If Congress Isn’t Going to Defund Planned Parenthood, Then We Have to Do This Instead

Pro-life conservatives have been frustrated with the ongoing failure to defund Planned Parenthood, and for good reason. America’s largest abortion provider markets itself as a defender of “women’s health,” but performs zero mammograms, willfully covers up statutory rapes, and has had to pay multimillion dollar settlements for Medicaid billing fraud.

All while ending the lives of hundreds of thousands of unborn children for massive profits every year.

So when the latest omnibus spending bill passed with half a billion dollars of funding for Planned Parenthood intact, even with Republicans in control of the White House and both the House and the Senate, conservatives were enraged. And not just because omnibus bills happen because Congress is stupid.

Watching Republicans campaign as pro-life champions every election cycle and then continue to send half a billion freaking dollars — that’s five hundred million dollars, $500,000,000.00 — every year is extremely infuriating.

Now, I don’t believe that Congressional Republicans are secretly pro-choice and actually want to continue providing funding to abortion clinics. What’s far more likely is they are wary of the backlash from Democrats and the media, who would complain that those mean ol’ Republicans are heartlessly cutting medical care to poor women.

Fine. Here’s an easy solution.

Don’t defund the budget for Planned Parenthood. Transfer the money. 

Take all of the money we send to Planned Parenthood clinics, and instead, send the money to medical clinics that provide services to the poor.

Congress has proven they have little appetite for cutting spending, so fine, just take the money we are giving to these abortion clinics and instead, send it to other health clinics in the exact same towns. Dollar for dollar, take it from the abortion clinic and just send it down the street.

The communities will still have the exact same amount of federal funds coming their way, but the money will go much further since it will be going to actual health clinics, and not Planned Parenthood, with its lavish budgets for its political activity, lobbying, contributions to candidates, executives’ salaries and benefits, travel, and events — not to mention all those flashy advertisements, graphics, and videos all over their social media.

And let’s be very clear: there is an abundance of choices for where these funds could be sent.

Drafting the bill should be an open and bipartisan discussion. Members of Congress should take into consideration the clinics in their own districts that are providing excellent care to the needy in their communities. If the Democrats truly care about women’s health, they should participate in the debate and offer amendments with their suggestions.

Some ideas for qualifying for the funds could include accepting Medicaid patients, providing a certain percentage of services pro bono or at reduced costs, being in operation for a certain number of years to prove stability, providing comprehensive prenatal and gynecological health care, and so on.

A similar program was adopted in Texas in 2013. The state cut funding to abortion providers and created the “Healthy Texas Women” program, providing low-income women with birth control, family planning services, and other health care. A Daily Signal report called the program a success, with the state’s pregnancy rate remaining relatively stable and abortions dropping.

There was also a massive drop in Medicaid and contraceptive claims, which liberals attempted to frame as a negative, but a federal civil suit was brought against Planned Parenthood for Medicaid billing fraud from 2003 to 2009 and eventually settled for $4.3 million dollars. Plus, the enactment of Obamacare during this period meant that women with those policies were entitled to free contraception. In other words, when another government program provided contraception coverage and the fraud spigot was cut off, that made the number of claims go down, not women forgoing necessary medical care.

“The data belies the claim that Planned Parenthood was necessary to women’s health care in Texas,” said Casey Mattox, a senior legal counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom.

The Democrats say they care about women’s health care. The Republicans say they don’t want to send money to an abortion provider. Fine. This solution lets both parties do what they say they want to do. 

If we can’t get our Republican-controlled Congress to cut spending, let’s at least quit sending money to America’s largest abortion provider, and send it somewhere it can still help women.

Advertisements

GOP Announces Sweeping New Plan To Lose All Senate Seats By 2020 (Satire)

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Inspired by the near-impossible loss of an Alabama Senate seat to a liberal Democrat, the Republican Party Wednesday unveiled a sweeping new plan to lose all of its Senate seats within the next four years.

Laying the groundwork for the plan, the GOP will select a slate of horrible candidates they will support from the primaries all the way through the final tally, no matter what awful revelations about their past come to light.

“If we just continue picking and backing terrible candidates, we’ll be sure to hit our goal,” RNC chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel said in an exclusive interview on Fox News. “We’ll stand by them all the way from the time they’re nominated through the moment we lose the Senate seat we could easily have won with any half-decent candidate.”

