Twisted Politics of Abortion

The Democrats' Partial Pro-Lifers
By Robert D. Novak Monday, April 23, 2007; Page A17

After the Supreme Court upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act on Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said at a news conference: "I would only say that this isn't the only decision that a lot of us wish that [Justice Samuel] Alito weren't there and [former justice Sandra Day] O'Connor were there." Does that mean Reid was repudiating his 2003 Senate vote in favor of the bill? No, he told me Thursday, he was talking about other decisions by Alito.

...Reid, another of the 17 Democrats, was given a 65 percent pro-choice record by NARAL in 2006. He tried to resolve the confusion created by his comments by noting that the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 lineup on partial birth abortion flipped when Alito replaced O'Connor last year (with Reid opposing his confirmation). Reid's statement Wednesday was widely interpreted as backtracking on his 2003 vote. Roll Call said Reid "seemed to think the Supreme Court's decision was unwise."

"Not at all," Reid said when I asked him. Recalling his many votes against partial birth abortion, he indicated he supported the court's decision. "I just don't like what Alito has done on other cases," he said. What other cases? "I can't recall," Reid replied, but he promised aides would let me know.

They did so several hours later. Out of more than 50 decisions that Alito has participated in, Reid disagreed with four. These include Alito dissents, in 5 to 4 opinions, on mandating the federal government to consider global warming and the Hamdan case granting habeas corpus rights to U.S. detainees. Alito concurred in a 5 to 4 decision limiting federal regulation of wetlands and wrote the majority opinion in a 6 to 3 outcome (concurred with by liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) rejecting federal funding of an educational consultant under the disabilities act. But there is no record of Reid criticizing Alito's court opinions before Wednesday.

Good for him!

McCain Message to Joke Critics: Get a Life

By KATHLEEN HENNESSEY, The Associated Press, Friday, April 20, 2007; 12:25 AM
LAS VEGAS --
...
While campaigning for president in South Carolina on Wednesday, McCain responded to a question about how to deal with Iran by breaking into the melody of the Beach Boys song "Barbara Ann" but changing the lyrics to "Bomb Iran."

"That old, eh, that old Beach Boys song, 'Bomb Iran,'" McCain joked and then added: "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb ... anyway, ah ..." The audience responded with laughter.

The Arizona Republican was asked for his reaction to any negative response to the joke when he arrived in Las Vegas for a fundraiser Thursday night.

"Please, I was talking to some of my old veterans friends," he told reporters. "My response is, Lighten up and get a life."

When reporters asked if the joke was insensitive, McCain said: "Insensitive to what? The Iranians?"

Are they Knuts?!

Polar bear cub Knut receives death threat

BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany's celebrity polar bear cub Knut has received an anonymous death threat, causing alarm at Berlin Zoo Thursday and prompting heightened security.

"We were contacted by the zoo about a (threatening) letter it had received," said a police spokeswoman, adding officers had investigated but they did not believe it was serious.

Top-selling Bild newspaper said the zoo had received a hand-written fax from a suspected animal hater with the words: "Knut is dead! Thursday midday."

t also said the zoo had trebled the number of minders to 15 responsible for the safety of media star Knut, who has been on newspaper front pages and news shows across Germany and around the world for weeks.

"Death threat, police protection for Knut!" Bild wrote in bold letters on page one above a picture of the sad-looking polar bear cub peering out from behind a tree branch.

Bild also published a picture of a security guard in civilian clothes guarding Knut from behind a rock.

The Supreme Court giveth and the Supreme Court taketh away

Oh, sure, NOW Democrats are upset when the SC plays God and reverses precendent! It's never too late to right a wrong - just think Plessy, Brown v. Board, etc.

The following comments are quite extreme considering a vast majority of the public is opposed to the barbaric partial birth abortion (which, to you liberals, DOES exist, IS a medical term, is NEVER medically necessary, and involves pulling the baby out of the body feet first, until only the head remains inside, then it's skull is punctured and the brains sucked out. Nice. Have fun defending that. Yay women's rights!):

On Wednesday, Edwards said he "could not disagree more strongly" with the high court's decision.

"The ban upheld by the Court is an ill-considered and sweeping prohibition that does not even take account for serious threats to the health of individual women," Edwards said. "This hard right turn is a stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election."

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama said the decision is a dramatic departure from precedents safeguarding women's health.

"I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women," Obama said.

Clinton said Wednesday's ruling "blatantly defies" the high court's decision in 2000 to strike down a state partial-birth abortion law because it failed to provide an exemption for a woman's health.

"As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account," she said. "It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OJ66P80&show_article=1

Sah-WEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!!

Too many left-wing athiests, not enough sense

Boston Globe Letter to the Editor
Bumper sticker's sticking point

TO THE owner of the car seen driving on Route 128 in Reading on Sunday, with the bumper sticker "Too many right-wing Christians, not enough lions":

How does "Too many orthodox Jews, not enough Nazis" sound? Or "Too many fetuses, not enough abortionists"? Would it be OK to make bumper stickers out of these slogans? Obviously not.

