the mother account for a tiny percentage of all abortions. Simply put, this is a non issue designed to cover up the fact that the vast majority of abortions are elective abortions.

Akin’s policy position is certainly a defensible position, and virtually every mainstream anti-abortion organization (including the American Life League and the National Right to Life Committee) holds a position identical to Akin’s position. The argument is simple: If you truly believe that abortion is the willful, intentional termination of a human life, then why would you allow that child to be killed for the crimes of his or her father?

The problem is that Akin does not appear to have the skills or knowledge necessary to articulately argue for the pro-life position without making himself look like an idiot, and this controversy over his foolish statement has become too much of a drag on the Republicans Party’s hopes of capturing the U.S. Senate. He needs to step aside so that someone else can take his place in this election.

This does not need to be a compromise on pro-life principles – the GOP could easily pick someone who is just as pro-life as Akin, but able to articulate his position in a coherent and intelligent way. For the good of the party, the good of the country, and the good of the unborn babies Akin wishes to protect, he needs to step aside.

NBC "News" obsessed with Hurricane Katrina

NBC Nightly News last night continued the whining about Bush and Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

“The Superdome, a symbol of official failure seven years ago…”

And of course Katrina is a pall over the GOP convention according to NBC.

Could they possibly be any more biased? Could they possibly be any more shamelessly political? Come on, NBC, can you at least pretend to be delivering the news instead of Barack Obama’s talking points?

Murder is never the solution to our problems

It would have been better if Lynn Beisner’s mother had taken a claw hammer and bashed her skull in when she was five weeks old. A month-old baby sleeps a lot, so the fatal beating could have started when she was asleep and she never would have known the difference. It would have allowed her mother more opportunities in life and would have spared Beisner a lifetime of abuse and suffering.

I discovered Beiser’s depraved rant though listening to the BBC, and the premise of her column is quite frankly evil.

I bypassed gestation altogether in my hypothetical scenario so that I could focus on the primary issue of abortion, the issue which makes all other arguments secondary. Is the fetus a human being or not? It is an nonviable tissue mass that we should not regard as worthy of protection, or are we dealing with a little boy or girl made in the image of Almighty God, who forbids the destruction of that tiny person?

With a five week old baby, we know that we have a person and we instinctively know that bashing this baby’s head in with a claw hammer is evil. (Well, most of us do. Certain “college professors” such as Peter Singer have not figured that out yet.) But with abortion, most people see it as a little more nebulous. We have taken the murder of 1,200,000 people every year and made it very antiseptic, hiding it behind the walls of a “medical procedure” and lying to ourselves about the reality of abortion. This way, we can see, hear or speak no evil and feel no pangs of conscience about what is happening all around us.

Again, the key issue is whether we are dealing with a person or a nonviable tissue mass. If the former, what is the difference between an abortion and my claw hammer scenario? There is none.

Beiser explained to the BBC that the reason she wrote her personal story of self-loathing is that the pro-abortion movement needs to counter the personal stories that abortion opponents are using with their own stories of why abortion would have been better.

But do we really know her mom’s life would have been better had she aborted her daughter? Are we sure she would not have been exploited and abused? Are we sure that she would have gone to college and been in a stronger financial position? Do we know she would have had other children when she was “ready” and given those children a better life? No, all of that is 100% pure speculation. It is more likely that her life would not have been much different, other than having blood on her hands and conscience.

The pro-abortion movement is a damnable lie. It pretends to want to “liberate” women by giving them the “choice” to murder their children. That is no choice at all – it is bondage.

Dems should stop blaming Bush for policies they supported

I am frankly fed up with hearing Democrats whine about George W. Bush being fiscally irresponsible as a way to excuse Barack Obama’s inexcusable budget deficits. The common complains are the two wars, the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit. First, the budget deficit in 2008 was $458 billion. The budget deficits in 2009, 2010 and 2011 were all over a trillion dollars. There is no comparison between Bush’s deficits and Obama’s deficits. Furthermore, the whining is filled with hypocrisy.

