Susan In Glendale

Obama Begs Support for his Marriage Switcheroo

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 10 May 2012 15:59:00 +0000

President Obama's campaign just sent out his umpteenth fundraising appeal, this time couched as a thoughtful explanation for his recent declaration of war on traditional marriage. Below is an excerpt from his email letter. The black text is Obama's original text. The text in red translates the political-speak into something we can all understand.

Susan -- aka Liberal Mailing List Drone

Today, I was asked a direct question and gave a direct answer: My Veep Joe "Gaff-a-Minute" Biden got me into this FUBAR, and I would really rather not go here, but Carville is nervous we're gonna lose BIG in November so I have to come out of the closet on this issue to rally my extremist base.

I believe that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. Please understand, back in 2008 I needed the black vote. Since they're in the tank for me now, I really need the gay vote in Hollywood and their money to win in 2012.

I hope you'll take a moment to watch the conversation, consider it, and weigh in yourself on behalf of marriage equality. http://my.democrats.org/Marriage . . . Wasserman-Schultz shouldn't have picked a traditional marriage/ right to work state like North Carolina state for our national convention! I need something positive to spin here.

I've always believed that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally. Marriage is discriminatory as an institution against women especially. Always has been -- just ask my mom. I was reluctant to use the term marriage because of the very powerful traditions it evokes. I oppose all American traditions, especially powerful ones, and Thanksgiving is next but I didn't want you to know. And I thought civil union laws that conferred legal rights upon gay and lesbian couples were a solution. I hoped the gay lobby would STFU until after November 2012 when I have more flexibility -- didn't they get the memo from my buddy Putin?!?!?!

...

So I decided it was time to affirm my personal belief that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. Internal White House polls tell us we're moving back to Chicago in December. Michelle is frantic because she can't focus on her next vacation, her organic garden or her food agenda for all Americans.

I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines. Except when it comes to contraception and that nefarious Catholic Church! They've gotta pay for abortion and sterilization under Obamacare just like everyone else. Religious objectors be damned!! But I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. It's just that some people, like my liberal financial supporters, are more equal than others. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them. Unless the state enacts a traditional definition of marriage as being solely between one man and one woman. Those have to be steamrolled just like Arizona's immigration laws. And we're gonna get rid of DOMA, too, just as soon as I'm re-elected. Pinky Promise!

If you agree, you can stand up with me here. I need MONEY. Seriously, hit the Donate button. NOW!

Thank you,

Barack (He who killed Osama bin Laden. That was me! and I like having a one word name like Rush and Oprah!)

---

More than 1.9 million people like you power this campaign. Thanks to our union money laundering operations across the country. If you can, please donate now. Tell us you still like us, PUH-LEEZE!!

Marriage is now just another evolving plank in Obama's Social Gospel.

Horror Movie Come True: Soylent Green is Babies

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Wed, 09 May 2012 22:58:00 +0000

From American films like Soylent Green and Sweeny Todd to Chinese movie fare Dumplings, human flesh as food is a recurrent horror film them. In a disturbing Movie-Come-True moment, South Korea has discovered that the Chinese are making health pills out of dead babies and exporting them.

South Korea has seized thousands of smuggled drug capsules filled with powdered flesh from dead babies, which some people believe can cure disease, officials said Monday. The capsules were made in northeastern China from babies whose bodies were chopped into small pieces and dried on stoves before being turned into powder, the Korea Customs Service said.

Customs officials refused to say where the dead babies came from or who made the capsules, citing possible diplomatic friction with Beijing. Chinese officials ordered an investigation into the production of drugs made from dead fetuses or newborns last year.

But it gets worse. South Korea may be a partner in a sick symbiotic relationship with China.

Back in August of 2011, a South Korean watchdog group exposed the underground market for aborted and still-born babies between the South Korean government and China. At least one blog captured the watchdog group's documentary report in Korean without English translation. The watchdog group claimed that DNA tests showed the pills were 99.7 percent human and could determine the gender of the baby.

The original 2011 report in the San Francisco Times story did not specify whether the South Korean watchdog group had provided specifics detailing the ratio of boys to girls in the pills. But since China dictates couples may bear only one child, it is a safe bet that the majority of those baby pills were made from girls, aborted out of a desperate choice forced upon pregnant mothers by a misogynist combination of culture and communism all in the name of environmental concerns (Where are the feminists? Holding their CO2 breath?).

Setting aside the frightening prospect that governments are collaborating internationally to profit from forced abortion, the logical legislatively foreseeable progression of events right here in America foreshadow the abortion industry's international monetizing. It is no secret that American businesses routinely insist on using tissues from aborted babies for medicines, vaccines and even taste-testing new soda flavors.