But apparently it's OK to advocate the extermination of Christians.

The hypocrisy of the radical left never ceases to amaze me.

Anyone else see this car in Reading?

From The Dartmouth Online, not Onion

Somehow this is not a parody:

Apology for hockey tournament mascot

By Josie Harper, Director of Athletics and Recreation
Published on Tuesday, November 21, 2006

To the Editor:

I am writing to strongly denounce the historical and recent affronts to the Native American community at Dartmouth and to offer the support of the athletics department in playing a leading role to combat racial, ethnic and sexist ignorance and intolerance on our campus.

At the same time, I must offer a sincere apology to the Native American community, and the Dartmouth community as a whole, for an event that will understandably offend and hurt people within our community. In late December, we will host a men's ice hockey tournament that includes the University of North Dakota Fighting Sioux. UND is one of 14 colleges or universities that continue to maintain a Native American name and image to represent their athletic teams.

Let me state clearly that UND's position is offensive and wrong. When we scheduled UND nearly two years ago to participate in our tournament, we did so without considering their team's nickname and symbol. Perhaps we should have, but I deeply regret that we didn't.

On Friday, as I was traveling on College business, a member of my staff met with the Native American Council to discuss our hockey tournament and to offer our apology for the pain that it will cause. In the days and weeks ahead, I will develop a specific and continuing plan to address issues of respect and tolerance within the athletic department as well as considering a policy for scheduling athletic contests against institutions that support offensive nicknames and symbols.

This is so unbelievably ridiculous, I'm practically speechless. But I will say that an article in the March 4, 2002 edition of Sports Illustrated magazine showed 83% of Indians polled said that professional teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots or symbols.

NYT has solved the mystery of American Idol's Popularity!

Voting Rights Drive ‘Idol,’ Not the Abuse or the Hair

The high viewer turnout for “Idol,” which is on tonight, cannot solely be explained by technological advances or a regression in human nature. It cannot be a coincidence that television voting rights arose so soon after the 2000 election left slightly more than half the voting population feeling cheated. Those who didn’t go to the polls and fear that their abstention inadvertently made possible the invasion of Iraq may feel even worse. “Idol” could be a displacement ritual: a psychological release that allows people to vote — and even vote often — in a contest that has no dangerous or even lasting consequences. (Even losers win out in the end: both Mr. Gore and Jennifer Hudson ended up on the Oscar stage.)

Maybe the reason that more people didn’t turn out for the 2004 presidential race, despite the closeness of the tally four years earlier, is that they were still in denial and distracted by “American Idol.”

Bush Can Do No Right

This article is ridiculous!

Bush success vs. al Qaeda breeds long-term worries

President George W. Bush's administration has crippled al Qaeda's ability to carry out major attacks on U.S. soil but at a political and economic cost that could leave the country more vulnerable in years to come, experts say.

Even as al Qaeda tries to rebuild operations in Pakistan, experts including current and former intelligence officials believe the group would have a hard time staging another September 11 because of U.S. success at killing or capturing senior members whose skills and experience have not been replaced.

"If the question is why al Qaeda hasn't carried out another 9/11 attack, the answer I think is that if they could have, they would have," said a former senior U.S. intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Tighter U.S. airport security, greater scrutiny of people entering the United States and better coordination between the CIA, FBI and Department of Homeland Security also have made it harder for extremists to enter the country, experts said.

Home-grown extremists in the United States are believed to be isolated and lacking the will or ability to carry out large-scale operations.

...Some experts warn that the successes of Bush's war on terrorism have been undercut by huge security costs, strains on the U.S. military from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and resentment of the United States abroad.

"Look at al Qaeda's plans," said Michael Scheuer, who once led the CIA team devoted to finding al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. "They're very simply defined in two phrases: spread out America's forces and bleed the United States to bankruptcy. I'd argue America has been under attack successfully every day since 9/11 from that perspective."

That doesn't make any sense and gives al Qaeda waaay too much credit. Al Qaeda didn't plan for any of this - they attacked us on 9/11 because they thought we were a paper tiger and wouldn't strike back - lessons from Mogadishu. And how could they have known we'd go into Iraq?

If you want to argue our response has hurt us, that's fine - I completely disagree, of course - but don't try to tell me that Al Qaeda planned this and we're playing right into their hands by successfully stopping them!

Those who forget the past . . .

Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims

Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Governmentbacked study has revealed.

It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.

...It found some teachers are dropping courses covering the Holocaust at the earliest opportunity over fears Muslim pupils might express anti-Semitic and anti-Israel reactions in class.

The researchers gave the example of a secondary school in an unnamed northern city, which dropped the Holocaust as a subject for GCSE coursework.

The report said teachers feared confronting 'anti-Semitic sentiment and Holocaust denial among some Muslim pupils'.