April 13, 2013

"But I understand why my readers suspect me, and other pro-choice mainstream journalists, of being selective..."

"... of not wanting to cover the story because it showcased the ugliest possibilities of abortion rights. The truth is that most of us tend to be less interested in sick-making stories — if the sick-making was done by 'our side.'" 

Says Megan McArdle. She rejects the excuse that it's not a national issue — that murder is a matter for state law. I would say that there are plenty of general policy issues you can extract from that story — at least as many as we get from the Newtown murders and the George Zimmerman case (to name 2 stories that have received massive national press).

The linked piece dithers, but I think it's a confession that she just didn't want to have to think about it. It was squeamishness and a political commitment to abortion rights that she didn't want rumpled.

Let's talk about the morality of the seen and the unseen. This is a shallow morality that infects our lives. If the human entity is inside the womb, and it is cut into pieces that is one thing, but if it's "partially born" so that a nurse sees it clenching and unclenching its fists as it meets its demise, it's another. And if it slips entirely out, and everyone sees a living child and then the doctor severs its spine, then everyone is supposed to know it's murder. From the inside, these deaths are all the same. But no one sees from the inside of that now-dead brain. Why not shine a bright light on Kermit Gosnell and yell monster? Make it clear to everyone that you think he is so different from properly professional abortionists.

If you don't, you reveal that you have a nagging suspicion that he is not. And that's the one thing you don't want anyone to see.

IN THE COMMENTS: Matthew Sablan says:
The thing is, you don't even have to frame the story about abortion. I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.
I respond:
I agree that's the way those who support abortion rights should cover it. But why did they not jump at the opportunity to display so vividly that health care services to the poor (or to women) are not what they should be and no one cares?

They didn't want to risk that. There's a deep fear — true shame — about this other matter that I'm talking about. 

469 comments:

1 – 200 of 469   Newer›   Newest»
Matthew Sablan said...

The thing is, you don't even have to frame the story about abortion. I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.

Saint Croix said...

Bravo.

C Stanley said...

Yes, Matthew, but the "why" of that is still going to be uncomfortable for a lot of people.

I thought McCardle was among the more honest. The funniest were the news outlets that suddenly (three weeks into the trial, after public pressure mounted) published their first peice, asking "Why Isn't the Media Covering the Kermit Gosnell Trial?"

Inga said...

Matthew, exactly, where were the state inspectors? But abortion does need addressing.

C Stanley said...

Oh and of course there were the lefties who indignantly pointed out that the conservative media hadn't been on the case either. Hey, it wasn't just us!

Ann Althouse said...

"The thing is, you don't even have to frame the story about abortion. I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people."

I agree that's the way those who support abortion rights should cover it. But why did they not jump at the opportunity to display so vividly that health care services to the poor (or to women) are not what they should be and no one cares?

They didn't want to risk that. There's a deep fear -- true shame -- about this other matter that I'm talking about.

wyo sis said...

Big of her to "understand."

Saint Croix said...

Althouse amazes me with her intellectual honesty.

PianoLessons said...

It's so freaking easy to be a Catholic - forever the dogma is "Humans are biological creatures, sex is to procreate (pleasure is unimportant and a culturally, corpporate commodity - sell pleasure as if this is all that matters in humans)....

So we humans - like animals - can't control or cherry pick the biological results of our sexual unions...

This position MANY oppose (I get it) takes care of After Birth Live Abortions (Grosnell - horrific stuff). Designer embryos. Genetic manipulation. Abortion. Cloning. Eugenics. Birth control pills (tho the rhythm method was what they used widely before the pill - just ask my Mom who had ten children:-)

Sometimes it pays to just have a constant star.

I know many don't understand or even hate Catholicism but - even those have to give them a little credit for being very consistent and constant in their dogma.

And I am sure not a holy roller Catholic but I do admire their constant star on the issue of humans cherry picking and designing their own fetuses.

Unknown said...

When your entrenched political view meets reality and and that reality produced a glaring contradiction, you tend to avoid that as much as possible.

Ann Althouse said...

"I thought McCardle was among the more honest."

Yes, she performed her discomfort in stream-of-consciousness writing.

lincolntf said...

Whether useful idiots or willful eugenicists, all pro-abortion Americans are marching in lock step with Sanger's psychotic dreams of an all-white, all politically acceptable society. All the "women's autonomy" crap has been nothing but cover for the thousands of Kermit Gosnell's across the country, doing the job Liberals demand that someone does, reducing the amount of people nibbling at "their" pie.

C Stanley said...

There are lots of other framings, which will come streaming forth this week.

This case is like Katrina, there's something for everyone. So many people f*cked up on so many levels. Pick the ones that serve your political worldview and run with it.

wyo sis said...

They didn't jump at the " opportunity to display so vividly that health care services to the poor (or to women) are not what they should be and no one cares" because they don't think that. They don't care what the costs to women are unless the cost to women can be laid at the feet of conservatives.

Strelnikov said...

"If the human entity is inside the womb, and it is cut into pieces that is one thing, but if it's "partially born" so that a nurse sees it clenching and unclenching its fists as it meets its demise, its another. And if it slips entirely out, and everyone sees a living child and then the doctor severs its spine, them everyone is supposed to know it's murder." No, it isn't different: All three are murder. The fact that pro-choicers, such as you, continue to make bald, logic-defying, hair-splitting statements such as this illustrates the indefensible foundation on which your position rests. Your continued reliance on the physical position of the fetus re the womb is ridiculous and unsupportable.

Drago said...

Inga: "Matthew, exactly, where were the state inspectors?"

LOL

You know precisely where they were.

And why.

MayBee said...

Yes, you are right, Althouse. You are absolutely right.

Shouting Thomas said...

I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.

The word "most" here is an astonishing qualifier. If only a very few abortion providers are doing what Gosnell did, the carnage on a national scope is of a scale that is hard to imagine.

A sort of tacit admission that a holocaust of incredible dimensions is taking place.

Saint Croix said...

I agree that's the way those who support abortion rights should cover it. But why did they not jump at the opportunity to display so vividly that health care services to the poor (or to women) are not what they should be and no one cares?

They didn't want to risk that. There's a deep fear -- true shame -- about this other matter that I'm talking about.


Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes!

There are all kinds of ways to frame it. All kinds of issues to discuss. And yet they instinctively shy away.

I don't even know if many journalists are even aware of the Carhart opinions. I've met lawyers who have never heard of it.

I think these reporters are having trouble with this very basic fact:

It's a dead baby in an abortion clinic! And so their two segregated worlds--baby and fetus--collide.

And yet people who have read Carhart understand that this trial raises serious problems for our Supreme Court.

Unborn: It's a constitutional right to kill

Born: It's murder to kill

But what if you're both? What if you're born and unborn? Now it's half constitutional right, half murder prosecution. The baby is half-citizen and half-property. Our minds recoil. And the entire apparatus unravels.

Strelnikov said...

Also, this is not a failing of the state to protect women. The averted eyes here, which continue to look askance, are the logical extension of the pro-abortion position taken by the state itself. No interference is allowable, so none was undertaken. Gosnell is just one among many monsters acting with the belief that they are above the law. After all, they have been and are being told constantly that can not be interfered with, that they are on holy mission.

cubanbob said...

The thing is, you don't even have to frame the story about abortion. I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.

Really? How so? The end result is the same for the fetus.

Go to a critical care ICU. Find a clinically brain dead person. Shoot them. Then get arrested for murder. Nevermind that an eight week old fetus and certainly a twelve week has more neural activity than the hypothetical person in the ICU. Technically both are not viable outside their environment but one is still considered a human being but the other is not.

lincolntf said...

The pro-abortion cabal hates this case because it disproves their lies. They know they're lying. Nobody with half a brain doesn't consider a "fetus" alive in any other field. Veterinarians recognize undelivered young animals as viable entities, as do doctors wth humans. The babies don't become "un-alive" after you watch a PP video extolling the virtues of killing the kid you made.

pm317 said...

The liberal argument is if abortions are made illegal there will be back alley abortions and poor women will suffer. Even I fell for that argument. But abortion is still legal and liberals could not prevent a Gosnell and when Gosnell happened they would not bring it attention so another Gosnell would not happen in the future. Failure on multiple fronts. This is all on liberal media.

Drago said...

Strelnikov: "Your continued reliance on the physical position of the fetus re the womb is ridiculous and unsupportable."

Most of leftist/liberal thought is ridiculous and unsupportable.

Thus we require an ever increasing encroachment on free speech and what is considered "acceptable".

In the former Soviet Union you could be committed to an insane asylum for publicly advocating for increased freedom.

The leviathan state where any disagreement with state policy is met with violence/force is the inevitable result of increasing Liberal (not 19th century liberal) policy.