[U]se of tissue from aborted fetuses is not a new practice. Controversy really began after 20/20 aired its undercover investigation into the harvesting of fetal tissues in 2000. Investigate Magazine, a conservative Christian publication in New Zealand, describes this as the “hidden side of medical research.” In the U.S., the National Council for State Legislatures states that many states “restrict research on aborted fetuses or embryos, but research is often permitted with consent of the patient.” What Investigate Magazine found was that University of Auckland, in collaboration with the University of Washington, is also conducting experiments using tissues from aborted babies in eyesight research. Here’s the kicker — the aborted fetus tissues are imported from America. (from The Blaze)

The UK already has secret stockpile of experimental human-animal hybrid zygotes ready and waiting in cryogenic freeze for God-knows-what sick "scientific" excuse. So what's the big deal about using "unwanted" babies to help build the brave new world complete with cherry-flavored Pepsi, anyway?

Without moral principles to guide health care, cannibalism is just another man's medicine. At the end of the day, microwaving, drying out and grinding up aborted and still-born babies to compound them into fountain-of-youth cure all pills for superstitious customers is just another justifiable scientific use of fetal tissue for health care.

Just as with so many other scientific innovations, China is copying America and the UK and simply upgrading to the next operating system, Abortion OS-2 with an environmentally friendly twist, bio-recycling of carbon based footprints. Soylent Green is Babies.

Obama to Women: "Stay at home, Moms."

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 01:30:00 +0000

Don’t be misled. At the heart of the Motherhood debate is not whether “stay-at-home” mothers “work for a living”. That is the Make-Believe media and Democrat deflection. No, at the heart of this debate is the Democrat theme to nullify the opinions of “stay-at-home” mothers on the economy, to reduce stay-at-home mothers to second-class citizenship. That was the specific point of Hilary Rosen's assault last week - that Ann Romney is unqualified to speak to the economy because she raised her children at home. To women, especially suburban women, Obama and Rosen are saying: “Stay at home, moms.”

The motherhood controversy is part of the ongoing Obama strategy making “women’s issues” a foundation of his re-election campaign. Doing so serves two purposes. First, it distracts from the dismal economy. Second, it presumably motivates an important voting base - overall 56% of women voted for Obama in 2008 (The marriage gap was vast: Unmarried women preferred Obama by 70% while 50% of married women preferred McCain).

But this strategy is risky. Obama presides over more Americans living in poverty than anytime in U.S. history, and the majority of those poor are women. Emphasizing poverty and the economy as a women’s issue would be political suicide. This explains why Obama instead shills the distraction and deception of casting the GOP as the bogeyman attacking women, forcing them to become pregnant and chaining them to their kitchen stoves.

Thus when objections arose to Obama’s tyrannical bullying of religious groups, Obama and the Media promptly demagogued the issue by positing Republicans as oppressors seeking to deprive women of birth control. Obama cannot win the religious rights argument but he might win by cynically and deceitfully casting the issue as a reproductive rights argument.

Now enter the Motherhood controversy. Obama launched the issue last weekend claiming that he and Michelle didn’t have the “luxury” of having Michelle stay at home to raise Sasha and Malia (never mind that Michelle’s “work” consisted of collecting a $316K salary in 2005 doing "community affairs" for a university hospital that was earmarked by her then senator-hubby to receive a cool $1M in taxpayer money). The real message behind Obama’s remark is that mothers who raise their children at home do so as a “luxury”. Setting aside the snide arrogance and contempt behind the statement, what it did was set up Hilary Rosen’s comment a few days later that Ann Romney’s role as a stay-at-home mother disqualified her from speaking on any real world issues, including economics, since she hasn’t been outside her kitchen walls earning a living.

The Make-Believe Media, as well as Obama, subsequently appeared to “disavow” Rosen’s statements, but only to the extent of affirming the “value” of stay-at-home mothers. Critically, none of these disavowals addressed Rosen’s foundational point that such mothers do not get to voice an opinion about any important economic issues; that they may be seen, but not heard. Some Democrats candidly admit that stay-at-home mothers obviously understand economics and its impact on daily life, for example, knowing the price of gas, bread and eggs "better than their husbands". And that is the danger posed by voices like Ann Romeny - they realize all too well that Obama's contrived "war of women" is a cynical detraction from the miserable plight of women under the Obama Economy.

It is no coincidence that stay-at-home mothers are perceived as being more conservative and likely to vote Republican. And it is no coincidence that Obama wants to censor their voices in the national political debate

Obama's War on Religion: Preaching The "Social Gospel"

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 03:39:00 +0000

In case you missed it, religion is no longer belief in God and obedience to objective tenets; it is now a social agenda clothed in religious terminology to advance a political end. And Obama admits it.

In an interview reported by Fox News last week, Obama admits he is “puzzled” that the Catholic Church opposes paying for all women to have fair, equal access to birth control and abortion. After all, Obama explained, his “first real job out of college, was working with churches in low-income communities, trying to make sure that the social gospel was made real, that people were getting help."

The Social Gospel. A missing books of the New Testament? Hardly.

Here's the Social Gospel in a nut shell: government forcibly ensuring that subjective political "good" is done unto thers. Current example: women need help affording birth control so we should make the Church "help" the people. Obamacare merely exists to ensure that “good” is done unto others. Government is making the "social gospel real.”

Over twenty years, Reverend Jeremiah Wright taught Obama the "Social Gospel," a blend of social justice, socialism, black liberation theology, and hatred for America as an oppressor nation. His teachings had very little to do with Christian theology; they had everything to do with advancing a radical socialist political agenda through passionate preaching. Obama was an apt pupil. Obama’s "Social Gospel" employs pseudo-Christian religious concepts and passionate speech to advance a socialist political agenda.

The Left is redefining the traditional social lexicon to apply subjective meanings. Marriage is not marriage anymore. The left demands a subjective definition of marriage to embrace anyone who is committed to someone else through some sort of meaningful relationship. Family is not a father and mother and kids traditional unit. Family is subjectively defined to encompass almost any cohabitation. Opposition to this redefinition is called “intolerance.’

There is nothing inconsistent between a far left wing policy decision impacting a teaching of faith because they are one and the same in Obama’s Social Gospel. There is no “war on religion” in Obama’s mind because Obama’s religion is politics, the social gospel and politics are one and the same thing because they advance the common “good.”

Obama’s puzzlement over Catholic non-compliance with Obamacare stems from his own subjective view of religion. This is how Obama can claim that Jesus would support his tax plan or Obamacare for that matter. Obama sees no First Amendment conflict when he dictates that the Catholic Church must adopt a more socialist agenda, because, to Obama, the left wing political/socialist agenda is synonymous with religious practice.

Socialism is the Social Gospel in action. Now you've heard the Word.

Rose Parade Crowd Boos Occupy Bullies

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 22:13:00 +0000

Boos greeted the post-Rose Parade Occupy protestors on Monday, January 2nd. Boos and empty bleachers. Traditionally, when the last float, band and equestrian unit in the Rose Parade passes and the parade concludes, what follows are janitors scooping up horse manure, along with individuals and groups hyping various political, religious and sundry causes. As reported in earlier articles at BigJournalism, this year's post-Rose Parade tag-alongs included a contingent of "Occupy The Rose Parade" malcontents with a hodgepodge of pathetic "floats", including a cheesy plastic bag "octopus of greed."

My video showing the Rose Parade crowd booing the "Occupy"ers has gone viral. I posted it to Breitbart.tv to show how the Occupods were bullying and harrassing regular people trying to leave after the prade had ended.

My sister-in-law took video from the stands at the beginning of the parade route. The crowd had not yet had a chance to disperse following the parade, so they booed the Occupy protesters. Further down the route, the crowd simply dispersed and ignored them.

My husband and daughter also attended the Rose Parade. Afterward when they attempted to get to their car among the dispersing crowds on Colorado Boulevard, they encountered the oncoming Occupy "paraders". But rather than allow them and other spectators to walk freely, the Occupy mob literally attempted to shove my husband out of the way of their "parade".

When he didn't accommodate them, he and my daughter were verbally abused by the Occupiers who walked through them with their banners and silly plastic octopus. And while disgraced lawyer, convicted thief and failed political Democrat candidate claimed a loyal following of 5000, it was obvious that the Occupy mob numbered no more than one or two hundred, many of whom were probably dispersing parade spectators.

The Occupy organizer (supposedly trained in crowd safety) tried to shove my husband out of the way, but like a typical bully he stopped when warned against such behavior. Then my husband fumbled to begin taping in the middle of the event (thank Steve Jobs for such amateur video protection devices!). His portion of the amateur video starts inside the belly of the beast and is self-explanatory. The Occupod was angry that someone had used citizen journalism to occupy his parade!

The shameless hypocrisy of the so called 99% is palpable: they believe that they are the only ones entitled on a public street and all others must make way for them. These are the same people who routinely blocked streets and intersections, disrupted businesses, took over public parks for months, raping and defecating along the way, preventing the free comings and goings of others. What their behavior demonstrates is the shear arrogance of the Occupy activism, their utter disdain for the law and the rights of others. It is they who are the one percent attempting to dominate with their fringe message of socialist control ably aided by the Make-Believe Media.

Frosty: Noble Martyr of Man-Made Climate Change

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:15:00 +0000

Cain beats Perry the Platypus in Florida Straw Poll

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:08:00 +0000

What do the results of the Florida straw poll teach us?

Obama’s divisive race baiting isn’t working. White crackers will vote for a black man. Cain is a genuine, conservative business man who merits more media time to sell a revolutionary 999 tax plan that will liberate the economy and is as simple as a pizza sales promotion.

Bachmann may have fatally vaccinated herself in the foot with an overdose of Gardisil. Newt is the old guard GOP statesman channeling Reagan. And Santorum has all the right beliefs but lacks the right delivery.

We now know that Governors Perry and Romney are actually moderates who played dueling banjos with their own books in order to snatch victory for liberal ideas from the jaws of Obama's certain defeat.

Like the Australian animal mix of mammal and bird, Perry the Platypus is a dangerous amalgam of liberal ideas wearing conservative cowboy boots. Perry’s positions on immigration are dangerous and schizophrenic at best. Boots on the ground can’t beat free college tuition and preference in admissions. Perry is playing the liberal race card by calling folks “heartless” who oppose his Dream Act. They just want a secure border and what’s wrong with that?

So, Pizza delivery beats Perry the Platypus.

California Plastic Bag Ban Backfires

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:39:00 +0000

Last year the California state legislature wisely voted down a law that would have imposed a state-wide ban on single-use plastic bags in stores, you know, the carry out bags retail stores like Vons, Ralph’s, Home Depot, Lowe’s, and Wal-Mart use to sack the stuff you buy. But a handful of county supervisors, including those in Los Angeles County, have imposed their regional political will by banning those plastic bags throughout unincorporated areas of the state.

And banning plastic shopping bags isn’t enough. Now a Democrat legislator in the city of Los Angeles wants to ban both plastic and paper carry out bags to help cut costs of waste management (see, in the end it’s all about the money -- liberals in government can’t confiscate enough taxes and won’t cut pet programs).

The proffered warm and fuzzy intent of these local tyrannies is to protect the global environment from evil private trash. Yet the myriad exceptions to the rule prove that plastic (or paper for that matter) is not the true concern. If either plastic or paper were truly the environmental equivalent of deadly second-hand cigarette smoke, then these bans should have no exceptions whatsoever. No sandwich bags, no paper lunch bags, no trash bags, no plastic potato chip bags, no plastic six pack cola rings, no plastic packaging for toilet paper and no toilet paper either, and absolutely no medical pharmacy plastic bags!

The laws also force retailers to charge between 10 and 15 cents tax for every recyclable paper bag provided to customers. Ostensibly, this economic punishment will motivate customers to bring in their own re-useable “green” canvas totes (made of locally grown hemp no doubt). Really it is hush money payola to the retail stores to compensate them for going peacefully along with the cost of providing the paper bags and program “education.”

Here’s the good news: Consumers are already one step ahead of the government tyrants. The shopping bag bans do not apply to sales of plastic (or paper) bags. If they did, Hefty and Glad would soon be pulling out of California faster than Amazon. Retailer are just banned from “providing” the bags for free. Savvy patrons are already buying plastic trash bags in the store and using them to sack the rest of the groceries.

Thanks to California Commie Liberals’ red tape tyranny, plastic bag manufacturers now have a huge new market. Retailers can sell pre-packaged single-use plastic bags for a profit at a unit price well below the government mandated paper bag fee of ten to fifteen cents each, e.g. 25 plastic bags in a $1.00 dispensing tube. The new customer is the multi-tasking soccer mom who will be more than happy to pay something less than ten cents a piece to once again enjoy the convenience of plastic bags dispensed from a little “Bags to Go” plastic tube hanging in the check out aisle next to the trashy tabloids. Ownership transfers to the customer at check out who then hands the grocery clerk her newly purchased single use bags to sack groceries.

Find a way to hang the plastic bag dispensing tube from the unused cigarette lighter in the minivan and soccer moms all across California will stock up on extra tubes to sack the post game victory fast food debris and tie up the toddler’s disposable diaper while on the go. “

Color the “Bags To Go” tube bright neon green ... just to irritate the liberals.

Darth Obama's "Transforming America" Re-election Campaign Ad

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 06:47:00 +0000

Newly leaked DNC presidential re-election test video highlights Obama's accomplishments to date!!

I mean, who wouldn't want four more years of socialist uptopia?!? Memo to RNC -- laughter lightens the load, opens the mind, and encourages the downtrodden. Ridicule freezes and personifies the problem. Give people something to laugh at and you will persuade them to hear the truth behind the humor.

No budget. No high tech effects. I'm just an American mother with her kids, doing the job the RNC just won't do . . . laughing at the Transformer-in-Chief.

Liberal Donors ignore, LA Times runs cover for CA Dem Candidate's Gangbanger Ties

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 04:19:00 +0000

A traditionally safe Democrat congressional seat is up for grabs in a special election in Los Angeles Tuesday, July 12th. Craig Huey is the GOP candidate. Janice Hahn is liberals' favorite to beat. The local FoxTV News ran a damning story exposing the Democrat candidate’s connection to a program that gave taxpayer money to Los Angeles gangbangers, including convicted rapists and gun traffickers. It is a must watch:

The Democrat responded by threatening legal action against the news station!! BreitbartTV and BigGovernment recently covered this scandal. So, to the Democrat’s rescue rides the liberal fish wrap known as The Los Angeles Times.

Reinforcing its role as trashy leftist tabloid, the Times responded with a story that repeatedly pronounced the Fox news report as “discredited” -- but without explaining “why” or “how” the report was discredited. The Fox News report is “discredited” because the Los Angeles Times just … said so.

The Times’ story then doubles down on stupid by uncritically reporting “claims” that GOP candidate Craig Huey is “suppressing women's votes.” Shocking claim, but how is Huey suppressing the women’s vote? By focusing the election on the economy instead of abortion! Yes, you read that correctly. Making the economy the issue in a Congressional election is sexist and suppresses the women’s vote, because The Los Angeles Times just … said so.