“This is the start of a big new relaunch for the GOP, in which we’ll alienate all of our constituents and lose all of our clout in absolutely no time at all,” she added.

According to inside sources, the Republicans have already floated several candidates to begin their devastating Senate loss campaign, with surefire losers like a resurrected zombie Adolf Hitler, former football star O.J. Simpson, and a half-eaten bag of pork rinds all getting full GOP support for Senate races in the coming years.


Disclaimer: The above story is satire. It is completely fictitious.

Insane Obsession of President Trump’s “Insanity”

Have you heard the one about the clinically insane commander-in-chief?

If not, you just haven’t been watching enough CNN and MSNBC.  Those networks, along with some anti-Trump print outlets, have been gleefully and repeatedly questioning the president’s mental stability.

This is another effort by hard-core leftists to somehow get Donald Trump out of the Oval Office.  Immediately after last year’s election there were allegations of voter fraud, followed by the absurd hope that some Trump electors would break faith and vote for Hillary Clinton.

Then Trump’s legion of enemies settled on Russia and “collusion,” which they believed would finally nail the coffin shut on Donald Trump’s presidency.  But barring something unforeseen, allegations of collusion are going nowhere.  That’s why the left has recently swung from collusion to “obstruction of justice.”

Throughout all this there has been another ominous undercurrent that the left believes could pull President Trump beneath the water.  That is the notion that he is insane.  Literally.

MSNBC’s Morning Joe and his merry band of armchair shrinks have been leading the way.  Joe Scarborough has decided that President Trump is “completely detached from reality” and perhaps in the “early stages of dementia.”

Co-host Mika Brzezinski and the regular guests, following Joe’s lead as always, also question the president’s mental fitness.

Not to be outdone, CNN’s Brian Stelter has tried to boost his anemic ratings by implying that the president of the United States is off his rocker.  He recently sat spellbound as a historian declared that there is “a sick man in the White House.”

TV hosts and publicity-seeking historians are free to think and say whatever they want, no matter how irresponsible.  But things get dicier when mental health “professionals” race to analyze the president from afar.

Last weekend, MSNBC welcomed psychologist Bandy Lee, who bandied about some truly reprehensible implications.  “We must act soon,” she warned, because “things will get worse.”  Lee actually declared that President Trump is “mentally falling apart” and warned that he will “likely become violent.”

Evidently the esteemed Dr. Lee has never heard of the “Goldwater Rule,” which was enacted by the American Psychiatric Association after scores of shrinks questioned the sanity of Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater.  According to that edict, it is unethical and irresponsible for a mental health professional to diagnose a person they have never met.

So who’s nuttier?  President Trump, who by all accounts commands the respect of his closest aides, or Bandy Lee, who smashed her professional code of ethics just to get a little face time on TV?

The goal of all this is, as always, to get President Trump out of the White House.  The best mechanism to do that, his antagonists now believe, is the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, adopted in 1967.

Under Article Four, a president can be removed when the Vice President and a majority of Cabinet secretaries deem their boss to be “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

Donald Trump is certainly an unusual president, which is putting it mildly.  His tweets, jokes, and comments can be strikingly odd.  But he was making those same tweets, jokes, and comments during last year’s campaign.  His unconventional behavior was a major force behind his victory, and that behavior simply hasn’t changed.

His foes are desperately trying to find some way, any way, to overturn the results of the election.  Their efforts began last November 9th and they have not stopped.

Nor are they likely to stop any time soon.  If the Republicans hold the House next year, hopes for impeachment are pretty much gone unless Robert Mueller comes up with a smoking cannon.  Even if Democrats take the House, it will require two-thirds of the Senate to actually convict the president and remove him from office.

So if impeachment is nearly impossible, the bitter clingers only have the 25th Amendment on which to pin their fading hopes.  Trump-loathers in the media are trying to lay the groundwork with all this reckless talk about insanity.

Do they really think Mike Pence and the majority of the Cabinet will stage a coup against a man they genuinely seem to respect?

Now that is a true sign of insanity.

