Archive for the ‘Gender Issues’ Category
Posted by DNW on 2013/12/12
We spit in your Christian face
I’ve not thoroughly investigated this for the back story, but rather stumbled across it while dealing with another matter.
The proximate source for this was the always provocative Michael Voris of the Catholic site “Church Militant TV”, though it’s been floating around the Internet for almost a month now.
I first came across Voris himself when a militant atheist troll dedicated to disrupting philosopher Professor Edward Feser’s moderate realist oriented blog (Feser is himself a Catholic) , mockingly inserted a link to a Voris polemic as an example of a “Real Catholic”.
The mockery might have backfired on him since although no one could call me a “Catholic in Good Standing” I found Voris’ observations and plain spoken manner of argumentation almost always entertaining, and quite often acute.
Voris’ point was that the people in what he calls the Catholic “Church of Nice” consistently underestimate the vehemence of the anti-Christians.
And I must say, that this event certainly comes as a shock to me. I cannot imagine how it did not break out into violence. Someone spray paint into my face and I would probably kill them in instant retaliation. But then these young men, praying the rosary around the church they were protecting, come from both a different culture, a different religion, and a different spiritual sensibility, than I do.
I’m mortified at what they have endured, but for some reason not contemptuous of them as I would be for those who otherwise passively submit to assault, when they need not endure it.
I don’t know what is going on here. But I have never seen anything like it before.
Posted in Christianity, Gender Issues, Insanity, politics, Religion, society, Uncategorized, Youth | Leave a Comment »
Posted by DNW on 2013/09/25
“Freedom”. It’s an obsolete word the meaning of which is obscure to us.
The “Constitution” you say?
Pay for our own what?
Posted in Constitution, Evolution, Gender Issues, Health Care, politics | 4 Comments »
Posted by DNW on 2013/08/14
No one expects Ariana Huffington’s snide exercise in left-wing propaganda to be or to even look neutral. And it has become abundantly, tediously, wearyingly, evident that anything involving or related to homosexual and gender disorders will receive the kind of histrionically laudatory headline ledes usually associated with the notoriously shameless and scruple free British tabloids.
This one though, is so contemptibly and unbelievably lunatic as to (nearly) beggar the imagination.
“Manning delivers heartfelt speech to packed courtroom
Army whistleblower Bradley Manning took the stand Wednesday and spoke candidly about his personal issues, controversial actions and hopes for the future.
‘I am sorry. I am sorry…’
Unbelievable? Believe it.
AOL and the Huff Po have obviously gone completely insane with everyone knows who at the helm.
Marvel then, at the morally disordered interior of Ariana’s mind, laid out for all to the world to see.
Posted in Culture, Gender Issues, Insanity, Liberal, media, society | Tagged: Ariana Huffington, Bradley Manning, News bias, tragedy as farce, whistleblower | 5 Comments »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/18
What better way for a white person born over a century after slavery was abolished to pay reparations to a black woman born roughly a century after slavery was abolished than to perform slave labor for that black woman?
From Mia Love:
Look at all those young men with “fun bags” (according to Pennsylvania Legislator Babette Josephs, D – Phila)!!!
By the way, normal people call them “responsible, politically astute young adults”. We all know Leftists have all manner of different terms for them, many of which would not survive the moderation filter here at Truth Before Dishonor.
Also note: Truth Before Dishonor officially endorsed Mayor Mia Love for Congress many months ago, prior to her winning her Primary in Nevada’s 4th Congressional District.
Posted in Conservative, Elections, Gender Issues, Humor - For Some, Liberal, media, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, Politically Incorrect, politics, race, society, stereotype, TEA Party, truth, Youth | Tagged: 2012 House election, endorsements, Mia Love, Nevada 4th Congressional District | Comments Off
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/08
Pew has released its October poll and Obama received terrible news. He lost 12 points to Romney in a single month. Perhaps it’s time for Obama’s corrupt Department of Injustice to sue Pew. The Socialist Perry Hood of Lewes, Delaware was crowing about the September Pew poll despite being shown very clearly that the poll was heavily skewed Democrat, far afield of the actual voting populace. So what will the Left (whom Perry Hood parrots) say about the same polling firm now that the numbers show Obama losing by 4? Will they, and consequently the parrot, accept the numbers? I highly doubt it. They’re very inconsistent like that.
