Killing Babies Around the World
You've probably heard that Biden has rescinded the "Mexico City Policy." And, like me, you likely thought, "So? I mean it has something to do with abortion and apparently something about abortion in Mexico City, but ...?" As it turns out, the policy is not a Trump policy. It came out of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 that disallowed using foreign organizations receiving federal funds to use them to encourage abortion as family planning. It was implimented by Ronald Reagan in 1981 and announced to the U.N. ... in Mexico City -- thus the "Mexico City Policy." It isn't Mexico City; it is worldwide. Since then every Republican president used it and every Democratic president rescinded it, thereby insuring that your tax dollars can be used worldwide to encourage killing babies in other countries. Because, apparently, killing babies wherever they may be found is a priority for the Democratic Party.
What Do You Know?
President Biden has signed three executive actions aimed at reuniting migrant families. Now, I think that reuniting families is a good thing and I'm all for it. I do have a question, though. ICE suggested that too many of the adults with children were not parents with children. The kids that were with them were not their own. In October there were approximately 500 children yet to be reunited with their parents. According to Homeland Security many of those children's parents "refused a reunion." Reports are that "two-thirds of the separated parents are believed to have returned to their home countries." It's not all "the evil U.S." and it's not all Trump, and Biden does not appear to be taking any of this into account.
Just Embarrassing
Utter nonsense. Apparently some of those storming the Capitol last month, outraged that the election was being stolen, didn't vote. Sorry. If you didn't vote, you don't get to complain. You certainly don't get to riot.
Not Protected Status
The U.S. has laws about the use of firearms, even for law enforcement. Generally speaking, the use of deadly force is reserved for the protection of life only. So an assailant bent on slugging a police officer, for instance, can't be shot on that basis. "Like force" is the rule. Now, if a white officer in the course of a criminal investigation happens to shoot a black person who was armed -- a threat to the officer's life -- then a significant portion of the nation today would be outraged. Sure, there was the crime and, sure, there was the threat, but it's a white officer shooting a black person and that must never happen. Of course, the same is not true for the officer that shot an unarmed "break and enter" suspect, Ashli Babbitt. Yes, she was breaking and entering. No, she was not armed -- did not represent a threat to life. Yes, she is dead because she (alone) was killed by a Capitol Police officer who will not face charges. Ashli is not in any kind of protected status, and any of you that think trivialities like "the law" or "I'm an American citizen with rights" or the like will matter should think again.
Not Sure What to Believe
You heard, I hope, about singer Marilyn Manson being accused by multiple sources of some pretty foul sexual shenanigans. According to the Bee, Manson has decided to avoid abuse allegations by running for office as a Democrat. Of course, the Bee is satire, but the story actually seems to make sense. The Angels suspend a coach for allegations of lewd behavior but a Democrat running for office gets a pass. "Believe the woman ... unless he's one of our boys."
7 comments:
Dan, despite your certainties that Dems always want to "believe the woman" and "do what's right," you apparently failed to note that no one ever pursued the 8 women's allegations of sexual abuse from a key Dem. Now, let's see, who was that? Oh, yeah, the current president. The outcome? Nothing. Nothing at all. All indications were that the story, examined and validated by others, was genuine. The outcome was, "He said he didn't do it, so he didn't. Move on." I understand your dedication to your side, but you probably should allow for the possibility that they may not all be as principled as you like to think.
Your point about Biden is well taken, but leaves out credible accusations of sexual impropriety against multiple national level DFL candidates over the last few years, as well as Harris’ apparent propensity to use sex to advance her career.
Biden's case was just my most prominent example. It's not just him. It's not just the DFL candidates. Interestingly, when Harris was running against him, she complained about the accusations and demanded we "believe the women" ... right up until he named her his VP candidate. Clearly it's not a "Biden" thing or a "Dem" things; it's a human thing. (Females are also capable of sexual abuse and harassment.) It's just that "we" don't like to admit it when it's "one of our boys." It's called hypocrisy.
Oh, it’s definitely a human thing. It’s just rare when folks don’t give their own side a pass on things.
It’s almost like there’s something that makes us do or excuse bad things.
Oh, who would have ever thought that Marilyn Manson would turn out to be a vile human being?
Did not see that coming.
It’s always sad when virtuous people fall like that. If only there’d been some clue.
Post a Comment