Tag Archives: liberal logic

America is Importing the Problems Abortion Was Supposed to Eliminate

illegal_children_at_border-590x331Originally posted at American Thinker

Sorry to be crude, but for all intents and purposes, America is currently the victim of a national rape, figuratively speaking – what our nation is experiencing on the southern border is a corporate violation.  Moreover, being implanted in the womb of what was once a sovereig n nation complete with boundaries and laws is an uninvited presence that, if it were a fetus, pro-choicers would heartily applaud terminating. 

Instead, liberal pundits and politicians alike contend that America should never turn children in need away.  That’s why bleeding-heart types are now arguing that our arms need to open even wider to welcome in as many illegal children from the poverty-stricken nations of Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador.

What doesn’t make sense is the contradiction of this opinion when compared to the standard liberal pro-abortion mindset that maintains that a life of abject poverty is far worse than death, and being unwanted justifies obliterating untold numbers of unborn human beings.

Yet suddenly, despite the intrusion taking place on our border, those who normally justify abortion on demand seem overly concerned about the well-being of the destitute youngsters imposing themselves on not just one woman’s life, but all our lives – itinerant youngsters who, if they were traveling in the womb, rather than on foot, the left would enthusiastically abort.

Even Barack Obama, the most pro-abortion president in the history of America, justifies accepting the tsunami of children streaming in from south of the border by calling it a “humanitarian crisis,” which naturally necessitates the “saving of human lives or … the alleviation of suffering.”

The irony is that while Barack Obama is in favor of open borders to quell a so-called humanitarian crisis, he simultaneously supports, promotes, and encourages an ongoing humanitarian crisis caused by the abortions of 3,000 American babies a day.  Babies aborted in greater proportion by lower-income women who bought the liberal lie that economic status somehow determines the level of wantedness an unborn child should be granted.

Then, as if aborting Americans presumably destined for abuse and poverty while waving in the underprivileged who arrive here illegally weren’t hypocritical enough, needy children are not the only ones being allowed to violate our country’s sovereign nationhood.

Chris Cabrera, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council in the Rio Grande Valley, has confirmed that gang members from Mexico are among those gaining entry into the U.S., including some from the extremely dangerous Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13).

According to Mr. Cabrera, the arrogance of gang members includes statements such as “You’re going to let me go, just like you let my mother go, just like you let my sister go.  You’re going to let me go as well, and the government’s going to take care of us.” 

So are liberals who claim that abortion prevents the costs of future criminals now changing their tune and suggesting that the federal government accommodate murderous gang members – whether it’s through government entitlements or as lifetime guests of the American penal system? 

And then there is the specter of the potential loss of life if a small-fry suicide bomber, carrying a backpack filled with more than just crumpled clothes and pictures of Mamacita and pretending to be a youthful Hispanic refugee, should happen to make his (or her) way across the southern border with the goal of martyrdom for Allah, Hamas-style.

Adding to that threat, in the name of immigration reform, the federal government’s hand is being extended to illegals, whose presence will likely cost untold numbers of unsuspecting Americans their right to life from the deadly-disease time bomb that could infect hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans with lethal viruses that the U.S. had previously tamped down or nearly wiped out.

That’s why the question that must be raised is this: what is the logic behind liberals preaching the right to choose on the micro level and then, on a macro level, when it comes to things like ObamaCare and in this case illegal immigration, denying free Americans the right to choose not to be saddled with another nation’s chronically ill, lawless, and/or underprivileged children?

What kind of rationale justifies abortion as sparing the unborn from the future plight of poverty and abuse and then, in the name of compassion, imports thousands of illegal children destined to become lifetime welfare recipients?  That confusing contradiction also holds true for the children who, if not for abortion, liberals believe would be destined to a lifetime of protracted illness.

Moreover, what kind of ideology that, on the one hand, argues that abortion releases mostly underprivileged children from what would otherwise be a life of abuse, crime, and incarceration, while on the other hand, it argues to allow entry to even the most violent gang members, who brazenly tell Border Patrol agents that law enforcement has no control over their desire to break into a sovereign nation and wreak havoc?