Continuing its feverish descent in Alinksyesque drivel, the Times explains that the GOP candidate is “out of step” with the “moderate” voters in the district because he opposes same sex marriage and favors abortion limitations. So, a “moderate” voter is one who supports gay marriage, opposes any limits on abortion, and never, ever is concerned with the economy, because The Los Angeles Times just … said so.

The Times sees nothing controversial with a local program that puts taxpayer money into gangbangers’ hands who then use that money for criminal activity and gun running. And, apparently, neither do liberal donors to Hahn's campaign:

The dearth in donations from GOP House members [to Craig Huey's campaign] also stands in contrast to the generosity of House Democrats, 27 of whom have contributed to Huey’s opponent, Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn. That’s nearly four times as many as their House GOP counterparts.

Hahn received contributions from a slate of party leaders and a few Democrats outside of California, including Massachusetts Reps. John Tierney and Nikki Tsongas, Washington Rep. Norm Dicks, and New York Rep. Joe Crowley. Hahn also picked up checks from several party caucuses, including the Congressional Black Caucus and the New Democrat Coalition.

So just what is it about Democrats and their obsession with getting taxpayer money and guns into criminals' hands, justifying it with some sort of program to rehab or track bad guys and then trying to smother news reports with legal sabre rattling? We'll have to leave that question to Eric Holder's DOJ and the ATF because no one at The Los Angeles Times, Politico nor even one of Janice Hahn liberal donors apparently has the least concern about how Ms. Hahn used local taxpayers' dollars.

Remember, women's rights uber alles.

Would Palin Unite America with a Conservative Cabinet Campaign?

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 23:47:00 +0000

If Sarah Palin runs for President, how can she unite Americans behind her campaign given a strong field of candidates and the frenzied onslaught of Make-Believe Media lies? I cannot speak as a politician or a "strategerist," but as a mother, I want all my children to stop squabbling and work together as a team. As an American, I want politicians to do nothing less for the good of the nation.
Applying that maternal common sense to politics, Mrs. Palin could unite Americans around her Conservative Dream Cabinet. As the keystone to her campaign, she could announce her intent to give Americans a team to vote FOR, a conservative team with an all star line up to defeat Obama and the liberals. The only trouble may be the excess of excellent conservatives in the field.

The selling point would be that every leading conservative will be part of a Palin Conservative Cabinet for America. Solely by way of example, Michele Bachmann as VP would create an awesome dynamic feminine duo. Similarly, Herman Cain for VP would bring conservatism with private business success credentials along with bullet proof credibility against the hackneyed leftist race card challenge. Either Bachmann's experience as a tax attorney or Cain's business acumen could be put to good use rearranging the IRS.

Rick Santorum could replace Eric Holder as Attorney General, a perfect place to fight abortion, enforce DOMA, police abuses in Congress, and drain the racist DOJ policy fever swamp in one fell swoop.

Although not formally in the race yet, Rick Perry would be an excellent draft to run the EPA, cutting stifling environmental regulations and encouraging oil drilling and private business development. Likewise, Allen West could be tapped to head up the military. Of course either man would be yet another great Palin VP pick if either decide to throw their hats in.

And what if Mrs. Palin invited Ron Paul to head the Fed? Sweet for the libertarians.

I'll leave it to Sarah and her advisers to figure how to incorporate Pawlenty and other noble conservative candidates into her conservative cabinet. And in the true spirit of keeping enemies closer than friends, Sarah could bring the Establishment RINO Republicans like media darlings Mitt Romney and John Huntsman in too.

Instead of gradually weakening our conservative field by letting the Make-Believe Media pick the most moderate as the Republican default to face Obama in a remake of the 2008 Liberal versus Liberal Light battle, Sarah could unite those brave conservatives now running and thereby also unite independents who are craving conservative leadership that has gone wanting in the Republican party since the Contract with America.

A proffered Conservative Cabinet for America would give many Americans reasons to vote FOR their favorite candidates under Sarah's dynamic media mantle. That positive vote FOR conservatism coupled with people's desire to vote AGAINST Obama's disastrous policies could be a landslide winning tactic. And such a tactic could emasculate liberal critics who would no longer be able to pick on the girl but would have to take Conservatism on. It could avoid a lot of the partisan competition and blood letting by giving some of the lesser candidates a graceful way out as Palin becomes the woman to beat for the nomination.

One Conservative Nation. One Conservative Cabinet. One Conservative President. Reagan did it. Sarah Palin can too.

Congressman Weiner Incognito

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 06:11:00 +0000

Ducking reporters' questions, Congressman Weiner slips out of D.C. . . . incognito.

How Jews could Undercut S.F. Circumcision Ban: A Late Term Bris Milah!

