When Will A TV Network Not Run An Inspirational Super Bowl Commercial Featuring Obama?

A: When it's a pro-life ad.



It reminds me of these rhetorical questions you occasionally see around postulating tough cases like:

The father is sick with sniffles, the mother has TB. They have 4 children. The first is blind, the second is dead. The third is deaf and the fourth has TB. The mother finds she is pregnant again. Given the extreme situation, would you recommend abortion?

[Y]ou would have killed Beethoven.

The big irony? Obama supports killing that baby at any time up to and including after birth. You'd think someone from his background would be more understanding and grateful for the choice of life, but liberalism is a mental disease that kills all reason. Maybe we should toss in some research money for a cure in the porkulus package the Dems are ramming thru. Yeah, that'd happen. [snort]

Ladies Night In Nuremberg (aka DNC Nite #2)

Live-blogging and updating as needed:

• Tonight is Hillary Clinton's night at the Obamessiah Coronation and they've got a lineup of shrieking harridans on parade. Are there any less happy, more shrill, angry people than liberal women? (OK, liberal guys are pretty whiny bitches, too, I suppose.) The Governor of Arizona - the one who most voters probably thought was the singer from Concrete Blonde - is on now braying about CHANGE and HOPE and BLAH and WOOF. Yeesh.

• I wonder if they'll mention how feminism has devolved from a quest for equal rights to a militant jihad to protect only one right: the right to murder their babies at any time; up to, including, and even after birth? I've written before about how the hardcore pro-lifers don't seem to understand that forcing women to bear unwanted children is a form of slavery, so stow any knee-jerk impulses to comment that I'm some sort of brute. In some cases, it's an extremely unfortunate decision that has to be made in tough circumstances. However, the inconvenient truth is that it is all-to-often used as post-conceptual birth control to avoid personal inconvenience, especially during swimsuit season.

Nancy Pelosi went on Meet the Press this week and blatantly lied about the doctrines of the Catholic Church, a faith she laughably proclaims herself to be an "ardent, practicing Catholic," and has been righteously smacked down by bishops and cardinals nationwide. Fortunately for her, the Treason Media is diligently not covering the story because they are in goosestep support for this unholy sacrament that is the cornerstone of feminism and fascist liberalism today. Only...wait for it...Fox News has mentioned Pelosi's heresy. There are plenty of pro-death churches - there's an oxymoron for ya! - Pelosi can attend that support her twisted view of God's teachings. The Church should excommunicate her.

• Just to show that it's not just shrill ladies, the male Republican mayor of Fairbanks, Alaska is on now spooging all over the Obamessiah. If he hadn't claimed to be a member of the Stupid Party, he is indistinguishable from the Dems yapping. What a maroon.

• Now the victim's parade continues with an aptly-named woman with the name of Craven who sounds like Forrest Gump and telling a tale of textile plant-closing woe. Does this woman know what happens to businesses under fascist state control? THEY FLEE OVERSEAS!!! Maybe they'll go to the glorious China that Barry O'Bama found so much better than the busted-ass lame country he seeks to rule. That would be some sweet irony, wouldn't it?

• Former Virginia guv'ner Mark Warner is giving the keynote and before he got into the red tofu for the herd, he was boring as heck about something. What perked me up was his barfing of one of the Left's favorite tropes, that Team Dubya "doesn't believe in science." This is code for "Jesus freaks believe in a Sky God and not our 'every man is his own god" religion and thus refuse to play god with aborted fetuses." This is because Dubya banned FEDERAL FUNDING of embryonic stem cell research. Got that? Using taxpayer money to kill embryos for Nazi-worthy experiments. Private research has not been banned, but the Treason Media omits that pesky fact in favor of the myth that Dubya hates Michael J. Fox and wants him to die because Jesus told him to.

We're told that all sorts of miracle cures will come if only we could abort and harvest enough babies. Uh-huh. OK, if there are cures then there are PROFITS to be made by the companies that find them, so why is taxpayer blood money needed to fuel the machine? Hmmmm? The Left believe that nothing good can come without government's intervention, but which branch of Uncle Sam created the iPod, the DVD, the Xbox, the phonograph, etc.? The same goofs who run the Post Office and DMV are going to raise Christopher Reeve from the dead if only they had the funds and fetuses? Yeah, right.

