Connect with us

Democrats

HELP WANTED! Dems want pro-lifers to run for Congress

Published

on

Do pro-life Democrats exist? New Mexico Democratic congressman and chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Ben Ray Luján announced on Monday that in an effort to win back the House of Representative the DCCC is willing to fund a pro-life candidate in the upcoming 2018 election.

This move by the DCCC is in stark contrast from DNC chairman Tom Perez’s statement that being pro-life is non-negotiable. Perez wants the DNC to be the party of unrestricted and unlimited abortion rights.

Now the real question is, does the DCCC want pro-life Democrats and do they exist? The answer is no and no. Pro-life Democrats don’t exist and here is the reason why. What the DCCC is advocating is the willingness to support pro-choice Democrats with more restrictions on abortion. First, we need to understand what pro-life means.

Being pro-life is believing unequivocally that the fetus in the womb is a human life. As a pro-lifer, I don’t even like the term fetus because it attempts to denigrate the reality that the baby in the mother’s womb is a living human being. Pro-choice advocates like Perez don’t believe it is a life until the baby is born. Pro-choice light candidates believe it is life under certain circumstances.

So the reality is most Democrats, and even most Republicans are pro-choice. The fight isn’t over pro-life verse pro-choice, it’s a fight over the restrictions we are willing to accept. How do I know this? The historical data from Gallup shows that consistently people believe abortion should be legal under any circumstance stands at 29% of the time. Legal under most 13%. Legal only in a few 36% and finally 18% illegal in all cases. Gallup also states that when rape or incest caused the pregnancy, abortion should be legal stands at 75% to 22% of the time. In the same poll, 46% considered themselves pro-life.

You see the problem. How can 46% of respondents think they are pro-life but only 22% believe it is wrong to abort a baby if caused by rape or incest.

It seems illogical and inconsistent. If you are pro-life, you believe that abortion is taking of an innocent life even under rape and incest. Now in the rape case, would you argue that it wasn’t consensual sex, therefore, that it’s okay because somehow the baby in the womb ceases to be a life. What if the incestual relationship was consensual would that be murder? Would it be logical to say that since most people don’t believe a woman should have to carry a baby to term in the case of rape or incest that most people are pro-choice with differing exceptions, and it isn’t about when life begins?

If it is about when is it right to take the life of the innocent for a genuinely pro-life person I believe that can only be when the mother’s life is beyond a doubt at risk, and no other choice exists.  At the same time, instead of aborting the baby we deliver the baby and use all our medical resources to save the life of the child.

As in war, we do everything we can to limit civilian casualties, but when we decide to take an innocent life, we do it to save others. The decision on how you weigh human life is a difficult question. Do I bomb a hospital or school which is used to store rockets which are used to launch missiles into civilian territories or do we not? These are always difficult question and decisions.

Just like in the case of rape and incest. I’m not this cold-hearted person that can’t imagine the horrors the woman went through. These acts are inhuman and some of the worse crimes a human can do to another person. I believe wholeheartedly that the woman is a victim and is not to blame. So why do I think abortion is still wrong in these cases?

The reason is as a pro-lifer, I believe unequivocally that the baby is a human being. The baby is the result of a terrible, unjustifiable act which the child and the mother had no part in it. We have already one victim the mother, by aborting the baby do we put the blame of the rapist on the baby and kill the child and thus create another victim.

You see that is why I’m pro-life and not pro-choice. I believe that all babies in the womb are human beings and worthy of the same respect, dignity, and protection under the law which all of us enjoy.  So when the DCCC is talking about pro-life Democrats it’s not about pro-life Democrats it’s about supporting pro-choice Democrats with fewer exceptions.

If we are to say we are pro-life, we must understand what that means and at the same time when the DCCC talks about supporting supposed pro-life candidates we need to know what that means as well.

Mr. Roditis is an entrepreneur and owns several companies. He graduated from UCSD with a B.A. in Political Science/International Relations with a focus on National/International Security Studies. He's a former City Commissioner with the City of Anaheim, CA. He's a Conservative Constitutional Federalist. Follow him on Twitter @KonRoditis

Democrats

Al Franken gets hit with two more accusations of inappropriate touching

Published

on

Al Franken gets hit with two more accusations of inappropriate touching

Huffington Post is reporting accusations number three and four against Senator Al Franken from Minnesota. The embattled Democrat has been in the hot seat ever since reports surfaced that he made unwanted advances on model Leeann Tweeden, including a damaging image of the former comedian groping her while she slept.

Senator Frankencreep: Leeann Tweeden accuses Senator Al Franken of sexual assault

https://noqreport.com/2017/11/16/senator-frankencreep-leeann-tweeden-accuses-senator-al-franken-sexual-assault/Tweeden’s article on KABC is startlingly detailed, accusing the former comedian of forcefully kissing her without permission. He then participated in a “funny” picture showing him groping the former Playboy model while she slept.

Should she be believed? According to Franken last month, yes.

