Afghans were unexcited, even blasé, when our Marines were recently caught on camera urinating on the dead bodies of their(the Afghans) Taliban comrades. Hey, no problemo, amigo, we can dig it. But accidentally toss a Quran in the garbage and all hell breaks loose. Plainly, the whole of Afghan society is gripped by a kind of collective hysteria, an obsessional behavior rooted in a sick pit of superstitious tribalism, whipped to a psychotic fury by so-called Imams (aka opium dealers). Good job, President Obama. The prison library for Taliban terrorists is well stocked: books of inspiring Islamic songs and poetry, "hadith" interpretation tracts, 70 different editions of the Quran, along with a a new "I Moved Your Cheese: For Those Who Refuse to Live as Mice in Someone Else's Maze" as well as an old dog-eared copy of Dan Greenberg's "How To Be a Jewish Mother". Oy.
Does anyone really think it a capital idea to stoke the religious mania of those who ALREADY COMMITTED A CRIME IN THE NAME OF ALLAH with more of the mumbo-jumbo that forms the filamentous skeleton of their mania? Kinda like giving the alkie whiskey for breakfast. Here's an idea: at Bagram, we confer the jailed terrorists with unlimited access to The World Book Encyclopedia and bequeath the Qurans to The Afghan home for Advanced Alzheimer patients.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
....filled with a passionate intensity
I'm not a Santorum guy but he really really drives some folks on the left nuts. Here are some random rantings from a website called thinkprogress.org mostly on a piece entitled:
Many posters like to put thoughts in others' minds, including these two:
"More like, "my god IS a dick" syndrome. Remember, this dude worships the wrathful and conceited desert god who gave specific instructions for thoroughly smiting thine enemies, including the murder of thine enemies' pregnant women, and who tested the faithful by asking them to sacrifice their only son." Modern theology at its best.
This guy "works at King Richard's Faire":
"He speaks against, and down to, millions of US residents, he denigrates the sitting President in ways that would have him arrested for treason if the President were white, he OBVIOUSLY wants to destroy the "wall" that separates church and state...WHY hasn't he been removed from running for office? He is speaking treason, for all intents and purposes!"
My exchange with one "Ron Murray" a "top commenter" on thinkprogress.com:
Ron: "Ricky suffers from a megalomania that should land him in a cell wearing a straitjacket, but the republican brand is so perverted and filthy with treason and bigotry that the radical right is actually supporting this traitor to everything real Americans hold dear. Burn him as a witch, that would be some ironic justice."
I asked : "Hello. How did you get to be "top commenter"? Read over your remark. It is so way over the top as to be demented in itself. You want to "burn" a man, but he is the megalomaniacal one? Honestly, buddy, are you that consumed with hatred?
Ron answered:"Barry Tilles, hatred? i'm just defending the USA and the Constitution. if that doesn't interest you, you're the one consumed with hatred. Santorum is an enemy of all that America stands for, and executing him would be an excellent start to cleaning up the filth and disease that the Christian Taliban is fully infected with. My remarks are not only reasonable, they are patriotic. Get over yourself, and read your Constitution, or have somebody read it to you. You're acting exactly like the "Good Germans" that thought Hitler was okey-dokey."
Ron's reply:
georgeisbowling (signed in using yahoo)
Santorum Excommunicates 45 Million Christians: Mainline Protestants Are ‘Gone From The World Of Christianity’
(Note the speech Santorum's quote was taken from was given in 2008-4 years ago!)
"republicans....are ignorant, hateful, prejuduce predators...for any Presidential candidate to campaingne against our right to reproduce(or not) they have got to be insane..."
At least they can spell.Many posters like to put thoughts in others' minds, including these two:
"A barefoot pregnant women in every kitchen"! Just the thought is what gives them a little woody."
"More like, "my god IS a dick" syndrome. Remember, this dude worships the wrathful and conceited desert god who gave specific instructions for thoroughly smiting thine enemies, including the murder of thine enemies' pregnant women, and who tested the faithful by asking them to sacrifice their only son." Modern theology at its best.