Pew’s September poll, and many other polling outfits’ September polls, were heavily skewed to the Democrat side of the RDI. Far afield of the actual voting makeup of the US population. And people went through the effort to unskew the polls. This effort showed Romney with a strong lead over Obama instead of the strong Obama lead that Pew and others were showing. Of course, the Left scoffed at the idea of unskewing their skewed polls. Well, Pew did just that. They unskewed their own September poll with their October poll, showing a far more realistic RDI sample. And the result is Romney leads Obama by 4 in October.
Now there’s a reason polling outfits would skew in September but not in October (or not so badly in October). It’s actually a very simple reason. While there are those who don’t see anything nefarious about the shenanigans, I do. And here’s why:
- Polling outfits want Liberals to win, so they provide propaganda showing Democrats in unrealistic leads. It helps bring low-information voters into the fold and discourages Conservative voters. It pushes the actual polling numbers more to the polling firms’ liking, thus when it’s time to unskew the polls, the damage has been done.
- Polling outfits like to tout their accuracy, pointing back to previous voting outcomes compared to their polls; thus, they have to have final unskewed polls to show to unsuspecting readers. Their earlier polls, since they are far enough away from the election, can be ignored. Or they can be said to show the gradual shift toward Conservatives as the cycle goes on (for other insidious anti-First Amendment activities by lawmakers and Leftist activists alike).
In order for the polling outfits to push their two-fold propaganda, they have to push a Left bias in their polls to start and then shift their polls to far more reasonable breakdowns as the election approaches. And this is what Pew has done. It is what other polling firms will be doing, as the election approaches. They have no choice if they want to be believed in later years.
In other bad news, that polling firm the corrupt Obama Department of Injustice sued is showing a 47/47 tie among registered voters, a 5-point Obama loss from its previous poll. What’s worse, this is a poll of registered voters, which consistantly swings two or three points further Left than the actual vote results will show. So, when adjusted for likely voters, Obama is trailing here, too.
In still other news, Obama went from +10 in Michigan in September to +3 now, with a margin of error of +/-4. That means it’s a statistical dead heat in Michigan. And in Pennsylvania, Obama only leads by 2 with a D+6 poll. That makes Pennsylvania a very clear toss-up, unlike what the loony Left were saying.
Mark Davis, who broadcasts on 660 am “The Answer”, declared there are only 4 possible outcomes to the Presidential election:
- Obama wins by a landslide.
- Obama wins a squeaker.
- Romney wins a squeaker.
- Romney wins by a landslide.
And he declared the first one, where Obama wins by a landslide, ain’t never gonna happen. I agree. The other three possibilities could happen, although he believes the middle two are the most likely. But as time goes on toward the election and the polls start unskewing, it’s looking more and more like the last two are the most likely with Obama’s squeaker least likely of the three and Obama’s landslide still ain’t never gonna happen.
Posted in Elections, Gender Issues, Liberal, media, Obama, politics, society | Tagged: 2012 Presidential Election, Barack Obama, Gallup poll, Michigan, Mitt Romney, Pennsylvania, Pew poll, skewed polling | 4 Comments »
Posted by Dana Pico on 2012/07/17
07 12 12
I have mentioned before how Allen West is on the top 10 target list for Democrats this year, Dem SuperPAC targeting “Tea Party 10″.
For that reason, among others, West is on the Operation Counterweight list, and we have a separate Focus Page with his website and other links.
Now a SuperPAC has been formed specifically to get rid of West, as reported by The Shark Tank:
via » Allen West targeted by new Soros-backed SuperPAC – Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion.
We have had some people who have
equated suspected that opposition to President Obama’s policies must be motivated by racism. Well, Representative Allen West (R-FL-22) is black, so, by using the logic that some other people have used, shouldn’t we at least suspect that George Soros’ opposition to Mr West could be motivated by racism?
Now, whether Mr Soros is actually a racist is something about which I have absolutely no information. But Foxfier’s brief article points out the silliness of the position that opposition to a black person’s policies must be motivated by racism. Then-Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) presented a health care plan fairly similar to what was passed into law; had she been elected, and a stimulus plan and universal health care plan been passed, would our liberal from Lewes be telling us that Republican opposition to her policies must be motivated by deeply-seated sexism?
