#THISisBornAliveAbortion

"So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief," said Rep. Jim Boyd. "If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”

"We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician," said Planned Parenthood lobbyist Snow.

---

source:

Video: Planned Parenthood Official Argues for Right to Post-Birth Abortion | The Weekly Standard

#THISisBlackOnBlack

On his show, Touré said this of Carson:

Carson is a brilliant medical thinker but he's got intellectual tumors like a flat tax, which is regressive, and ignorant in the face of wealth inequality where the top 1% own 35% and the bottom 60% own 2.3%. I doubt Jesus would tax them equally. Just as I doubt the GOP would entertain a white non-politician with unserious ideas. But Carson has joined the GOP's version of affirmative action, where blacks that can speak conservative game get raced to the front of the line because then people get to put a bumper sticker on their car that say, 'How could I be racist? I would have voted for Carson!' Which would fit nicely over the bumper sticker saying, 'How could I be racist? I would have voted for Cain?' Which fit nicely over the bumper sticker saying, 'How could I be racist? I would have voted for Allen West!'

Yes, any black friend will do, no matter how far outside the political system they emerge from and no matter how unserious their ideas are. Because it's all make believe. None of them will ever get a nomination for the Presidency, just as the GOP will never get black votes, because the only thing they care about is winning and not the economic or social needs of black people. But in the meantime, imagine away you guys.

At CPAC Carson said, 'Let's say you magically put me in the White House.' But, my brother, no magic is required to accomplish that. As soon as the sequester ends, you could take a White House tour.

---

The 'Uncle Tom-ing' of Ben Carson Begins

'via Blog this'

#THISisInfanticide

ABSTRACT
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3)adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled

"After-birth Abortion. Why Should the Baby Live?", Journal of Medical Ethics, Online first 23 February 2013 | Alberto Giubilini - Academia.edu

#THISisPersonhood

Abstract
In this paper the permissibility of stem cell research on early human embryos is defended. It is argued that, in order to have moral status, an individual must have an interest in its own well being. Sentience is a prerequisite for having an interest in avoiding pain, and person hood is a prerequisite for having an interest in the continuation of one’s own existence. Early human embryos are not sentient and therefore they are not recipients of direct moral consideration. Early human embryos do not satisfy the requirements for person hood, but there are arguments to the effect that they should be treated as persons nonetheless. These are the arguments from potentiality, symbolic value and the principle of human dignity. These arguments are challenged in this paper and it is claimed that they offer us no good reason to believe that early human embryos should be treated as persons.

Stem cell research, personhood and sentience | Lisa Bortolotti - Academia.edu

#THISisMissleDefenseless

'I can tell you that the United States is fully capable of defending against any North Korean ballistic missile attack," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

Carney added that "our recent success in returning to testing of the upgraded version of the so-called GBI (ground based interceptor), or the CE2 missile, will keep us on a good trajectory to improve our defense capability against limited ballistic missile threats such as those from North Korea. But let's be clear, we are fully capable of dealing with that threat."

The operative word here is "returning," for what Carney did not say is that candidate Obama campaigned on gutting missile defense and carried out that pledge in his first term, along the way betraying our allies and caving in to Russian demands that we limit our missile defense capabilities.

In a campaign video shown to the far left group, Caucus for Priorities, a month before the January 2008 Iowa caucuses, candidate Obama pledged, "I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space." And he kept his word.

President Obama's 2010 defense budget cut $1.4 billion from the Missile Defense Agency's budget. The cuts included scaling back the Airborne Laser boost-phase program, terminating the Multiple Kill Vehicle and Kinetic Energy Interceptor, canceling the expansion of those same ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California, and delaying funding for interceptor and radar sites in Poland and the Czech Republic.

President Obama betrayed allies Poland and the Czech Republic, abandoning plans for ground-based interceptors and missile defense radars, needed to defend against Iranian missile launches.

An open microphone at a photo-op between President Obama and outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev after a meeting in Seoul, South Korea, at the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit caught Obama saying to Medvedev, "On all these issues, particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it's important for him (past and future Russian President Vladimir Putin) to give me space."

---

source:
Obama Says Missile Defense He Opposed Can Handle North Korea - Investors.com

#THISisSequesterPunishment

In the internal email, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service official Charles Brown said he asked if he could try to spread out the sequester cuts in his region to minimize the impact, and he said he was told not to do anything that would lessen the dire impacts Congress had been warned of.

“We have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be,” Mr. Brown, in the internal email, said his superiors told him.

---

source:
Email tells feds to make sequester as painful as promised
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - March 5, 2013