This guy "works at King Richard's Faire":
"He speaks against, and down to, millions of US residents, he denigrates the sitting President in ways that would have him arrested for treason if the President were white, he OBVIOUSLY wants to destroy the "wall" that separates church and state...WHY hasn't he been removed from running for office? He is speaking treason, for all intents and purposes!"
My exchange with one "Ron Murray" a "top commenter" on thinkprogress.com:
Ron: "Ricky suffers from a megalomania that should land him in a cell wearing a straitjacket, but the republican brand is so perverted and filthy with treason and bigotry that the radical right is actually supporting this traitor to everything real Americans hold dear. Burn him as a witch, that would be some ironic justice."
I asked : "Hello. How did you get to be "top commenter"? Read over your remark. It is so way over the top as to be demented in itself. You want to "burn" a man, but he is the megalomaniacal one? Honestly, buddy, are you that consumed with hatred?
Ron answered:"Barry Tilles, hatred? i'm just defending the USA and the Constitution. if that doesn't interest you, you're the one consumed with hatred. Santorum is an enemy of all that America stands for, and executing him would be an excellent start to cleaning up the filth and disease that the Christian Taliban is fully infected with. My remarks are not only reasonable, they are patriotic. Get over yourself, and read your Constitution, or have somebody read it to you. You're acting exactly like the "Good Germans" that thought Hitler was okey-dokey."
I also commented: "You write things such as (from below, and submitted without apparent irony): "but the republican brand is so perverted and filthy with treason and filthy with treason and bigotry that the radical right is actually supporting this traitor to everything real Americans hold dear. Burn him as a witch, that would be some ironic justice..." and you call Santo "deeply insane"? You better plug yourself in, pal. This (the comments here) is negative writing at its worst. By negative writing I mean words that do the opposite of elucidate or clarify.Of course Santo is guilty of the same thing (negative writing, as any topic concerning religion is by its nature prone to the squishiness that characterizes n.r.) (By the way, you did not excise the earlier iteration of this reply, did you? That wouldn't be very "progressive", to quash a slightly dissenting voice, now would it?)"
Ron's reply:
"Barry Tilles, yes, I call him, and his supporters, deeply insane. And your silly, puerile argument is that of the kind of idiot who would follow such a destructive charlatan into the fascist hell he's proposing. On top of that, you're paranoid, placing you nicely into the whacko right wing."
My retort:"Stop it right now. I just had put up a comment and it disappeared. I don't know what your policies are regarding remarks. If Repubs are as evil or insane as you submit perhaps their offerings here would be best eliminated. Look, I only stumbled here through James Taranto's "Best of the Web Today" column on WSJ and I couldn't believe my eyes: hyperbolic invective and hate-filled jeremiads verging on the comedic - sorry. Honestly I'm not a big Santorum guy. I like Newt, but hey who cares? I used to be a lefty believe it or not. But let me ask you - when you go to Thanksgiving dinner at mom's are you hostile to those who may be your right wing relations?
Peace brother man"
My retort:"Stop it right now. I just had put up a comment and it disappeared. I don't know what your policies are regarding remarks. If Repubs are as evil or insane as you submit perhaps their offerings here would be best eliminated. Look, I only stumbled here through James Taranto's "Best of the Web Today" column on WSJ and I couldn't believe my eyes: hyperbolic invective and hate-filled jeremiads verging on the comedic - sorry. Honestly I'm not a big Santorum guy. I like Newt, but hey who cares? I used to be a lefty believe it or not. But let me ask you - when you go to Thanksgiving dinner at mom's are you hostile to those who may be your right wing relations?
Peace brother man"
To which Mr Murray replied:"Barry Tilles, Newt is as evil and sick as Santorum, and either one would be a major disaster for most Americans. and, yes, I am hostile to my wingnut relatives. This is self-defense, and you as*holes have gone to far in Hitler's direction for we patriots to ignore."