Clemson Professor Must Apologize Or Resign After Defaming All Republicans As Racists

This past week an Assistant Professor of Human-Centered Computing at Clemson University, Bart Knijnenburg, took to social media to attack all Republicans as racists deserving of violence and scorn.

Mr. Knijnenburg wrote that “All Trump supporters, nay, all Republicans, are racist scum” on his social media account, comments which have prompted passionate debate. In response to a dissenting comment on his post, he went further writing that “All Republicans, yes, your complacency made this happen. Pick a side: denounce your affiliation, or admit that you’re a racist.” The professor’s comments are derogatory and defamatory to the majority of South Carolina voters and millions of Americans who are supporters of the Republican Party.

I denounce this sort of hate-filled rhetoric directed at Republicans. As you are well aware, the South Carolina Republican Party helped elect our state’s first-ever female, Indian-American Governor in our friend Nikki Haley. U.S. Senator Tim Scott, one of conservative champions of the United States Senate, is the first African American U.S. Senator from South Carolina and he is a member of the Republican Party. The Republican Party is diverse, young, and growing, and it is not exclusive to any one race, ethnicity, or gender. An attack on all Republicans as racist because of the actions of alt-right fanatics in Charlottesville is absurd. The so-called “alt-right” isn’t right, and they certainly do not speak for conservatives like me.

President Clements issued a well-worded response, but did not call on Assistant Professor Knijnenburg to apologize for his hateful rhetoric. While I appreciate Dr. Clements’s response, it still constitutes a double standard. If Mr. Knijnenburg was a Republican, and he had defamed the Democrats, he would have been escorted off campus by security. It is time that all Americans, regardless of our political party or principles, treat one another with dignity and respect. The hateful rhetoric surrounding race, ideology, and party affiliation has reached a fever-pitch not known since the 1960s, and this tenor is untenable. I do hope that Clemson University President Clements asks Mr. Knijnenburg to apologize, and for his resignation if he does not. Mr. Knijnenburg was also involved with Clemson’s Black Lives Matter spin-off “See the Stripes”. In response to Milo Yiannopoulos’ speaking event (that was scheduled for October 18th, 2016) at Clemson University a group of Left-leaning students and their respective organizations formed the “Anti-Milo Event Committee” to protest against the conservative speaker. The Clemson chapters of Students for a Democratic Society (whose motto is “crush the right”) and “See the Stripes” are the primary instigators of the protest committee. Here, you can listen to an audio recording of one of their meetings, trying to stop people’s right to the first amendment:

dad176a714f04cc498bec86685cd8baf

In these difficult times for our country, we certainly cannot afford to have academic leaders using their platforms at public universities to fan the flames of division. I hope that Clemson President James Clements can appreciate this fact.

My Thoughts on Charlottesville

First of all, racism is wrong. And disgusting. And evil. Secondly, what we saw in Charlottesville was racism. In fact, it was terrorism. They can dress it up in their fancy alt-right excuses. They can say it was about free speech, or “putting America first”, or monuments, or the Confederacy, or (some how that I don’t understand) Christianity (should we tell them that Jesus was Jewish?).

These idiots knew it wasn’t supposed to be about any of those things. It wasn’t supposed to be patriotic, Christian, or conservative. This was about losers that crawled out of their mom’s basement in the first time in ten years to have a massive white supremacy rally.

Third, these people are not conservatives. They’re not patriots and they’re not constitutionalists and they don’t represent the American right. These are the guys who peaked in middle school and are still mad about that their frosted tips that they got in sixth grade did not lead them to a life of success. Nobody likes them.

So fourthly, to some of you on the left who are saddling up on high horses: spare me your judgement. We really don’t need your self-righteous condemnation about this being “our people.” I don’t think you want to go there. Because correct me if I’m wrong but, I haven’t heard too many who call out the violence of the anti-fascists by name. I don’t remember you taking the fall for the cops that were killed in Dallas last year and I don’t remember you blaming the left for James Hodgkinson (the congressional baseball practice shooter).

That’s because these anti-fascists, cop killers, and the Hodgkinsons don’t represent the left. Just like these racist bigots don’t represent the right.

Fifth, Donald Trump has not said enough, neither did Obama during his presidency. But the shortcomings of both of them don’t make either one better. Leaders especially need to be able to call out evil in this country by name.