In 2008, former Senator John Edwards (D-NC) was also running, and was considered the third of the top three candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination.1 Like Senators Clinton and Obama, Mr Edwards had a universal health care coverage plan as part of his platform, one not terribly dissimilar from the plans offered by Senators Clinton and Obama. Had Senator Edwards won the nomination, and the general election, he would have attempted to get his health care plan passed,2 and probably some sort of stimulus plan in 2009; would Republican opposition to those have proved that we hated white men? For that matter, had former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) won the 2008 Republican nomination,3 and proposed something like the Massachusetts plan known as RomneyCare, and we opposed that, would that have made us, well, what now?
What it would have made us are people who supported or opposed given political positions or policies on principles, not on the race or gender of the politician promoting them. More, it makes us people who believe that a person’s race should not define his political positions. As noted here, when our Democrat from Delaware opined that we evil Republicans must hate blacks and women and Mormons and Hispanics and homosexuals and non-Christians, John Hitchcock’s list of endorsements just happened to be loaded up with the groups that our frequent Democratic commenter assured us we, and he, must hate, and, coincidentally enough, didn’t include even one Anglo white male.4
Why? Because Mr Hitchcock was choosing favored candidates based on where they stood, not for whom they were; he was selecting based upon the content of their character, not the color of their skin. In favoring Ted Cruz for the Texas Republican senatorial nomination, he is favoring a man running against a solid, Anglo white male, Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst (R-TX)
You see, that’s what real conservatives do. We aren’t looking at people’s race or religion, but at their beliefs and political positions. We want to unite people who are Americans as Americans, not divide them into separate groups, selecting some for favored treatment and others for special burdens. And that is the primary thing that separates us from the liberals.
1 There were other candidates, such as Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM), Representative Dennis Kucinich (Kook-OH) and former Governor Mike Gravel (D-AK), running, but they were always considered the longest of long shots, and their vote totals confirmed that.
2 Though it wouldn’t have been in time to pay for the birth of Rielle Hunter’s daughter.
3 He did run for the nomination in 2008, but withdrew two days after the Super Tuesday primaries left him trailing Senator John McCain by more than two-to-one in delegates.
4 Mr Hitchcock’s endorsement list:
Cross posted on THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL.
Posted in Elections, Gender Issues, race | 2 Comments »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/07/03
Women cannot be Pro-Life. Those Pro-Life women are actually men with boobs, according to Babette Josephs, a prominent female Pennsylvania Democrat.
You have to look up women’s skirts to prove they’re women if they vote Republican, according to Janis Baird Sontany, a prominent female Tennessee Democrat.
If you’re a woman, there’s no way you can vote Republican, according to Obama campaigner Eva Longoria. (HT Hot Air Headlines)
My question is, if you’re a woman, why would you want to associate with a group of people who feel so little about you that they strip you of your rights to think freely? Why would you want to be a part of the misogyny that group of people push?
Posted in Character, Gender Issues, Liberal, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, politics, society | Tagged: Babette Josephs, Democrat misogyny, Eva Longoria, Janis Baird Sontany | 1 Comment »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/06/11
Democrats prove the “war on women” garbage was just a political ploy as they once again have no desire to make abortion anything other than a convenient way to avoid Personal Responsibility.
Originally posted on Lady Liberty 1885:
Punished With A Girl…
In case you missed it in between all the star-studded fundraising and DOJ Fast and Furious dodging, the House killed a bill that would make it illegal for doctors to perform abortions based on the gender of the unborn child. Talk about the ultimate war on women and truly trying to play God. The idea is repulsive, to put it mildly.
From The Washington Examiner:
The House on Thursday rejected a bill that would have made it illegal for doctors to perform abortions based solely on the gender of the unborn baby.
In a 246-168 vote, Democrats prevented Republicans from securing the two-thirds majority needed to pass the measure, which Republicans said is needed to protect unborn females they claim are more likely to be targeted for “sex-selective” abortions.