First, let’s examine the tax cuts. The premise that the tax cuts caused the deficit if flawed. Barack Obama’s own website reveals the following facts about the tax cuts passed during the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

  • Federal revenue in 1981 was $599 billion

  • Federal revenue in 1989 was $991 billion

And:

  • Federal revenue in 2001 was $1.99 trillion

  • Federal revenue in 2008 was $2.52 trillion

The problem is not a lack of revenue. The problem is that spending outpaced revenue.

Regarding the Medicare prescription drug benefit, following is a list of Democrats who voted for it in the U.S. Senate.

Akaka

Baucus

Bayh

Biden

Bingaman

Boxer

Breaux

Cantwell

Carper

Conrad

Corzine

Daschle

Dayton

Dodd

Dorgan

Durbin

Feingold

Feinstein

Inouye

Johnson

Kennedy

Landrieu

Lautenberg

Leahy

Lincoln

Mikulski

Miller

Murray

Nelson

Nelson

Pryor

Reid

Schumer

Stabenow

Wyden

As to the two wars that Democrats whine about, let’s examine the roll call votes for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Here are the Democrats in the Senate who voted for the war in Afghanistan:

Lincoln

Boxer

Feinstein

Dodd

Lieberman

Biden

Carper

Graham

Nelson

Cleland

Miller

Akaka

Inouye

Harkin

Durbin

Bayh

Breaux

Landrieu

Kennedy

Kerry

Mikulski

Sarbanes

Levin

Stabenow

Dayton

Wellstone

Carnahan

Baucus

Edwards

Conrad

Dorgan

Nelson

Corzine

Torricelli

Bingaman

Reid

Clinton

Schumer

Wyden

Reed

Hollings

Daschle

Johnson

Leahy

Cantwell

Murray

Feingold

Kohl

Byrd

Rockefeller

Democrats in the House who voted for the war in Afghanistan:

Earl Hilliard

Robert Cramer

Ed Pastor

Vic Snyder

Mike Ross

Marion Berry

Mike Thompson

Ellen Tauscher

Pete Stark

Hilda Solis

Brad Sherman

Adam Schiff

Lucille Roybal-Allard

Nancy Pelosi

Grace Napolitano

George Miller

Juania Millender-McDonald

Robert Matsui

Zoe Lofgren

Tom Lantos

Michael Honda

Jane Harman

Bob Filner

Anna Eshoo

Calvin Dooley

Susan Davis

Gary Condit

Lois Capps

Howard Berman

Xavier Becerra

Joe Baca

Maxine Waters

Diane Watson

Henry Waxman

Lynn Woolsey

Mark Udall

Diana DeGette

James Maloney

John Larson

Rosa DeLauro

Karen Thurman

Carrie Meek

Alcee Hastings

Peter Deutsch

Jim Davis

Corrine Brown

Allen Boyd

Robert Wexler

Cynthia McKinney

John Lewis

Sanford Bishop

Patsy Mink

Neil Abercrombie

Janice Schakowsky

Bobby Rush

David Phelps

Jesse Jackson

Luis Gutierrez

Lane Evans

Danny Davis

Jerry Costello

Rod Blagojevich

Peter Visclosky

Timothy Roemer

Baron Hill

Julia Carson

Leonard Boswell

Dennis Moore

Ken Lucas

Christopher John

William Jefferson

John Baldacci

Thomas Allen

Steny Hoyer

Elijah Cummings

Benjamin Cardin

Albert Wynn

John Tierney

John Olver

Richard Neal

Marty Meehan

James McGovern

Edward Markey

Barney Frank

William Delahunt

Michael Capuano

Bart Stupak

Lynn Rivers

Sander Levin

Dale Kildee

John D. Dingell

David Bonior

James Barcia

Martin Olav Sabo

Collin Peterson

James Oberstar

Betty McCollum

William Luther

Bennie Thompson

Gene Taylor

Ronnie Shows

Ike Skelton

Karen McCarthy

Richard Gephardt

Wm. Lacy Clay

Shelley Berkley

Steven Rothman

Donald Payne

Bill Pascrell

Frank Pallone

Robert Menendez

Rush Holt

Robert Andrews

Tom Udall

Nydia Velazquez

Edolphus Towns

Louise Slaughter

Jose Serrano

Charles Rangel

Major Owens

Jerrold Nadler

Gregory Meeks

Michael McNulty

Carolyn McCarthy

Carolyn Maloney

Nita Lowey

John LaFalce

Steve Israel

Maurice Hinchey

Eliot Engel

Joseph Crowley

Gary Ackerman

Anthony Weiner

David Price

Mike McIntyre

Bob Etheridge

Eva Clayton

Mel Watt

Earl Pomeroy

James Traficant

Ted Strickland

Thomas Sawyer

Dennis Kucinich

Marcy Kaptur

Stephanie Jones

Tony Hall

Sherrod Brown

Brad Carson

Darlene Hooley

Peter DeFazio

Earl Blumenauer

David Wu

John Murtha

Frank Mascara

Paul Kanjorski

Tim Holden

Joseph Hoeffel

Chaka Fattah

Mike Doyle

William Coyne

Robert Brady

Robert Borski

James Langevin

Patrick Kennedy

John Spratt

James Clyburn

John Tanner

Bart Gordon

Harold Ford

Bob Clement

Jim Turner

Charles Stenholm

Max Sandlin

Ciro Rodriguez

Silvestre Reyes

Solomon Ortiz

Nick Lampson

Eddie Bernice Johnson

Sheila Jackson-Lee

Ruben Hinojosa

Ralph Hall

Gene Green

Charles Gonzalez

Martin Frost

Chet Edwards

Lloyd Doggett

Ken Bentsen

Jim Matheson

Bobby Scott

James Moran

Rick Boucher

Adam Smith

Jim McDermott

Rick Larsen

Jay Inslee

Norman Dicks

Brian Baird

Nick Rahall

Alan Mollohan

David Obey

Gerald Kleczka

Ron Kind

Thomas Barrett

Tammy Baldwin

Democrats in the U.S. Senate that voted for the war in Iraq:


Lincoln

Feinstein

Dodd

Lieberman

Biden

Carper

Nelson

Cleland

Miller

Harkin

Bayh

Breaux

Landrieu

Kerry

Carnahan

Baucus

Edwards

Dorgan

Nelson

Torricelli

Reid

Clinton

Schumer

Hollings

Daschle

Johnson

Cantwell

Kohl

Rockefeller

In addition, 81 Democrats voted for the war in Iraq in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Frankly, given the wide bipartisan support for the prescription drug benefit as well as the wide bipartisan support for both wars, I am sick and tired of hearing Democrats whine about how the wars increased the deficit and debt. Democrats need to stop blaming George W. Bush for policies that a wide swath of Democrats supported – especially the Democrats who voted for those policies themselves.

Parental rights for rapists? That’s just plain evil.

Men who father children through the crime of rape should have absolutely no parental rights regarding that child. Period. It is nothing short of astonishing that so many states allow rapists to sue for visitation – allowing them to continue tormenting their victims and in effect rewarding them for their crimes.

Recognizing that there are false allegations of rape and recognizing that we must never compromise on the principle of innocent until proven guilty (anyone remember the Duke Lacrosse case?) rapists should have absolutely no parental rights. The first people in line to demand reform should be law and order conservatives

Barack Obama: Our pro-infanticide President

Four years ago, I wrote a series of articles on Barack Obama’s opposition to legislation that would make it illegal to kill a baby after he is born. Now, LifeNews.com reports on new audio that has surfaced of Obama arguing against this legislation – essentially arguing against making infanticide illegal.

See here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here for those articles.

Outside of the pro-life community, this issue got very little discussion, and the McCain campaign would not touch it. But it is every bit as relevant now as it was four years ago, especially in light of Obama’s mandate that employers provide contraception and birth control – including abortifacient drugs – to employees even if the employer has a religious objection to birth control, contraception or abortion.

As a side note, birth control and contraception are not the same, which is why I listed them separately. Contraception prevents the fertilization of an egg – it prevents a new person from being created at all. Birth control is a different matter, especially since even Planned Parenthood has admitted that the birth control pill can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. If life begins at fertilization (and there is no other place where it could begin) this is unacceptable.

The last Democrat who served as President, Bill Clinton, was so extreme that he vetoed the ban on partial-birth abortion. We did not get a federal ban on this barbaric procedure until after George W. Bush took office. President Obama is even more extreme, even opposing efforts to protect babies that survive abortion and are born alive. It is absolutely critical that Obama is defeated in November.