So for all of you alt-right racists, you are irrelevant. I know you’re just being apart of this thing because you want to feel important. But in reality, you’re not. History will remember you as a worthless blob of human fecal matter (in they same way as Hitler and the nazis).

This is America, we are free to disagree, we are free to protest, counter-protest, and fiercely debate. But why would we recklessly waste that freedom for racism and hate? What good is that going to do? What is that going to accomplish? How many lives are going to be lost?

So for those of us who are not on the fringes (on both sides), all we have to do is start a conversation, reach across to the other side, and start listening. We may not ever agree, but as long as we all have the same goal in mind, liberty and justice for all, we’ll figure out a way to get there.


Jesse Watters from Fox News also has some pretty good analysis on this whole Charlottesville situation, you should definitely check it out:

Watters’ Charlottesville Analysis

Yep, It’s Definitely Donald Trump Who’s the Tyrant Here

Hitler. Mussolini. Stalin. Pol Pot. al-Assad. Hussein. Gaddafi. Franco. Kim Jong Il. Each one is considered a dictator, a tyrant who’s greed for power is only surpassed by their cruelty and inhumanity.

If you were to wade into the depths of #TheResistance on social media (which I don’t recommend), you’d also see a movement to brand Donald Trump a dictator and his administration a lawless tyranny over the nation.  To be sure, the Trump administration has done itself no favors is coming across as inept, overly ambitious and yet clearly out of its depth. They have said things that, yes, are frightening.

But let us be absolutely honest here. When it comes to tyranny in America, there is no tyranny except for that of the mob.

Social media is both a blessing and a curse. The instant communication of thoughts to the world allows for breaking news to break faster and hard-hitting news to hit harder. The downside is that it opens you and everyone you know and love up for ridicule, petition, and even expulsion from society.

Case in point, the lad from Google who wrote what is being called a “manifesto” opposing Google’s diversity policy. It seems that, virtually instantly, this person was the target of a mob whose sole purpose was to flush him out of The Collective.

It worked, too. Google fired the man (interestingly, a new social media platform called “Gab”, which touts itself as an ad-free, free speech platform, offered to hire him), and the Left was delighted that the wrongspeak was punished.

This is not the first time, however, that someone’s livelihood was destroyed over thinking or believing the “wrong” thing. We’ve covered countless times the bakers, photographers, and other business people whose lives were ruined and their businesses shuttered because they dared to not conform with the Left’s ideology.

“But Mr. Reagan Conservative,” some on the Left might cry, “this isn’t tyranny because mobs aren’t the government.” If you think that, you are wrong. It is with the help of the courts that these attacks on private businesses have flourished. It is the politicians who speak out and encourage this behavior that ruins the lives of people whose only crime is thoughtcrime.

For another example, take Chelsea Handler, the so-called comedienne who actually suggested we criminalize speech.

Where, exactly, does this type of legislation begin and where does it end? By the Left’s standards, virtually everything is racist, so that means if you laugh at something someone else deems is racist, you’re going to (at best) be fined. This is an actual proposal from someone who thinks there is no problem with criminalizing what someone finds funny. There is no end to this slippery slope, either.

Or take the case of Dana Loesch, who is under attack from journalists and Leftists because she appeared in an NRA video ad and says she wants to fact-check the media. The number of people who want to silence her by reporting her to the feds, threatening her husband and her children, and making graphic, sexual threats to and about her is appalling.

But this is the new norm. This is the world we live in now. We have to deal with the tyranny of the mob before we can move on to the tyranny of any White House occupant.

So, forgive me when someone calls Donald Trump a fascist dictator with one breath and turns around to advocate banning speech because they don’t like it.

 

Without Trump, Pritzker and Emanuel Would be Lonely, Sad and a bit Lost

As a resident of Illinois, I’m also involved and interested in state politics. As I’ve said before, I usually do not write that much about state politics, I usually focus on the nation as a whole; this will be one of my last post about Illinois politics, unless something worth writing about occurs.


What would Illinois Democrats do without President Donald Trump?

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and billionaire J.B. Pritzker — the choice of boss Democrats for governor — spend their time talking and talking and talking about Trump.

With J.B. and Rahm it’s Trump this and Trump that. And they speak in excited, fearful and outraged tones.