Democrats said Republicans’ decision to force a vote on the measure using a parliamentary maneuver that…
View original 112 more words
Posted in abortion, Character, Gender Issues, Liberal, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, politics, society | Tagged: sex selective abortion | Comments Off
Posted by Dana Pico on 2012/05/20
This story has been making its way around the blogosphere. This one from Donald Douglas:
Jeez, this dude needs to put on a raincoat — either that, or keep it holstered permanently.
See the Los Angeles Times, “Man who had 30 kids with 11 women wants child-support break” (via Memeorandum)
Dependency is the new freedom . . . .”
As Darleen Click put it, “
I have seen this story floating around, and while the irresponsibility of Desmond Hatchett is obvious, what I haven’t seen is anyone asking:
- Don’t the women involved have any responsibility for contraception; and
- Just what kind of self-respect do the ladies in question have if they are copulating with a guy who has been fornicating with that many other women?
The feminists who normally comment on just about anything relating to sex and families have been notably quiet: Amanda Marcotte has, at least thus far, said nothing, Feministing has been completely silent, despite having an article up about maternal health still being a feminist issue, and is concerned about the possible sexism on a picture of a woman riding two dolphins, Melissa McEwan was very busy condemning those who are concerned about the recent demographic news that more non-white babies were born in the US than white ones, including a condemnation of anybody who is in any way critical of contraception, yet hadn’t a word about the Hatchett case, and Think Progress and the Lost Kos and the Delaware Liberal were all silent.
Why? Well, if any of our friends on the left even questioned this case, it would raise questions about the women’s responsibility as well as the man’s. Thirty children by eleven different women means that most of these women had to have multiple children by the same man to whom they were not married and could not support. Were our friends on the left to raise this topic, it would call into question their abandonment of the apparently quaint and surely anti-feminist notion that sex has natural consequences, that women bear the greater burden of these consequences, and the old-fashioned norms that women shouldn’t screw around were for their own protection and well-being.
Contraception? It’s inexpensive and widely available. Abortion? Yes, I would like to outlaw it, but it is still perfectly legal, and a large city like Knoxville, Tennessee (which is the home of the University of Tennessee) has two abortion clinics, with inexpensive fees, along with a link to an organization which can help poor women with those fees.
Dr Douglas concluded:
And it is. The report indicates that some of the mothers of Hatchett’s children get as little as $1.50 a month. Somewhere along the way, probably as early as the first child, Hatchett and his hookups were relying on government to pay for their children, the hospital costs, for example (and pre-natal care), and unless the mothers are living with family members and self-sufficient, there’s no doubt that the kids are being supported through public assistance. Indeed, that’s why the county is all over this dude to get with the program. And I can guarantee you that if you say one word about the breakdown of individual responsibility in this case you’ll be attacked as racist. It’s almost unbelievable to think about what’s happened to this country. That’s almost unbelievable. As long as marriage is ridiculed by the enlightened progressive, and as these same left-wing idiots insist on perverting the institution through gay marriage radicalism, things will only get worse before they get better.
The county “is all over this dude to get with the program?” How? He makes minimum wage which, if the reports are accurate, means he is making $7.25 an hour, or $15,080 a year. Supposedly half of his income is being taken for child support, but, divided among thirty children, doesn’t go very far. If some of the children’s mothers get $1.50 a month, the administrative costs alone are higher than what the recipients get.
The war on women? It was waged with not by Republican policies, but with Desmond Hatchett’s dick, and the people who are suffering the casualties are the eleven women who have children for whom they receive virtually no child support (they were willing casualties), for the thirty children growing up without their scumbag father, and the taxpayers who are going to have to pay for the irresponsibility of Mr Hatchett and his eleven sluts.
Cross posted on THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL.
Posted in Character, Gender Issues, Health, Personal Responsibility, Politically Incorrect, society | Tagged: personal responsibility | 7 Comments »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/04/11
Do you want to help the radical Leftists keep track of you? Do you want the Obama Government to know who you are, so they can watch you? Let us at Truth Before Dishonor know! We’ll put you on the list! That way, Big Brother only needs to come here to find out who you are, and you don’t even have to report yourself to Barack Obama’s multiple web-sites set up to track you from your neighbors reporting you to the local Office of Watching Your Neighbors.