• Jonah Goldberg got some mail about Warner:

From a reader:

If Warner could make millions in the cellphone biz w/o a govt. program paid for by taxpayers, why can't the new energy entrepreneurs he's touting do the same w/o some Obamacash taken from the rest of us? Isn't his very STORY a testament NOT to big-gov nannystatism but to independent capitalism that is the root of Republican, not Democrat, politics?

Me: I wondered the same thing. Warner spoke well of how this country let him learn from his mistakes as an entrepreneur. That ain't the Obama way on economics, now is it?

Hey, guys, it pays to enrich your word power.

• Michelle Obama is being interviewed on PBS and she looks like she can't wait for this charade to be over. They've got her in a demure dress and she sounds tranquilized to keep her from breaking into her normal Angela Davis black rage persona. The front page the paper headlined "Michelle Obama tells Democrats 'why I love this country'", which begs the question, "If you really love your country, don't you think people would pick up on that fact and not require a loud, obviously insincere declaration of such?" The tape is out there: She thinks this is a "downright mean" country that she hasn't been proud of and fears will harm her husband. The Treason Media will sweep that down the Memory Hole and call you racist if you ask about it. Move along. Nothing to see here.

• The guv'ner of Massachusetts just scolded the Stupid Party for presiding over the largest expansion of government in ages. This is a valid criticism and high on my list of why I've told the Stupid Party to FOAD. But wasn't the knock on Dubya and the SP from Dems that they weren't spending enough on socialism to suit their desires?!? Which is it? Spending too much or too little?

• Hillary came out and fell on her sword for the Obamessiah. It was hilarious to see Bubba pretend to cry and bite his lip and mouth "I love her" when we know what a faithless asstackler he was and remains to this day. Hillary just barfed up the talking point that we are "borrowing money from the Chinese to buy oil from the Saudis." Um, how about drilling in America for oil, guys? NYET!!!! Socialist health care got name-checked in a torrent of boilerplate bullet points that came so fast that the audience didn't get to applaud her.

At one point, she baldly claimed that a total fascist takeover of all branches of government would bring economic prosperity. "We did it before with President Clinton and the Democrats and we can do it again with President Obama." Nice line, except it's a total lie. When Clinton and the Dems had it all between 1993-1995, the budget was projected to be hundreds of millions of dollars in the red well into the next millennium. Then something happened. Newt Gingrich and the Republicans - the REAL GOP, not the fake losers like Dubya et al who have destroyed the Party in the past decade - came in, forced fiscal discipline on the Big He and the economy boomed. And the Treason Media gave Clinton all the credit and the feckless douchebags in the Stupid Party proceeded to rush to the left in hopes that they would get the wet kiss of approval from the media. Epic fail, bitches!

All in all, Hillary gave a good performance of a pack of lies and encouraged everyone to support a naive radical Marxist who craves infanticide who will usher in the End Times. Thanks, babe.

• If Hillary was the Dem's candidate, I wouldn't be happy, but I wouldn't be terrified for the future of the world. She's a dishonest crook and a radical in her own right, but she's milquetoast compared to the pure evil that is the false Obamessiah.

• John Hinderaker at Power Line disagrees:

Hillary Clinton's speech tonight prompted just two thoughts.

First, her ignorance of economics is cosmic. Thank God this woman will never be President.

Second, her speech was a vivid reminder of why she lost. She was intensely annoying. You could just about hear the sound of television sets clicking off all across America. Good night, Hillary.

• Jay Nordlinger on The Corner noticed that the Dems are infantilizing our soldiers:

Do you notice that soldiers in Iraq are being kind of infantilized at this convention? They’re so often referred to as social-welfare cases — people in need of health benefits and so on. Delicate. Fragile. A mother was “worried about her child in Iraq.” Okay, he’s her child, all right. But he’s also a soldier.

The speakers I’ve heard don’t seem to want our soldiers to fight and win. They are simply “children” to be cared for, by Democratic programs.

That statement will probably be judged as harsh and McCarthyite, but I still think it’s true.

The Left, generally speaking, learned a lesson from Vietnam: They now “support our troops.” That has been the constant slogan of the last several years, “Support our troops,” even as the administration is reviled. Fine. But how about “winning the war”? Doesn’t that phrase sound about a thousand years old, and does it not reek with belligerence?

Ramesh Ponnuru concurred:

I agree with Jay. The Democrats have a way of talking about how much they support the troops that treats them as a victim group in need of subsidies, but rarely suggests that they have accomplished anything. Note that Michelle Obama closed her reference to the troops by talking about their need for mental health care when they get home. I'm all for mental health services for people suffering from PTSD. But the overall impression is that what the Democrats stand for is post-defeat therapy.

Nordlinger followed up:

Heard from a reader, who heard a fairly obscure Hollywood figure on the radio a few weeks ago. The man said, “Hollywood loves the troops as victims, not as warriors.” Our reader comments, “God, I love that line.” I know what he means.

I’m also reminded of elite elements of Europe — who liked America when it was down and bleeding, right after 9/11, but liked it much less when it stood up and fought.

Sounds about right. Tell ya what, Europe: When the Islamofascists are ready to slit your Continental throats, don't call. We won't be answering. (Though Obama won't help because he doesn't believe in standing up to fellow fascists.)

UPDATE: Charlie Rose has his usual all-liberal panel who think everything that happened tonight was wonderful and spewing the usual smears and lies about the current woeful Administration. (It drives me nuts that with all the legitimate knocks that can be dealt on Dubya and the Stupid Party, they persist in fabricating slams instead.) Predictably, the talk inevitably turned to the racism chatter; fairly bullying anyone who dares to find his magical brand of fascism unacceptable to put on a sheet. It got so ridiculous that the NY Times hack on the panel had to say, in effect, "yeah, Americans are stupid racists, but they aren't THAT bad racists as you guys are saying." He actually said that a white empty-suited naive radical Marxist who craves infanticide (note: he didn't say those exact words, but that's what he meant) would have problems, too.

How empty is the Left that they can't win without projecting their own racist white guilt upon everyone else? If John Edwards was about to pick up the nomination on Thursday and he had the same beliefs and close associations with racists and terrorists that Obama had - race-reversed of course - then sensible freedom-cherishing patriots would be terrified of the ramifications of his election. By trying to make opposition to their Anointed One an automatic ticket to being smeared as a racist, the Treason Media diminishes the sins of true discrimination in service of a hack political agenda. They so wish to be Pravda, they don't even understand what their wholesale slaughter of the Truth means in the long run. Considering the bratty juvenile mentality of liberals, this is no surprise, but it's still sad to realize it's so prevalent when it's so dangerous.

"Why Obama Really Voted For Infanticide"

Andrew C. McCarthy says it's because it was "[m]ore important to protect abortion doctors than “'that fetus, or child — however way you want to describe it.'"

There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was “movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead.”

No, Senator. They wouldn’t go along with the program. They wouldn’t just come out limp and dead.

They were coming out alive. Born alive. Babies. Vulnerable human beings Obama, in his detached pomposity, might otherwise include among “the least of my brothers.” But of course, an abortion extremist can’t very well be invoking Saint Matthew, can he? So, for Obama, the shunning of these least of our brothers and sisters — millions of them — is somehow not among America’s greatest moral failings.

No. In Obama’s hardball, hard-Left world, these least become “that fetus, or child — however you want to describe it.”

Most of us, of course, opt for “child,” particularly when the “it” is born and living and breathing and in need of our help. Particularly when the “it” is clinging not to guns or religion but to life.

But not Barack Obama. As an Illinois state senator, he voted to permit infanticide. And now, running for president, he banks on media adulation to insulate him from his past.

The record, however, doesn’t lie.

Go read the whole article which includes substantial transcripts from hearings in which Obama repeatedly voices his concern that "Born Alive" legislation will lead to second-guessing abortionists and preventing the "mother's" - you've got to air-quote that word when she clearly doesn't want to be one - expressed wishes of killing her baby to be carried out. I've written about "Obama's Infanticide Problem" recently and with the coronation of this extreme radical fascist scheduled for next week, the race is on to get the crown on his head before word spreads about his militant anti-life views.

The Treason Media will be spinning and attempting to cover up these inconvenient truths not only in order to protect their Anointed One and their advocacy of the Culture of Death, but because they know this is an issue that could drop the scales from the eyes of the Christians who have blindly followed this false Messiah for reasons that make no sense. Jesus said to feed the hungry and clothe the naked, not to take from the rich and give to the poor. (That was Robin Hood. Or Karl Marx.) How can even the most liberal nominally-Christian denominations square their support for a woman's right to kill her baby with refusing to render aid to a baby born alive.

This isn't that hard a moral dilemma to suss out...provided you have a f*cking soul, that is. Try this: A man shoots another man on the front steps of a hospital in full view of doctors and nurses. Should the doctors rush to the aid of the wounded man or stand back and let him die because the shooter's intention was to terminate the life of the victim and thus shouldn't be interfered with or second-guessed? If the shooter's desires are irrelevant in this example, why does the "mother's" intent get elevated to the detriment of her victim?

Laws are passed to express society's will to encourage proper behavior and sanction those who stray beyond decency's bounds. Murder and rape laws don't stop either, but serve to lay out how society intends to deal with those unable to control their impulses. Common human decency should compel people to assist those in need, but as the situation in Illinois revealed, some doctors were so bankrupt in the empathy category that they required rules to encourage them to help the helpless, even if the original intent was to kill them outright.

As I wrote before, the Born Alive Act was supported by die-hard militant abortion advocates including NARAL (whose sole reason for existence is to promote as many abortions as possible), Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. As much as these groups and people wish for as much abortion as possible, even they know that this was too much to sell to the public because you can't spin infanticide without looking like a monster.

Barack Obama is counting on the Treason Media to protect his monstrous contempt for human life secret. He views babies as a punishment - at least as far has his own daughters go - and has been willing to stand alone to ensure the death of helpless babies. Note that I'm not using the word "baby" in the manner of the shrill pro-lifers who cry "baby killer" even if its a 6-week-old fetus; I'm talking about living, breathing, viable BABIES existing outside of the mother's womb. If the abortionist went, "Oh, crap. It's still breathing.", and then picked up a brick and smashed it down on the baby until it was dead - the desired outcome dontchaknow? - would the Obamessiah have a problem with that? If an unwanted baby isn't worth anything to Obama at its birth, what's to prevent his commanding that viable ADULTS be eliminated because they're just useless eaters? Hmmmm?

CFE: Barack Obama's Infanticide Problem

The Background: A Digg item referring to a HuffPoo story about some McCain adviser who has something in his past that they disapprove of. What that is is irrelevant because what they're worried about is...

he's begun launching the "infanticide" smear against Obama in niche media outlets.

The comments are typical Digg crap from the raging liberal fascists who have turned a good idea for a site (i.e. social news aggregation) into a cesspool of liberal conspiracy wackos and frothing rage and hate. Not that it'll last long before being buried by the mob, I posted:

To all you blind Obamessiah followers, one simple question: If actively blocking legislation that would require babies who survive abortion attempts to receive medical care doesn't qualify as infanticide, what the hell does?!?

The Born Alive Act was supported by die-hard militant abortion advocates including NARAL (whose sole reason for existence is to promote as many abortions as possible), Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. As much as they support abortion, even they knew that this was too much to sell to the public.

Barack Obama is more extreme than NARAL. Obama doesn't want any baby who isn't wanted to survive. He figures, "Hey, the woman doesn't want the child, so what's the difference? If the stupid doctor didn't mess up in the first place, it would've died, so what's the big deal if we let it lie there and suffer on a tray until it expires?"

Sorry, you apostles of the Obamessiah, but he IS for infanticide. That you are hysterically shrieking ad hominems about some McCain supporter reveals how desperate you are to deflect these inconvenient truths away from your Lord and Master.

As Obama slips further in the polls because people are realizing he is less than an empty suit and the panicked media's attempts to bully people into voting for him in exchange for not being called racists, look for the rhetoric to amp up to even higher decibel levels. The tantrums that are coming are going to be fierce.