If we were living in Neanderthal times, Rahm and J.B. would gather us around the campfire, pointing their fingers into the darkness at some demon spirit, and smile, thinly, as we huddled close to them for protection.

But these are modern times. Politicians don’t tell stories around the campfire. They use media.

Still, where would they be without Trump?

They’d be devastated, lost and lonely and afraid without Trump, because Trump is his own gift to them.

Because without Trump, they might have to address what’s been going on in Chicago and Illinois — from blood constantly flowing in the city’s streets to corruption and chronically bad schools, and even those idiotic Pritzker mystery toilets.

If you were in their shoes, would you want to talk about City Hall’s failure to stop the bloody gang wars or the failure to effectively address black unemployment?

Would you like questions about whether you used union plumbers to rip out the toilets of a building next to your mansion, so the toilet-less home could be termed “uninhabitable” and you’d get a nice property tax break?

If you were Rahm and J.B., would you like to talk about Democratic Boss Mike Madigan and the game of chicken he’s playing with Illinois schoolchildren and suburban taxpayers?

Or the $500 million Chicago Public Schools just borrowed that will cost an additional $850 million in interest payments?

If you were Rahm or J.B., or most any Democrat running, would you want to talk about Boss Madigan?

And just what would Pritzker say, exactly? That he can’t wait to be elected governor to do Madigan’s bidding, like some eager-to-please billionaire Mr. Belvedere?

It’s likely they really don’t like Trump. It’s also possible that you can’t stand him either.

Or, perhaps you do like him. Or perhaps you like some of his policies — like the appointment of a conservative to the Supreme Court with the promise of more to come — but you loathe all that vulgar Fifth Avenue Hillbillies drama in the White House.

But if you are a true student of politics, you’ll put aside tribal feelings and realize that Trump’s presence in the White House, his stupid tweets, and the things he says and how he says them, all give nourishment to Illinois Democrats like Emanuel and Pritzker.

And lately they’ve been trying to tie him to Gov. Bruce Rauner, even though Rauner doesn’t much like Trump.

But the Trump outrage is an easy story to tell and write, too, even if we’re not huddled around a campfire, fearful of a demon in the dark.

It’s much easier than talking about what decades of Chicago Democratic rule have done to the city and the state.

“I’m proud to be part of the resistance,” Pritzker announced the other day, standing in front of Trump Tower, which is to Democrats what Stonehenge must have been to wizards with blue face paint back in the day.

“When I’m governor, we’re not going to be silent like Bruce Rauner,” Pritzker said. “Illinois will be a firewall against Donald Trump’s destructive and bigoted agenda.”

“He is his own worst enemy,” Emanuel said of Trump, reaching into his pouch to slap a dab of Trump on Rauner. “I actually don’t think it’s an accident — since people say, ‘Oh we need a businessman’ — they don’t understand politics, and we see it in our governor’s office.”

So what we really need are powerful Chicago Democrats who’ve spent decades running the city and the state into the ground?

Don’t we already have that?

What is obvious is that Rahm and Pritzker and the other Democrats are good at taking their shiny Trumpian rattle and shaking it, furiously.

They focus our attention on the demon, to distract us. But from what?

How about the more than 2,220 shooting victims in Chicago through Aug. 2, and the more than 410 homicides so far ths year, most of them coming in the bloody gang wars that City Hall has no answer for? And violent crimes on the CTA that remain unsolved?

And black unemployment? Why talk of that, when it’s much easier, at least politically, for Democrats, to embrace Latinos, including immigrants who are here illegally. That is why Emanuel has now become desperate, seeking re-election.

Black unemployment in Illinois is the highest in the nation. And the share of 20- to 24-year-old African-American men who are neither working nor in school is 43 percent, according to a report presented in January by the Great Cities Institute at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

President Barack Obama from Chicago — not Trump — was in power for eight years as many of those young men were jailed or shot down in the gang wars. And what was done?

And the Chicago Public Schools that didn’t prepare them for work has a long history of mismanagement, corruption and fiscal failure under the Democrats of Chicago.

But Emanuel and Pritzker don’t want the conversation to get awkward. So they control it, with helpers to shape the debate.

It’s so much easier to talk about Trump, isn’t it?