We have had a large influx of new visitors since the last time we issued the invitation, so there may be some who don’t know exactly what this is all about. Weeeeellllll, let me tell you! If you’re black… or if you’re hispanic… or if your not-white… and if you’re a Conservative, you’re a Race-Traitor. So saith the radical Leftists in charge of the Democrat Party. If you’re a woman who votes Republican, well, Democrats have declared they need to look up your skirts to ensure you actually are a woman, because for some reason, Democrats don’t believe women should be allowed to vote Republican and still call themselves women. Heck, just recently, a Democrat woman from Philadelphia, the Democrat head of a Committee in the Pennsylvania Legislature, declared all such women were in actuality men with jugs.
So that’s where the Race-Traitors point comes in. If you’re not white and yet you believe you have the freedom of mind to be Conservative, you are a race-traitor as far as the Democrat Party is concerned. Welcome to the club. And if you have a blog, we have a special place of prominence for you in our side-bar.
Regarding the Self-Proclaimed Right Wing Extremist™ Blogs, that came straight out of laughing at Janet Napolitano’s document warning about those of us Right Wing Extremists™ who could become the next terrorist groups to violently attack the US from within. So a couple of us decided to call ourselves Self-Proclaimed Right Wing Extremist™ Bloggers, and I sent out an invitation to all others who would like to be so labeled, just to help the overburdened Janet Napolitano and the overburdened Federal Government be better able to keep track of us would-be terrorists.
Won’t you join us and self-identify today?
For more information and to help you reach your decision, I am providing some research information.
Right Wing Extremist™ Blogs
Self-Proclaimed Right Wing Extremist™ Blogs, A Renewed Call
I Added A New Blog List (The Race-Traitors blog list)
Attention All Race-Traitors, Gender-Traitors And Self-Proclaimed Right-Wing Extremist™ Bloggers
Posted in Blogging Matters, Character, Conservative, funny business, Gender Issues, history, humor, Liberal, media, Obama, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, race, society, stereotype, truth | Tagged: Attack Watch, AttackWatch, Janet Napolitano, Race Traitors, Self-Proclaimed Right Wing Extremist™ Blogs | 3 Comments »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/04/07
HT Tina Korbe, who is a smart girl.
Barack Obama doesn’t speak for smart girls like my Army Veteran daughter (or her Army and Navy Veteran husband, who isn’t a girl). Teh Won doesn’t speak for my sister, or my female (or male) cousins, or my aunts, or my mother (who cannot imagine anyone actually wanting to kill her unborn child). And the man who claimed “this is the day the oceans began to recede” (or something to that effect) after he was elected definitely does not speak for these Smart Girls:
Posted in abortion, Character, Conservative, economics, Elections, Gender Issues, Liberal, media, Obama, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politics, society, stereotype, truth | Tagged: Barack Obama, Smart Girl Politics PAC, You don't speak for me | Comments Off
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/03/27
The pro-abort crowd is very vociferous in their hate-filled attitude that men have no voice whatsoever in “a woman’s choice” (unless that man is pro-abort). The pro-abort crowd is also very vociferous in claiming Pro-Life women are merely “men with fun bags” as I clearly showed in my previous article referencing Philadelphia Democrat Legislator Babette Josephs. So the pro-abort crowd only accept the opinions of pro-abort women and pro-abort men (who very much wish not to be saddled with any responsibility related to their conquests of morally challenged women).
I have some photos that I picked up from ChristianProLife, who picked them up from Abolish Human Abortion.
And now, the type of “man” the pro-abort crowd finds acceptable.
Pro-aborts always say a man’s contrary opinion doesn’t count, so why would a man’s opinion count at all? Oh, I know. So it gives cover for all the irresponsible women who want to kill their babies. But seriously, why would any pro-abort seek the aid of that “man” above? He’s a dog who has no chance at all of bedding an educated, refined woman. He’s dregs of society and the women he beds are also dregs of society. Neither of them have any interest in being personally responsible for their actions, or in obeying society’s rules.
But according to Babette Josephs, Democrat Pennsylvania Legislature and Dem leader in a certain committee in the Pennsylvaia Legislature, Pro-Life women are actually men with ta-tas. So every photo above, according to Babette Josephs — herself a useful tool in scaring away rats — is of men, and mostly men with melons, or who will have melons.
Talk to the Pro-Abort women and they’ll tell you “I’m not a snob! Just ask anyone! Anyone who counts, that is!”