Thanks to liberals’ upside-down reasoning, America has deteriorated into a place where leaders promote abortion for all the same reasons they are currently using to justify their acceptance of sickly, disadvantaged children and future convicts from south of the border.  

The left maintains that in order to live a life free of sick and impoverished children, not to mention potential future felons, the freedom to have an abortion is crucial.  But then the pro-abortion party in power turns around and imposes the same human dilemma on its unwilling citizens whom its adherents claim abortion purges from American society.

 

Huh?! Obama’s Healthcare Now for the Privileged

Originally posted at Clash Daily

access1In the mixed-up world of liberal logic, it’s hard to ignore that policy initiatives passed by this incompetent bureaucracy intended to advance fairness often end up contradicting the argument used to justify instituting them in the first place.

Take for instance the liberals’ insistence that healthcare is a right or a moral entitlement. The argument is that health care should not be a marketable commodity available to a chosen few, but instead a free perk every human being, regardless of social or financial status, should have access to and be able to afford.

The problem is that a ham-fisted government attempting to establish healthcare as a right has accomplished precisely what it was trying to prevent. Instead of healthcare becoming more accessible and affordable, it’s becoming less accessible and even more unaffordable.

Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization, agrees with the liberal left that health care is a right:

The right to health means that governments must generate conditions in which everyone can be as healthy as possible. Such conditions range from ensuring availability of health services, healthy and safe working conditions, adequate housing and nutritious food. The right to health does not mean the right to be healthy.

Although not up-to-speed on the “adequate housing” part just yet, in hopes of “ensuring availability of health services” to every American, Barack Obama has worked feverishly to catch up to socialist countries like Great Britain and Canada, both of whom have healthcare systems that, despite the glowing advertisements, fail miserably.

Oddly, here in America, those determined to ensure that 300 million people are recipients of what the WHO calls the “right to health” are making it harder instead of easier to attain the “right to be healthy,” which Dr. Chan did point out is not a right.

During the 2008 debates, when asked if healthcare was a right or a privilege, former professor and full-time revisionist of America’s “fatally flawed” Constitution, candidate Barack Obama (who makes things up as he goes along), said that he believed healthcare should be a right!

Barack Obama followed that proclamation by proceeding to tell a heart-wrenching personal tale – eventually proven false – about his dying mother spending her last days fighting with her insurance company from her hospital bed! In typical Barack Obama style, the president was fudging the truth a bit. Ann Dunham’s health insurance adequately covered her cancer treatment; what the anthropologist with ovarian cancer was arguing over was her disability insurance policy.

It should be noted that Obama said that Stanley Ann did the arguing from a hospital room, which was a privilege denied to 150 and counting deceased U.S. veterans trapped in a government single-payer system who wasted away on a VA waiting list.

Now, six years after Barack Obama shared his made-up family deathbed insurance struggles, there are millions of Obamacare horror stories emerging daily and a VA rationing scandal with a growing body count. Notwithstanding the sadness associated with his mother’s medical condition, Stanley Ann Dunham was ultimately better off than millions of Americans who will surely be denied access to healthcare thanks to her highfalutin’ son’s attempt to reengineer the U.S. healthcare system.

What Barack Obama and his liberal cohorts sold to America as a safeguard against healthcare denial stemming from lack of privilege has now become the tool that is depriving 270 million Americans of many of the benefits they enjoyed before the promise was made. In other words, contrary to the original stated intent, what was supposed to be a safeguard is accomplishing the exact opposite.

The initial effort was to turn a marketable commodity into a fundamental right, which it is not, and as a result – regrettably for the progressive left – the liberal cause has taken a hit. Thanks to the government’s pervasive lack of ability, instead of accomplishing another lofty liberal goal, the special advantages that healthcare reform was instituted to eliminate have made things worse.