We are probably too far gone at this point to recover. We are past the tipping point. All that's left now is to see how long our previous economic and military prowess can be coasted upon until the house of cards fall in.

With a national debt at 100% of GDP and increasing by a Trillion a year, it won't be too far off.

rcocean said...

People don't want to tell the truth. Its all about Race, my friends. Change this Death Doc and his victims from Black to white, and the "interest" in the story skyrockets. How many blacks killed each other in NYC or DC so far this year? A lot. But its a non-story.

Reminds of 20 years ago. Some whitebread Senator's niece got killed in Manhattan Front page NYT, Time, Newsweek - "Crime out of control!". 10 black girls murdered that year for every Senators niece. Non-story.

rcocean said...

You can call out Liberal hypocrisy till the cows come home. They won't change. Force is necessary. Conservative will force them? LoL. Only if you stop Televising Baseball and Football. Or pay them to oppose liberals.

lincolntf said...

Let the Left continue to subsidize and promote the eradication of blacks, let them aid the myriad of leaders and countries that dedicate their lives and national honor to the eradication of all Jews, just make sure you call the Right "Nazis". Key to a 40 year career in the MSM.

Saint Croix said...

If only a very few abortion providers are doing what Gosnell did, the carnage on a national scope is of a scale that is hard to imagine.

According to the New York Times, there were roughly 1800 abortion clinics in the U.S. in 2000.

Roughly 1.5 million abortions every year.

Back of the envelope calculation...

Over 800 abortions a year in Gosnell's clinic.

He opened his clinic in 1979.

Strelnikov said...

While it is obvious that black victims cause the MSM to lose interest where the wrong cannot be laid at feet of "White America", in this instance it is clearly the urge to protect all aspects of abortion that is driving the non-coverage.

tiger said...

I'm surprised that McArdle is 'pro-choice'

Her economic/political writing has seemed right-of-center to me and I know that she follows Dave Rames' (ram-zees) evangelical methods of family budgeting.

The notion that this wasn't a national story - only a local murder trial - flys in the face of other 'local' murder trials like Jeffrey Dahmer and Zimmerman.

The 'pro-choice-as-long-as-that-choice-is-abortion' crowd just can't stomach to admit what happens in abortion clinics especially when 3rd tri-mester ones are performed.

McArdle as lost some of my respect.

sane_voter said...

Good thing guns were not in his clinic. Otherwise, imagine the carnage!

Paul Zrimsek said...

"It is funny how mortals always picture us [demons] as putting things into their minds: in reality our best work is done by keeping things out." -- C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters

Quayle said...

Did anyone ever consider that all abortion providers tend toward Gosnell level of callousness because the actual practice, whether legal or not, is a soul numbing, spiritually suicidal activity?

Shouting Thomas said...

According to the New York Times, there were roughly 1800 abortion clinics in the U.S. in 2000.

@Matthew Sablan... says "most" abortion doctors don't operate like Gosnell.

What percentage do operate like Gosnell. 1%?

If so, that equals 15,000 deliberately murdered babies per year.

Lydia said...

lincolntf said...
all pro-abortion Americans are marching in lock step with Sanger's psychotic dreams of an all-white, all politically acceptable society.

I don't think this is true for most pro-choice people.

And those who abort their babies because of abnormalities, for example, I think mainly do so because they personally can't face raising such a child and they convince themselves that they're doing it for the good of the baby and/or their family. This may account for why they often do things like request a footprint of the aborted baby.

That sounds crazy on the face of it, but I think it reflects the truth of Althouse's comment about the deep-down "true shame" surrounding the decision to abort.

Methadras said...

Matthew Sablan said...

The thing is, you don't even have to frame the story about abortion. I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.


What is it with you Matthew? Do you approach every topic with such spineless and wet noodled ease? When are you going to realize that this is what abortion is. This is the mantra of what has been indoctrinated as an extension of what happens. Yet, you overlook the obvious and try to dissuade the reader of your comments, that oh, this man is a monster. Yes, but he is also an admitted abortionist and that this is the outcome of such a horrific act.

All the while you try to couch it as a story of the state not protecting it's people. Since when can it even do that as long as the abomination of law known as Roe v. Wade is allowed to stand as a hindrance to that protection. Stop deluding yourself. This doesn't require nuance. See it for what it is, genocidal murder in the ever increasing American holocaust that the left has perpetuated as a sacrifice of our children to promote their ideology of death.

rhhardin said...

Society takes an interest owing to cuteness and visibility.

It's a nice bright line.

Nothing much changes in the baby across the line, except that it's taken by society as a person.

Taken as.

It's in a lot of respects not a person, and those are then overlooked.

A parallel. Your toddler wants to pay for the restaurant meal. You give him the money and he gives it to the cashier. Did he pay for the meal?

Not fully. But you take him as having paid for the meal, act as if he'd paid for the meal, and if you keep doing that, he learns what paying for the meal is and goes with.

If you take a child as a person and act that way, he becomes a person as he grows into it.

There's no bright line on personhood. There's a bright line on birth, and when taking-as begins.

The right to life movement will always, always, try to move back the cuteness and visibility stage before birth, so as to engage society's instinct on that.

But society cannot take-as before birth, so it's in that respect empty and dogmatic.

Jabes on freedom:

Freedom awakens gradually as we become aware of our ties, like the sleeper of his senses. Then finally our actions have a name.

Steve Koch said...

So one second before birth it is ok to kill the baby but one second after birth is murder? Haha, how illogical and stupid is that? Get a clue Althouse, they are both murders.

lincolntf said...

The MSM black out had less to do with the horrors in Gosnell's lab than the fact that Obama would make those horrors legal, and has tried to pass legislation to that effect. Its not the dirty tables, idiots, it's the dead Americans lying on them.

Quayle said...

The great irony, of course, is that ancient civilizations were known to sacrifice their children on alters to appease the Gods of prosperity and the driver of familial prosperity: fertility.

We think we're so advanced and so much smarter, but we're no different that those 'barbaric' societies.

We're still sacrificing our children on an alter to gain prosperity.

Matthew Sablan said...

"When are you going to realize that this is what abortion is. This is the mantra of what has been indoctrinated as an extension of what happens. Yet, you overlook the obvious and try to dissuade the reader of your comments, that oh, this man is a monster. Yes, but he is also an admitted abortionist and that this is the outcome of such a horrific act."

-- The man -is- a monster. But, abortion is going to remain legal for, at least, the foreseeable future. We can continue to point out the simple fact everyone knows: Gosnell is a madman and vile.

Where does that get us in a national discussion?

rcocean said...

"I'm surprised that McArdle is 'pro-choice' "

Lol! Yes, other than the fact that she writes for liberal publications, and she's "Libertarian" on economics and liberal on everything else, its just shocking that she follows 90% of the MSM.

BTW, I always thought Bill Maher was conservative based on his support for lower capital gains taxes. Imagine my surprise when he attacked Rush Limbaugh!

Shouting Thomas said...

We're giving women what they want.

This, not all the high falutin' intellectual arguments, is what we are up against.

We imbue women with superior moral authority. Thus, what they want is always morally correct.

The is the inevitable end of the corrupt religion of feminism.

Saint Croix said...

McCardle writes this:

I don't support late-term abortions of viable infants unless the mother's life is in danger.

Where this path takes you is to be a hostile foe of Roe v. Wade. Because viable infants are killed all the time under Roe v. Wade. The Guttmacher Institute (which is the research arm of Planned Parenthood) claims that 1.5% of abortions happen after 22 weeks. That's roughly 900,000 abortions that upset Megan McCardle. Those are 900,000 abortions that she does not want to think about.

It's simply unacceptable to say that the Supreme Court is 98.5% correct. That translates into mass murder. You can't applaud the abortions that (you think) the Supreme Court got right, when they might have accidentally killed hundreds of thousands of babies.

The problem with the Supreme Court's work is that even they do not like the viability doctrine, which abortion doctors routinely ignore all the time.

The baby whose murder is described in Carhart? 26 weeks. Utterly viable. But she had Down's syndrome, so she was decapitated outside the birth canal.

BaltoHvar said...

Pro-Choicers (not the squishees) instinctively know that on this question, Government intervention/regulation will result in less of what THEY demand. Look at what THEY have done with “Gun Control” and “Universal Health Care”! They rely on regulation to promote their morally questionable goals. They know that.

Gosnell is a Pro-Choice Chinese Finger Cuff; the harder they try to pull away, the tighter the cuff becomes. They demanded no oversight, and Gosnell is the result. I wager that they fear there will be more discoveries. Live by the anecdote (Newtown, etc.) DIE by the anecdote (Gosnell).

DADvocate said...

Good for McArdle for rejecting the murder excuse. Goto to CNN.com and search for "Arias" as in Jodie Arias and you get 539 hits. Search for "Gosnell" and you get 38 hits and at least 2 of those are actually for "gospel."

The Gosnell murder story doesn't promote the left wing narrative and potentially threatens it. Were our left-wing journalists not so intellectually dishonest and agenda driven, they could face and write about Gosnell and such things. But, they are dishonest and agenda driven and fear what they seen in themselves.

Methadras said...

Matthew Sablan said...

"When are you going to realize that this is what abortion is. This is the mantra of what has been indoctrinated as an extension of what happens. Yet, you overlook the obvious and try to dissuade the reader of your comments, that oh, this man is a monster. Yes, but he is also an admitted abortionist and that this is the outcome of such a horrific act."

-- The man -is- a monster. But, abortion is going to remain legal for, at least, the foreseeable future. We can continue to point out the simple fact everyone knows: Gosnell is a madman and vile.

Where does that get us in a national discussion?


Yes, abortion is going remain legal as long as you make remarks in a collective jog around the issue. Gosnell is a direct product of Roe v. Wade and I can assure you he isn't the only one. That's where the national discussion needs to go. You know it. I know it. Stop the delusion.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Gosnell is a direct product of Roe v. Wade and I can assure you he isn't the only one. That's where the national discussion needs to go. You know it. I know it."

-- And how do you plan to get there by simply beating a dead horse about how bad abortion is? If you really want to bring the conversation there, get people to face the reality that the state is fundamentally flawed in its approach. You won't get there if you fall for the bait of simply saying: "Gosnell is bad, therefore, abortion is bad."

Matthew Sablan said...

"Settle down and argue the position that in order for abortion to remain legal, we're just going to have to tolerate the likes of a small percentage operating like dr. gosnell"

-- You make that sound ridiculous, but it is the basis of a lot of the risks/rewards we place. For example, to allow people to have cars, we have to accept that a small percentage of people will be killed by drunk drivers a year or deliberate hit-and-runs.

To accept that we're allowed to have personal firearms means some people will be shot (on purpose with legal justification or not, accidentally, etc.)

Forcing the discussion to what risk tolerance the country has an abortion-related horrors is actually a real discussion that is worth having.

Shouting Thomas said...

This is just one of the first cracks developing in the facade of the feminist/gay/abortion religion of the secular left.

I'm tired of Althouse's pretense that this is an intellectual, legalistic battle.

It's a religious war.

jr565 said...

Let's talk about the morality of the seen and the unseen. This is a shallow morality that infects our lives. If the human entity is inside the womb, and it is cut into pieces that is one thing, but if it's "partially born" so that a nurse sees it clenching and unclenching its fists as it meets its demise, it's another. And if it slips entirely out, and everyone sees a living child and then the doctor severs its spine, then everyone is supposed to know it's murder. From the inside, these deaths are all the same. But no one sees from the inside of that now-dead brain. Why not shine a bright light on Kermit Gosnell and yell monster? Make it clear to everyone that you think he is so different from properly professional abortionists.

If you don't, you reveal that you have a nagging suspicion that he is not. And that's the one thing you don't want anyone to see.


But how different is that than saying that you think it's murder but should be legal anyway?

By the way, this bit about the seen and the unseen reminds me a lot of the climactic scene at the top of the ferris wheel in The Third man (a movie about the banality of evil).

Martins and Lime (the villain) are looking down at the people below who look like little dots below they are so high up.
Lime says:
"Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you 20,000 pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?"
The banality of evil. If you view them as dots, then it's merely stopping a dot from moving, not killing a person. And who cares about dots that are not movign. THey're just dots. Same thing with abortion. Just because you can't see the baby being chopped up doesn't mean that it isn't. If it's just a clump of cells, then it's like snuffing out a dot.

Harry Lime was kind of a monster. Prochoicers make the exact same argument every day. What does that make them?

Shana said...

"Pro-choicers support quality women's health care, and are the enemies of those who force women into underground clinics like Gosnell's."

This is how Amanda Marcotte is rationalizing to herself on Twitter.

CEO-MMP said...

Shouting Thomas, could you please define 'religious war'? Thanks.

PianoLessons said...

Boy Althouse - Lots of anti-choice folks posting like monkeys on a cupcake but where is your usual brigade of snarky, pro-choice voices?

A conspicuous absence - let's blame it on a Saturday afternoon. They will surely pipe up soon?

Inga said...

Piano Lessons, obviously you didn't read the abortion thread from yesterday that is over 500 comments.

CEO-MMP said...

Inga said...

Piano Lessons, obviously you didn't read the abortion thread from yesterday that is over 500 comments.


But easily half of those posts were you alternating between blaming libertarians for the lack of inspections, just the lack of inspections, and of course attacking those who disagreed with you.

Deflect and derail, right Ings?

Shana said...

Speaking of LeRoy Carhart: he killed a couple of women himself. Such a charming profession. But he's a hero! The Sundance Film Festival loves him.

http://m.spectator.org/169539/show/370379366bd05816ea2a929b8ea454b7/?

Shouting Thomas said...

Shouting Thomas, could you please define 'religious war'? Thanks.

A religious war is a violent conflict based on theological disagreement. Proper sexual conduct, and the proper role of men and women has always been one of the central tenets of religion.

The war that is slowly building into an international inferno is the secular West with its feminist/gay/abortion religion, versus the rest of the world which continues to honor the traditional religions.

Chip Ahoy said...

But I understand... suspect... journalists... selective...

Because ya ahhhh, Blanch, ya ahhhh.

Inga said...

Much of it was an abortion discussion CEO, inbetween poo flinging, some very very good stuff in there from St. Croix and CStanley.

Methadras said...

Matthew Sablan said...

"Gosnell is a direct product of Roe v. Wade and I can assure you he isn't the only one. That's where the national discussion needs to go. You know it. I know it."

-- And how do you plan to get there by simply beating a dead horse about how bad abortion is? If you really want to bring the conversation there, get people to face the reality that the state is fundamentally flawed in its approach. You won't get there if you fall for the bait of simply saying: "Gosnell is bad, therefore, abortion is bad."


No, you little fool. I never made the claim that Gosnell was bad therefore abortion is bad. Abortion is bad, therefore it allows Gosnell to be bad. That is the reality of it. Since the MSM refuses to cover this story in any meangingul way and will forced to it kicking and screaming, then the dead horse is really in their bed, not ours. Their simple ability to ignore a story of this nature implies that there is approval of abortion and there is nothing to see here folks. You on the other hand have offered zero solution to the problem and why is that? Because you believe no solution exists. A pragmatic point of view in this case is no point of view. Stop being squishy, oh wait...

CEO-MMP said...

Inga said...

Much of it was an abortion discussion CEO, inbetween poo flinging, some very very good stuff in there from St. Croix and CStanley.


I read it. For every good post there were about 8 attacking misleading Inga posts.

Inga said...

Whom I agreed with, BTW.

jr565 said...

Gun control freaks like Obama have been using the death of children, cynically I might add, to push gun control.
Obama even had this to say:

“If there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try".

He also said:
"We have to examine ourselves in our hearts and ask yourselves: What is important? If parents and teachers, police officers and pastors, if hunters and sportsmen, if responsible gun owners, if Americans of every background stand up and say, enough, we’ve suffered too much pain and care too much about our children to allow this to continue, then change will — change will come.”


Pro lifers should use those exact quotes and merely replace the gun control bit with the abortion bit. Is it cynical as hell. Sure, but what's good for the goose, as they say.

And besides. How many shootings of schools are there per year, versus how many abortions? If we really are out to protect kids, dealing with a policy that says it's a womans choice to kill her kids might be a good place to start. If even ONE of those abortions could have been prevented we have to do something.

Saint Croix said...

For example, to allow people to have cars, we have to accept that a small percentage of people will be killed by drunk drivers a year or deliberate hit-and-runs.

Oh my God, Matt, you know those are crimes, right?

We allow cars even if we know that a small percentage of people will die in car wrecks.

But that's not quite the same thing as saying that drunk driving is a constitutional right, and that we just have to accept all those dead people.

You are making a Mao argument. He killed a small percentage of Chinese. We got a billion Chinese, what does it matter if a small percentage are killed?

It's insanity. You kill one baby, you're a murderer. What do statistics have to do with the vicious stabbing?

CEO-MMP said...

Okay ST, thanks. I don't know as I'd use the word religious, then again I'm not.

I was going to say "cultural" but I suppose at the root culture would go end up at a judeo-christian end.

Matthew Sablan said...

"You on the other hand have offered zero solution to the problem and why is that? Because you believe no solution exists. A pragmatic point of view in this case is no point of view."

-- To what problem? To the problem of abortion existing? In an ideal world, we wouldn't need abortions. This isn't an ideal world.

To the problem of Gosnell, in particular? Lots of people in oversight roles should be losing jobs and new oversight authority should be handed down, and he should have the book thrown at him.

The two problems are in no way inter-related when it comes to proposing solutions.

lincolntf said...

Religion has nothing to do with my opposition to the Liiberal position on abortion. Americans have the right to life, no Dr. Gosnell or Planned Parenthood shitbag can take it away. Look it up, it's on some old paper somewhere.

Matthew Sablan said...

"We allow cars even if we know that a small percentage of people will die in car wrecks.

But that's not quite the same thing as saying that drunk driving is a constitutional right, and that we just have to accept all those dead people."

-- No; we acknowledge some things are rights/privileges/simply not inherently able to legislated and are unwilling to completely ban activities that could lead to things. Instead, we criminalize the misuse of those things.

Shouting Thomas said...

Look it up, it's on some old paper somewhere.

That "old paper" says something about those rights deriving from the Creator, doesn't it?

edutcher said...

I understand Ms McArdle's reaction. After the 5th Ranger Battalion led the citizens of Buchenwald, Germany through the death camp, the town burgomeister and his wife went home and hanged themselves.

This is one of those rubicon moments we seem to be having fairly frequently. Just as 9/11 changed a lot of minds about a vigorous military policy and the '08 crash brought a lot of people around to the idea of fiscal responsibility (including Ann IIRC), so we have this with regard to abortion.

I have a feeling this is only the beginning of the chickens coming home for the hippie crowd.

Inga said...

Matthew, exactly, where were the state inspectors?

This is a black doctor in the Philadelphia of the Street brothers.

Get real.

PS Shout is right about a religious war.

Methadras said...

Matthew Sablan said...

-- You make that sound ridiculous, but it is the basis of a lot of the risks/rewards we place. For example, to allow people to have cars, we have to accept that a small percentage of people will be killed by drunk drivers a year or deliberate hit-and-runs.

To accept that we're allowed to have personal firearms means some people will be shot (on purpose with legal justification or not, accidentally, etc.)

Forcing the discussion to what risk tolerance the country has an abortion-related horrors is actually a real discussion that is worth having.


More deflection. This is the risk of living. Abortion doesn't even allow that. 60 million abortions, aka dead Americans who never had a say so vs. the living who got a chance to do it and went through life with the risk that death hung on the balance. Apples oranges.

Besides, what is the risk tolerance to those that never had a chance to take the risk? Your collective and selective musings ring through that of a coward.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Oh what bullshit. Her waffling is understandable, and not made of the political milquetoastiness of dames like Althouse - who seeks controversy for its own sake without caring to, or perhaps deliberately avoiding, making a point.

Anyway, pretending that visual sensitivity is a moral issue is the stupidest dodge I've heard, well, unfortunately all week. How many medical and surgical documentaries are prefaced with the disclaimer: "This show contains scenes that some viewers may find disturbing. Viewer discretion advised." For christ's sake, you can't even show sex without a disclaimer! Is sex really all that scary to most Americans, as Puritan as they are? No, they just have a problem with realistic depictions of anything.

"Up your game," or whatever you say. Just because McArdle's is afraid of buying into the idea that depicting abortion in any form is too visually moralizing to take part in, doesn't mean it is -- the horrifying and gruesome Gosnell murders notwithstanding. McArdle's not a very deep thinker, period, and a total asskiss. Linking to her thoughts on this is as much an exercise in obfuscation as saying that all right-wingers are the sort of racists that Cedarford is and Governor Wallace was.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Matthew, exactly, where were the state inspectors?"

-- Per the Grand Jury report, cowed by pressure from a pro-choice government, inherent government laziness and bureaucracy, and not wanting to deal with difficult situations.

They were out to lunch. Taking a powder. Knocking off early.

The state failed.

jr565 said...

Inga asked:
where were the state inspectors?

Blocked by Planned Parenthood perhaps?

http://clinicquotes.com/abortion-clinic-health-regulations-and-pro-choice-opposition/

Search your heart, you know it to be true.

So, quit trying to pass the buck.

CEO-MMP said...

Matthew Sablan said...

"Gosnell is a direct product of Roe v. Wade and I can assure you he isn't the only one. That's where the national discussion needs to go. You know it. I know it."

-- And how do you plan to get there by simply beating a dead horse about how bad abortion is? If you really want to bring the conversation there, get people to face the reality that the state is fundamentally flawed in its approach. You won't get there if you fall for the bait of simply saying: "Gosnell is bad, therefore, abortion is bad."



Dead horse? For fuck's sake, show the fucking pictures of this cat's sicko clip joint! It looks like a low budget horror movie set. Every time abortion is brought up by the beautiful people, pictures of Gosnell's clinic need to be draped in front of the camera.

It's that relentless drumbeat of bullshit that gets the liberals as far as they go.

ST's right, it's a war. Fight it or go sit down and shut up and leave it to those with the stomach for it.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The war that is slowly building into an international inferno is the secular West with its feminist/gay/abortion religion, versus the rest of the world which continues to honor the traditional religions.

I hope it isn't long until Shrieking Thomas is invited to pay homage to his neighbor's daughter's clitoridectomy. What a tool.

CEO-MMP said...

And I'm not even particularly pro-life. But there's a big difference between safe, legal and rare and Obama's world where living babies have sharp blades plunged into their necks to stifle their cries.

Fuck.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

But there's a big difference between safe, legal and rare and Obama's world where living babies have sharp blades plunged into their necks to stifle their cries.

Fuck.


Obama had as much to do with this as Reagan had to do with the Beirut embassy bombing. Get a grip.

Methadras said...

Matthew Sablan said...

-- To what problem? To the problem of abortion existing? In an ideal world, we wouldn't need abortions. This isn't an ideal world.


Great, a plea for the ideal. Any other brilliances you want to shine on us?

To the problem of Gosnell, in particular? Lots of people in oversight roles should be losing jobs and new oversight authority should be handed down, and he should have the book thrown at him.

The two problems are in no way inter-related when it comes to proposing solutions.


Great, a plea for a new bureaucracy of via musical chairs. All the while the typical political ass covering ensues hence deriving nothing. Any other brilliant ideas? I think you are fresh out. That must really be a nice, squeaky clean, shiny bubble you live in Matthew.

CEO-MMP said...

Ritmo, is there anyone you like?

BTW, how's the sun deficit these days?

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard,

You know, your posts virtually reek of testosterone.

You're a savage, evil tempered male. You're struggling internally to reconcile the fierce feminist/gay/abortion indoctrination you received in the school system.

Until you reconcile this dilemma, you will continue to be a complete savage.

I can help you to shed this stupid indoctrination that enslaves you, or if you find me too offensive, I can direct your to others who can help you.

You're enslavement to the indoctrination is pathetic.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Dead horse? For fuck's sake, show the fucking pictures of this cat's sicko clip joint! It looks like a low budget horror movie set. Every time abortion is brought up by the beautiful people, pictures of Gosnell's clinic need to be draped in front of the camera."

-- Why? Whenever we have a gun debate, should we show pictures of the dead bodies from school shootings? Or, is this a case where emotional appeals via jarring photos is acceptable?

Gosnell is as much an abomination as a mass shooter; he is not the status quo. What he did is horrible; relying on people to think that what he did is normal is a poor argument tactic because what he did wasn't normal.

Shouting Thomas said...

I really feel for you, Ritmo.

The young men have been subjected to a horrific, fierce indoctrination.

You're one of the worst cases I've ever encountered.

Inga said...

Why did Tom Ridge stop inspections? How can a Republican governor stop inspections on abortion clinics? Where we're HIS principles? I'm not giving any Pro Choice group a pass either.

jr565 said...

You make that sound ridiculous, but it is the basis of a lot of the risks/rewards we place. For example, to allow people to have cars, we have to accept that a small percentage of people will be killed by drunk drivers a year or deliberate hit-and-runs.


We allow people to have abortions. What percentage of people who are aborted will be killed by those who abort them? Er, all of them?
So, not really sure how this is comparable to drunk driving vs driving. Yes, there are some deaths in the case of drunk driving but it's not as if drunk driving is the protected policy. And usually when someone kills someone while driving drunk they are still punished for drunk driving. It's not as if they have a get out of jail free card for drunk driving.

CEO-MMP said...

Ritmo, you do remember one of the few times Obama didn't vote "present" was a vote in favor of partial birth abortion, right?

My grip is fine, thanks for asking though.

Shouting Thomas said...

I'm not giving the women who patronized this abbatoir a pass either.

They committed the same sin Dr. Gosnell committed.

CEO-MMP said...


-- Why? Whenever we have a gun debate, should we show pictures of the dead bodies from school shootings? Or, is this a case where emotional appeals via jarring photos is acceptable?



Do you actually watch the news/read news web sites and blogs? That's exactly what happens and it's why 60% of women favor gun control.


O Ritmo Segundo said...

I can help you to shed this stupid indoctrination that enslaves you, or if you find me too offensive, I can direct your to others who can help you.

No thanks, Preacher Thomas. As we said, your age doesn't make you wise, especially in your case.

You're enslavement to the indoctrination is pathetic.

Count me as also being "enslaved" to the rules of grammar.

Anyway, whenever you post this shit, I'm reminded of the radicals who do vandalism like this.

Thanks for using the term "retard" before pretending that your motives are selfless and genuine.

lincolntf said...

Like I said, it's not about Religion. Even if I was a Stone-Age animist with a bone through my nose I'd know that killing babies wasn't exactly the path to a better society. Liberals know it too, so they create"women's autonomy" fictions to persuade the idiot masses into thinking abortion is a social good. Sick people with sick aims.

jr565 said...

O Ritmo wrote:
Obama had as much to do with this as Reagan had to do with the Beirut embassy bombing. Get a grip.
With this particular case, or with the idea that babies born can still be "aborted" even while outside the womb?

He did vote against the Born Alive Act 4 times as a senator. Sounds like this kind of abortion is right up his alley.

Shouting Thomas said...

Thanks for using the term "retard" before pretending that your motives are selfless and genuine.

I've never pretended any such thing.

C Stanley said...

Obama wasn't directly responsible but he should answer for his opposition to born alive protections.

"Mr. President, on the floor of the Illinois Senate in 2002 you said that you believed that physicians would do their sworn duty and provide care for infants born alice in a botched abortion, withput a requirement for a second medical opinion. Do you still stand by that opinion?"

C'mon, WH press corps, someone has to grow a pair. Jake Tapper, are you game?

CEO-MMP said...

Why did Tom Ridge stop inspections? How can a Republican governor stop inspections on abortion clinics? Where we're HIS principles? I'm not giving any Pro Choice group a pass either.


Inga, when did inspections stop? When was Tom Ridge governor of PA?

Be careful....

dreams said...

"And if it slips entirely out, and everyone sees a living child and then the doctor severs its spine, then everyone is supposed to know it's murder. From the inside, these deaths are all the same. But no one sees from the inside of that now-dead brain. Why not shine a bright light on Kermit Gosnell and yell monster? Make it clear to everyone that you think he is so different from properly professional abortionists."

When that bright light is shined on Gosnell, it also shines a bright light on what has happened to those babies who haven't slipped entirely out. Inside or outside the result is the same, death.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Do you actually watch the news/read news web sites and blogs? That's exactly what happens and it's why 60% of women favor gun control."

-- Yeah, I do. And that's sort of the point. There's some serious progress that could be made to get society into a better position where abortions are safer and rarer. For pro-life people, that's a chance that will be blown if a go-big strategy is done to get a complete end to abortion.

I don't like the idea of abortion; but I also recognize that as a society, it is not something we can simply strike at a whim. It will take a long time of renegotiating and legislating, and we may ultimately decide a complete ban is a bad idea (which it may very well be.) But, right now, a complete ban is not going to work (and probably wouldn't be good policy.)

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Ritmo, you do remember one of the few times Obama didn't vote "present" was a vote in favor of partial birth abortion, right?

My grip is fine, thanks for asking though.


I didn't mean fine enough to choke off the circulation to whichever body part you're squeezing onto for dear life, but whatever.

Anyway, there's no inconsistency between allowing medical procedures that protect the life or wishes of a mother from danger while before delivering a congenitally defected headless fetus and these criminal events. Just because you don't realize them, doesn't mean that others don't, either. It's just means you're being a partisan ideologue.

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard's fierce artillery barrages aimed in every direction are the key to understanding him.

He doesn't have a clue about what's making him furious and savage.

It's the indoctrination in the feminist/gay/abortion religion, Ritmo.

It violates your nature. Your reeking testosterone male self.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

"Thanks for using the term "retard" before pretending that your motives are selfless and genuine."

I've never pretended any such thing.


You certainly act like you do, but I accept your admission that you're really just a myopic and greedy turd at face value. Those pretenders in the robes and collars must have taught you well. But at least you're ecumenical about the supposed virtue of religious intolerance.

As I said, enjoy the next clitoridectomy. Will you be bringing treats?

Inga said...

"There's some serious progress that could be made to get society into a better position where abortions are safer and rarer. For pro-life people, that's a chance that will be blown if a go-big strategy is done to get a complete end to abortion."

I don't like the idea of abortion; but I also recognize that as a society, it is not something we can simply strike at a whim. It will take a long time of renegotiating and legislating, and we may ultimately decide a complete ban is a bad idea (which it may very well be.) But, right now, a complete ban is not going to work (and probably wouldn't be good policy.)"

4/13/13, 7:41 PM

YES, thank you Matthew Sablan!

Shouting Thomas said...

Thanks for illustrating the senseless, wild savagery the indoctrination has imposed on you, Ritmo the Retard.

You are a monument to blind stupidity.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

It violates your nature. Your reeking testosterone male self.

Lol. Hilarious that Shrieking brings out the "You're too chauvinistic for me!" guns. Hilarious!

What a sensitive man. With the soul of a turtle.

Shouting Thomas said...

You can see in the behavior of Ritmo the savage decadence and stupidity the feminist/gay/abortion religion is creating in young men.

The contradictions are impossible to sustain.

wyo sis said...

remember when we used to say "How could that have happened?" about Pol Pot or Mao or Stalin or Hitler?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Don't forget the communists, Shrieking! And the blacks! And the gypsies and foreigners! No "feminist/gay/abortionist" alliance without lumping in all those undesirables, as well.

CEO-MMP said...

In 2001, Illinois State Senator Patrick O'Malley discovered that a procedure was being performed at hospitals in Illinois where labor was induced on a mother for the purposes of an abortion. Children who survived this procedure were taken to another room and left unattended until passing. In response to this practice, he introduced three pieces of legislation dealing with born children:

SB1093 said that if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present "to assess the child's viability and provide medical care"
SB1094 gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child's rights
SB1095 simply said a baby alive after "complete expulsion or extraction from its mother" would be considered a " 'person,' 'human being,' 'child' and 'individual' "

The only member to oppose the legislation in committee and the only member to speak against them was State Senator Barack Obama.

Be a little honest, Ritmo.

Shouting Thomas said...

wyo sis,

In this case, the problem is that abortion is something that women want.

We have been ferociously indoctrinated for my entire lifetime in the feminist belief that women are moral exemplars.

Thus, anything they want is morally sanctioned.

JL said...

Politicians cravenly fear the pro-choice zealots and their supporters in the media. Why would any politician allow abortion clinics to run for years w/o regulations? Because they fear push-back from the pro-choice lobby. Politicians, especially those in the GOP, are savaged in the media if they are seen as attempting to restrict women's access to abortion. The GOP were so afraid of the "war on woman" bullshit in the last election, they largely avoided making abortion an issue.

As for the Dems who are in favor of allowing babies to die if they are born alive during a botched abortion-- like our President -- I doubt they have the courage to really look at the horror they are condoning. How would they be able to sleep at night if they did?

Our so-called leaders are cowards; afraid of a media that has tunnel vision when it comes to the abortion issue-- as McArdle admits, ardent pro-choicers do not want to visit the ugly place where unrestricted abortion leads.

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard responds with the preprogrammed taunt of the indoctrination.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Right on time. Wyo brought the communists into it.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Tell me the AMA's and the ACOG's stance on late-term abortions and you'll then be able to just my honesty for what it is, CEO.

jr565 said...

Back when the Born Alive Bill was being discussed there was this exchange between Barack and Senator O'mAlley who was sponsoring the bill


OBAMA: Yeah. Just along the same lines. Obviously, this is an issue that we’ve debated extensively both in committee an on the floor so I — you know, I don’t want to belabor it. But I did want to point out, as I understood it, during the course of the discussion in committee, one of the things that we were concerned about, or at least I expressed some concern about, was what impact this would have with respect to the relationship between the doctor and the patient and what liabilities the doctor might have in this situation. So, can you just describe for me, under this legislation, what’s going to be required for a doctor to meet the requirements you’ve set forth?

SENATOR O’MALLEY: First of all, there is established, under this legislation, that a child born under such circumstances would receive all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice, and that’s as defined, of course, by the … practice of medicine in the community where this would occur. It also requires, in two instances, that … an attending physician be brought in to assist and advise with respect to the issue of viability and, in particular, where … there’s a suspicion on behalf of the physician that the child … may be [viable,] … the attending physician would make that determination as to whether that would be the case…. The other one is where the child is actually born alive … in which case, then, the physician would call as soon as practically possible for a second physician to come in and determine the viability.

SENATOR OBAMA: So — and again, I’m — I’m not going to prolong this, but I just want to be clear because I think this was the source of the objections of the Medical Society. As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child — however way you want to describe it — is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that it’s nonviable but there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct?

Barack helped kill off the bill that even NARAL ended up supporting. He's full on supportive of infanticide.

CEO-MMP said...

Chill out, Ritmo. That imagery has been going on for a couple of days.

C'mon man--take your nose out of the air and the stick out of your ass.

I should think you'd be happy--ST's saying your problem is an overload of testosterone. In this day and age, that's a rare thing. You must not eat soy.

wyo sis said...

Right on time Ritmo brought stupidity into it. (Citing history is "not fair" (stamps his little feet))

If we are forced to recognize Gosnell as a murderer. As he has always been. Then how can we stand around and stroke our chins and debate about the right time to end it. The right time is long past.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I should think you'd be happy--ST's saying your problem is an overload of testosterone. In this day and age, that's a rare thing. You must not eat soy.

Every ounce of what little intelligence ST has is directed toward his chest-beating obsession with proclaiming his silly self as more important than me, so to see him go on with the newest theory of what makes me so supposedly inferior to him - i.e. TOO MUCH testosterone - is too hilarious for words. Yes.

If he were worth taking seriously or even paying attention to, I would have laughed harder. But it's a minor improvement, much like a terminal Alzheimer's patient remembering the name of a son that he forgot the day before. Anomalous, but still unmistakenly Shouting Thomas in its underlying incoherence.

rcocean said...

The Weirdness of Liberalism. Capital punishment for a serial killer, who tortured and raped 12 women? Liberal reaction: "Heavens forbid! Murder by the state! Tears for the Killer, outrage at thoughts of his death! Candlelight vigils."

Some abortion doc who killed 12 babies and a couple patients? Liberal shrugs. "Nothing to see here. Can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs..."

Shouting Thomas said...

Yes, it is the testosterone.

Ritmo the Retard, as you can tell by his use of language, is at heart about as wild an old fashioned male chauvinist pig as it is possible to be.

The savage fury he displays in his posts is the result of his attempt to pervert his own nature to attempt to be in compliance with the orthodox indoctrination he received in school.

dreams said...

We share in the delight of young married happy mothers to be who are pregnant with their first babies but then we pretend that those women who experience an unwanted pregnancy, that their babies aren't babies until they slip entirely out. That seems to me to be cognitive dissonance.

JL said...

They didn't want to risk that. There's a deep fear — true shame — about this other matter that I'm talking about. 

Agreed. There is tacit and sometimes outright approval of what Gosnell was doing from some abortion supporters. They should be ashamed.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

If we are forced to recognize Gosnell as a murderer.

What "force"? In what way was that ever contested?

Geez, wyo. If I want to hear a mouse roaring I'd goad Thomas more. Not that he isn't obsessed enough with me already, though.

CEO-MMP said...

That's the beauty of it, Ritmo. You actually make me laugh. Well, not laugh maybe, but smirk and chuckle.

Shouting Thomas said...

The abortion debacle, just as predicted, is hollowing us all out morally.

Methadras said...

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard,

You know, your posts virtually reek of testosterone.


How so? Does he ingest it, inject it, or bath in it? It's the only thing I can think of on how it even comes anywhere near his body. Yeesh.

Renee said...



He's being prosecuted up the law, so why does it have to be in the media all over the place. It isn't like justice isn't happening.

The average media consumer doesn't like to hear about abortions, unless they get to hear the details about the sex or child abductions involved. Usually cutting out a fetus for the purpose of keeping it as a live baby does well in the news.

People watch Nancy Grace and her coverage of Jodi Arias, all the time. It's annoying.

I'm pro-life and all, and pretty strongly on that issue. How can anyone be upset with Gosnell's practice, what do people think abortion is anyways? Either you're prochoice and don't care as long as it is done in a sterile environment, or you're pro-life and you try to reach out to pregnant women in need so they don't have to kill their unborn baby as a last resort of desperate measures. .

Shouting Thomas said...

What about the women who patronized Gosnell?

Why is everybody giving them a pass?

wyo sis said...

What is this if not a time to force people to confront their insane double standard. They (you) are resisting it because it's finally going to be impossible to maintain the fiction that it's anything else.

m stone said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
CEO-MMP said...

Because, Renee, people don't often get the chance to see images of baby's bodies stacked in multiple fridges, exam tables coated in old blood and so forth.

It's a teachable moment. That's why it should be covered.

This guy was white and voted republican, it would be all over the news.

rcocean said...

Never trust a liberal. One minute - zero population growth. 200 million Americans too many. 10 years later - open borders, 400 million Americans A-OK, as long as there not white.

One minute - war Bad. "Johnny got his gun". Next minute: Hitler bad. War to the knife. Burn those Nazi babies. Next minute: War Bad. Hiroshima Bad. America the guilty. Next Minute: ???

pigpaws said...

It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.

Oh just you wait until the state has all of us under their health taking thumb. Superior bureaucrats, who can give a f*ck less unless it is more pension benefits for them.

Inga said...

Renee, he aborted then killed a six pound baby. Even many pro choice people know this is murder. It's not run of the mill abortion.

edutcher said...

Inga said...

Why did Tom Ridge stop inspections? How can a Republican governor stop inspections on abortion clinics? Where we're HIS principles? I'm not giving any Pro Choice group a pass either.

Yeah, right, but you want to do all your shrieking at a Republican.

As I say, the Democrats have run Philadelphia for 61 years and black Democrats have run it for the last half.

Why not ask the same questions of Willie Wilson Goode, John Street, or Michael Nutter? Not to mention the Demos' perennial Veep contender, Fast Eddie Rendell?

CEO-MMP said...

Shouting Thomas said...

What about the women who patronized Gosnell?

Why is everybody giving them a pass?


Because by all accounts they were mostly just poor and stupid and scared. This guy was a rich doctor. He knew better.

m stone said...

Abortion is bad, therefore it allows Gosnell to be bad. That is the reality of it.

Methadras, your words speak truth. I commend you for your perspective. This matter of states protecting women is ludicrous.

Inga said...

MOST pro choice people actually.

Saint Croix said...

I don't like the idea of abortion; but I also recognize that as a society, it is not something we can simply strike at a whim. It will take a long time of renegotiating and legislating, and we may ultimately decide a complete ban is a bad idea (which it may very well be.) But, right now, a complete ban is not going to work (and probably wouldn't be good policy.)

We can't have any sort of conversation about what a good abortion law might be until liberals overturn Roe v. Wade.

Shouting Thomas said...

Because by all accounts they were mostly just poor and stupid and scared. This guy was a rich doctor. He knew better.

The women walked into that charnel house atmosphere and didn't notice something was awry?

"Poor, stupid and scared" relieves you of moral obligation?

CEO-MMP said...

Hey ed, ask her when Tom Ridge was governor and when the inspections were stopped.

See if she'll answer you. She vanished when I asked her.


O Ritmo Segundo said...

As I say, the Democrats have run Philadelphia for 61 years and black Democrats have run it for the last half.

Gosnell's being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and the (black, not that it matters) mayor of the city speaks out stridently against Gosnell's crimes. What amount of unconstitutional precognition needs to be combined with your racism in order to make this leap?

C Stanley said...

What about the women who patronized Gosnell?

Why is everybody giving them a pass?


At least one of them was allegedly a teen who was forcibly aborted at the behest of her parents.

pigpaws said...

I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do.

Oh, I bet if 'the state' starts looking without fear of the pro choice at all costs lunatics, they're not going to like what the find.

Delaware is hearing some noises. And Michigan tried to do some regulating of the abortion mills - simple things like putting sinks in every exam room, but were shot down by abortion at all costs democrats.

cubanbob said...

So if Gosnell is convicted for capital murder and sentenced to death how long before he is made in to a martyr for abortion rights? And how long before it becomes a meme in the MSM?

wyo sis said...

cubanbob
Only if abortion rights and the MSM are thoroughly evil.

rcocean said...

Waste of time for anyone to post here. Althouse had gone into Ritmo and troll enabler mode.

predicted next 100 posts:

-Shouting Thomas: you're wrong
-Inga/Ritmo: No, I'm not
-ST: Yes you are
-Inga/Ritmo: No, I'm not.

zzzz. goodbye.

