When the police entered the Philadelphia building they were immediately overcome with the over-whelming stench that challenged their olfactory nerves as well as their digestive tracts.
The operating room of Dr. Kermit Gosnell was littered with filthy instruments, jars of body organs, blood-stained scissors, and foul-smelling residues of animal waste.
What was this place–a puppy mill? A slaughterhouse?
Depending on your perspective it was both of these.
Dr. Gosnell’s abortion clinic is part of the sordid legacy of Roe v. Wade.
The fetal feet he kept in his mason jars reminded me of a big-haired gal I met at the Avis counter many years ago in Boston.
I as wearing my fetal feet pin on my lapel and she asked me if I were a foot doctor.
Unfortunately I was too tired to give her an explanation, leaving to think that I might even have a foot fetish.
That possibility led me to wonder why Gosnell felt compelled to save all those feet the arresting officers found in his abortuary.
I think I read he wanted them for research.
I am tempted to think that maybe his gruesome profession made him collect souvenirs, not unlike the Indians who scalped their victims after dispatching them from this world.
Living feet–hundreds of 1000s of marching feet including over 200,000 sets of them in Washington, D. C. last Monday, marched all over the country to give clear witness to the evil of what people like Dr. Gosnell have done to America’s soul.
These modern-day abolitionists have been forced to bear the slings and arrows of derision and apathy that their forbears did during the ante-bellum years.
But eventually those voices were heard and the country righted its original sin in the Constitution.
Gosnell now faces charges of 3rd-degree murder for one of his clients who died under his knife and seven counts of 1st degree murder for the seven babies who survived his violent assault on their place of residence.
These charges were possible under the 2002 Born-Alive Act Infants Protection Act that makes it a crime to murder a baby who has survived abortion.
I ask you what kind of country needs to have an act like this?
One of the vicious sideshows of the abortion industry is some babies come out of their gauntlet alive.
However for most of them their remaining moments of life are spent in waste cans, alone and unattended in some broom closet.
Gianna Jessen, whom I met years ago, survived her mother’s abortion and the closet chamber, only through the good graces of a valiant nurse, who could not stand idly by and see a baby die.
Since Roe 1000s of babies like Gianna were not so lucky to have had a guardian angel.
Our fearless president, who spent last Monday celebrating the Roe v. Wade decision, voted against a similar bill in the Illinois State Senate.
He voted against it, not once, not twice but three times, arguing that it was a first step toward limiting abortion rights.
Yet we are supposed to believe that people like him want to make abortion safe, legal and rare.
We only need look to Philadelphia to see what an empty and dangerous mantra the Democrats would have us recite.
While Obama will probably retire the crown as the most opaque American president, his views on abortion are very clear.
His Roe Anniversary statement tells us exactly what he believes about this Marxist sacrament.
He declared that he remains committed to policies designed to prevent unwanted pregnancies–does he mean abstinence?
As a constitutional scholar and I surmise as a man, the president is committing to protecting this right of women to rid themselves of any baby who complicates their lives.
He encouraged all Americans to recommit themselves to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms and the same opportunities to fulfill their dreams.
Recommit? What does he really mean?
Does he mean that under Bush we lost our way and our daughters were second class citizens?
Oh, I got it–the old blame it on Bush gambit!
What rights do our sons enjoy that women don’t?
Does he mean the right to be promiscuous and plunder every girl they can get their hands on?
Or in the case of girls, the right to be plundered?
What does that do to our moral fiber?
What does Michelle Obama think about this? Or is she just interested in colon fiber?
Certainly boys don’t have a right to an abortion.
And this is all coming from a father who has two budding young daughters!
He says that he doesn’t want them punished by a pregnancy.
Does he really entertain the prospect of applauding his girls’ right to abort his grandchildren?
Is this the kind of sage advice America’s youth needs to hear from its leader?
Does it not concern him that a full 1/3 of all the babies slaughtered in abortuaries not very dissimilar from the criminal facility in Philadelphia are of his race..or at least the race he identifies more with?
Rick Santorum, the former pro-life Senator from Pennsylvania, created a mini-firestorm when he questioned Obama 2008 comments about when life began.
When asked that question, Obama dodged it by saying that it was above my pay grade.
Santorum was taken aback by his evasion and said Well if it isn’t human life, I find it remarkable that for a black man to say ‘Now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people.
It was the Dred Scott decision in 1857 that said, black people were not human but merely chattel or personal property.
How dare he inject race into the abortion debate, the media wantonly raved!
Perhaps abortion as a means of racial limitation is the elephant in the room that polite people can not discuss openly.
Has anyone read Margaret Sanger’s eugenic views on the mongrel races?
Or maybe her Negro Project from 1939?
I wonder if the president and Dr. Gosnell are aware of this fact of history?
I suggest people research her true beliefs, which helped lay the foundation for a national 007 license to kill that our president celebrates like it were the 4th of July and was what America was all about.
I think that our commander-in-chief has been recommitting the country to its war on the womb and the traditional family.
January 22nd, like its brother in infamy, December 7th are watershed days that illustrate dichotomy in American culture.
The one is celebrated as a memorial while our president celebrates the other like a solemn holy day.
The one brought Americans together against a common enemy.
The other has divided us as did our Civil War.
The one led to the good war that considered all of its combatants heroes and basked in the confidence that they had helped eliminate evil from the world.
The other perpetuates an evil that has permeated America’s culture.
The one led to our regeneration while the other is sowing the seeds of our own self-annihilation.
It was January 22nd that launched us on our Bad War.
Slavery has often been called the country’s original sin.
The founding fathers pragmatically put it in the body of the document so that there could be a United States.
Without this first great compromise, it is likely that the nation would have broken into at least two and maybe like ancient Gaul into three distinct parts.
Given the pain, misery and sorrow that the compromise allowed, I sometimes think it would have been better not to have compromised on such an important moral issues and let the political chips fall where they may.
Of course as brilliant as were Washington, Madison, Adams et al., they did not possess a prophetic sense.
Most of the Eastern and Northern colonies believed that slavery as a singular economic institution was ultimately unprofitable and would eventually just fade away.
None had the foresight to see that a young inventor, named Eli Whitney applied his genius to developing a workable cotton gin that revolutionized the cotton industry, and made the South even more dependent on cotton.
King Cotton need even more slaves, giving rise to an ever-important slave trade that just underscored the abuses done to a different race of mankind.
The nation fixed the problem with its Civil War Amendments that allowed for black adult males to have the right to vote.
But after the federal occupying troops left the 11 Southern states in 1877, notorious Jim Crow Laws, and Black Codes institutionalized a legalized system of segregation that permeated Southern culture far into the 20th century.
And all this was for a moral compromise.
The courts, even with the freedom amendments, still protected the South under the U. S. Constitution.
That was until 1954 when the Earl Warren Court decided the Brown vs. Board of Education, Topeka, Kansas, which officially desegregated all the public schools in America.
This was a very popular moral decision that was very bad constitutional law.
According to the Constitution the Federal Courts had no right to interfere with the states’ right to educate its children.
I know that sounds crass of me but that’s what the 10th Amendment says and the last time I looked it was still a part of the document.
So in its efforts to right a wrong the Court had violated the separation of powers, which is one of the most vital cogs in the protective wheel of our balance of powers.
Good came out of the decision but the harm had been done.
Set a precedent that violates the letter of the law, even if you are doing a good thing and you make it easier for the next violation, which most likely be up to no good.
This the principle of the Nose of the Camel.
And while the nose may not smell so bad and may even be kind of cute, we all know what happens when the entire camel is lodged within the tent.
In a word, the tent becomes uninhabitable.
Liberals like to call this Camel Principle by its popular name, that is the living constitution.
The logic behind this that was applied to the Topeka school system was that the Constitution was written a couple hundred years ago, exclusively by men who would not have been able to understand the world Americans inhabited today.
So using the elastic clause and the 14th Amendment, the Court has been able to fashion just about anything they thought need doing.
In other words, Sociology trumped the law.
The best and most offensive example of this was the infamous Roe v. Wade decision that was forced on the American people, on January 22, 1973.
It was not only a sad day in our country but was a blight on our most important institution, namely marriage.
Roe was the end result of the Brown decision in 1954.
If the one eliminated our original sin, this one created an even bigger actual sin.
The one educated millions of black children and the second has resulted in over 50 million unborn children, including 17 million black children, being sacrificed on an altar of choice.
