Fact-Check Websites have Little to do with Facts

Just further proof not to trust so-called fact-checking websites. They, like most leftist “news” sites, have morphed into nothing more liberal enablers. They do nothing but excuse away or cover up the actual facts to protect those with the same liberal worldview. Here is just one more example.

from NewsBusters:

Snopes.com keeps attacking conservative website articles as “False” when the facts favor the conservatives. On November 9, these “fact checkers” tagged LifeNews.com as “False” for a headline that said “Arizona Senate Candidate Kyrsten Sinema Voted to Allow Abortions Up to Birth.” read more

Video Podcast – You can put a Price on a Human Life

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

And that price is not nearly as much as you might think.

Last Saturday, lil-Chelsea Clinton spoke at a #RiseUpforRoe event in New York, where she and other pro-abortion leftist women rallied against Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Today I discuss what she said and why it is just so absurd, and frankly just wrong. read more

Black Conservative Censored by Instagram

from the Daily Wire:

Instagram Censors Conservative Columnist For Saying: Planned Parenthood Kills More Blacks Than The KKK

Conservative columnist Ryan Bomberger, a black man who was adopted after being conceived in rape, dared to speak the truth about Planned Parenthood and abortion in general: it kills more black people than the KKK ever did. For that, Instagram censored him.

Writing for LifeNews, Bomberger claims that a meme he had created for #WorldPopulationDay in which he blasted Planned Parenthood for their killing of black children was censored by Instagram for supposedly violating “community guidelines.” read more

Trump’s War on Women Continues

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

The left is once again in melt down mode over Trump’s latest supposed war on something they hold dear. This time it is the President’s wanton disregard for ObamaCare’s mandate requiring free contraception and his “administration’s increasingly bizarre war on abortion.”

The New York Times writes in an article entitled, “Why Judges Matter,” that the Trump administration is attempting to block access to abortions for “undocumented teenagers” and employee access to birth control.

As if right on cue, a leftist hack federal district court judge in Philadelphia, Wendy Beetlestone, stepped in and blocked the administration’s attempt at both saving human life and providing for employer’s religious and moral objection to contraception.

Imagine the lengths the left will go through to get these young illegals to this country safely and insist they stay at any cost, only to authorize and encourage the murder of one after they arrive. This is exactly what they are proposing, by offering free and easy abortions to illegals. read more

Video Podcast – Pastor for Reproductive Rights – Price Gouging Can be Good

by: the Common Constitutionalist

A Female Methodist Reverend claims she was “moved by Scripture” to become an abortion advocate. She says her interpretation of the Bible called her to join the pro-abortion movement.

No one likes price-gouging – especially during times of exceptional need, as in the case of Hurricane victims. I argue that these pirates who jack up prices of goods and services actually perform a needed service to the desperate evacuees. read more

The Nazis were more Humane than Modern-Day Abortionists

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

In my opinion, there are two types of pro-abortion females. I was going to say pro-choice, but that term gives one a false impression. Fact is there are only two choices. If you are not pro-life, the only other choice is pro-death or pro-abortion, which is the same. There is no other “choice.”

One can just be ignorantly pro-abortion. These females are naturally progressive and have been told often enough that it is a woman’s right to choose to end a pregnancy, that they believe it. Most have given the subject very little, if any thought, beyond just parroting what they’ve heard their whole lives. No more than, “my body – my choice,” or other such slogans – which is enough to “fit in” with the rest of the progressive crowd. Any contrary stance would be uncool, and of course, all the cool people are pro-abortion.

As I said, this stance is born of ignorance, which can be cured with the proper education. Ignorance, as we know, is merely the lack of knowledge, which is far afield from stupidity. One consciously chooses to be, or remain stupid. This ignorance can almost be excused.

The other type of pro-abortion female is far worse and cannot be excused or explained away. These are the radical feminists who treat abortion like the Holy Sacrament of the religion of leftism. These females lack any moral center and will promote any means to end the life of a baby. read more

Confession of a Eugenicist

“A life worth sacrificing”: Salon blogger admits abortion ends life

by:

Many pro-aborts try to flip the label of pro-life on us, calling us anti-abortion or anti-choice. They don’t want the reminder out there that abortion is ending a life. But one pro-abortion blogger at Salon, Mary Elizabeth Williams, is going a different route. She readily admits that abortion ends a life… and that’s A-OK.

Her response to the question of abortion ending a life? So what?

Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.

… When we try to act like a pregnancy doesn’t involve human life, we wind up drawing stupid semantic lines in the sand: first trimester abortion vs. second trimester vs. late term, dancing around the issue trying to decide if there’s a single magic moment when a fetus becomes a person. Are you human only when you’re born? Only when you’re viable outside of the womb? Are you less of a human life when you look like a tadpole than when you can suck on your thumb?

… My belief that life begins at conception is mine to cling to. And if you believe that it begins at birth, or somewhere around the second trimester, or when the kid finally goes to college, that’s a conversation we can have, one that I hope would be respectful and empathetic and fearless. We can’t have it if those of us who believe that human life exists in utero are afraid we’re somehow going to flub it for the cause. In an Op-Ed on “Why I’m Pro-Choice” in the Michigan Daily this week, Emma Maniere stated, quite perfectly, that “Some argue that abortion takes lives, but I know that abortion saves lives, too.” She understands that it saves lives not just in the most medically literal way, but in the roads that women who have choice then get to go down, in the possibilities for them and for their families. And I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing.

A life worth sacrificing. An unborn baby is indeed a life…a life which matters only if the mother finds it convenient. If the mother finds the pregnancy inconvenient, then it’s no big deal at all to end that life.

And she calls pro-lifers diabolical.

Of course, there’s something she’s getting wrong. Abortion isn’t sacrificing a life. Sacrificing a life requires willingness, for someone to stand up and say, Yes, I am willing to die for you. A mother absolutely can make a sacrifice to save the life of her unborn child – Chiara Corbella is a heart-breaking example – but an unborn child cannot be “sacrificed” for his or her mother. An unborn baby does not have a say in the decision to have an abortion; an unborn baby does not choose to die. Abortion is not a sacrifice. It’s murder. Let’s get that straight.

While Williams claims she does not want to come across as a “death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm trooper,” that’s exactly what she’s done. Some lives are worth more than others? Said every eugenicist, totalitarian dictator, and murderer who’s ever existed. That is the mindset that says it’s acceptable for parents to euthanize their disabled children, or that the elderly can be killed without their consent. By this same logic, infanticide should be completely acceptable as well. Heck, a mother should be allowed to kill her ten-year-old, too, if the mother decides that that child’s life is worth sacrificing.

It would be interesting to know who exactly gets to decide which lives are worthy to continue living, and which are not, since according to Williams, some lives are worth more than others. Are the disabled worthy of living? The elderly? The poor? Who decides? If not all humans are worthy of life, then who decides which get to live and which are sentenced to die?

I also want to point out the inherent narcissism of Williams’s argument. Not only is it acceptable to kill your unborn child merely out of inconvenience, but to Williams, it’s something worth sacrificing. How self-absorbed and narcissistic must you be to see the murder of your child as a noble, worthy sacrifice? It’s as if she thinks the baby would willingly agree to be slaughtered so Mommy doesn’t have to deal with the hassle of having a baby. That takes a seriously warped mind.

Pro-aborts will surely be cursing this article for drawing back the curtain and exposing the grisly truth about abortion. It doesn’t actually matter what people say regarding whether the unborn baby is a human life. Science has already established that it is. The question is whether or not women should have the right to take that life. And while abortion activists usually try to avoid the truth, Williams has brought it, like maggots festering underneath a rock, unflinchingly to the light for all to see.

Attribution: Marty

Real Choice and the Left

by: the Common Constitutionalist

The definition of the prefix pro-: indicating favor for party, system, idea, etc.

The definition of choice: the act of selection, the right, power, or opportunity to choose; option.some choice

The left is said to be all about Pro-Choice. Unfortunately the choice must always agree with their set of beliefs. Choice to the left is also quite myopic. The only choice for the left, is in fact, no choice at all.

I’m speaking of course, of the only pro-choice stance that liberals insist upon, and of course, it is not a choice. The correct terms are, or should be, pro-life and pro-abortion and for the left, the choice must always be abortion.

Let’s take a look at just how pro-choice the left is regarding a couple other hot topics.

The right to work issue has been news for quite a while, but has bolted to the front page with the recent Michigan vote. Unions came out in droves and were bused in by the thousands to rally unsuccessfully against “Right to Work”.

Right-to-Work-Union-Choice-or-NotIs “Right to Work” not just pro-choice? One may “choose” in favor of joining a union, or “choose” not to join. That seems pretty pro-choice to me.

What about the issue of school choice? Liberals are all about the children, or so they say. However, when the matter of parents choosing which school they may send their children to, choice is not an option. Sure the left will argue that there is only so much money to go around and school choice would just further drain funding, but of course that’s a bogus argument that can easily be countered with a voucher system or tax credits. Parents receive their standard per-student funding via a voucher and are then free to “choose” the school of their “choice”. That’s pro-choice, is it not?

Now that I think of it, I guess the left is pro-choice regarding schools. They just happened to choose the teachers unions over the children, 100% of the time.

There are any number of things I would regard myself as being pro-choice, if I had the choice. Here are just a few.

  • I would choose not to fund PBS (kudos to Mitt)
  • I would choose to close the border
  • I would choose to bring our troops homegot-out-free-obamacare-waiver
  • I would choose to allow Israel to defend itself by any means necessary
  • I would choose to drill for oil and gas everywhere there might be some
  • And coming soon, I would choose to opt out of Obamacare, where soon enough, I will not be able to “choose” my own doctor nor make my own health care decisions.

So you see, for the left, being pro-choice isn’t really about choice. It’s just repackaging and marketing. It is a lot more palatable to say one is pro-choice than pro-abortion. It’s like being gay instead of the proper term, homosexual, just as blacks are now all African-Americans, even though most of them are no more African than I am European.

Progressives are good at this sleight-of-hand. If some word, phrase, or thought falls out of favor or develops a neblack-vs-african-americangative connotation, they simply change the name and voilà, it’s magically acceptable and supposed to be somehow, different. The name progressive actually fell out of favor long ago and was changed to liberal, and now we’re back to progressive. Funny the way that works.

These names are just that; names. The ideas or ideals behind them never change. Don’t be fooled by a name.

Whether it be liberal, gay, African-American or pro-choice; with the left it is all about the packaging. What’s inside the package is immaterial.