Could not help myself, but my efforts kept getting mysteriously deleted " Yeah Hello Ron Murray, having "trouble" replying on your thread below so......Okay. Howdy Ron and thank you, I think you toned down the animus a bit. First re Gingrich, I like him because he understands the New Space Economy, which industry I think could revive the American economy, and the American spirit, not through a big Soviet-style "program" a la Apollo, but in the way that the transcontinental RR was developed or the organic way the aerospace industry blossomed. (See David Zimmerman's wonderful blog beyondtheblack.com or the spaceshow.com or you can listen to these guys often on the Batchelor show.) Newt has the smarts the skill-set and the chops. With Newt what you see is what you get, unlike Mitt who is a bit of a cypher.
Anyway I'm not here to sell you on Newt Gingrich obviously. But man oh man please get some perspective. Nobody's out to hurt you. I understand how these website chat-rooms work: each writer wants to be perceived as the most true-blue whatever - progressive, conservative, libertarian - it depends on the identity of the site of course, and the most pugnacious poster gets the most recommends, likes, Top Commenter badge and the like. So, I am sure your more violent threats are bits of bombastic bluster. If not, for the love of Pete, don't do it, you will regret it. Your loved ones will regret it.
I see by your careful attention to syntax, spelling, and punctuation you are an intelligent man, and so worth engaging.
As I said, I was left at one time. Left of left. But more than I left the left I think the left left the left. That is, the liberty- loving, free-spirited, dope-smoking, sex-happy intellectuals of the 60's have become the stiff-assed sanctimonious sour-grapes dried up old busybody poopheads of the current times, who, not only don't laugh at a joke, apparently can't even recognize one.
Good luck"
Case closed I guess
Could not help myself, but my efforts kept getting mysteriously deleted " Yeah Hello Ron Murray, having "trouble" replying on your thread below so......Okay. Howdy Ron and thank you, I think you toned down the animus a bit. First re Gingrich, I like him because he understands the New Space Economy, which industry I think could revive the American economy, and the American spirit, not through a big Soviet-style "program" a la Apollo, but in the way that the transcontinental RR was developed or the organic way the aerospace industry blossomed. (See David Zimmerman's wonderful blog beyondtheblack.com or the spaceshow.com or you can listen to these guys often on the Batchelor show.) Newt has the smarts the skill-set and the chops. With Newt what you see is what you get, unlike Mitt who is a bit of a cypher.
Anyway I'm not here to sell you on Newt Gingrich obviously. But man oh man please get some perspective. Nobody's out to hurt you. I understand how these website chat-rooms work: each writer wants to be perceived as the most true-blue whatever - progressive, conservative, libertarian - it depends on the identity of the site of course, and the most pugnacious poster gets the most recommends, likes, Top Commenter badge and the like. So, I am sure your more violent threats are bits of bombastic bluster. If not, for the love of Pete, don't do it, you will regret it. Your loved ones will regret it.
I see by your careful attention to syntax, spelling, and punctuation you are an intelligent man, and so worth engaging.
As I said, I was left at one time. Left of left. But more than I left the left I think the left left the left. That is, the liberty- loving, free-spirited, dope-smoking, sex-happy intellectuals of the 60's have become the stiff-assed sanctimonious sour-grapes dried up old busybody poopheads of the current times, who, not only don't laugh at a joke, apparently can't even recognize one.
Good luck"
Case closed I guess
Another "top commenter" Harriet Hoff Skjerly, keeps it pithy:
"This man is such a POS....." (that standalone got 24 likes, so much for deep analysis.)
Not sure where this guy stands:
sandyok1950 Fear, and fear well... the New World Order IS the New Dark Ages!!! We don't burn witches anymore, only sanity goes on the pyre... or into a noose!
Babe, do those legs go all the way up?