This case did not happen. At least three members of the Court, Harry Blackmun, William Douglas and William Brennan conspired to find just the right case to drive home this alleged right for women.
The creative justices manufactured the artificial right of women out of a penumbra in the right to privacy in the 9th amendment, adding Astronomy to Sociology to their arsenal of legal precedents.
Norma McCorvey, a poor unmarried pregnant woman, who had already given birth to her child while the decision was pending.
She easily became the unwitting dupe of the agenda-driven left.
At first she claimed she had been raped and could have gotten an abortion under Texas law but without a police report her lies were exposed.
On a side note the use of the word right in terms of an abortion is an only an affront to the English language, it is an abomination that mocks 200 years of American history.
What women have is not a right but a license to rid them of any of their unborn off-spring.
It is a privilege that was granted to them by seven men, ultimately for the benefit of men and to the detriment of women.
You don’t believe me?
Just ask Hugh Hefner, one of the most consistent supporters of a woman’s right to choose, both financially and ideologically.
The next big push on our freedoms and out civilization of freedom is ObamaCare. This virtual take-over of one sixth of our economy is designed to force Americans to buy a product that we might not want.
Like Brown if this does eventually pass Court muster, the government can force us to buy or maybe even sell anything they feel might not be good for the general welfare.
Maybe something like a new Chevrolet Volt.
Given what I have written in the past two weeks, is in a nutshell why the Tea Party arose at approximately this time and place in history. One of their battle cries has been to get back to the Constitution.
And the reason for this, the Constitution is our governing principle.
Since the Progressives in 1900 the country has gradually gotten away from being a nation of laws but more a nation of sociologists, who want to staple, fold, bend and mutilate our governing principle so out of shape that they will have carte blanche to do and enact what ever laws they deem necessary for our control.
And for this they are mocked!
A recent article in the New Yorker Magazine questioned whether the Constitution had become a cult.
Like the leaders of business and insurance, now it is the Constitution that is being marginalized and turned into something foreign and alien to American society.
This reminds me of the card game that the baseball players relaxed with in the movie, Bang the Drum Slowly.
They called it TEGWAR..the Exciting Game Without Any Rules.
The ball players made up the rules as they went along, relieving the mark of all of his money.
There is something about rules that warrant a visceral reaction.
I think people feel that way because rules tell us, not just what we can do but what we cannot do.
In a society that has turned some freedoms into licenses that can be a very harrowing thing.
Personally, I think government goes too far with its multi-layered bureaucracy of innumerable agencies with their volumes of rules and regulations that threaten my personal freedoms from 16 different directions.
However I think some personal rules are great for society.
Take the 10 Commandments–if more people followed them religiously, we could easily dispense with millions of our government’s petty moralizing of our behaviors.
But there is one set of rules most Democratic politicians and even a few Republicans find troublesome and too restrictive on their own freedom and power.
I am talking about the Rule Book for Politicians.
No, I do not mean Machiavelli or even Saul Alinsky.
I am talking about the United States Constitution, which was designed 223 years ago to empower, direct and limit our politicians in their myriad dealings with the citizens and foreign countries.
It is a marvelous document that could only have been created by leaders whom I fear were far greater than any this country has produced in the last generation or two.
Most of our politicians, especially the progressives, hate the Constitution because it tells them what they cannot do.
It puts a curfew on them when they want to spend all hours of the night trying to expand their powers, while getting rich in the process.
To hear many of them argue today in the wake of the November debacle at the polls, inspired largely by members of a throwback era, the new Tea Party that demanded a new respect for the Constitution be demonstrated by all those who wished to serve this nation.
After all it is not only the president that swears to uphold and protect the Constitution but also every member of Congress.
I dare say I would wager than many of them have never even read the document.
One would think that with a president who presumably has not only read it but understands it well enough to have taught it at the University of Chicago Law School that there would be more respect offered to this our primary source of authority and the rock upon which the nation’s existence and future rests upon.
But is that the case? Perhaps Professor Obama studied the document, only so he could find all its loopholes.
The bone of political contention in the Constitution revolves around two potentially conflicting sections.
The enumerated powers lists all the specific things that the different branches have as their responsibility.
There is also an amendment process that is a bit cumbersome and can take years before a change is enacted.