The second accusation came out Monday when Lindsay Menz accused him of groping her while he was a Senator.

2nd Al Franken accuser Lindsay Menz on why she went public with her story

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2nd-al-franken-accuser-lindsay-menz-public-story/story?id=51320842“My husband steps away from us to take the photo. I stand next to Sen. Franken and he pulls me into him and then he moves his hand to my butt,” Menz, 33, told ABC News’ chief national correspondent Tom Llamas. “I was shocked.”

She added, “I was surprised and kind of wondering, did that really just happen?”

The latest accusations move this into the realm of “serial” sexual misconduct, according to conservative news aggregator Drudge Report. The top headline of Matt Drudge’s site is “Getting Serial,” referencing the notion that this isn’t the case of a couple of isolated incidents spanning many years. This may be Franken’s modus operandi:

Drudge Report Al Franken

Though the two new reports are coming in from a single article, the women claim to not know each other. Their identities are being withheld, but HuffPo claims to have researched them thoroughly and discovered similarities in the accounts. Moreover, the women have been telling this story privately for years, well before the recent allegations came to light.

The incidents in question happened during Franken’s first campaign for Senate. One accusation is similar to the one made by Menz, stating “he grabbed my buttocks during a photo op.”

The other accuser said he cupped her buttocks and suggested the two of them visit the bathroom together at a Democratic fundraiser in Minneapolis.

“My immediate reaction was disgust,” the second woman said. “But my secondary reaction was disappointment. I was excited to be there and to meet him. And so to have that happen really deflated me. It felt like: ‘Is this really the person who is going to be in a position of power to represent our community?’”

My Take

Franken, a rising star in the Democratic Party and one of the most covered members of the Senate, needs to step down. Just as calls are being made for Republican Roy Moore to step aside in his Senate run, so too should calls be made for this Senator to vacate his seat immediately.

Further Reading

Two More Women Accuse Sen. Al Franken Of Inappropriate Touching

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/al-franken-two-more-women-groping_us_5a15a455e4b09650540ec295The first woman, who spoke to HuffPost on condition of anonymity because she’s worried she’ll be harassed online for making the allegation, said Franken groped her when they posed for a photo after a June 25, 2007, event hosted by the Minnesota Women’s Political Caucus in Minneapolis.

“My story is eerily similar to Lindsay Menz’s story,” the first woman said. “He grabbed my buttocks during a photo op.”

The second woman told HuffPost that Franken cupped her butt with his hand at a 2008 Democratic fundraiser in Minneapolis, then suggested the two visit the bathroom together. She spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear that the allegation could affect her position at work.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Beware of the dark side

Published

on

Many have started down the dark path.

Regardless of what you think of Roy Moore, I hope you reached that conclusion objectively. Unfortunately, those who dominate my news feed did not.

I saw bloodthirsty cries for him to drop out of the Senate race as soon as the first allegations were made, just as I witnessed stubborn declarations of innocence and that it was all a political smear. Both sides had more in common than not: their positions had nothing to do with the credibility of the allegations, but with the existence of the allegations alone.

Democrats and RINOs want him gone, so he must be innocent. Flyover Republicans want him elected, so he must be guilty.

From there, no amount of evidence on either side could penetrate stubborn skulls. The filter of confirmation bias tainted any appearance of guilt or innocence, and once again tribal politics reigned supreme.

But because God has a sense of humor, He threw Stuart Smalley into the mix.

Once the Al Franken (D-MN) groping photo surfaced, it was nothing if not comical to watch the tides reverse. Suddenly Moore’s tribal defenders started arbitrarily calling for Franken’s resignation, and Democratic loyalists rushed to protect him from fallout.

Bear in mind, I’m still not talking about those who’ve evaluated the evidence at hand and reached an objective conclusion. This is about the moral relativists who claim that sexual harassment and assault warrant swift impeachment and that women should be believed, not scrutinized — unless it’s happening to their guy.

Suddenly Democrats yell, “But we can’t afford to lose a pro-choice vote, no matter who it comes from!” And as Babylon Bee satirized, evangelicals would vote for Satan if he ran as a pro-life Republican.

Everyone, it seems, has forsaken principle.

I’m sick of arbitrary virtue, and, as always, there’s a Star Wars analogy for that.

In Episode III, Revenge of the Sith, Anakin Skywalker kills a disarmed (well, dishanded) Count Dooku at the prodding of his friend, Palpatine (or his pal, Friend-patine. I’ll stop now, I promise). While Palpatine insists, “He was too dangerous to be kept alive,” Anakin laments, “It’s not the Jedi way.”

Later, when Palpatine finds himself at the tip of Mace Windu’s lightsaber, Anakin demands that Palpatine stand trial. Because it’s the Jedi way? Not quite.

In a chilling echo, Master Windu counters, “He’s too dangerous to be kept alive” — the exact phrase used earlier by the Sith Lord.

(I could write an entire piece on how the Jedi and Sith are akin to the increasingly similar Republican and Democratic Parties, but I won’t go down that rabbit hole just yet.)