"Sick. Just sick. I'm stunned that in 2012, Rich White Men are still telling us girls that we need to keep our legs shut. It's just more stark evidence of the War on Women. Have we truly made such little progress in women's rights that men think it's okay to tell us to "put an aspirin between our legs" for birth control? And LAUGH about it? The hypocrisy, the utter disdain for women, is shocking and disgusting. And then to say that WE'RE the ones obsessed with sex - those of us who want these pigs OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS! No, we're not obsessed with sex - we just don't want YOU telling us what we can and cannot do with our own bodies!"
This guy has my complete respect:
This guy has my complete respect:
"Rick's idea of being good stuarts of the earth is to run a thousand miles of pipeline carrying extreemly toxic materials through uncontaminated aquafir."
Friday, February 17, 2012
Comment On Underwear Bomber's Sentencing Appearance
By catering to these fellows' theistic psychopathies, do we not put society's imprimatur on their sick fetish for "Islam"?
God may be great but this clown has has about as much to do with anyone's God as a cockroach one might find in a dish of bad Chinese food. Please let us not permit him to don the attire of a pious man.
Comment on Vapid, Inane Herald Column
First the Column:
Love, American Muslim style
Tanzila Ahmed loves a man with a Mohawk. Tolu Adiba is a lesbian. And Aisha C. Saeed married a man she only knew for six weeks.
Meet the American Muslim woman looking for love.
Fed up with stereotype of the sisterhood — all that subservient, veil-wearing, submissive stuff that painted them as oppressed and promised in marriage to old, bearded men — writers Ayesha Mattu and Nura Maznavi are telling it from their perspective, and the perspective of 25 other ladies in their new anthology, “Love, InshAllah: The Secret Love Lives of American Muslim Women.”
Mattu and Maznavi decided on the universal appeal of love stories to take ownership of the conversation about American Muslim women. Through a social media campaign and word of mouth, the duo solicited stories of love, loss and lust from women within their communities. After more than 200 submissions, they knew that it was time for the voices to be heard.
“A lot has been written about Muslim women but very little has been written by the Muslim women ourselves. And we really wanted to sort of shift the paradigm around, turn it on its head,” said Mattu, 38. “Many Americans don’t know a Muslim woman personally but they have this image of her. ... We felt that this was sort of our moment to come forward and tell their stories.”
The stories are filled with the kind of raw honesty usually reserved for private chats with your best friend. And together they successfully weave a new tale that transcends the idea that Muslim women are any different than those in any other religion.
Leila Khan recounts the painful day her non-Muslim fiance labeled all Muslims as terrorists. She had packed her bags, quit her job and was planning to move to Europe with him. It was the last day she ever saw him. Nura Maznavi dishes on resisting the urge to smooch Rohan, her “hot Catholic personal trainer” while on a Fulbright Scholarship in Sri Lanka. She was saving every part of herself for marriage, even her lips. Navja Sol remembers what is was like to lose her virginity at 15, after drinking cheap keg beer at a friend’s party. At 21, she comes out to her conservative Iranian parents in a coffee shop.
It’s interesting to see how faith intersects with love for these women — “InshAllah” means God willing —some convert, some grapple with the duality of worshipping Allah while still choosing lifestyles that conflict with traditional Muslim thinking. It’s a coming of age that any immigrant or child of an immigrant can understand. The complexity of straddling two identities, navigating two worlds and finding a way to successfully honor your culture and religion without losing the very core of who you are is a constant struggle for so many.
Ultimately, “Love, InshAllah” speaks to the most common of all human needs, the desire to love and be loved. And that transcends gender, religion and race.
Ayesha Mattu and Nura Maznavi will read from “Love, InshAllah” today from 7 to 9 p.m. at Boylston Hall at Harvard University. Visit loveinshallah.com for more information.
Now the comment:
Meet the American Muslim woman looking for love.
Fed up with stereotype of the sisterhood — all that subservient, veil-wearing, submissive stuff that painted them as oppressed and promised in marriage to old, bearded men — writers Ayesha Mattu and Nura Maznavi are telling it from their perspective, and the perspective of 25 other ladies in their new anthology, “Love, InshAllah: The Secret Love Lives of American Muslim Women.”