For a president or a Congress in a hurry, this can be game-breaker.
The clause that has given the most hope to presidents with big ideas is the general welfare clause that states the government may do anything that is necessary and proper to promote…
Since it carries with it a lot of implied powers, it has often allowed presidents a lot of wiggle room.
Alexander Hamilton was the nation’s first Secretary of the Treasury and he had big ideas for launching America’s economic enterprise.
His series of Reports on Manufactures set a paradigm for American prosperity that seemed to capture the future in a handbasket.
People like Hamilton were called loose constructionists because they favored a relaxed approach to the extension of government power through those pesky implied powers.
Hamilton’s ideas became the linchpin of the Federalist Party, one of the country’s first faction that is a group of people with a similar political agenda and philosophy.
They were quickly opposed by their polar opposites, for want of a better name, the Anti-Federalists, led by Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison.
They believed in few if any implied powers, or a strict constructionist view of the Constitution.
These two principles set the stage for evolution of a system of faction that Madison had warned against in hisFederalist #10.
These two “parties” were the progenitors of the political struggles were have been enduring in the 21st century.
However the differences between the two parties have become more extreme and the nation is in severe danger of turning its rule book into a quaint historical artifact.
These contradictory views are clearly visible in our current Supreme Court.
As President Jefferson was so dedicated to his belief that had his ministers not gone ahead without his consent and agreed to the purchase of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the country would be a lot smaller and the nation’s history much different.
When the agreement reached his desk, he bit his lip and signed it even though he could think of no place that it was allowed in the Constitution.
The general welfare clause, sometimes called the elastic clause was a stroke of our political genius.
I took a course in Constitutional History at Fordham University one summer.
The professor pointed out that the nation of India was less than 25 years old and already its Constitution had hundreds of amendments.
The Indian constitution lacked an elastic clause that would have allowed for changing times and new circumstances that the founding fathers could in their wildest imagination never predicted.
At that time our constitution was approaching its 175th birthday and it only had 24 amendments.
Of course the elastic clause has since the dawn of the 20th century and the rise of the Progressive philosophy of big and intrusive government has been thoroughly abused by several presidents.
This clause has allowed a number of them to confuse the general welfare of the country with the welfare of their winning the next election.
Since FDR and later under LBJ and now with BHO, the country has suffered through an enormous expansion of government that has made it become a Leviathan State that many of the founding fathers warned against.
Look for an expansion of this extreme division in my Part II later next week.
The story of Yahweh instructing Moses to lead the children of Israel out of slavery in Egypt into the promise land of Canaan is one of the most dramatic events in the Old Testament.
What a fitting lesson it holds for us today.
The American people are looking forward to the new Republicans, that is the Tea Party members whose patriotic inspiration can lead them out of the economic economic slavery of Obama.
Otherwise, surely the country will drown in a sea of red ink like its Egyptian precursors..
Former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi recently prided her 111th Congress on its fiscal responsibility.
That’s the same as Casanova patting himself on the shoulder for his marital fidelity.
Statements like that from her have always made me wonder about her intelligence, or her sanity.
Her Congress was one of the worst in history, primaryily for its ruinous spending.
It was the Pelosi Congress that has brought the country to the abyss of bankruptcy.
In fact bankruptcy is become as popular as bowling and tennis used to be.
Several of our united states are teetering on the brink of fiscal failure. These states are mostly blue states, such as California, Massachusetts, Michigan and Nevada.
New Jersey would be there too had it not been for the heroic swimming against a liberal red sea of its Governor Chris Christie.
I do not know who dictated the nomenclature for the so-called red and blue states but he got it very wrong.
There is far more accuracy, and symbolism in designating such states with the Marxist spending habits of an uptown drunk as red.
Even the Catholic Church has recently suffered another bankruptcy.
With Milwaukee the number is now up to eight, though the reason given had little to do with financial mismanagement but more with the moral turpitude of sexual abuse.
And with the case of the public bankruptcies what is the most apparent cause for this eventual day of reckoning?
Is it tax cuts for the wealthy?
That’s nothing but a mendacious joke on the American people.
The former speaker tells the House that they have to concentrate on job creation.
Now she tells us.
What did she and her president do for the two years since Obama was elected?
Nothing more than chase jobs out of this country.
How does she plan to do that? Most likely more of the same–government jobs and infrastructure projects, all on the federal nickel.
What effect will these twin pillars of self-destruction have on the economy?
Every dollar taken out of the private sector to pay for these jobs, means there will be fewer dollars in the private sector to hire private employees who would ostensibly produce goods and services that would not cost Uncle Sam a nickel.
In fact these are real jobs that will more than likely last several more years that the government busy work kind of jobs
Concomitant with his spending, President Obama has done the most he could to ensure the future of government unions.
You could probably put the United Autoworkers in this equation as a public union, since General Motors would have been out of business had not the government stepped in to save the jobs–all on the taxpayer’s bill.
This would not have happened had not the union saddled GM with excessive wages and high legacy costs.
Now government jobs add little to the productivity and job-creation sector because so many of them are regulatory positions that actually limit productivity.
How serious is it?
Some commentators are saying that with our 14 trillion-dollar debt–which is roughly equal to the entire earnings of all of American economic activity–at least that which is reported–we are already close to falling into the Nietzsche-like abyss.
However one of my sources tells me that to compare debt with cash flow is comparable to comparing a cheese burger with a steak.
They both may be meat but there is a vast difference in their importance.
The United States economy has over 150 trillion dollars in assets–both public and private.
If the country had to it could sell its ANWR oil reserves, open several other areas to oil production, even privatize many of the public parks.
Of course the psycho-greens would never allow this.
Add to this the fact that Obama is not only our first black president but also our first green president and you have a formulae for the socialization of America.
The radical Green philosophy is a Marxist subset that is counter-productive to capitalism and all its benefits.
The Greens are ideological Luddites, who are not happy until there are fewer people in the world, less technology and a leveling of wealth to a mere subsistence.
They would relish seeing all Americas live in caves or the wilderness like Grizzly Adams.
Just look what the greens and the public unions have done to Europe.
Greece went bankrupt because it has become a nation of librarians, and civil servants–all on the public dole.
American states that are facing bankruptcy have two option. They can renegotiate all their public union contracts or they can declare bankruptcy and start over from scratch.
Will their unions like that?
No and if Greece and the rest of Europe is any guide they will take to the streets or at least, they will all call in with the blue flu as according to some reports was the case in New York City in the aftermath of its recent blizzard.
If Obama has his way the liberals will address this issue by paying off the debt by simply printing the money.
That would lead to high inflation, more unemployment and a worthless currency.
Personally I believe the president wants us to fail because people will always prefer security over freedom.
What will this America look like if Obama gets his way?
The Associated Press recently ran a short news item about the Cuban Paradise.
It is becoming more expensive to live and stay clean in Cuba .
The Cuban people live on an average salary of about $20 a month–most American teenagers get that per day.
Soap, toothpaste and detergents are going to be cut from their monthly ration book.
These one-time necessities now join cigarettes, salt, peas and potatoes on the list of non-essentials for the Cuban people.
The Cuban government says the cuts are necessary to continue to offer all their people free or heavily subsidized education, health care, housing, transportation programs.
Is this what’s on the Obama agenda? Remember Michael Moore telling is how good Cuban medical care was?
Well it costs about as much as your human freedom.
Is that the kind of change that the American people really want?
Just stick around!
The ride is going to be very bumpy
The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:
The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.
A Boeing 747-400 passenger jet can hold 416 passengers. This blog was viewed about 6,000 times in 2010. That’s about 14 full 747s.
In 2010, there were 62 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 73 posts. There were 104 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 85mb. That’s about 2 pictures per week.
The busiest day of the year was November 30th with 92 views. The most popular post that day was The Blood of a Martyred Faith.
The top referring sites in 2010 were mail.yahoo.com, mail.live.com, webmail.aol.com, mail.aol.com, and sz0099.ev.mail.comcast.net.
Some visitors came searching, mostly for liberal fallacies, bill o’reilly pinheads and patriots=, bbprof.wordpress.com, ward clever, and armageddon was yesterday.
These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.
The Blood of a Martyred Faith July 2010
Free Will: The Battle of the Blogs February 2010
The Human Game August 2010
When Your Cotton Balls Get Rotten March 2010
Back to Bataan May 2010