So, if only 22 percent of Americans think Abortion should be legal under any circumstances, why do our laws reflect their wishes, and not those of the majority? More people think that Abortion should be illegal in all circumstances, than the number who think it should be freely available.
The more moderate position, that Abortion should be allowed only under very specific circumstances, is held by 53% of us.
Put another way, 76% of people surveyed think Abortion should be illegal in most or all cases.
So, again, why are we allowing a 22% minority to kill our children whenever they want?
Three parts of the press conference where Donald Trump announced that Carrie Prejean will continue as Miss California. Several photos were released yesterday and today, by evil people trying to add more pressure to the decision. Part 2 includes Carrie’s explanation of the sources of those photos.
The most frightening aspect of this imbroglio is the fact that Carrie’s face was photoshopped onto the body of a nude model in an attempt to discredit her. This is the standard MO for the Left–manufacturing evidence to support their false accusations against their critics and opponents to shame them into silence. Their methods will ultimately drive them into irrelevance, so the sooner we learn to ignore them, the better.
Congratulations to Carrie Prejean, and a big thank you to Donald Trump.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Now, can we get Perez Hilton and similar idiots critics to sit down and shut up?
According to Miss Rhode Island Alysha Castonguay, Carrie Prejean is being attacked for her beliefs, and not for the racy photos that were recently published. Miss Castonguay points to her own photo shoot that appeared in Maxim Magazine as evidence of the double-standard.
Some Miss California Peagean officials maintain that because Carrie Prejean didn’t disclose the existence of her photos before the pageant, she is in violation of her contract with the Miss California pageant, and should have her crown stripped. Miss Castonguay informed pageant officials previous to the pageant, and pageant officials allowed her to continue with the competition.
But Castonguay’s statement exposes a major flaw in the Pageant’s argument. She said, “I don’t know if I would’ve came forward with them, you know, and let them know that there were pictures out there. I wouldn’t have thought that they would ever be published.”
Castonguay agreed to her photo shoot in full knowledge the photos were going to be published. Carrie Prejean’s photos, as Castonguay points out, were not taken with the intent of publishing them. She couldn’t have known beforehand that someone would publish those photos because, at the time the photos were taken, Carrie wasn’t working for any modelling company, nor for any fashion magazine. These were sample photos taken to help her in her pursuit of a possible modelling career. Carrie failed to mention them because they were not available to the public. The publication of the photos is a blatant attempt to smear Carrie Prejean.
There is an enormous difference between the two photos shoots because of this detail, which provides a better explanation of why Prejean did not mention her photos. Her critics’ maintain she is a horrible, evil person who should be shunned, shamed, and shot (regardless of their anti-gun political positions). But it is a difference which will be convenientely ignored by the Move-on Media. Fortunately, there are right-thinking people that will not let the Truth slide.
The most ironic thing about the flap over Carrie Prejean is the Left’s over-the-top, despicable treatment of someone they would normally be defending. But Carrie committed the ultimate sin, the one thing that will get you immediately excommunicated from the New Secular Religion–she spoke against gay marriage in a national forum. And to make matters worse, she announced, in public even, that she was a Christian.
The Left’s Hate Machine has since been set loose on Carrie. The smear campaigns, the lies, the innuendos, all the tools of personal destruction the Left possesses has been brought to bear again this upstart who dares to speak her mind in public.
You’ve seen the video of Keith Olbermann and Michael Musto, a gay columnist who writes for the Village Voice and pretends to be funny, savagely attacking Carrie Prejean in manner more than a little reminiscent of two catty 7th grade girls talking about the pretty new girl in school. They never address her statement; they just keep repeating how dumb she is. Right. She’s dumb.
For those who haven’t seen the video, here it is.
But because Keith Olbermann only has a viewership of 7, the leftist media Hate Machine needed to take things up a few notches and hired Matt Lauer of the Today Show for the next hit piece. Matt reports that “nude photos” of Carrie Prejean had been unearthed, and were being posted around the internet. Matt mentions that the photos might be a violation of Carrie’s contract with the Miss California pageant, but somehow forgets to mention that the posting of the photos might also be a violation of Carrie’s right to privacy and, if they were truly “nude photos,” that posting them might be a violation of child pornography laws because of Carrie’s age at the time they were taken.