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Mon, 23 May 2011 07:07:00 +0000

Liberal logic illustrated: Come November in San Francisco, it may be illegal to circumcise your baby boy but you'll still have the have the right to kill him in the womb. A measure banning male circumcision has qualified for the city's November ballot.

Lloyd Schofield, the proponent of the Male Mutilation Ban, seeks to protect children from "forced circumcision," arguing it is a matter of human rights: "Circumcision is a decision that should be left] up to the choice of the individual -- not the parents, society or religion... This is a choice for body integrity."

Athough even the S.F. Chronicle calls the measure "wacky," Jewish groups are already concerned over the measure's First Amendment ramifications.

"For a city that's renowned for being progressive and open-minded, to even have to consider such an intolerant proposition ... it sets a dangerous precedent for all cities and states," said Rabbi Gil Yosef Leeds of Berkeley. Leeds is a certified "mohel," the person who traditionally performs ritual circumcisions in the Jewish faith.

If enacted, the circumcision ban would apply only to newborns and those under the age of 18. Violators would face fines and jail time. And the measure has no tolerance for religious exemptions.

But why worry about the First Amendment when there's an easy way to ... ahem!... circumvent any ban on male circumcision? Since abortionists can thoroughly dismember a fetus legally, certainly a trim job is...well, shall we say...no biggie. The proposed law does not ban the removel of preborn foreskin. I give you the late term bris by an in-utero Mohel!

Or better yet, just take a page from Dr. Kermit "Snips" Gosnell's approach: a partial birth bris! Abortionist prompts a breach "delivery" of the necessary little member while the Mohel stands by ready to perform the bris. And if something slips, why any legal liability can simply be scissored in utero by turning the partial birth bris back into a partial birth abortion.

And for those Jews objecting that a late term bris would break the eight day rule, what's a few days between birth and bris? Just think of it as a political sacrifice for peace with radical liberals -- kinda like Obama's 1967 boarder peace plan between Israel and Palestine.

Just like Isreal's right to exist depends upon the Golan Heights, circumcision in San Francisco may become all about location, location, location. And tyrannical liberal politics.

Right to Life. Right to Exist. Mazel tov!

Obama's Secret Service GITMOs 7th grader for FaceBook Post, Media Advises Caution about Posting Political Speech

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Sat, 21 May 2011 23:12:00 +0000

Thirteen year old Vito LaPinta used his Facebook account to post a concern for President Obama’s safety, reasonably positing suicide bombers might seek revenge in the aftermath of Usama Bin Laden’s assassination. The Washington boy’s Facebook post had NO connection whatever to his middle school. Not on school time. Not on school equipment. Not about school matters, other students or teachers.

A week later, in the middle of the school day, the Secret Service showed up at the 7th grader’s public school and, with the aide and assistance of the local Washington state police and the school principle and staff, they GITMoed this kid. Secret Service ~~water boarded~~ interrogated this 13 year old for half an hour at school away from his parents, without parental knowledge, without informed consent and without legal representation all because the Secret Service couldn’t be sure that a 7th grader’s social network post wasn‘t some sort of coded Al Qaida death threat against our illustrious Leader, Barack Obama.

If this had happened to a Muslim terrorist, the Make-Believe Media would be screaming bloody murder.

I doubt the poor kid even knew he had any rights to assert in the face of his principal, teacher and Tacoma state police wearing badges and Secret Service agents in suits and possibly packing government issued firearms. The school delayed informing the boy’s mother until the Feds’ ~~water boarding~~ interrogation of her son was already complete (security guard tipped mom off -- I guess the principal was too busy to make the call).

It’s been days since Vito LaPinta’s story appeared on Drudge and I‘ve been waiting to see the Make-Believe Media’s angle. Fox News picked up the story, and Yahoo ran a follow up report not on the boy’s civil rights or the mother’s legal options, but rather on the Not-So-Secret Service tweet confirming that Big Brother is indeed monitoring Fox News. (The Secret Service confirms it is indeed the Political Police monitoring all news at a fellow news network and Yahoo giggles over twitter etiquette!!! Ooops indeed.)

The issue of liberty within the original story seems to have been ignored by the serious media outlets. At MSNBC’s “Digital Life” blog, the take was flippancy with comments along the lines of “No Biggie”, or it’s all mom’s fault for not parenting properly. The writer Anthima Chansanchai quipped “if you think someone’s reading your tweets and Facebook posts, you’re probably right.” Her nearsighted caution was similarly parroted by Barabara E. Hernandez over at a local bay area NBC blog too: “keep your most controversial thoughts to your self” was her sage advice to Facebook fans.

At best, these ladies’ Bambi-esque “if you can’t say sumpthin’ nice…” analysis ignores the fundamental issue of liberty and free speech at stake and, at worst, accepts as normal the tyranny illustrated by government oversight imposed on everyday Americans’ political speech. Hopefully these ladies’ ovaries are even less functional than are their dysfunctional brains.

But set aside the lofty legal concepts of the 4th Amendment and Miranda rights. You don’t have to be an ACLU lawyer to figure this out. Whatever happened to the natural Mama Grizzly maternal instincts of protecting children against school yard government bullies?

