Three Cheers for Infanticide!

In her column for Salon So what if abortion ends life? Mary Elizabeth Williams brags, “I believe that life starts at conception. And it’s never stopped me from being pro-choice.”

Hallelujah! What candor! Life? And at conception, no less! Sister Williams, perhaps you betray what’s truly in the minds of all “pro-choice” folk:

All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.

Yes, shout it from the mountaintops!

When we on the pro-choice side get cagey around the life question, it makes us illogically contradictory.

You go, girl!

We’re so intimidated by the wingnuts, we get spooked out of having these conversations.

Yes! We wingnuts—who agree with you about that whole “life question” and are so wingnutty as to think that ending life is, well, a bad thing—applaud your frankness and welcome the new “conversations.”

My belief that life begins at conception is mine to cling to. And if you believe that it begins at birth, or somewhere around the second trimester, or when the kid finally goes to college, that’s a conversation we can have, one that I hope would be respectful and empathetic and fearless.

Indeed! Let’s have that respectful and empathetic conversation about that kid who “finally goes to college,” but fails to maintain the GPA we expect. Or that kids who doesn’t go to college. Why should mom and dad have to continue footing the bill for that lazy overgrown non-autonomous entity? Let’s be “fearless” here. Not sure what the D&E equivalent is for a 19-year-old SOB who’s outlived mom’s tolerance, but let’s find it—and get the Feds to subsidize it—so moms can live “not just in the most medically literal way, but in the roads that women who have choice then get to go down, in the possibilities for them and for their families.”

Oh, Sister Mary, how you fulfill us! Leave us, we beg, with one more pearl:

And I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing.


Sec’y Panetta – Part I: A Republocrat in Vietnam

As the great equalizer Leon Panetta wraps up his tour as Secretary of Defense by “opening up” combat to America’s mothers and daughters, let’s take a closer look at another of his recent recklessness before addressing G.I. Jane.  Take a deep breath and follow me closely… Leon Panetta (a Democrat), who used to work for President Nixon (a Republican), who was ultimately held responsible for the war in Vietnam (by Democrats), which was started by President Kennedy (a Democrat) who believed in the “Domino Theory,” which was coined by President Eisenhower (a Republican), but later ridiculed by anti-Vietnam war protesters (Democrats) only after Nixon (a Republican) became president and by anti-anti-(that’s not a typo) communists opposed to the foreign policy of President Reagan(a Republican), which is irrelevant now (that is, the “Domino Theory”) because we’ve seen the end of the Cold War—begun during the administration of President Truman (a Democrat), but really the fault of President Roosevelt (a Democrat—not his cousin, also a President and not a Democrat) and continued by Presidents Kennedy and Johnson (yep, Democrats), but not opposed (by Democrats) until continued by Presidents Nixon, Ford (Republicans)—skip President Carter (a Democrat)—and Reagan (a Republican)…Back to Secretary Panetta (still a Democrat, used to be a Republican), who visited Vietnam last year to finagle the use of our former Navy base at Cam Ranh Bay (opposed by anti-war Democrats during the Vietnam war)—originally established by President Johnson (a Democrat)—in order to “reposture our forces”—a term that sounds like it was invented by Secretary Rumsfeld (a Republican) under President Bush (a Republican, but not his father, also a President and Republican) and served under President Nixon (a Republican) at the same time as Secretary Panetta (still a Democrat)—to counter the “threat” from China, a communist country praised by anti-anti- (still not a typo) communist Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s, but with whom diplomatic relations were launched by very anti-communist President Nixon (a Republican) in 1972—and a country with whom we are not currently at war and which is as close as a drunken crow flies to Cam Rahn Bay as Miami is to Havana, but not to worry because Secretary Panetta (still a Democrat) swears the “increased U.S. involvement in this region will benefit China”—which again sounds like Rumsfeld (still a Republican, but not in power—but might as well be)…and interestingly, Secretary Panetta (still a Democrat and no longer a Republican) offered that diplomatic gem while visiting every ally in the region except our biggest, Pakistan—a country which has been courted by both Democratic and Republican presidents, but with whom we are now “reaching the limits of our patience” because the country isn’t doing enough to stop terrorism—even after President Obama (a Democrat) showed them we mean business by bombing Pakistani civilians from drones—with which Democrats seem to be OK, unlike Napalm in Vietnam, helicopters in Central America and landmines anywhere, which, of course are Republican weapons…and, by the way, we are not at war with Pakistan and it is, still in fact, an ally, but that shouldn’t be too surprising because Nobel Peace Prize-winning President Obama (still a Democrat), who vehemently opposed the War in Iraq when it still belonged to President Bush (a Republican, but not his father, also a President and Republican who started the other war in Iraq), has Commander-in-Chiefed us into war in Libya, Syria, Yemen and maybe soon…Iran.

On “Assault” Rifles


Trained by the USMC to handle it, carry it, drill with it, take it apart and, of course, shoot to kill with it – oh, and, ugh, clean it (still have nightmares about The Basic School: “carbon on the notch, Savage!”). Treated it from 1987-1991 better than I treated my girlfriends (not proud, just a fact). Slept with it in the jungles of Panama and the deserts of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Kept it cleaner and drier than my own body at all times. Employed it as an extension of my self in combat – and, thanks be to God, never had to kill another human being with it. Don’t own one, but ought to. Certainly can’t afford one now. Semi, 3-round burst or even fully-auto with a 10-, 30- or million-round magazine doesn’t matter. Know that the English Bill of Rights of 1689, upon which the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is based, codified a long-established natural right to deter and, if necessary, repel, tyrants. Believe that ALL wars the U.S. has fought could have been avoided or settled without bloodshed. Dislike neo-cons and other chicken-hawks as much as I dislike bed-wetting gun-controlling liberals. Really don’t like guns much, but like them better than the government that wants to take them away.

Read the excellent article by Walter Williams Are Guns the Problem?


After haranguing my Facebook friends and “friends” for way too long, I’ve decided to spare that semi-captive audience my hasty tirades, leaving them only with an ever-evolving photo album of my kids, and direct my discontent here, where, probably, no one will notice. Should you have stumbled upon this site by accident and need directions to a better neighborhood, please click here. If you are visiting intentionally – and are not from any of the investigative agencies of the Federal government, a whiny member of a “protected” class or a bill collector – then, welcome.

Here you will find an assortment of blurbs, posts, essays, interjections, regurgitations, photos, cartoons and more. Targets are not limited to, but do overwhelmingly include anyone in government – except, of course, Ron Paul (who is actually no longer in government, sigh) – liberals, RINOs (especially the neo-con variety), war-mongers, gun-controllers, Hollywood, radical chic-sters, abortionistas, anti-anti-Federalists (which is really confusing because the original “Anti-Federalists” were actually federalists), bullies (but not “bullies”) and “victims” (but not victims).

Should you, dear reader, ever feel compelled to demand equal time or otherwise respond, please do so in the comment boxes below every post. Or feel free to email me at  I look forward to reading and posting your thoughtfulnesses.

Thanks for visiting.