Mattu and Maznavi decided on the universal appeal of love stories to take ownership of the conversation about American Muslim women. Through a social media campaign and word of mouth, the duo solicited stories of love, loss and lust from women within their communities. After more than 200 submissions, they knew that it was time for the voices to be heard.
“A lot has been written about Muslim women but very little has been written by the Muslim women ourselves. And we really wanted to sort of shift the paradigm around, turn it on its head,” said Mattu, 38. “Many Americans don’t know a Muslim woman personally but they have this image of her. ... We felt that this was sort of our moment to come forward and tell their stories.”
The stories are filled with the kind of raw honesty usually reserved for private chats with your best friend. And together they successfully weave a new tale that transcends the idea that Muslim women are any different than those in any other religion.
Leila Khan recounts the painful day her non-Muslim fiance labeled all Muslims as terrorists. She had packed her bags, quit her job and was planning to move to Europe with him. It was the last day she ever saw him. Nura Maznavi dishes on resisting the urge to smooch Rohan, her “hot Catholic personal trainer” while on a Fulbright Scholarship in Sri Lanka. She was saving every part of herself for marriage, even her lips. Navja Sol remembers what is was like to lose her virginity at 15, after drinking cheap keg beer at a friend’s party. At 21, she comes out to her conservative Iranian parents in a coffee shop.
It’s interesting to see how faith intersects with love for these women — “InshAllah” means God willing —some convert, some grapple with the duality of worshipping Allah while still choosing lifestyles that conflict with traditional Muslim thinking. It’s a coming of age that any immigrant or child of an immigrant can understand. The complexity of straddling two identities, navigating two worlds and finding a way to successfully honor your culture and religion without losing the very core of who you are is a constant struggle for so many.
Ultimately, “Love, InshAllah” speaks to the most common of all human needs, the desire to love and be loved. And that transcends gender, religion and race.
Ayesha Mattu and Nura Maznavi will read from “Love, InshAllah” today from 7 to 9 p.m. at Boylston Hall at Harvard University. Visit loveinshallah.com for more information.
Now the comment:
News flash: American Muslim women have "love lives". Who knew? These love stories are secrets, though, heretofore untold. I can't imagine why. The columnist feels though it is high time they came out from under wraps due to the vicious stereotyping faced by those women "in the community".
In facing down these ugly images, Ms. Mirchandani and her coterie of storytellers come up with boilerplate patterns of their own:
American "non-Muslims" (the distinction is set in stone, eternally so it seem) are depicted as thinking strictly in terms of terrorism and "all that subservient, veil-wearing, submissive stuff that painted them as oppressed and promised in marriage to old, bearded men". "Americans" the writer says, fancy "Muslim women" as "different". Now why would anyone think that?
Is it possible this "false image" has to do with insular behavior of folks who stay methodically "within their communities" unlike immigrants of yore? Would the example given of the lady who had words with her fiance on her wedding eve be telling? One disparaging remark (about Muslim men) and she's out the door. One can see where the loyalties lie in cases of conflict with "traditional Muslim thinking".
It is true that many who came to this country had problems with assimilation, but that had always been the goal.
Here's an idea for those "grappling with the duality of worshiping Allah" and, how should I say this...being a modern American woman? Forget it (your religion)! America was founded on Judeo-Christian values. Those rational tenets are the basis of our laws, our freedoms, our successes and our prosperity, and I daresay, our happiness. Islam, notwithstanding its monotheistic roots, and its laws and politics are antithetical to Western mores, codes and principles.
In facing down these ugly images, Ms. Mirchandani and her coterie of storytellers come up with boilerplate patterns of their own:
American "non-Muslims" (the distinction is set in stone, eternally so it seem) are depicted as thinking strictly in terms of terrorism and "all that subservient, veil-wearing, submissive stuff that painted them as oppressed and promised in marriage to old, bearded men". "Americans" the writer says, fancy "Muslim women" as "different". Now why would anyone think that?
Is it possible this "false image" has to do with insular behavior of folks who stay methodically "within their communities" unlike immigrants of yore? Would the example given of the lady who had words with her fiance on her wedding eve be telling? One disparaging remark (about Muslim men) and she's out the door. One can see where the loyalties lie in cases of conflict with "traditional Muslim thinking".
It is true that many who came to this country had problems with assimilation, but that had always been the goal.
Here's an idea for those "grappling with the duality of worshiping Allah" and, how should I say this...being a modern American woman? Forget it (your religion)! America was founded on Judeo-Christian values. Those rational tenets are the basis of our laws, our freedoms, our successes and our prosperity, and I daresay, our happiness. Islam, notwithstanding its monotheistic roots, and its laws and politics are antithetical to Western mores, codes and principles.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Another Marge Eagan Column, Another Comment
The article:
Un-Planned controversy
Komen decision ignites pro-choice firestorm
The great, sleeping giant that is pro-choice America was startled awake this week — and then, in about a nanosecond, proceeded to crush pro-life forces like a bug.
Just steamrolled ’em, actually. It was extremely gratifying, I must say.
This all happened after Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the pink-ribbon breast-cancer charity, announced it was cutting off money for breast-cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood. What?
How can a breast-cancer charity oppose breast-cancer screenings?
It turned out, of course, that Komen’s move was really about pro-life pressure on them to cut ties with Planned Parenthood, which does abortions. Komen, hoping no one would notice, buckled to that pressure.
And it was a big, big mistake. Social media went berserk — against Komen. Millions of dollars came into Planned Parenthood’s coffers — against Komen.
Such is the awesome power of pro-choice Americans who grew up with the understanding that the government no longer rules women’s bodies. Women do.
Such is the power of Facebook and Twitter. They have changed everything.
Such is the power, too, of the one in five American women who have visited Planned Parenthood for birth control and health care (only 3 percent of their money — private money, by the way — is used for abortions). Many of these women are young, poor, without insurance and sometimes even desperate when they go to Planned Parenthood. Check out some online postings. Women say over and over how grateful they are that Planned Parenthood is available to them. They also say how ready they are to leap to its defense.
Pro-life politicians should remember this moment. What happened to Komen — its power and reputation shredded in mere days — is akin to what will happen to any politician, or U.S. Supreme Court justice, who actually threatens women’s reproductive freedom. It’s been so long since 1973, when abortion became legal, many of us forget. Freedom is what abortion rights are all about: freedom from government meddling in the most personal, private and intimate decisions of a woman’s life. Clearly women are not about to give such hard-fought freedoms away.
Here’s what else we forget: It’s easy to be pro-life when the law of the land is pro-choice.
That stance risks, basically, nothing. To keep my head from exploding, I need to remind myself of this when I’m being lectured about morality by Mitt “My money’s in the Caymans” Romney and Newt “I seduce and abandon” Gingrich. I mean, really. Who do these guys think they are?
In fairness, many Komen regional offices, including the one here in Massachusetts, opposed the disastrous move by Komen’s national board. And the groups who benefit from Komen’s fundraisers here include numerous community health centers in poor communities such as Lawrence, Chelsea and Holyoke.
Still, the organization that secretly tried to sacrifice women’s health at the altar of pro-life politics must now prove why it deserves any support at all.
But I’m grateful to them for this much. Komen reminded us all that the usually silent majority of pro-choice Americans — those who want abortions legal, safe, early and rare — can only be pushed so far.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1401317
The Comment:
Un-Planned controversy
Komen decision ignites pro-choice firestorm
Photo by AP
Just steamrolled ’em, actually. It was extremely gratifying, I must say.
This all happened after Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the pink-ribbon breast-cancer charity, announced it was cutting off money for breast-cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood. What?
How can a breast-cancer charity oppose breast-cancer screenings?