BTW just where is the ACLU, that defender of minors who create questionable websites and who post provocative rap lyrics on line? Does the ACLU conveniently turn a blind eye when a Democrat President’s henchmen go around mugging childrens’ rights? So it would seem...

Contrast LaPinta’s case to the vigorous defense afforded by the ACLU and CBS to a kid who was sent home from school for wearing a T shirt sporting the image of President Bush bearing the words “International Terrorist.” And yes, you can still buy the T shirt here.

The ACLU was called in, followed by the MBM. Media interest in protecting student speech rights concerning any given president appears to depend on that president’s party affiliation.

So, what was a big story with Bush was a non-starter with Obama…. Typical leftist media, right? It’s worse than that. The T shirt kid dealt with school officials over a free speech issue that happened at the school. Nobody called in the Secret Service to interrogate the T shirt kid to determine whether he was plotting to kill President Bush from something he said out of school on his own time.

Lost in all of this is the media outrage over why anyone in the state, local or federal government had any right to corner any American, let alone a child, inside a secure government owned and operated building (public school) without legal guardian or lawyer for a vague concern over presidential safety over speech posted via the internet on Facebook .

Sadly, with today's twisted liberal bias in the MBM, this story would have gotten MBM coverage only if: 1) if a Republican President had sent his Secret Service to investigate the kid's public school English teacher and andy union connection to Al Qaida; and 2) if the school principal had offered littleVito LaPinta a sugar coated trans fat filled Twinkie or pint of chocolate milk after the interrogation was all over.

Mothers Organize First Pro-Life Walk at Pasadena's Rose Bowl

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 05:53:00 +0000

Never underestimate the power of motherhood to change the world.

About a year ago, some high schoolers came up with a fresh, brash idea to promote their after school club’s simple pro-life message: "Life Is For Everyone." These 14 to 16 year olds thought it would be great if they could organize a pro-life walk around Pasadena’s Rose Bowl. Their mothers agreed and together they acted to fulfill the goal. Walk4Life SoCal was born and began its mission to promote the first ever walk for life at Pasdena's Rose Bowl.

On Sunday March 27th, over 5,000 people registered to walk for the unborn, to send a positive message of life, to answer “yes” to the question of life in the womb. They recruited nationally known pro-life champions Lila Rose, African-American preacher Walter Hoye, film producer Jason (“Bella”) Jones, and Hispanic actress Karyme Lozano as speakers.

The event’s lead speaker, Los Angeles’ Archbishop Jose Gomez, blessed the event, proclaiming “all life is sacred from conception to natural death. Let us ask our good God to bless us today and to be with us in all of our efforts to promote the culture of life." The Archbishop echoed Pope John Paul II’s famous phrase “culture of life” in his remarks (not “culture of God” as was misreported). I was in attendance that day.

The only paper to report the Walk for Life was the Pasadena Star News, a local paper owned by the Los Angeles Newspaper Group. Predictably, the reporter totally missed the monumental story: Twelve mothers with a combined total of 71 children (yeah, life math is impressive) did what professionals charge big bucks to do. They organized and promoted a political march at the iconographic Rose Bowl, symbol of America college football competition and the envy of parade goers the world over.

Just like the Tea Party, these conservative women used every form of social media plus old-fashioned grassroots spread-the-word skills they could muster. And they did it for love. Love of their children. Love of unborn children. Love of Life. Love for women who do not know the truth of abortion, its pain, its finality, its scars.

The media and the abortionists slept like the proverbial hare while Life walked steadily to Los Angeles, into the heart of Leftist La La Land and its film-making mecca. Perhaps the event passed beneath the abortionists’ radar this year. Perhaps Planned Parethood underestimated what a handful of mothers could do inside of a year. No death cultist sicko protestors picketed the Rose Bowl walk...this year. That will certainly change.

Like the rebirth of the hero film genre, these conservative mothers have opened a new campaign, a real life “Battle LA” defending the sanctity of human life. Their simple big tent motto, Life Is For Everyone, can make conservatives and Reagan democrats across Californians cheer and “re-up” if only someone has the guts to run a brave, pro-life campaign.

Perhaps conservative mothers will show the way in 2012.

STOP Planned Parenthood's New Location in Duarte, CA

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 01:09:00 +0000

To quote Edmund Burke, "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Planned Parenthood wants a new site in Duarte. To stop them, we must simply show up and voice objection.

TOMORROW, TUESDAY MARCH 22nd protest Planned Parenthood.!!
Location: 1600 Huntington Drive, Duarte, CA 91010
Time: anytime from 7:00 PM (arrive early to sign up for one of a maximum number of 10 spots to speak about PP's presentation).

The Council of Duarte will hear Sara Howard, a representative of Planned Parenthood, give a presentation and overview describing Planned Parenthood's services (women's health no doubt!). I believe this is the first step towards getting the City's approval for a new PP center in Duarte.

Since speech is limited by time, please bring signs so that you can effectively join in silent protest of Planned Parenthood. If you plan to sign up for one of those 3 minute spot to address the council, prepare short remarks in advance so you won't sound like our President when he goes off the teleprompter!

PLEASE SHARE, POST ON SOCIAL NETWORKS, EMAIL FRIENDS AND BRING YOUR NEIGHBORS.

O'Keefe's Videos Threaten NPR's Tax-Exempt Edge

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:38:00 +0000

Congress defunding NPR is throwing Brer Rabbit into the briar patch. NPR only gets 2% of its money from the U.S. Taxpyer. It's a slap on the wrist. However, revocation of NPR's tax-exempt status as a 501(c)(3) non-profit means donors cannot claim tax credit for "donating" money to sponor shows.

Without its tax-exempt status, NPR would have to compete with other broadcasting companies on an equal footing. That's the real thermo-nuclear threat posed by O'Keefe's undercover videos so far.

Without Planned Parenthood Who Wouldn't Be Here Today?

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 07:58:00 +0000

Planned Parenthood's newest ad campaign urges Senators to restore its public funding recently stripped by House vote. The ad portrays PP as a life-saving organization with a woman's poignant quote: "Without Planned Parenthood, I wouldn't be here today." It's unclear whether PP appreciates the callous irony of such a depiction, but here's a short counter-ad created by my teenage daughter to illustrate the point in case it does not:

It is important to ask who wouldn't be here today without Planned Parenthood. We are glad that "Carolyn" in the PP ad survived her cancer but, sadly, many others do not, and we are left to ponder who among the 50 million Americans aborted since Roe v. Wade might today be making the next great scientific breakthrough for cancer, HIV, birth defects, Alzheimer's, etc.

My message to Planned Parenthood: get out of the abortion business.

Spot That Pimp! Training Film from Margaret Sanger Productions

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 21:31:00 +0000

Doing the job Saturday Night Live won't do.

Dems Make Political Hay out of Giffords' Shooting Tragedy, introduce New Gun Control

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 03:39:00 +0000

Juxtapose these two recent news items and you have Republicans and Democrats in a nutshell.

Hours after the senseless shooting of Democrat Congresswoman Giffords, brand new Republican House Speaker of the House John Boenher postponed indefinitely the planned vote to repeal Obamacare, originally set for Wednesday, January 12th. A generous well-meaning gesture to reach across the aisle at a time of national tragedy by a noble, teary-eyed sap, I’m afraid.
As the hoary saying goes, no good deed goes unpunished.
Politico reports that liberal Democrat Carolyn McCarthy plans to promptly introduce new gun control legislation tomorrow (Monday) morning to capitalize on the Arizona massacre.

If Republicans inhibit McCarthy’s bill in any way whatsoever, you can bet your underwater mortgage the Make-Believe Media will scream vitriolic hyperbole all the while claiming that the laws we already have obviously weren’t enough to stop leftist pot-head Jared Loughner’s sick assassination plot. It won’t matter that at point blank range he could have dispatched the congresswoman more effectively with a good sharp kitchen knife.

While good men sleep, tyranny plots

2011 Rose Parade Govenor's Award Winning Float depicting Life in California Breaks Down, needs Tow

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 16:22:00 +0000

You can’t make this stuff up. The Rose Parade’s “Governor’s Award”-- for the float best depicting “life in California” -- could’ve been renamed the “Irony Award.” The winner, “Suenos de California” (Dreams of California) by the City of Sierra Madre, suffered an humiliating breakdown at the start of the parade and was unceremoniously towed the remainder of the course. What a perfect representation of once the Golden State’s current financial woes. California Dreamin’ it wasn’t.

And until 2012, when the state’s gerry-mandered electoral districts get a Pelosi-style facelift, there’s little hope for a solution that can tow California’s broken down economy out of its Democrat Ditch.

Laughing all the way

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 04:02:00 +0000

Christmas Planning

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 22:42:00 +0000

Less than two weeks to go...

What do Cell Phones, Guns and the TSA Have In Common?

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 07:15:00 +0000

To address the government's growing focus on "distracted" driving, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is exploring technology that will disable cell phones in vehicles.

What if you're not the driver but a passenger?
What if your car breaks down on the highway?
What if you've become lost late at night and you need directions?
What if, God forbid, you are in or witness an emergency situation and need police or fire protection?

Just like the groin gropers at the TSA or gun control fanatics in the government, LaHood is not identifying criminals (terrorists, felons or reckless drivers), but rather is criminalizing the object, in this case a cell phone.

What're they going to protect drivers from next?  How about French fries and hot coffee and children?

Make-Believe Media Shield Obama’s Waffling on Trial for 9/11 Mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

noreply@blogger.com (Susan Swift) — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:31:00 +0000

What's happened to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?
You know, the 9/11 Mastermind Terrorist whom Obama moved out of GITMO
and into NYC Federal Court?
Make-Believe Media Shield Obama’s Waffling on Trial for 9/11 Mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed