Daily Archives: November 7, 2013

Wendy Davis Redefines ‘Pro-Life,’ Enrages Anti-Choicers

This entry was posted in SteveG's Posts on by

The National memo has the story Wendy Davis Redefines ‘Pro-Life,’ Enrages Anti-Choicers.

Poster of Wendy Davis definition of Pro-Life


“I am pro-life,” she told a University of Texas at Brownsville crowd on Tuesday. “I care about the life of every child: every child that goes to bed hungry, every child that goes to bed without a proper education, every child that goes to bed without being able to be a part of the Texas dream, every woman and man who worry about their children’s future and their ability to provide for that future. I care about life and I have a record of fighting for people above all else.”




This matches what I think the definition of Pro-Life is. If you want to put a fetus, a zygote, or even an ovum on a par with a child or an adult, you have some ‘splaining to do.


Fetus: a human being or animal in the later stages of development before it is born


Zygote: a cell that is formed when an egg and a sperm combine


Ovum: a female gamete : macrogamete; especially : a mature egg that has undergone reduction, is ready for fertilization, and takes the form of a relatively large inactive gamete providing a comparatively great amount of reserve material and contributing most of the cytoplasm of the zygote


If you want to let Texans know what you think, you can go right to the article in The Valley Morning Star and make a comment. It’s about time we tried to rescue “those people” from the bubble in which they live.


    

    
                                    

                                
                                                            
                                                                    

                                        
    

              

          
Fruits of Republican Folly
This entry was posted in  Greenberg's Law of Counterproductive Behavior  SteveG's Posts  on  by  
        

        
The American Prospect has the article Fruits of Republican Folly by Robert Kuttner.


Since Barack Obama took office, the two Republican factions have complemented each other in a successful “good cop, bad cop” effort to ratchet down public spending. Wall Street creates one sort of crisis; the Tea Party creates another; government takes the hit. Except for the short-lived stimulus of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009, this is the first prolonged slump of the postwar era in which government cut rather than expanded public spending.

.

.

.

With everything else having been cut, the pressure has shifted to the big social-insurance programs—so-called entitlements—that have thus far been protected. Once again, the corporate right and Tea Party right have called for a grand bargain targeting Social Security and Medicare.


Can anyone please explain why President Obama is so hell bent on cutting the throats of the Democratic Party and its elected Congress People?


Can he  really be so ignorant of what every postwar President of either party has known about how to deal with a slump?


To brag on his “accomplishment” as shown in my previous post What So Proudly We Hail, shows that he is either completely ignorant, smoking something that is not Federally permitted, being held hostage, or some other explanation.


Notice that I have placed this post in the category of Greenberg’s Law of Counterproductive Behavior.  Which translates to, please explain to me what Barack Obama is trying to accomplish.  I am pretty sure, I no longer know.