Eye-Crossing: Liberal Logic and Helping the Oppressed via Abortion

abortionOriginally posted at The Clash Daily

At a militant Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) demonstration held in New York City recently, scowling women in combat boots who believe in armed conflict stood on soapboxes rallying against patriarchy. Their battle cry: “Abortion on Demand without Apology.” The twisted premise of the rally was that women should be vindicated if they kill unborn babies (without apology), including female babies, which, in turn, would somehow liberate the gentle sex from oppressive males.

Similarly, when it comes to health care, liberals applaud beneficence, unless it’s bestowed by way of evil conservatives with lots of money, like the Koch brothers.

That’s why on one street corner in New York you might find liberals staging a perfectly illogical “Quality Care, not Koch Care” protest, and on another, an equally illogical “Stop the War on Women…Stop Patriarchy…Abortion on Demand without Apology” convention.

Recently it was reported that Americans for Prosperity humanitarian David Koch contributed mega-millions to a new ambulatory care center due to be built at New York-Presbyterian Hospital. The left’s reaction to David Koch’s philanthropic gift is similar to the reasoning that killing female babies is key to liberating women who care about people.

Brothers Charles and David Koch rank #59 behind other political contributors, including the liberal billionaire Steyer brothers, who called David Koch “famously evil” for doing malevolent things like contributing enormous sums of money to charitable causes.  Koch’s latest contribution is “the largest philanthropic donation” in the history of New York-Presbyterian Hospital and will help provide “patients with the best personalized and integrated outpatient care, from diagnosis to treatment to aftercare, in a single, patient-friendly and technologically sophisticated environment.”

“Patient-friendly” environments aside, liberals apparently believe they can further healthcare for the poor by protesting huge donations by rich conservatives, even if those donations lead to job creation and improved healthcare facilities for the poor.

For greater understanding, here’s how it works: the left defines David Koch funding of an outpatient ambulatory care center as “defeating and repealing healthcare to all Americans,” and his oil tycoon money helping create new jobs as “attacking workers.”

That’s why, “Quality… not Koch” militants recently marched in front of the “soon-to-be-built” David H. Koch Center location. The complainers included such notables as the New York State Nurses’ Association (NYSNA), who apparently are angered because, by 2018, Koch’s donation will help create new nursing jobs. Also in attendance were the NAACP New York State Conference and SEIU Local 1199, as well as guitar-playing people in red jackets who’ll march for anything if it gets them a free pancake breakfast.

In 2012, in the midst of layoffs at non-profit Washington Hospital Center, ardent abortion supporter/former President Bill Clinton received a $225,000 speaking fee. Remarkably, Bill Clinton’s insensitivity toward laid-off hospital workers failed to rouse even one concerned lesbian to host a “Speak out for Quality Care, Not Clinton Care” street march. But let a conservative donate $100 million to a hospital, and rampant ire is the response from the “Abortion on Demand without Apology” crowd.

On International Women’s Day protesters were annoyed because the “oil tycoon” contributing the money has an anti-abortion conviction – without apology – that is contrary to liberal ideology, which includes the unfettered right to abortion without apology!

So, evidently a huge donation to supplement jobs and provide a spanking-new health pavilion that is poised to enhance healthcare in New York City is unwelcome if the philanthropist doing the donating does not support the Revolutionary Communist Party’s stance that abortion should be available to anyone, anytime.

Adding to that irritation, the “soon-to-be-built” New York-Presbyterian Hospital pavilion will be located on the wealthy Upper East Side, where Mayor Bill ‘Tale of Two Cities’ de Blasio would likely agree that, as punishment for success, residents should be left to die in snowdrifts.

So there you have it – liberal logic in action:  protest for a cause and feign concern for the oppressed, then turn around and oppress the ones for whom you were feigning concern.

According to the Revolutionary Communist Party, the way to address male oppression of women is to kill unborn women. For the “Quality Care, not Koch Care” activists, it means biting the hand that provides healthcare and jobs just because on Election Day that hand pulls the Republican lever.