The Other McCain has placed this article in its “Headlines” section! Thank you, RS McCain!
Posted in abortion, Gender Issues | Tagged: Pro-Life photos | 1 Comment »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/03/27
Pennsylvania Legislator Babette Josephs (D - Phila) (click to embiggen, if you dare)
Not according to a Democrat Pennsylvania Legislator from Philadelphia
‘I don’t believe they’re really women. … I believe they’re men with breasts.’
Baby killer Kermit Gosnell, who did his heinous deeds in Philadelphia, and those like him thank you for all the business you send their way.
Where are all the feminist organizations? Why have they not denounced this Democrat misogynist, and stridently so? Oh, that’s right. The feminist organizations aren’t actually out to support all women or to protect all women from misogynist attacks. They only wish to protect Leftist women from misogynist attacks.
My mother is Pro-Life. My sister is Pro-Life. My daughter is Pro-Life. My cousins, both male and female, both by blood and by marriage, are Pro-Life. In fact, I don’t know a single member of my nuclear or extended family that is pro-abortion. And babs is accusing all the female members of my extended family of being men with boobs. But she gets a pass from the “don’t say bad things about women” crowd because she is a Leftist saying bad things about Conservative women (who don’t really count as women).
When you target a group of people as the source of your woes, then you dehumanize those people, you can kill those people without a pang of guilt, because you have rotted your own brain and propagandized the populace into rotted brains. And when people stand up and rehumanize those you dehumanized, you need to dehumanize the defendants of your victims you had previously dehumanized. And this is exactly what rotted-brained radical Leftists like Babette Josephs are busily doing. They have to dehumanize and de-womanize women who stand up for the Truth: that unborn babies are in actuality humans. Because the radical Left cannot stand for the Truth to be told or to be shown to those who have bought into the pro-abort Lie.
Target a group of people, blame them for holding people down, turn them into non-persons, turn society against them, then exterminate them, all legal-like.
And when people stand up to your evil, Alinskyite, satanic agenda, dehumanize them as well! Just like Babette Josephs is doing to women who refuse to toe the radical Leftist line. But she is not the only radical Leftist woman de-womanizing Conservative women. You remember that Tennessee Democrat who declared you have to lift the skirts of Republican woman voters to prove they’re women (because they don’t vote like women)? If you’re a politically astute Conservative, you absolutely know about that incident. But if you’re a radical Leftist, or if you’re one of millions of uninformed people (that would be ignorant people), chances are you haven’t heard much, if anything, about that. But I’ve covered that incident previously. And on more than one occasion. So has Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, Red State, Free Republic, Rush Limbaugh, and many, many others. (About 14,300,000 results in the above-linked search.)
As Tina Korbe in the very first link said,
Make no mistake: Feminism in its present day iteration does not teach us to use our freedom for something other than motherhood or for something in addition to motherhood. We all know women are capable of bearing fruit in a myriad of ways — not just by having children — and that they should not be denied opportunities to contribute to society in ways other than motherhood.
No, feminism seeks to actually take that freedom from us by obscuring the terms of the debate. A woman who does not know reality has no meaningful freedom to speak of because she has only false choices. A woman, for example, who thinks that she can become pregnant without becoming a mother is unable to make a meaningful choice between non-motherhood and motherhood.
Oh women, please don’t buy the lies! Wake up and claim the freedom that is your due!
What’s Babette complaining about? Women sponsored a Bill in the Pennsylvania Legislature that would require abortionists to show women the ultrasound videos of their babies they are planning to kill. And Babette tried to make that demand for information to be proof that these “men with breasts” don’t believe women can make informed decisions! The requirement to provide information the radical Left don’t want provided is proof that those who require that information be presented to women want women to be ignorant! Who, in his or her right mind, can actually claim that requiring information is a demand that people be uninformed? Only radical Leftists would make that claim!
Oh, and for a bit of Rule 5, a commenter on Hot Air provides the ultimate. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in abortion, Character, Conservative, Gender Issues, Law, Liberal, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, Photography, politics, Real Life, Rule 5, society, truth | Tagged: Abortion photos, Babette Josephs, Kathy Ireland photo, Liberal double standards, misogyny, Pro-Life | 7 Comments »