Save the Children...from Us

What A Loving President

Everyone knows that Democrats -- particularly Liberals, Progressives, Hippies, whatever you want to call them -- care more about people than we evil Conservatives do. All one has to do is ask them. They constantly remind us of all the "things" they oppose, things that make the lives of people miserable, if you listen to them. Corporations, guns, oil, technology, etc.

So when the Liberals and President Obama sprung into action after the Sandy Hook massacre, we were reminded once again that guns are evil and must be vanquished, banished from our existence. For the good of the children. Because no one cares more about children than our benevolent Liberals.

I've often wondered -- during the days of the Million Mom March, in which several thousand women (I know, far from a million, cue eyeroll) marched on Washington to express their outrage over the existence of those dangerous guns -- why no one ever asked one simple question: "Excuse me ma'am, but are you implying that no one has the right to kill your child except you"?

That seems to be the message Liberals are trying to convey to the rest of us; that women have a right to "chose" because they are women. But aren't we also conditioned to believe that women are moms, and that moms love us better than anyone? So how do we reconcile the disparity between the caring mom and the murderous Liberal woman? How do we escape the modern woman who will wantonly murder her child either in the womb or out, while claiming to be "emancipated"?

This past week was one that disgusted me, and probably did many of you as well, especially my Texas readers. One week ago, on Monday, Texas State Senator Wendy Davis prepped herself with running shoes, a back brace and a urinary catheter to launch into an 11 hour filibuster that would be hailed by the Liberal media as "heroic", among other lofty adjectives. But Senator Davis' heroics were nothing more than an advocacy for the murder of viable babies. This is what passes for courage in the America in which we live today.

The Texas measure was designed to stop late term abortions, those performed after 20 weeks into gestation. For those of you who may be products of State education, we're talking about 5 months of pregnancy, when a baby in the womb already has eyelashes, eyebrows and fingernails. Despite the arguments I have encountered from crazed Liberals in the past, we are not talking about a "lump of protoplasm" here, we're talking about a human child.

One of the arguments I have been forced to counter over the years is that it is impossible to tell what that lump of protoplasm is at the early stages. Call me crazy, but I doubt a human woman would be carrying a duck billed platypus or a cactus, but I entertained such notions for the sake of arguing in good faith. Early term abortions, while still repulsive to me, I could accept as reproductive choice, but pulling viable babies from the womb and either twisting their fragile necks or stabbing them in the spine with scissors was the line in the sand. And yet here was Wendy Davis last Monday -- in spite of the horrendous revelations of the Kermit Gosnell trial in Philadelphia -- being hailed as a champion of "women's rights".

What if They Were Aborted?

Democrats are indeed the "Party of Death", of that there can no doubt today. From their insistence that life is precious in the case of the convicted killer, to their defense of the murder of the innocent, to their Death Panels for the elderly in the looming ObamaCare, it seems that only the weak are expendable to Democrats.

I have heard the phrase that Liberalism is a mental disease, and I am more convinced today than ever that that is true. How else could such a stance be held up as an act of courage in the case of Wendy Davis? How on Earth did we as a species get to such a point in our existence that our "mainstream media" would applaud such barbaric behavior?

Think about this the next time a Liberal like Obama uses living children as props for some other stance. Remember, they are only flanking him because they were not slaughtered at birth, no thanks to him.

Sphere: Related Content

The New Catch Phrase: Constitutional Fetish

Where's the Expiration Date?

Liberals - now to be referred to as "Progressives" because Liberals no longer liked the negative connotation of the word "liberal" - have been scared witless (I know, I know) by the sudden truculence of the people. As they marched onward with their radical plans to transform America into their Socialist Utopia, those formerly passive people were either unaware or indifferent, perhaps refusing to believe the reality of what was afoot.

No longer. With the rise of the former Speaker of the House to the election of Barack Hussein Obama, people finally saw and realized the full extent of what the Progressives were attempting to do. And they rose up, loudly.

The response from the left - both politicians and pundits - was a defiant one in which they attempted to ridicule and belittle the new opposition, and it almost worked. If not for the relentless work of the Tea Party and similar groups, combined with a brave new crop of political nubiles unafraid to embrace the new ferocity, the Left may have succeeded.

There were many different attacks from the new "Obama Movement" on us. There was the "gun-toting, Bible-clinging" intended insult, which seems a strange position for an allegedly devout Christian like Barack Obama. The very people at whom that barb was hurled, however, instead caught and embraced it proudly. Obama even denigrated middle Americans for having American flags on their pickup trucks. Again, the response from middle Americans was, "Damn right"!

Deeply held American values, generations old and passed down from parents, were suddenly the object of ridicule. The Left tried to pass such traditions off as old and archaic. We weren't buying.

During the lead up to the passage of Obama Care, when constituents demanded of their representatives to know the Constitutional authority of Congress to ram it down our throats, some said that they didn't care about that document. They said it was too imperative to get the bill - which they hadn't even read - passed. Big mistake. People embraced the Constitution even more tightly.

Not a problem for the Progressive cabal; now they wonder aloud what this new "fetish" for the Constitution means, and why we right-wingers care so much. According to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, a fetish is defined as -  b : an object of irrational reverence or obsessive devotion.

That is critical, because it signifies that the Left views the document responsible for this great nation's rise to prominence as irrational, and to revere that document as obsessive. They would prefer to toss it aside like an old novel and move on (pardon the pun), and take this country in a new direction.

Sound familiar? It should. The Democrats slogan leading up to the 2006 elections that swept them into power was "A New Direction for America". And in 2008, the Obama campaign was all about "change". Since then, we have gotten both, and all it's done is to drive more and more people back to the Founding document. The left calls that "going backward". Glenn Beck has a better description.

Beck portrays it as simply going back far enough to see where we left the tracks, and restart on the one that gave us the best success. I agree, and it is something we are still capable of doing, so long as we don't let the bullies make us cry.

Sphere: Related Content