Connect with us

Politics

What do Planned Parenthood and pro-life groups have in common? Making money from abortion.

Published

on

What do Planned Parenthood and pro-life groups have in common Making money from abortion

After Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-alive Abortion Survivors Act failed to garner the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster, Trump and the GOP jumped on the opportunity to turn the vote into an anti-Democrat campaign issue to raise funds and steal votes going into 2020.

It makes sense when you think about it. After all, what better way to distract the base and redirect their attention away from two years of failure to advance the pro-life agenda while still funding Planned Parenthood. Not to mention their 46 years of failure to defend life since Roe v. Wade.

But Republicans aren’t the only ones playing political football with the bodies of murdered unborn babies, and Planned Parenthood isn’t the only enterprise out there raking in the dough from the slaughter. Sadly, many of the organizations wearing the pro-life label are also cashing in, and for that reason, they are teaming up with Republicans and Planned Parenthood to keep the abortion industry open for business.

Three recent events underscore my point.

In Oklahoma, with a pro-life governor and where Republicans outnumber Democrats 39-to-9 in the State Senate and 77-to-24 in the State House, a bill entitled “The Abolition of Abortion in Oklahoma Act” (SB13) has been introduced. Slam dunk, right? Wrong.

Abortion remains legal in Oklahoma because National Right to Life VP Tony Lauinger opposes SB13 and has successfully lobbied key Republicans to keep it from passing. He claims to oppose it because it’s “unconstitutional” under Roe v. Wade, even though there is no constitutional right to abortion. In reality, Lauinger opposes SB13 because he wants current Oklahoma laws regarding abortion — which he helped create — to remain even though they still allow abortions to occur.

Next, we go to Indiana where a bill entitled the “Protection at Conception Act” (HB1430) was recently introduced. The title of the bill makes the intent of this legislation perfectly clear, yet it didn’t even receive a hearing thanks to Indiana House Committee on Public Policy Chairman Ben Smaltz.

According to Smaltz — who opposed a similar bill in 2017 — laws protecting life at conception are “catastrophic” to the pro-life movement and are unconstitutional. If that sounds familiar to the Oklahoma situation, it’s because National Right to Life is behind the opposition in Indiana just as it was in Oklahoma.

By the way, Indiana Right to Life endorsed Smaltz in 2018 over his challenger William Carlin who ran on a platform in support of the Protection at Conception Act.

That brings us to the third event. In Idaho, the “Abortion Human Rights Act” was recently introduced, a measure that would end abortion in the state. But just as it was in Oklahoma and Indiana, a so-called pro-life Republican in the Idaho State Senate, Fred Martin, won’t advance it because he says it’s “unconstitutional” and would “destroy the pro-life movement.”

And yep, you guessed it. Idaho Right to Life is leading the opposition to this one too.

In all three of these cases, Republicans and the National Right to Life or their local chapters opposed bills designed to abolish abortion. Why? I think Sen. Martin answered that question when he said that abolishing abortion would “destroy the pro-life movement.” In other words, the pro-life movement and their Republican buddies will be out of business if the abortion industry is shut down.

Unfortunately, this means we’re likely to see them continue doing all they can to prevent the end of abortion in America. Why? Because their bank accounts depend on it.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Is the nation ready to revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

0

Media

AMPFest19 denounces NY Times report of unauthorized, violent Trump meme video that few even saw

Published

on

NY Times Violent Trump Meme Video

It’s another case of leftist media taking nothing and turning into a major news story bashing President Trump. At the very least, the NY Times reporters were lying about the facts surrounding the story. At worst, this seems like it could be a blatant setup. Either way, it’s working as the President is being blamed left and right for a violent spoof video played in a back room at AMP Fest 2019.

The three-day event in Miami was tainted by a report from the NY Times that a parody video depicted President Trump violently killing Democrats and progressive news outlets. It’s an edit of the infamous “church massacre” in the movie Kingsman: The Secret Service starring Colin Firth and and Taron Egerton. President Trump’s head replaces Firth’s as the protagonist goes on a murderous rampage, along with everyone else in the “church,” shooting, stabbing, and killing each other. The other churchgoers’ heads are replaced by logos for various progressive news outlets as well as Democratic politicians, plus Mitt Romney who fittingly stab President Trump in the back.

The NY Times article, which I won’t link to for the sake of journalistic integrity, insinuates that it was a major part of the event that included such prominent Trump supporters as Donald Trump Jr., his former spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. They even quoted a spokesperson at the event saying the video was being looked into.

But a statement by the event on Twitter seems to contradict the NY Times report and put it into a more dubious light:

The statement reads:

It has come to our attention that an unauthorized video was shown in a side room at #AMPFest19. This video was not approved, seen, or sanctioned by the AMPFest19 organizers. The organizers of #AMPFest19 were not even aware of the video until they were contacted by the NYT. The first time anyone officially associated with #AMPFest19 was made aware of the video was when the NYT requested comment. We find it shocking that the New York Times would not report on any of the sanctioned events in the article. Including our panel conversation LITERALLY condemning political violence while claiming to be upset over a meme that was not sanctioned shown on stage, or approved. #AMPFest19 always has and always will condemn political violence. And proof of this was our major panel discussion on this very topic at AMPFest19.

The video was shown in a side room. It was unapproved. None of the big names mentioned in the article even saw the video on the small screen where it was played. The event itself, which is relatively new and not as widely attended as events like CPAC, focused on important political issues, including stopping political violence. Anyone reading the NY Times article would know none of this based on their reporting.

In a sad irony, the violence being “condemned” would have been seen by literally dozens of people at best had the anti-Trump news outlet not made the story go viral.

Conservatives on Twitter pointed out the hypocrisy of the NY Times reporting:

Here’s the graphic video for anyone interested. Just to reiterate, it’s graphic. Last warning: Graphic content.

It is clear based on AMP’s statement that this was a setup designed to attach a silly, albeit horrible video to the Trump campaign. Sadly, nobody even saw the video until the NY Times made it go viral. Who incites violence? Leftwing media.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Stench of impeachment must stick to Democrats in 2020

Published

on

Stench of impeachment must stick to Democrats in 2020

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has one goal. Contrary to popular belief, it’s not impeachment of the President. She’s supporting it now because she has to for various reasons ranging from a revolting left within her own caucus to acting as a smokescreen to protect Joe Biden and other Democrats (possibly including herself) who have engaged with the previous corrupt government of Ukraine. But it’s not what she wants because she knows it will fail in the end.

Her actual goal is to clear the stink of impeachment off the Democrats before the 2020 election. Yes, it’s going to stink. Thanks to the antics of Adam Schiff and others, it’s already stinking pretty badly and it hasn’t even had very much time to rot in front of American voters. She wants to get in, check off the impeachment box on her list of “accomplishments” as Speaker, and move onto the next component of obstruction that she’ll hope to ride into the 2020 election.

We cannot allow that to happen. This stink must remain firmly attached to the Democrats who support impeachment all the way through to election day next year. They need to wear impeachment like an albatross of shame around the necks, and they must not be allowed to shed it until they’re ousted from office.

This is important. The press is going to help them “move on” after it’s done. But conservatives must keep pressing it. We cannot allow it to fall off the radar as we’ve done so many times in recent elections. Benghazi should have sunk President Obama, but he was let off the hook. The Brett Kavanaugh confirmation debacle should have helped Republicans expand their control of the Senate, but it was old news a month after his confirmation just in time for the 2018 midterm elections. Time and time again, Democrats hand Republicans something that stinks, and Republicans fail to capitalize on it during elections.

If former FBI Director James Comey had let Hillary Clinton off the hook for her email scandal a month earlier than he did, she might have won the 2016 election. That’s how bad Republicans are at capitalizing on Democratic mistakes. Impeachment is such a mistake, a huge one. And if Republicans don’t handle it right, they’ll let it slip into the history books instead of letting it carry them to big gains in the House and Senate.

President Trump will be fine. He’ll capitalize on it without even trying and will use it to win his reelection. Down-ballot races must do the same. Any Republican running against a Democrat who supports impeachment should use that as the anchor that sinks the incumbent into a dark electoral pit. They should hammer this debacle until their opponents’ names are synonymous with “impeachment” among their constituents.

We must help them.

If your representative supports impeachment, make certain everyone you influence knows just how bad that really is. Today, it is allegedly popular with many. But it’s going to end up stinking very badly, and that odor must stick to Democrats like glue.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Andrew Wilkow: Elizabeth Warren’s lack of real-world experience is why progressives love her

Published

on

Andrew Wilkow Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren is the current frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president. I’ll admit, I never expected that to be the case until recently. I truly believed she would be in the middle of the pack before bowing out in favor of Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, or one of the other radical progressives who would take on Joe Biden. But I was wrong. She has surged into the lead and at this point, it’s her race to lose.

BlazeTV’s Andrew Wilkow explained her popularity among the progressives, and in doing so showed by I was unable to see her appeal. According to Wilkow, the difference between her and Hillary Clinton is that she’s a member of the elite academia, which progressives love. Her lack of real-world experience isn’t seen as the clear detraction that it should be. Instead, having lived in a theoretical bubble of feel-good progressive policy proposals gives her an advantage in the eyes of hyper-leftists.

In other words, she hasn’t had any real-world experience to burst her bubble, so she’s able to enact hypothetical ideas that are demonstrably bad without reality clouding her judgment. To the far-left, this makes her an ideal candidate.

How in the world is Elizabeth Warren leading in the Democratic polls? Andrew Wilkow breaks it all down for us in this eye-opening analysis for BlazeTV. She’s as detached from reality as her policy proposals, which is why the radicals adore her.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending