Another Example of Media Bias

I have to put in my two cents on the layout of the Opinion Page in the print edition for The Bulletin today July 9 2011. Someone thinks he is being oh so clever!

On either side of a fantastic letter by John McCommas are seemingly combating op-eds. I love the concept but things didnt go 'right' --pun intended.

On the left, under the banner "From the Left", is a full frontal attack on presidential candidate Michele Bachman by Richard Cohen. Fair enough except for the unsubstantiated 'she hates fags' remark. On the right side, "From the Right", is ANOTHER attack on Mrs. Bachman! In a snarky backhanded way George Will basically writes she and her staff are "not ready for prime time". Will seemed to endorse Rick Perry from the way I read it.

What the fuck? -- Just whose idea of fairness and balance is this shit??!!! How about picking a From the Right columnist who is actually FOR BACHMAN? That would be the point-counterpoint you would expect in a head to head match up but someone seems to want it both ways here. The message sent was 'The Left AND the Right agree Bachman is a loser'.

Well that is not what the polls say lately boys!

I am not a Bachman supporter yet, I am leaning towards Rick Perry in fact, but I like her a lot and clearly she is not being treated fairly by The Bulletin and this is but the latest example. Mrs. Bachman is getting the same treatment as Sarah Palin gets. What is so threatening about a conservative woman who looks like she just might be our next president or Veep?

The Bulletin did the same exact thing a while ago with abortion which is another issue they are kinda funny about. From the Left had someone who naturally is *pro-choice*, but then on the other side was Kathleen Parker. Parker's so-called From the Right perspective was great until you get to the end where she says well gosh darn it even if abortion is murder, we still shouldn't make it illegal.

I guess that is a From the Right position the editor didnt mind printing, but that is not what most Pro-Lifers think.

The Norwich Bulletin seems to be saying heads the Left wins, and tails the Right loses.

note: The mentioned op-eds did not appear in The Bulletin's online version.

Why I Switched

Connecticut Bob and someone called Tessa Marquis at "My Leftmeg" put up posts celebrating abortion. I then wrote this long -- but not angry -- post which it turns out is to long so I will put it up here instead. There should be not space limits on a subject as important as this.

I used to be pro-choice but my conscience kept bothering me until I finally changed my changed my mind about two years ago. I have President Obama to thank for that. He horrified me into it.

I probably never really was in the pro-choice camp anyway because every single time a debate came up between the pro-abortionists and the pro-lifers, I would always secretly root for the Life side. I admired Operation Rescue only at the time I thought of it as a magnificent exercise in Free Speech.

To be brutally honest I think I was for *choice* probably because it was the more popular position to take. When I was younger my priorities were different. I remember these screaming arguments from the pro-abortionists "Well what if a girl is raped by her father?!!" , --- which almost put me in the position of having to defend incest. And incest is definitely not cool.

Their other scare tactic was that men should not have any position on abortion unless it is to support it because men can't get pregnant. -- Which is only true for the walk away Joes.

As I write this there are two delightful girls giggling and playing outside my condo. Its almost a sign....

To tell you the truth I am not as nearly bothered by the early abortions as the latter ones. That is what really changed my mind. Far from being moderate, the self described "moderates" are opposed to any restriction on abortion at all no matter how late it is.

I recall one really hateful woman who was the head of one pro-abortion organization (Susan Yolen) who even opposed a bill that would make it illegal for a man to murder a wanted child while he was still in the womb. Before "Jenny's Law", it was perfectly legal for a man to kill his girlfriend's baby as long as he wasn't born yet. Of course he also killed the mother too, but the killer was not charged with the murder of the baby because it just didn't count under CT law as a person at the time as hard as that is to believe. This happened in Plainfield Connecticut which is just a stone's throw from here.

Now isn't that taking *choice* a bit to far? Yolan actually sided with he murderers of pregnant women. Talk about tunnel-vision! And yet this is seen as the more enlightened positon.

The way I think of it is that when a child develops a mind, then no matter what religion you are (and even if you don't have one), you have to admit that he or she has a soul and should have at least some rights. If abortions are to be allowed at all, they should only be in the first trimester before the soul manifests itself.

But even then it is just so unthinkable to me. If you know anything about human genetics, the instant that sperm meets egg a distinct individual is created. The person that tiny fertilized egg is destined to be is cast in cement. Eye color, hair, sex and even some say sexuality are all chosen at that moment. If a different sperm made it in there, it would be a totally different person.

The parents who are inconvenienced may rationalize that they/she can have children latter in life but it will never be that same infant. It will be someone entirely different. An aborted baby can't be replaced ever.

My mom had several pregnancies before she had me. They all died. Two were really bad ones my Dad told me. It bothers me that my Mom must have been in a lot of emotional pain. I was the first to be born alive. On my birth certificate those two deaths are noted on it. My sister was born without any trouble after me. I often wonder about them. It was such a pity they did not make it. Were they boys or girls? What was wrong with them that made my Mom miscarry? What ever they were, you can't argue that were nothing.

I think the only morally justifiable reason for an abortion is to save the life of the woman (when it is authentically at stake) because every person has the right to protect herself. Other than that, I don't have much sympathy anymore for the other rationalizations for abortion. I admire Sarah Palin for her decison to carry her baby to term even though it was not an ideal situation. Likewise for her daughter. It is quite telling that her opponents hate her for the act of not killing her baby. That is quite telling of their morality -- or lack of it.

Just because the child is exterminated quietly without so much as a whimper does not mean that it isn't murder. Did you know that some babies are actually born alive when the doctors (if you can call them that) try to abort them? What would the pro-abortionists have done with these children I wonder? They are not human beings too?

Gianna Jessen is one such person.

We know what Obama's position was on her. If he had his way, Miss Jessen would be dead. 'Just give them a warm blanket' and wheel them into the corner to suffer and die from neglect. That's President Obama's position on the matter in a nutshell. On a bill that would give these children rights as citizens he voted "present". He really wanted to vote "no" but clearly he made a political calculation. I am surprised he got elected despite his "present" vote.

I really can't believe this kind of thing goes on in the best country in the world. It has to be stopped. Did you know that babies cry in the womb? If that doesn't melt your heart than man, you just don't have one.

I don't think of this choice as a euphuism. Not any more I don't. The era of legal abortion will someday be called for what it is -- the holocaust.

I urge you to listen to your conscious like I did mine. At least oppose the late abortions. That's what a real moderate would do, wouldn't she?

Disallowed Speach -- "Abortion Is Murder"

There are just some things that liberals just don't want to hear. For all their talk about diversity, liberals really can't stand people -- or speech -- that is not exactly like their own.

The Norwich Bulletin, in order to attract interest in its website version of the paper, has a comment section on the bottom of most stories and opinions.

This letter by Mr. Mark T. Kalinowski o-pined about the evil of abortion, but then concluded that it still should be between a mother and her doctor. I responded to that simply "Abortion is Murder".

I checked back latter and the post was erased (I rewrote it at least twice with the same result) seemingly because somehow what I said was ummmm... what?

Racist? Well no....

Sexist? Nope...

Homophobic? Oh come on!

The post was erased either by other readers hitting the "report" button or the webmaster because it was a assertion that liberals just don't want in the public square. Now precisely why is that? They have tolerated the most hateful exchanges between liberals and conservatives on lot of other subjects. Why is abortion special?

I think I know the answer to that. Deep down the Pro-Abortionists (yes Virginia, there is such a thing) know what they advocate is the killing of innocent children.

That must be the reason. Otherwise, why pull the plug? Everything I post now disappears automatically. Is this what we have to look forward to in the age of Obama? --Words that are to dangerous to be heard just disappear in a blink? Will their next be a knock at my door? Yes, it can happen here if we let it.

Are we going to allow it then?

This is a time to be vigilent of not only our own rights but those of others. We can only protect them if we stand together. Whether you agree with my words or not, you should stand up next to me and defend my right to say them.

Journalists should know that better than anyone else.... or so you would have thought.....

Obama's Warm Blanket

The abortion cheerleaders like to say that no one is "pro-abortion" but sadly that is not the case. I have never been completely comfortable with abortion even in the early stages. When a debate came on TV about abortion I have always rooted for the pro-life speaker. When the issue of partial birth abortion came to light I promised myself if the Supreme Court did not uphold the federal ban on this procedure I would switch sides. While the court did rule it constitutional (which it certainly is) I ended up changing my mind anyway when I found out about abortion survivors. Babies separate and apart from the egg-mother were being left to die from neglect -- or worse.

What could be the excuse now for killing the baby now that the mother's body is not in the equation?

How can this happen in America? I am now a reformed pro-choicer and the two people I have to thank for that are President Obama and Gianna Jessen.

If Obama had his way Gianna would have been given a "warm blanket" and wheeled into some corner to die from neglect. Obama thinks people like her have less rights than stray dog.

Gianna ran commercials exposing Obama's record and he now says he is favor of taking care of babies "no matter how they came into this world" (and he always has). Of course that's a bold faced lie. Obama claims the Illinois legislation that gave aborted babies born alive full citizenship, where he voted "present" on passage, undermined Roe V. Wade.

True. But that would be the case no matter how the legislation was worded. By recognising that a baby can be taken from the mother and he or she is still alive proves that these are people. Its not a complex question. The compassion for these children undermines Roe V. Wade.

I am reminded of the Gary Larson Far Side cartoon where a scientists draws a cow on the blackboard with the words "cow" and the caption reads "Yes, I believe we have a question in the back".

Here are Gianna's story in her own words:

"My biological mother was seven-and-a-half months pregnant when she decided to abort me. I don't know why she made that decision. It was 1977. She and my biological father were 17 at the time and weren't married.

She went to a clinic in Los Angeles and had a saline abortion. A salt solution is injected into the mother's womb, which the baby gulps. The solution also burns the baby inside and out. The idea was that within 24 hours she would deliver a dead baby. But, by the grace of God, I survived.

The abortionist wasn't on duty when I came into the world. Had he been there, he would have ended my life with strangulation, suffocation or leaving me there to die, which was considered perfectly legal up until 5 August 2002 in the United States. Now, a child who has survived an abortion must receive proper medical care. The abortionist had to sign my birth certificate. He had to acknowledge a life that just hours before he was trying to end.

The only person even remotely concerned about my well-being was the nurse. She called an ambulance and had me transferred to a hospital. I was placed in an incubator weighing two pounds. They didn't expect me to live.

After several months they decided that I had a tremendous will to live. I was placed in the foster care system and at 17 months was diagnosed with cerebral palsy due to lack of oxygen while I was being burnt alive for 18 hours in my mother's womb. I was 32lbs, couldn't move and they said that I would just be a vegetable for the rest of my life.

My foster mother, Penny, decided that despite what the doctors were saying, she would work with me. She did my physical therapy three times a day and I began to hold up my head, sit up and crawl. Eventually, at the age of three-and-a-half, I was able to walk with a walker and leg braces. That was the age at which Penny's daughter, Diana, who was then in her thirties, adopted me.

I'm 28 now and work as a musician in Nashville, Tennessee. I still walk with a limp and fall occasionally. But I've just completed my first marathon and will be running the London Marathon next April to raise funds for children with cerebral palsy. I'll be running on behalf of Stars Organization Supporting Cerebral Palsy.

Diana told me about my past. I had always had this sense that there was more to my life story. I was always asking her why I had cerebral palsy. You would have thought that I would be fine with her answers because I was a premature baby or that I had experienced a traumatic birth.

But when I asked her again when I was 12 she asked me whether I really wanted to know and I said yes. When she explained it to me, my reply was typical of a 12-year-old. I just said, at least I have cerebral palsy for an interesting reason. My mother said a good thing: that instead of focusing on the fact that you almost died, rejoice in the fact that you are alive. And I do.

When I was 17, Diana met my biological mother and communicated very clearly to her my forgiveness. I'm a Christian. I believe that bitterness eats up your life. I want to be the opposite of bitter. I never wanted to meet her. Penny has loved me so well I don't feel the need. I don't know much about the meeting, only that she didn't ask for forgiveness from me and that she had another abortion later.

I started speaking out about abortion when I was 14, and on Tuesday I will be speaking to a parliamentary meeting at the House of Commons about it. I believe that it's important when something like this has happened to you to present the truth about not just abortion, but also about what a tremendous life you can possess through overcoming weakness.

I don't believe that killing is a right. I am completely against abortion in any circumstance, including rape.

Even though rape is a horrific crime I do not believe that a child should have to pay for the crime. I don't believe that abortion in that case will solve a problem. In fact I have met people who are the product of rape and they say they are very glad to be alive. If abortion is merely about women's rights then what were mine? There wasn't a radical feminist yelling about how my rights were being violated on that day.

Every day I thank God for life. I do not consider myself a by-product of conception, a clump of tissue, or any other of the titles given to a child in the womb. I do not consider any person conceived to be any of those things. I have met other survivors of abortion. They are all thankful for life.

Today, a baby is a baby when convenient. It is tissue or otherwise when the time is not right. A baby is a baby when miscarriage takes place at two, three, four months. A baby is called a tissue or clumps of cells when an abortion takes place at two, three, four months. Why is that? I see no difference.

I believe that I am living proof that abortion is the killing of a human being. My biological mother felt that she was entitled to a choice 28 years ago that she thought would only affect her. And yet I bear the mark of her choice every day of my life with my cerebral palsy. Although I don't hold it against her, I think it's important for people to think about that before they make their decision".

WASHINGTON TIMES EDITORIAL: Obama a 'Liar' on Abortion

If you want to know Barack Obama's real views on abortion, you should meet registered nurse Jill Stanek.

Mrs. Stanek worked at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois from 1993 to 2001. When she worked in the hospital's Labor and Delivery Department she saw that babies who survived abortion attempts were left to die alone in supply rooms. They could linger for as long as eight hours, without medical care, without even the dignity of a warm blanket or a soft touch. Their tiny bodies were then dumped in the trash. Mr. Obama's spiritual mentor served on the board of the hospital. Mrs. Stanek went on a public crusade to protect these children.

At a 2001 Illinois legislature hearing, Mr. Obama questioned Mrs. Stanek. She insisted that children needed medical care if they were born alive. Mr. Obama said: "Ms. Stanek, your initial testimony last year showed your dismay at the lack of regard for human life. I agreed with you last year and we suggested that there be a Comfort Room or something of that nature be done. The hospital acknowledged that and changes were made and you are still unimpressed. It sounds to me like you are really not interested in how these fetus [es] are treated, but rather not providing absolutely any medical care or life to them."

Mrs. Stanek replied: "What the hospital did was try to make things look better. What it really is, is that the baby is still dead."

In committee testimony, Mr. Obama said it was sufficient to give "comfort care" to a baby that is born despite all the efforts to kill it. "Comfort care" means giving the infant a warm blanket and permitting the baby to be held by someone as it dies. This is the most Mr. Obama could find in his heart to provide - a warm blanket for a child grasping for life. Mrs. Stanek told The Washington Times that Mr. Obama showed callousness when he questioned her in committee testimony: His inability to grasp that babies born alive need medical care was disturbing.

Despite all the details Mrs. Stanek provided in her testimony, Mr. Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act in the Illinois legislature in 2002 - a bill that would give legal protection and medical assistance to a baby born from a botched abortion. Mr. Obama stated that he feared the bill could undermine Roe v. Wade. When a similar bill was put to Congress, other lawmakers had better sense and bigger hearts: The Born Alive Infants Protection Act passed the Senate with a vote of 98-0. It was signed into law by President Bush on Aug. 5, 2002. Infants born alive are now recognized as legal persons with full rights.

Mr. Obama even voted against banning partial-birth abortion - a radical procedure - in the Senate, in October, 2007. Since 2005, he has a 100 percent rating on pro-choice votes by NARAL, a leading, national pro-choice organization.

There is no doubt that Mr. Obama wants not only to uphold existing abortion laws, but a more radical view. At an address before Planned Parenthood on July 17, 2007, Mr. Obama said: "The first thing I will do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." He received a standing ovation. FOCA was introduced in Congress in November 1989 by Rep. Don Edwards, California Democrat. The legislation has since been a focal point for staunch pro-choicers. The bill would codify the 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, into law in all the states. This would overturn state laws that have been passed to limit or delay abortions. Contrary to Mr. Obama's pledges to reduce the number of abortions, he really wants to make them easier to get - while overriding state and federal laws.

Mr. Obama wants to uphold an abortion policy that has a disproportionate impact on blacks. The Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on sexual and reproductive health research, finds that 13 percent of the U.S. population is black, but 37 percent of all abortions are performed on black women and teens: Blacks are 4.8 times as likely as whites to have an abortion. A vote for Mr. Obama is, in effect, a vote that permits the disproportionate elimination of blacks in America.

Mr. McCain believes unequivocally that life begins at conception. Mr. McCain even supports requiring parental notification for underage girls who want to abort the fetus. His 0 percent rating by NARAL is perhaps one of his greatest achievements as a senator. On one of the fundamental moral questions of our time, the choice is clear: One man favors life, the other prefers a society that permits the death of the most innocent and vulnerable of us.

Mrs. Stanek told The Times that Mr. Obama's talk of compassion for the weak and underprivileged rings hollow to her: "Frankly, I think he is a liar."