In fairness, I actually agree in both cases that the villains should have been killed. That’s my principle. And if Anakin opposed Palpatine’s death based on the Jedi way of not killing an unarmed opponent (are you still unarmed if you can shoot lightning from your fingertips?), that would have been his principle. It’s possible for two principled people to disagree.

But that wasn’t Anakin’s objection. As Windu draws back for the kill, Anakin confesses his true motive. Not “the Jedi way,” not due process, not even further interrogation or hostage bargaining. Seconds before the final blow, Anakin cries out, “I need him!”

Anakin severs Windu’s hand, Palpatine’s lightning thrusts the Jedi Master from the shattered window, and Anakin’s turn to the dark side is complete.

Anakin’s fall is a painfully recognizable warning in contemporary American politics — not just in 2017 or even 2016, but for decades of political discourse.

“I don’t care if he’s a child molester; I need him!”

“I don’t care if he assaulted women; I need him!”

“I don’t care if he left a woman to drown in Chappaquiddick,” and “I don’t care what he grabs women by.”

The chorus echoes loud and clear: “I need him!”

This is how you fall to the dark side, and as Padmé notes only moments later, “this is how liberty dies.” Ultimately, this moment proves the destruction of the entire republic.

When the wicked rule, the people mourn. Without consistent principles, we are in danger of sacrificing every blessing of freedom we enjoy. The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away.

My warning to you is the same caution Master Yoda gives to Luke on Dagobah decades after the rise of the Empire: “Beware of the dark side. … If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice.”

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Continue Reading

Democrats

John Conyers’ denial of wrongdoing is exactly what’s wrong with abusive men in power

Published

on

John Conyers denial of wrongdoing is exactly whats wrong with abusive men in power

The longest-sitting member of Congress, Democrat John Conyers of Michigan, is “expressly and vehemently” denying any wrongdoing following Buzzfeed’s blockbuster report that he paid off a former employee by three extra months of pay after firing her for what she claims was opposition to his sexual advances.

She Said A Powerful Congressman Harassed Her. Here’s Why You Didn’t Hear Her Story.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/paulmcleod/she-complained-that-a-powerful-congressman-harassed-her?utm_term=.kwaeyWOB5#.yakGXl5EOConyers confirmed he made the settlement in a statement Tuesday afternoon, hours after this story was published, but said that he “vehemently denied” the claims of sexual harassment at the time and continues to do so.

And the documents also reveal the secret mechanism by which Congress has kept an unknown number of sexual harassment allegations secret: a grinding, closely held process that left the alleged victim feeling, she told BuzzFeed News, that she had no option other than to stay quiet and accept a settlement offered to her.

Unlike accusations that keep popping up on a seemingly daily basis, this one has a very clear paper trail. That the Congressman is denying “wrongdoing” exemplifies a bigger problem than just sexual misconduct. Men like Conyers do bad things, but more importantly they truly believe they should get away with it.

“No wrongdoing” is legaleze

There seems to be no difference, at least in the minds of people like Conyers, between getting away with doing wrong and not actually doing it. At no point yet has Conyers claimed he isn’t a creep who uses his power to manipulate women he employs into being sexual objects for him. That isn’t what’s important to him. What’s important is that he got his victims to sign documents absolving him legally from his actions.

For this reason, he believes he needs to continue to represent the people of Michigan who have kept him in office for half a century.

This is a systemic problem that exists everywhere in free America, but the fact that it’s apparently rampant in Washington DC is utterly disgusting. In a seven-year period, Congress dished out millions of dollars to 235 people for “workplace violations.” Perhaps more infuriating is that it’s not the perpetrators, their campaigns, or their Congressional offices who pay for these settlements. They’re paid by taxpayers.

How Congress plays by different rules on sexual harassment and misconduct

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-congress-plays-by-different-rules-on-sexual-harassment-and-misconduct/2017/10/26/2b9a8412-b80c-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.htmlWhen settlements do occur, members do not pay them from their own office funds, a requirement in other federal agencies. Instead, the confidential payments come out of a special U.S. Treasury fund.

Congressional employees have received small settlements, compared with the amounts some public figures pay out. Between 1997 and 2014, the U.S. Treasury has paid $15.2 million in 235 awards and settlements for Capitol Hill workplace violations, according to the congressional Office of Compliance. The statistics do not break down the exact nature of the violations.

How do we stop this from happening? How can we protect the women and men who are victimized? How do we get these creeps out of the halls of power in our nation’s capital? We need to make it as transparent as possible.

Every settlement dollar should be broadcast to the world

If an incident is worthy of having taxpayer dollars used to hush people up, then the people need to know about it. We need to know who did what. While payment of settlements aren’t always done because of actual crimes committed, we should have the ability to discern for ourselves when an elected official does something worthy of a payout.

The club in DC is corrupt. We all know this. While it may be hard to track down all of the wrongdoing, we can at least attempt to address the misconduct by public officials against their own employees. That’s a reasonable expectation.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.