Of course, we can’t tell how bad the photos really are because Miguel Almaguer, who wrote the report, refers to the “topless” photos as being too graphic for NBC to broadcast. Nonsense. A Google search for “Carrie Prejean photos” will bring them up for you. They are certainly racy, but aren’t much different than past covers of Sports Illustrated, which featured supermodels wearing only paint, or the photos of Miley Cyrus in Vanity Fair magazine, which were in full display on the Today Show. See for yourself.
The Photos were taken when Carrie was 17 (she was a minor), and were given to a modeling agency in the hopes of securing a modeling contract. Publishing those photos may constitute child pornography, and Matt Lauer promotes it. Strategically placed black bars are often used on these shows to cover nudity in photos, so why not now? Because by not broadcasting them, NBC knows that the imagination runs wild. The intent is the destruction of Carrie Prejean’s credibility among conservatives.
But, you’ll notice they don’t ask Conservative groups for their opinions. Instead, they ask some Liberal to give us his opinion on what he thinks conservatives might do, or rather, should do. Leave it to the immoral Left to lecture America’s conservatives on what is righteous.
Now, a story has come out about the divorce of Carrie’s parents, in which one of her parents alleged that the other was gay. This, it is being reported, is said to be the cause of Carrie’s mental imbalance. Because, as I’m sure you’re aware, opposing gay marriage must be rooted in some mental imbalance. Hot Air Blog has the story, as does the New York Daily News.
The Left will not rest until Carrie Prejean’s reputation and credibility are dead. They know their position is untenable, and Perez Hilton is a clown act who shouldn’t have brought the question up in the first place. But Gay Marriage is a Holy Sacrament of the Left, and they will protect their own, no matter the cost to others.
You’d think that the Move-on Media would have figured out the dynamics of the American political landscape by now. And you’d be wrong. Despite years of reporting on current events and the critical issues of the day, the Liberal Media has yet to fully comprehend the American People. This come from inhabiting the places they do–vast echo chambers that reflect only their own worldview.
Arlen Specter’s announcement this morning triggered an analysis of the state of the GOP by Charles Babington of the AP. I suppose Charles is really trying to be helpful, but his analysis is so far off-base as to be laughable. “The GOP is a shrinking tent,” he exclaims. His conclusion as to why it is shrinking? It has moved too far to the right.
Charles writes,
Specter’s departure follows recent Republican losses in once-reliable states. While Barack Obama was cruising to the White House last fall, Republicans were losing long-held Senate seats in Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico, North Carolina and Virginia. A moderate Republican lost his seat in Oregon, and the same seems likely to happen when Minnesota’s long recount is settled.
Alaska is an excellent point for a closer look. Who lost the seat in Alaska? Ted Stevens. Remember Ted Stevens? He lost his seat because four weeks prior to the general election, he was convicted on charges of corruption. The news was devastating to the Republicans. But even with the conviction hanging like a dark cloud over him, Stevens lost by only a thin margin. So, were the voters voting out Stevens because he was too far right? Or were they voting him out because they were tired of the corruption in Government. The answer is clear to anyone aware of the recent Tea Party Movement. Everytime a Republican is at the center of even the smallest scandal during an election cycle, it is almost assured the seat will go to the Democrat.
If there is one thing the Democrats have learned about the Republicans, it is that Republican voters don’t readily tolerate monkey business on the part of their elected representatives. We like to keep things clean–to a fault. And they have used this to their advantage.
If the Republican tent is shrinking, it is because the regular Americans who make up the Republican Party are fed up with their elected leadership governing like Democrats, and abandonning Conservative principles. Arlen Specter is an example of the kind of Republican that is causing voter dissatisfaction with the GOP. He jumped ship to maintain his own power, not so he can continue serving the American People. He couldn’t care less about the People. (Of couse, the Move-on Media label Specter a “Pragmatist,” while Conservatives think of him as a political opportunist–or worse.)
Ironically, the Stevens case illustrates just how low the Democrats will go to secure a seat for themselves in the Halls of Power. Stevens conviction was dismissed by a federal judge last month, because of corruption on the part of the prosecutors who were all but sleeping with key witnesses. They withheld evidence from the defense during the course of Discovery, and acted so improperly that the investigation into Stevens has now become an investigation into the Justice Department’s prosecutors. The judge literally yelled at them in open court.
The Democrats have their own scandals that crop up as often as any in the GOP; it’s just that the Media are less apt to report it. Besides, America has come to expect immoral behavior from the Democrats. But it seems the message has got through, and the Republicans are starting to clean house. And though we may lose a few now, in the long run, as the GOP becomes more Conservative, its power and influence can potentially exceed anything it has experienced thus far.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are too preoccupied with Republican problems to be troubled with their own issues. If the Democrats continue with the status quo, they will see soon enough that worrying about the GOP’s tent was a case of looking beyond the mark. They should be shoring up their own house.
Does the Media really care what Americans think? Do they really believe we should have a voice? Has the Media become an enemy of the People? Do I sound like a right-wing extremist yet?
There has been a lot of criticism of the Media for ignoring the Tax Day Tea Parties, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of people attended tea parties in their area. Attendance numbers run from the hundreds in smaller towns, to thousands in places like Cincinnati and Sacramento.
I wanted to see first-hand whether or not the criticism was merited. I went to AP.org, the website for the Associated Press. They have a search feature on the site where you can use a keyword search to look up stories within the last 7 days. The keyword “tea party” returned 38 entries, only 4 of which occur on April 15th. Of those four results, only two had some connection to the tea parties; one referred to protesters throwing tea bags at the White House, the other covered a tax counter-protest in Vermont where about “two dozen people” demanded higher taxes. The story did not cover whether or not those people were later referred to competent mental health professionals.
None of the stories dealt specifically with any of the tea parties.
So, I tried “tea parties” as the keyword. The results were just as bad. Of 18 results, only one was returned for April 15th, a story about Next Gingrich’s possible bid for the presidency in 2012.
How can I conclude anything other than, at least as far as the AP is concerned, the tea parties never happened? We expected to be treated unfairly by the Media. After all, we all know how they operate. But I don’t think we were prepared to be completely ignored.
The very point of a protest is to get the attention of the Media, who will then relay that information, via news coverage, to government officials. At least, that’s the theory. But in this case, a small handful of environmental protesters dressed up as polar bears and sea turtles appearing at a city council meeting in Sacramento got more coverage by the AP than more than 6,000 tea party goers in the same city a day earlier.
The Media has abandoned its once honored position as the watchman of the People, keeping us apprised of government misbehavior. The Media is supposed to report, not interfere. It has instead become an enabler of corruption and unchecked power. Barak Obama said he had not heard of the tea parties before they happened. There are two possible reasons for that. Either 1) he is kept intentionally in isolation by his handlers, which includes the Media, or 2) he is lying. Every other elected official in America knew about these events. How are we supposed to believe Obama didn’t? Either way, he is only adding more evidence to the case against him.
Take a look at the coverage of one of the tea parties by CNN (one of the rare events that was covered). Pay close attention to the questions this reporter asks the man she is interviewing. Ask yourself what her underlying assumptions are. What does she believe, that causes her to ask these questions?
Her belief is that these people should not be protesting, because of the benefits they can receive from the government. She is so completely steeped in Statism that no other alternative even registers in her mind. Individual liberty and independence are foreign concepts to people like her. She also fails to understand that the protests were not about taxes per se, but about Washington ignoring the voices of We, the People. 90% of the millions of contacts made to government officials in Washington DC at the time the stimulus bill was being considered, were opposed to it’s passage. They ignored us, and passed it anyway.
The Media is not to be trusted now, anymore than the government can be trusted. If we want our elected officials to stay in touch with us, we’re going to have to get the word out by our own methods, and circumvent the Media. They don’t want our voices to be heard. But we must not allow them to dictate either the terms in the debate or who has a voice in it.
Liberals Lie. They just do. I would like to think they can’t help it, but I know that isn’t true. It’s part of their standard operating procedure.
It’s really kind of sad–their positions are so out of touch with Main Street, America that the people would not choose Liberalism if given a real choice.
So, the Liberals begin campaigns of disinformation about Conservatives in an attempt to demonize them, thinking that the people, left with no other choice, will choose Liberalism. They will hold up this most recent election as evidence of that.
The problem is that their efforts work on people who aren’t familiar with the real Conservative movement, those people who only know Conservatism by what the Media shows them on TV.
There are four major Liberal sites (The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Media Matters, and Gawker) that are carrying an account of what is allegedly a Conservative advocating the burning of college text books at a 9/12 Project gathering. The truth is easily discovered with a little footwork.
There are also plans by Liberal groups to try to infiltrate the Tea Party events and disrupt them, or present themselves as Conservatives with outrageous signs or speech. Their aim is to discredit the Tea Party Movement. Don’t underestimate their cunning and subtlety; they have been doing this for decades.
These people love lying. They believe it gives them power. And, as long as the Move-On Media gives them air time, it will continue to seem that way. Their methods come straight out of Saul Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals. Alinsky was a Marxist and a Community Organizer. Sound familiar? It should. Many of Obama’s campigns tactics were borrowed from Alinsky.
The best way to overcome their lies is with the irrefutable truth. So, bring your cameras to the Tea Party events. For every camera they bring to try to discredit us, we want 10 cameras showing the truth. We want to show the world where the truth is.
John Zeigler is producing a new documentary entitled “Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected.” Below is a preview.
I have heard some conservatives criticizing the video as “derogatory” to those who were interviewed. I think maybe they have not really paid attention to the details behind the film. According the the website,
On Election day twelve Obama voters were interviewed extensively right after they voted to learn how the news media impacted their knowledge of what occurred during the campaign. These voters were chosen for their apparent intelligence/verbal abilities and willingness to express their opinions to a large audience. The rather shocking video below seeks to provide some insight into which information broke through the news media clutter and which did not.
Zogby also conducted a telephone poll using these same questions, with similar results. The details on the Zogby poll are here.
I think this helps to put to rest the ongoing debates with friends over whether or not there is a liberal media bias. This may not conclusively prove it, but it certainly indicates that some topics were more heavily covered by the media, especially the negative messages about Sarah Palin, while the negative messages about Barak Obama were not given as much air time as evidenced by the lack of familiarity with those issues by people who get their news primarily from the “establishment media,” i.e. CNN, the NY Times, MSNBC, etc.
Here is a list of facts regarding the Proposition 8 vote which I found very interesting. These came from the info on this youtube video (language warning).
I haven’t been able to verify them yet but, if they are correct, the question must certainly be asked of the gay community why they are focusing so much attention on the LDS Church and its people.
1. Mormons make up less than 2% of the population of California. There are approximately 800,000 LDS out of a total population of approximately 34 million.
2. Mormon voters were less than 5% of the yes vote. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6% of the Yes vote and 2.4% of the total Proposition 8 vote.
3. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) donated no money to the Yes on 8 campaign. Individual members of the Church were encouraged to support the Yes on 8 efforts and, exercising their constitutional right to free speech, donated whatever they felt like donating.
4. The No on 8 campaign raised more money than the Yes on 8 campaign. Unofficial estimates put No on 8 at $38 million and Yes on 8 at $32 million, making it the most expensive non-presidential election in the country.
5. Advertising messages for the Yes on 8 campaign are based on case law and real-life situations. The No on 8 supporters have insisted that the Yes on 8 messaging is based on lies. Every Yes on 8 claim is supported.
6. The majority of our friends and neighbors voted Yes on 8. Los Angeles County voted in favor of Yes on 8. Ventura County voted in favor of Yes on 8.
7. African Americans overwhelmingly supported Yes on 8. Exit polls show that 70% of Black voters chose Yes on 8. This was interesting because the majority of these voters voted for President-elect Obama. No on 8 supporters had assumed that Obama voters would vote No on 8.
8. The majority of Latino voters voted Yes on 8. Exit polls show that the majority of Latinos supported Yes on 8 and cited religious beliefs (assumed to be primarily Catholic).
9. The Yes on 8 coalition was a broad spectrum of religious organizations. Catholics, Evangelicals, Protestants, Orthodox Jews, Muslims all supported Yes on 8. It is estimated that there are 10 million Catholics and 10 million Protestants in California. Mormons were a tiny fraction of the population represented by Yes on 8 coalition members.
10. Not all Mormons voted in favor of Proposition 8. Our faith accords that each person be allowed to choose for him or her self. Church leaders have asked members to treat other members with “civility, respect and love,” despite their differing views.
11. The Church did not violate the principal of separation of church and state. This principle is derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” The phrase “separation of church and state”, which does not appear in the Constitution itself, is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, although it has since been quoted in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court in recent years. The LDS Church is under no obligation to refrain from participating in the political process, to the extent permitted by law. U.S. election law is very clear that Churches may not endorse candidates, but may support issues. The Church has always been very careful on this matter and occasionally (not often) chooses to support causes that it feels to be of a moral nature.
12. Supporters of Proposition 8 did exactly what the Constitution provides for all citizens: they exercised their First Amendment rights to speak out on an issue that concerned them, make contributions to a cause that they support, and then vote in the regular electoral process. For the most part, this seems to have been done in an open, fair, and civil way. Opponents of 8 have accused supporters of being bigots, liars, and worse. The fact is, we simply did what Americans do: we spoke up, we campaigned, and we voted.