Inga said...

"Pennsylvania's health department stopped routine inspections of abortion facilities in the state after Tom Ridge, a pro-choice Republican, became governor in 1995.
Health department lawyers "changed their legal opinions and advice to suit the policy preferences of different governors," health department official Janet Staloski said in grand jury testimony. In this case, she said the state didn't want to be "putting a barrier up to women" who wanted abortions.
In 1999, high-level Pennsylvania officials met to consider starting up regular inspections again but decided not to, state lawyer Kenneth Brody testified, according to the grand jury report. He told the grand jury that officials were concerns that abortion clinics wouldn't meet inspection standards and then there "would be less abortion facilities.""


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/kermit-gosnell-clinic-not-inspected-2013-4#ixzz2QOaiKH3c

pigpaws said...

tho the rhythm method was what they used widely before the pill - just ask my Mom who had ten children:-)

Billings Method has better results.

CEO-MMP said...

No, but it might mitigate it a little, don't you think?

wyo sis said...

Inga I don't think you are proving what you think you are proving.

Shouting Thomas said...

No, I'm about to go record my hymns for tomorrow's Mass.

Ritmo the Retard is interesting in a very negative way.

He's been thoroughly programmed by the indoctrination.

I'm on the side of men in this religious war, that is traditional, religious men. You'll notice that in this entire thread, the subject of the rights of men to their children hasn't even been mentioned...

Well, until now.

Inga said...

Tell me what you think I'm trying to prove Wyo Sis.

CEO-MMP said...

No, Ings. They stopped inspections in 93.


This is from the Daily Beast. Kinda funny considering the gap between when they stopped and when Ridge was gov.

Then, in 1993, the department stopped inspecting abortion clinics except when it received complaints about them. The report says they stopped inspecting “for political reasons”:

“The politics in question were not antiabortion, but pro. With the change of administration from Governor Bob Casey to Governor Tom Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be ‘putting a barrier up to women’ seeking abortions.”

Shouting Thomas said...

It's almost as if the fathers of all these aborted children are non-existent and of no importance, isn't it?

I wonder what role this has played in this slaughter?

Good night!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

No, I'm about to go record my hymns for tomorrow's Mass.

Ritmo the Retard is interesting in a very negative way.

He's been thoroughly programmed by the indoctrination.

I'm on the side of men in this religious war, that is traditional, religious men. You'll notice that in this entire thread, the subject of the rights of men to their children hasn't even been mentioned...

Well, until now.


Translation: "I'm obsessed with Ritmo but slowly starting to realize that it's better to let religious fanatics fight my battles for me. Plus, constantly telling him that he needs to respect me more and kiss my feet seems a little too weird, even for a geezer like me."

Renee said...

"Renee, he aborted then killed a six pound baby. Even many pro choice people know this is murder. It's not run of the mill abortion."

Well, it's the woman's body..... and her right to privacy.

Just saying.

CEO-MMP said...

Who you calling a religious fanatic, Ritmo?

Renee said...

"Because, Renee, people don't often get the chance to see images of baby's bodies stacked in multiple fridges, exam tables coated in old blood and so forth.

It's a teachable moment. That's why it should be covered. "

I've been told by pro-lifers, who were once pro-choice, that these images did nothing for them. Their change of heart comes from somewhere else. Just grossing out people with dead bodies doesn't help, it desensitizes them.

C Stanley said...

http://articles.philly.com/2011-02-01/news/27092983_1_abortion-clinic-gosnell-s-west-philadelphia-illegal-abortions

Inga said...


"Perhaps the worst part of the horrifying allegations against a Philadelphia abortion clinic is that it operated for 17 years before anyone did anything.
72-year-old Kermit Gosnell has been charged with killing seven babies and accused of killing hundreds in gruesome and illegal late-term abortions.
Prosecutors claim Gosnell "snipped" the necks of viable babies and exploited low-income, immigrant women who couldn't get abortions anywhere else.
Gosnell — who wasn't licensed to practice obstetrics and gynecology — is also accused of giving women venereal diseases by using dirty instruments, and of causing the death of a 41-year-old immigrant from Nepal. His lawyer insisted in court Wednesday that the clinic never killed any babies.
The clinic was not inspected from 1993 to 2010, when FBI agents finally raided the place. They found moaning women covered in blood-stained blankets and jars with severed fetus feet, according to the 281-page grand jury report.
The grand jury report that lays out allegations against Gosnell has an entire section called "How did this go on so long?" The simple answer is politics.
Pennsylvania's health department stopped routine inspections of abortion facilities in the state after Tom Ridge, a pro-choice Republican, became governor in 1995.
Health department lawyers "changed their legal opinions and advice to suit the policy preferences of different governors," health department official Janet Staloski said in grand jury testimony. In this case, she said the state didn't want to be "putting a barrier up to women" who wanted abortions.
In 1999, high-level Pennsylvania officials met to consider starting up regular inspections again but decided not to, state lawyer Kenneth Brody testified, according to the grand jury report. He told the grand jury that officials were concerns that abortion clinics wouldn't meet inspection standards and then there "would be less abortion facilities."
The state's politics-driven policy continued until the gruesome allegations regarding Gosnell came to light.
Inspections finally resumed in 2010 after more than 15 years. When pro-life Republican Gov. Tom Corbett took office in 2011, he asked officials to issue a report on the state's failure to inspect facilities for so long, the AP reported.
By February 2011, Corbett had announced sweeping changes at the health department — including routine, unannounced inspections of abortion facilities."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/kermit-gosnell-clinic-not-inspected-2013-4#ixzz2QOcVLJho
----------------------
CEO are you saying THIS article which I posted in full now is from the Daily Beast?

ken in sc said...

Most of the women who have abortions should have abortions. They should not be reproducing, and they know it.

Renee said...

omg, ken. terrible.

most women, even with an unplanned pregnancy can be a good mother. they just need some emotional support.

AprilApple said...

The media covers for Obama at every turn. This is just another example.


pigpaws said...

They don't care what the costs to women are

Period. End of story. Exploit them and send them on their way as if cheap monkey sex, killing your young, and record numbers of STDs, is normal and fulfilling. And women don't realize until it's too late, how stupid they are to fall for it.
The left does not like women.

CEO-MMP said...

You don't read very well, do you Inga?

Your article is wrong. Period.

There are a dozen articles detailing when they stopped inspecting. I picked the Daily Beast to quote because it's not a conservative site or blog.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Who you calling a religious fanatic, Ritmo?

Thomas, of course. He even went so far as to say that the "secular West" is on a course of destruction against "traditionalists" the world over, which one must assume, also includes "traditional" fanatical Muslims.

So he has now crossed the rubicon into even declaring common cause on that front - which should be the ultimate kiss of death even from the most right-wing conservative's standpoint.

You should know better by now, CEO. You've got your biases, but they're a thousand times more intelligently arrived at than anything emitted from Shouting Thomas's mind.

Inga said...

Here is a hyperlink to the Business Insider article I posted.

Inga said...

Why would the Business Insider be less accurate than the Daily Beast CEO? Post a link to the Daily Beast and point out where the Business Insider article is inaccurate.

Patrick said...

They didn't want to risk that. There's a deep fear — true shame — about this other matter that I'm talking about

The deep fear really, is that there is such a fine line between what is accepted by pro-choice people and what Gosnell did, that it is very very difficult to articulate why one is acceptable and the other is not.

For some commenters - Inga, Garage - who have acknowledged squeamishness with abortion, yet favor its legality in some circumstances, it's probably even more tough. The press's failure to widely discuss this story stems from the fear that those who are "squishy on abortion" would possibly rethink their positions. The left won't have that.

Interesting contrast with how they treat violence related to the Second Amendment.

CEO-MMP said...

Inga, no one cares about your business insider binky.

It's wrong.

Period.

ken in sc said...

Sorry Renee, that's what I think. Even when the children are put out for adoption, they turn out bad. This is my experience. I am an old man.

pigpaws said...

I fully acknowledge Gosnell is probably not what most abortion providers do. It needs to be framed as another example of how the state failed to protect its people.


I'm sure Tiller the baby killer didn't have filthy rooms, but he carried the same services. Not exactly sure how he carried out the murder of the 'big ones' though.

Sebelius did what she could to prevent the indictments from touching her friend and donor.

Inga said...

CEO, no link? Why should anyone here believe you? Or are you just too lazy?

wyo sis said...

Inga I can't tell what you're TRYING to prove, but you ARE proving that abortion is an untouchable by any and all who want to even discuss it let alone regulate it. The conclusion is that pro abortion means you must agree to let abortionists behave in any depraved way they want to and they will get a pass.

cubanbob said...

cubanbob
Only if abortion rights and the MSM are thoroughly evil.


You have a doubt?

Inga said...

Wyo Sis, you couldn't be more wrong.

Renee said...

ken, sigh, to a minor extent I sympathize with the adoption issue.We fail to talk about the traumatic loss of losing one's birth parents, or the loss for the birth mom. Adoption today isn't seen to serve the needs of the child, but of the infertile/gay couple or whatever. I always prefer a child to be raised by kin, over adoption.

C Stanley said...

The two quoted sources seem to be saying the same thing about the dates but one emphasizes the transition to Gov Ridge more. There's no need to cover for Ridge, he should answer for this. If Casey either let down his guard or started changing his prolife stance at the end of his term (the '93-'95 period) then he should be called out for it too.

The selective outrage isn't helpful. There's enough blame to go around.

CEO-MMP said...

Then, in 1993, the department stopped inspecting abortion clinics except when it received complaints about them. The report says they stopped inspecting “for political reasons”:

“The politics in question were not antiabortion, but pro. With the change of administration from Governor Bob Casey to Governor Tom Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be ‘putting a barrier up to women’ seeking abortions.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/12/why-is-the-media-apologizing-about-kermit-gosnell-coverage.html

I posted it once already. Will you shut up if I post it again?

AJ Lynch said...

Next, perhaps Megan will explain why the media annually ignores it when 100,000 plus people do the Walk For Life in DC. Does that hurt wittle Megan's eyes too?

Shana said...

Renee said:"I've been told by pro-lifers, who were once pro-choice, that these images did nothing for them. Their change of heart comes from somewhere else. Just grossing out people with dead bodies doesn't help, it desensitizes them."

Yet, there are many former Planned Parenthood workers who quit after watching an abortion via ultrasound, and became pro-life.

Out of sight, out of mind.

For example, Abby Johnson:
"The next movement was the sudden jerk of a tiny foot as the baby started kicking, as if it were trying to move away from the probing invader. As the cannula pressed its side, the baby began struggling to turn and twist away. It seemed clear to me that it could feel the cannula, and it did not like what it was feeling. And then the doctor’s voice broke through, startling me.

“Beam me up, Scotty,” he said lightheartedly to the nurse. He was telling her to turn on the suction — in an abortion the suction isn’t turned on until the doctor feels he has the cannula in exactly the right place.

I had a sudden urge to yell, “Stop!” To shake the woman and say, “Look at what is happening to your baby! Wake up! Hurry! Stop them!”

But even as I thought those words, I looked at my own hand holding the probe. I was one of “them” performing this act. My eyes shot back to the screen again. The cannula was already being rotated by the doctor, and now I could see the tiny body violently twisting with it. For the briefest moment the baby looked as if it were being wrung like a dishcloth, twirled and squeezed. And then it crumpled and began disappearing into the cannula before my eyes. The last thing I saw was the tiny, perfectly formed backbone sucked into the tube, and then it was gone. And the uterus was empty. Totally empty."

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-ultrasound-that-changed-my-life-abby-johnsons-pro-life-conversion-in-he/

AprilApple said...

Igna says it's all Tom Ridge's fault. Got that?
All Tom Ridge's fault.

Don't blame Gosnell or the pro-abortionist left and certainly ignore the fact that the dominate leftwing media will not touch the story because it doesn't fit the narrative.
Inga just found some leftwing narrative.
Tom Ridge! His fault!

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
CEO-MMP said...

The two quoted sources seem to be saying the same thing about the dates but one emphasizes the transition to Gov Ridge more. There's no need to cover for Ridge, he should answer for this. If Casey either let down his guard or started changing his prolife stance at the end of his term (the '93-'95 period) then he should be called out for it too.


I have no interest in covering for Ridge. I only want to counter Ing's constant bleating that Ridge is the one who relaxed inspection standards, which isn't true.

As you say--plenty of blame to go around.

C Stanley said...

Actually you are mistaken on that, Inga. I am 100% prolife but was trying to discuss areas where we might find common ground. And I did express that I could potentially see an incremental approach to the legal aspect.

Shana said...

"Sorry Renee, that's what I think. Even when the children are put out for adoption, they turn out bad. This is my experience. I am an old man."

Good Lord, Ken. That's pretty calloused.

edutcher said...

Somebody tell the She Devil of the SS that the City of Philadelphia has a Department of Public Health. They don't have to wait on Harrisburg.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

As I say, the Democrats have run Philadelphia for 61 years and black Democrats have run it for the last half.

Gosnell's being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and the (black, not that it matters) mayor of the city speaks out stridently against Gosnell's crimes.


Now.

Only after people complained.

What amount of unconstitutional precognition needs to be combined with your racism in order to make this leap?

Complaints about Gosnell go back 40
years.

Interesting we haven't heard his party affiliation.

Inga said...

April Apple,

"Why did Tom Ridge stop inspections? How can a Republican governor stop inspections on abortion clinics? Where we're HIS principles? I'm not giving any Pro Choice group a pass either."

4/13/13, 7:35 PM

Did you miss my last sentence here?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

St. Croix is pro choice, so is CStanley, we agreed.

They are not absolutists.


Even Synova's got the sense to agree that sentience/brain development is a more reasonable starting point for agreement than fucking fertilization.

Saint Croix said...

Anybody heard of an abortion doctor named Abu Hayat?

Read that New York Times article. He killed one of his patients in 1990. Dirty instruments. But he kept his license, and his practice continued. The next year he ripped off the arm of Ana Rosa Rodriquez.

CEO-MMP said...

"than fucking fertilization."

Heh.

wyo sis said...

Inga
I don't read huge 500 comment threads after the fact. They are too tedious. You appear to be blaming the whole thing on Ridge.
That is just insanely strange. Ridge bears some blame, but he's far from the reason for Gosnell.

If I missed something, and I most likely did, the essence seems to be the allegations about Ridge. But, what you post proves that the political climate, which is clearly engineered by pro abortion, is not going to allow anything to derail killing babies as a women's issue.

Could there be anything more cynical?

Inga said...

Wyo Sis, sigh.

April Apple,

"Why did Tom Ridge stop inspections? How can a Republican governor stop inspections on abortion clinics? Where we're HIS principles? I'm not giving any Pro Choice group a pass either."

4/13/13, 7:35 PM

Did you miss my last sentence here?

4/13/13, 8:38 PM
----------------



CEO-MMP said...

By the way, Inga-doo...I'm sure you don't know this because the big 'R' after his name throws you, but Tom Ridge is pro-life.

AprilApple said...

Thanks for posting that, Shana.

Inga- Got it. Tom Ridge. His fault. Plus perhaps maybe a little bit the abortion folks.

Inga said...

Yes CEO I know. Does that give him a pass for stopping inspections on the clinics?

Cedarford said...

lincolntf said...
Let the Left continue to subsidize and promote the eradication of blacks, let them aid the myriad of leaders and countries that dedicate their lives and national honor to the eradication of all Jews

What blithering stupidity. Abortion, since it became legal, has hardly resulted in the eradication of blacks. The white part of the population has gone from 90% to under 70% though. If abortion rates are higher in blacks, it is higher only because blacks have a higher breeding rate - especially incentivized in the black underclass that the more chilluns they have, the mo' state, local, and Federal checks they get.

But we know you honestly don't give a rats ass about blacks....you are just a right winger blabbing "Genocide!" because you think it sounds powerful.

As for Jews, the people that seriously thought of persecuting them, and did, have been right wingers that saw Jewish involvement in communist terror as a threat to all. Or right wing Arabs that saw the Jews as unwelcome interlopers the Arabs were bagged with because they were weaker than the Europeans and Americans that foisted Israel on them..Add to that right wing regimes from the Babylonians onwards through todays Russians, and Asian nations that felt that Jews had too much power and influence in many industries. And lay at the heart of global financial machinations that saddled Russia with the Oligarchs, and brutalized Asia in the 90s. Then as key players in the 2008 fiscal meltdown that hurt more than the American economy.

Saint Croix said...

St. Croix is pro choice

No, I'm pro-life. I don't think every abortion is a homicide, but I really don't like them.

I think the unborn baby is a person, and Roe v. Wade should be overruled.

Inga said...

Why did he allow himself to be pressured by Pro Choice groups? Pro Choice groups are complicit in this, how much clearer can I make it?

Saint Croix said...

Tom Ridge is pro-life.

He must have changed his mind! He was definitely a pro-choice Republican for years and years. And Governor Casey was a pro-life Democrat. Pennsylvania was kinda weird that way.

Inga said...

Sorry St. Croix, I know that.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 469   Newer› Newest»