At a militant Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) demonstration held in New York City recently, scowling women in combat boots who believe in armed conflict stood on soapboxes rallying against patriarchy. Their battle cry: “Abortion on Demand without Apology.” The twisted premise of the rally was that women should be vindicated if they kill unborn babies (without apology), including female babies, which, in turn, would somehow liberate the gentle sex from oppressive males.

Similarly, when it comes to health care, liberals applaud beneficence, unless it’s bestowed by way of evil conservatives with lots of money, like the Koch brothers.

That’s why on one street corner in New York you might find liberals staging a perfectly illogical “Quality Care, not Koch Care” protest, and on another, an equally illogical “Stop the War on Women…Stop Patriarchy…Abortion on Demand without Apology” convention.

Recently it was reported that Americans for Prosperity humanitarian David Koch contributed mega-millions to a new ambulatory care center due to be built at New York-Presbyterian Hospital. The left’s reaction to David Koch’s philanthropic gift is similar to the reasoning that killing female babies is key to liberating women who care about people.

Brothers Charles and David Koch rank #59 behind other political contributors, including the liberal billionaire Steyer brothers, who called David Koch “famously evil” for doing malevolent things like contributing enormous sums of money to charitable causes.  Koch’s latest contribution is “the largest philanthropic donation” in the history of New York-Presbyterian Hospital and will help provide “patients with the best personalized and integrated outpatient care, from diagnosis to treatment to aftercare, in a single, patient-friendly and technologically sophisticated environment.”

“Patient-friendly” environments aside, liberals apparently believe they can further healthcare for the poor by protesting huge donations by rich conservatives, even if those donations lead to job creation and improved healthcare facilities for the poor.

For greater understanding, here’s how it works: the left defines David Koch funding of an outpatient ambulatory care center as “defeating and repealing healthcare to all Americans,” and his oil tycoon money helping create new jobs as “attacking workers.”

That’s why, “Quality… not Koch” militants recently marched in front of the “soon-to-be-built” David H. Koch Center location. The complainers included such notables as the New York State Nurses’ Association (NYSNA), who apparently are angered because, by 2018, Koch’s donation will help create new nursing jobs. Also in attendance were the NAACP New York State Conference and SEIU Local 1199, as well as guitar-playing people in red jackets who’ll march for anything if it gets them a free pancake breakfast.

In 2012, in the midst of layoffs at non-profit Washington Hospital Center, ardent abortion supporter/former President Bill Clinton received a $225,000 speaking fee. Remarkably, Bill Clinton’s insensitivity toward laid-off hospital workers failed to rouse even one concerned lesbian to host a “Speak out for Quality Care, Not Clinton Care” street march. But let a conservative donate $100 million to a hospital, and rampant ire is the response from the “Abortion on Demand without Apology” crowd.

On International Women’s Day protesters were annoyed because the “oil tycoon” contributing the money has an anti-abortion conviction – without apology – that is contrary to liberal ideology, which includes the unfettered right to abortion without apology!

So, evidently a huge donation to supplement jobs and provide a spanking-new health pavilion that is poised to enhance healthcare in New York City is unwelcome if the philanthropist doing the donating does not support the Revolutionary Communist Party’s stance that abortion should be available to anyone, anytime.

Adding to that irritation, the “soon-to-be-built” New York-Presbyterian Hospital pavilion will be located on the wealthy Upper East Side, where Mayor Bill ‘Tale of Two Cities’ de Blasio would likely agree that, as punishment for success, residents should be left to die in snowdrifts.

So there you have it – liberal logic in action:  protest for a cause and feign concern for the oppressed, then turn around and oppress the ones for whom you were feigning concern.

According to the Revolutionary Communist Party, the way to address male oppression of women is to kill unborn women. For the “Quality Care, not Koch Care” activists, it means biting the hand that provides healthcare and jobs just because on Election Day that hand pulls the Republican lever.
Read more at http://clashdaily.com/2014/03/eye-crossing-liberal-logic-helping-oppressed/#i7WJxMyefY4cztTM.99

%d bloggers like this: