ARE THEY KIDDING?
This has been an interesting week in Washington. We had a moment of silence today for the 32 victims of the Virginia Tech slaying.
How many years of silence should we have for the half a million Iraqis we slaughtered for their “freedom” and favorable oil trade terms? There is something just a wee bit perverse about that.
Then yesterday on the Hill:
Our Attorney General has proved that he should now be called “The Right Honorable Esteemed Little Lying Putz, Esquire.” His rehearsed lapses in memory make one wonder how he remembered to put a tie on. He was there, he wasn’t there, he had a meeting with discussions, without discussions, what meeting? he forgets who was there, he is the decider, he had minimal involvment, it's the DAG's job, it's his job, he didn’t know about it, Who’s on first? GIMME A FRIGGIN BREAK! The only things he can specifically remember about why he fired brilliant, highly educated, highly experienced, successful chief US attorney prosecutors in EIGHT jurisdictions had something to do with failings in the areas of “energy level” (from someone who could put the Energizer Bunny to sleep), vague ill-defined “judgment” areas (meaning they disagreed with the Torture Czar’s judgment) and failing in some undefined way to more vigorously prosecute immigration and obscenity cases.
What is really obscene, however, is the Attorney General’s total Perversion of Truth.
And for the triple hitter on the Too Perverse to Leave a Head Unscratched Meter, is the slew of statements from virtually every Democratic Presidential contender condemning the 5-4 Supreme Court “partial birth abortion” decision that was quickly eclipsed by the more macabre news. We actually have to have a law and we actually have to have the Supreme Court of the land saying it’s a good one, that we can’t puncture the skulls and suck the brains out of viable pre-born children as they are being born. The weird fact that we actually have to have a law saying that is trumped only by the weirdness of every Democratic Presidential contender boldly declaring that the law violates women’s rights to –what privacy-? Aren’t you forgetting that there is someone else present getting his or HER skull punctured in and brains sucked out?. In the last days it is said, people will call right wrong and wrong right and really not know the difference. Hard to see how we could be more there than now. A procedure that most people would recognize as inhumane torture worthy of locking someone up for life if done to a puppy, somehow should be permitted because to not permit it violates women’s rights? Are they kidding?
Women, who are by Democrats presumed to be completely emotionally incapable of making a choice to not have sex and thus avoid an unwanted pregnancy as if they had no clue how babies are made, want all the choices in the world when and how to dispose of the natural repercussion after ignoring the fact of how babies are made, abnegating all pre-conception choices, and after having made a baby.
Here are the choices they apparently thought they didn't have a problem exercising in a timely manner- whether to meet a man, to go to a private place with a man, to take off one’s clothing and have a man take leave of his clothing, to then consummate. Here are more choices no one seems to have a problem with- do you want the chicken or fish at dinner? Do you accept the guys call or hang up on him? Do you want to take a cab to his place or have him come to yours? Do you want to pay for parking or park on the street? Do you want to go to a movie first or just home? Do you want to go upstairs or just sit on the couch? Do you want to have the red or white wine? Somehow we think women are mentally capable of exercising all those choices out of their own free will-and guess what- they do!. But they don’t apparently have the last choice when to succumb to having him insert himself into them. Are they kidding?
Then they want to say that because their fetus (which contains DNA different than theirs and can even have different blood type) is in utero- regardless of the fact of whether it can exist viably outside the womb- it is something somehow etiologically of a different substance than the identical DNA it is ten minutes later after it makes it outside the birth canal such that they can't call it a "baby" or "child" and they have exclusive right to deny it of all legal right to existence. Just Totally Perverse.
The Democrats want to canonize people like Kate Michaelman because she was victim to an abusive husband whom she divorced and so she wants the legal right to “terminate” her offspring before she figured out how to leave him. Cry me a River Honey. Sorry- Again- Just Perverse. Why are we canonizing women not having the strength or intelligence to exercise their bodily integrity before they get pregnant? We have bodily integrity enough to stick to a Jenny Craig diet, South Beach Diet, and bodily integrity enough to know when we have our clothes on or off. People have been leaving their abusive husbands for thousands of years. Aren’t we catering to and promoting a culture endorsing the bigotry of low expectations of women’s underestimated emotional intelligence? Can’t we insist women be –hello- just a little smarter than that? Because most of us are and we are sick of the argument.
Family Planning starts at “Hello, here’s my number.”
We are creating a culture where men treat women like disposable trash because, frankly, we treat the fruit of ourselves, our offspring that way. I would rather live in a country where women are considered worthy to be trained to be smarter than that, because until we respect ourselves and the lives within us how do we expect men to?
No comments:
Post a Comment