It turned out, of course, that Komen’s move was really about pro-life pressure on them to cut ties with Planned Parenthood, which does abortions. Komen, hoping no one would notice, buckled to that pressure.
And it was a big, big mistake. Social media went berserk — against Komen. Millions of dollars came into Planned Parenthood’s coffers — against Komen.
Such is the awesome power of pro-choice Americans who grew up with the understanding that the government no longer rules women’s bodies. Women do.
Such is the power of Facebook and Twitter. They have changed everything.
Such is the power, too, of the one in five American women who have visited Planned Parenthood for birth control and health care (only 3 percent of their money — private money, by the way — is used for abortions). Many of these women are young, poor, without insurance and sometimes even desperate when they go to Planned Parenthood. Check out some online postings. Women say over and over how grateful they are that Planned Parenthood is available to them. They also say how ready they are to leap to its defense.
Pro-life politicians should remember this moment. What happened to Komen — its power and reputation shredded in mere days — is akin to what will happen to any politician, or U.S. Supreme Court justice, who actually threatens women’s reproductive freedom. It’s been so long since 1973, when abortion became legal, many of us forget. Freedom is what abortion rights are all about: freedom from government meddling in the most personal, private and intimate decisions of a woman’s life. Clearly women are not about to give such hard-fought freedoms away.
Here’s what else we forget: It’s easy to be pro-life when the law of the land is pro-choice.
That stance risks, basically, nothing. To keep my head from exploding, I need to remind myself of this when I’m being lectured about morality by Mitt “My money’s in the Caymans” Romney and Newt “I seduce and abandon” Gingrich. I mean, really. Who do these guys think they are?
In fairness, many Komen regional offices, including the one here in Massachusetts, opposed the disastrous move by Komen’s national board. And the groups who benefit from Komen’s fundraisers here include numerous community health centers in poor communities such as Lawrence, Chelsea and Holyoke.
Still, the organization that secretly tried to sacrifice women’s health at the altar of pro-life politics must now prove why it deserves any support at all.
But I’m grateful to them for this much. Komen reminded us all that the usually silent majority of pro-choice Americans — those who want abortions legal, safe, early and rare — can only be pushed so far.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1401317
The Comment:
The rapacity of the leftist sanctimonious smears on a charitable organization is breathtaking in its hubris, just as this column is jaw-dropping in its partisanship. Imagine you decide to donate to a cause you found worthy. Then when next year rolls around, you choose to refrain from another contribution. Then you start to receive phone calls, threatening phone calls: "Would you like to reconsider?"..."do you want to see your picture in the paper?"..."we know where your kids go to school". Your reputation becomes a target of a vulgar on-line smear campaign: smudges, taints and disgraceful innuendos.
What would you call this action?
I call it for what is is: extortion. Yep, it's an old-fashioned shakedown, 2012-style: vicious facebook rants, New York Times and weak sister (Hello Marge) editorials, bitter blasts from batty boobs, the whole nine yards.
A decision to withhold a voluntary contribution is painted unabashedly as a "Republican war on women".
This is the Totalitarian New Left, the "my way or the highway" modern liberal newthink - as far from the freedom loving, free-thinking intellectuals of the '60's as McDonald's is from Locke-Ober.
Pro-choice indeed, unless you make the wrong choice.
Big Sister is watching you.
What would you call this action?
I call it for what is is: extortion. Yep, it's an old-fashioned shakedown, 2012-style: vicious facebook rants, New York Times and weak sister (Hello Marge) editorials, bitter blasts from batty boobs, the whole nine yards.
A decision to withhold a voluntary contribution is painted unabashedly as a "Republican war on women".
This is the Totalitarian New Left, the "my way or the highway" modern liberal newthink - as far from the freedom loving, free-thinking intellectuals of the '60's as McDonald's is from Locke-Ober.
Pro-choice indeed, unless you make the wrong choice.
Big Sister is watching you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
"dogmatic pedantic closed mindedness is part of the GOP"
So glad those attributes are not part of the liberal left.