• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower
  • Advertisements


Wondering Which States Americans Hate to Live In? Ask U-Haul.

by Gary Gindler  at American Thinker:

Americans are dynamic people.  World statistics on the number of cars per capita show that America is in first place among the “big” countries and inthird place among all countries, behind the dwarfs of San Marino and Monaco.

Where do Americans drive other than to work, shopping, and perhaps to school?  Americans move, and move quite often.  They relocate to neighboring cities and distant states.  By and large, the U.S. looks like a big monolithic country.  In fact, the U.S. is a federal republic of independent states, each with many laws, many customs, and a unique political climate.

Does the changing political climate affect population migration between states?  Of course, it does, but how?  What if we were to express the movement of intra-American migration, not in words, but in the language of numbers?  A convenient measure of internal migration could be the U-Haul Index.

U-Haul is a truck rental company used by many Americans who relocate.  The rented trucks must be driven by U-Haul customers themselves, and payment is charged one way only.  That is, after unloading, it is not necessary to return the vehicle to the starting point.  If necessary, the U-Haul company will take care of it.  Then the prices for transportation from point A to point B will be the same as from point B to point A, but only if the average number of customers is the same at both points A and B.

If the number of orders for trucks at both destinations is the same, then U-Haul has no problems.

If the number of orders is not the same, then U-Haul must hire drivers to relocate the empty trucks, and then pay to transport these drivers back.  In this case, the prices for traffic will not be symmetrical – renting trucks to a popular point A from an unpopular point B will entail higher costs.

Here are some examples (all data is taken from the U-Haul website; prices are for March 1, 2018, for a favorite 20-foot van.)

Renting a truck from New York to Orlando costs $2,214 and back $1,557 (the difference is $657, a 42% surcharge.)

Renting a truck from New York to Dallas costs $2,442 and back $1,962 (the difference is $480, a 24% surcharge.)

Renting a truck from San Francisco to Orlando costs $3,308 and back $1,988 (the difference is $1,510, an 84% surcharge.)

Renting a truck from San Francisco to Dallas costs $3,206 and back $1,128 (the difference is $2,078, a 184% surcharge.)

For comparison, renting the same truck from New York to San Francisco costs $3,409, and back $3,058 (the difference is $351, a surcharge of 11%).

What causes people to leave San Francisco and New York and to make a move to Dallas and Orlando?

San Francisco is in the state of California, and New York City in the state of New York.  Both states for decades have been bastions of left-wing politicians – former Democrats, and now socialists and communists.

Dallas is in Texas, and Orlando is in Florida.  Both states for decades have been bastions of right-wing politicians – Republicans and conservatives.

Perhaps the question should be posed differently: what forces people to leave those states where the government is pursuing a left socialist policy and move to states where the government is pursuing a pragmatic right-wing policy?

The example above shows that in the move from one corner of the American socialist paradise, San Francisco, to another, New York, a small difference in prices exists.  But, most likely, this asymmetry is because the climate in San Francisco is more pleasant than in New York.

Regardless of the political views of those Americans who leave Democrat states for Republican states, Democrat states will be the losers.  After all, most American migrants simply repeat the path of many talented people who left the socialist paradise known as the Soviet Union.

Democrats are losing their electorate and therefore are forced to pursue a policy of “open borders.”  Moreover, the inclusion of socialism into the capitalist economy leads to severe imbalances that Democrats prefer to compensate by the injection of illegal aliens into the U.S. economy.  Democrats see their last hope in the legalization of illegal aliens.

The socialists pursue a single goal: to legalize the participation of illegal aliens in elections.  The mayor of New York, communist Bill de Blasio, openly supports the idea that 500,000 illegal aliens residing in New York City should receive the right to vote at least in local elections.  The governor of California, socialist Jerry Brown, has already implemented that law.  Starting April 1, 2018, all residents of California, including illegal aliens, will automatically be added to voting rolls while renewing their driver’s licenses.

The U-Haul Index shows that Americans categorically do not like such policies.  Americans take part in federal elections every two years, but in between elections, they vote, too – with their feet.  More precisely, with trucks.




Horrors! IQ Display Stirs Hate and Upset at School “Science” Fair

Race and IQ: A High School Science Fair Project Ignites a Storm

by Selwyn Duke   at American Thinker

“We don’t know the student’s name, but we do know that he hit a nerve — in fact, he hit a whole bunch of them. Identified only as a boy of Asian descent at C.K. McClatchy High School in California, the teen’s recent science-fair project, “Race and IQ,” propounded the thesis that differences in groups’ average intelligence influence their academic performance. He couldn’t win, though, because his project was removed after parents, staff and other students became “upset” and one girl said she felt “unsafe and uneasy.” The irony?

A project on evolution would no doubt have been well received — even though an assumption of racial differences is implicit in evolutionary theory.

In fact, The Sacramento Bee, which hasn’t yet evolved out of the progressive primordial soup, mentioned that the student’s thesis is associated with eugenics (which the Bee casts negatively), the science of improving the human race via selective breeding. The paper is likely unaware, however, that the term “eugenics” itself was coined by Sir Francis Galton — a cousin of famed evolutionist Charles Darwin — and that Galton made clear that in his eugenicist endeavors, he was merely building on his cousin’s work.

Philosopher G.K. Chesterton once noted that if people “were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal.” This is easy to understand: What are the chances that different groups could have “evolved” isolated from one another for eons — subject to different environments, stresses, procreation-influencing cultural imperatives and adaptive realities — and ended up identical in every worldly measure? Why, even if the peoples evolved isolated in identical environments, the separation alone would make the prospects of winding up completely “equal” a virtual statistical impossibility.

Whatever you believe about evolution, it’s clear that equality is not a thing of this world. Do we see it in nature? Some species can dominate others or are more adaptable, which is why the rat is a pest and the dodo is extinct (and, in fact, the rat helped drive the dodo to extinction). Even within species, some members are hardier, smarter, faster or stronger than others. There are alphas and betas, with a silverback gorilla running his troop and a dominant lion leading his pride. And different breeds of dogs have different characteristic traits, with some being more intelligent than others…..”    Click below for more!


Some Congressional Democrats Become Ditsier by the Day

Pelosi: My Grandson’s Birthday Wish Was To Have Brown Skin, Brown Eyes; “Face Of The Future Of Our Country”

Pelosi: My Grandson’s Birthday Wish Was To Have Brown Skin, Brown Eyes; “Face Of The Future Of Our Country”

During an extended speech on the House floor Wednesday morning, where she read a long list of profiles of DACA recipients, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was reminded of her own grandson.

Pelosi, who noted her Italian heritage, said her grandson comes from Irish, English, “whatever, whatever” descent. She added that he is a “mix.” Pelosi shared that when her grandson blew out the candles at his sixth birthday party he made a wish that he would have “brown skin and brown eyes” like his Hispanic friend Antonio.

NANCY PELOSI: I’m reminded of my own grandson. He is Irish, English, whatever, whatever, and Italian-American, he is a mix. But he looks more the other [Italian] side of the family, shall we say.

And when he had his sixth birthday… he had a very close friend whose name is Antonio, he’s from Guatemala. And he has beautiful tan skinned, beautiful brown eyes, and this was a proud day for me, because when my grandson blew out the candles on his cake, they said did you make a wish?

He said yes, he made a wish. What is your wish? I wish I had brown skin and brown eyes like Antonio.

So beautiful. So beautiful. The beauty is in the mix. The face of the future for our country is all-American. And that has many versions.





Nicholas Kristof Sinks Yet Deeper into the Dummy Mud at the New York Times

President Trump, if You’re Innocent, Why Act So Guilty?

(…..so reads the headline regarding long time light-headed New York Times snowflake, Nicholas Kristof.   After months and months of Leftist lies and innuendo from the fascist Democrat Party-New York Times fake news in America from the Atlantic to the Pacific, TRUTH HAS BEEN EXPOSED.   Reddened  Lefty St. Nicholas at this Times is perhaps still deep asleep from working too hard snoring after Christmas.

It’s the fake news now and forever  published at the New York Times and spread via television and the press throughout the nation’s   fake news pages and television screens throughout America to create a fascist ONE Party  State to be led by Hillary R. Clinton.

Fake News Kristof and other Obamalings surely must know by now  that the Hillary corrupt and many top egos at the FBI have been exposed truthfully for their corruption to secure their  crooked  Hillary,  as their devoted lefty in the White House that freedom election night, November 8, 2016 and the weeks following its result?

The nation is still waiting for even a Trump puff of cigarette smoke to prove anything untoward was done regarding the November, 2016 Trump Presidential campaign and the dictators of modernized Soviet Russia.

A special note to all of the wimpy-wussy Nickolas leftist liars at the New York Times factory of fake news….”If you and your countless other leftist publishers and politicians of the Hillary for President crowd  are innocent of collusion pacts with  Putin’s of Soviet Russians, WHY DO YOU APPEAR SO GUILTY SIDE BY SIDE WITH THE FBI CORRUPT  BY THE EVIDENCE?)

Kristof writes:   “President Trump and Devin Nunes have been muddying the waters of the Russia investigation, so let’s try to clarify those waters so that they’re as clear as vodka.

Here are a dozen things we know.

1. Russia interfered in the U.S. election. The U.S. intelligence community concluded that President Vladimir Putin had “a clear preference” for Trump and “ordered an influence campaign” to hurt Hillary Clinton. The Department of Homeland Security notified 21 states that Russian hackers (mostly unsuccessfully) had targeted their election systems before the 2016 election.

Russia oversaw an online campaign using fake American accounts to spread anti-Clinton messages. Twitter found that 50,000 Russian accounts fired off 2.1 million election-related tweets in the fall of 2016, and in the final weeks around the election accounted for 4.25 percent of retweets of Trump’s own account.

2. Trump has longstanding business interests in Russia. The Times has explored these, beginning with a trip to Moscow in 1987 to try to build a hotel there. As recently as 2013 on another Moscow visit he was still optimistic, tweeting “TRUMP TOWER-MOSCOW is next,” but the buildings have never come to fruition.

More successfully, Trump has attracted murky investments from Russia, raising speculation that Russia might have gained some leverage over him. A Russian oligarch paid Trump an eyebrow-raising $95 million for one Florida property. A Reuters investigation found that people with Russian addresses or passports had invested nearly $100 million in seven Trump properties in southern Florida.

3. Trump has consistently displayed a soft spot for Putin. At various times, Trump has described Putin as “so nice,” “so smart” and doing “an amazing job.” Trump defended Putin from allegations that he interfered in elections and killed journalists. “You think our country is so innocent?” he scoffed. Trump told another interviewer, “I think our country does plenty of killing also.”

4. Trump picked people with ties to Russia. He named as a foreign policy adviser Carter Page, who was investigated by the F.B.I. as far back as 2013 for possible ties to Russian intelligence (Page denies any wrongdoing). To run his campaign, Trump selected Paul Manafort, who had long experience working for Russian interests and once wrote a memo offering a plan to “greatly benefit the Putin Government.” Trump’s aides also tweaked the Republican Party platform in a way that would please Moscow.

5. Russia confided in the Trump campaign. In April 2016, the Russians told George Papadopoulos, another Trump foreign policy adviser, that they had “dirt” on Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.” It’s not clear what Papadopoulos did with that information.

6. Trump aides secretly met with Russians. In June 2016, Russia offered the Trump campaign “official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary.” Instead of calling the F.B.I., Donald Trump Jr. responded, “I love it,” and arranged a meeting with the Russians and top campaign officials.

7. A Trump ally secretly communicated with a Russian mouthpiece. In August 2016, Trump ally Roger Stone communicated with Guccifer 2.0, believed to be an outlet for Russian military intelligence. Separately, Stone tweeted that “it will soon [be] Podesta’s time in a barrel”; seven weeks later, WikiLeaks began releasing emails Russia had hacked from John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman.

The remaining  listings from this  New York Times Kristof editorial are even more embarrassing to read and remember than the stench you’ve read through above…..proceed at your own risk:

8. … more secret contacts. WikiLeaks, presumably representing Russian interests, engaged in secret correspondence with Donald Trump Jr.

9. Kushner met a Putin ally. Jared Kushner met in December 2016 with a Russian, Sergey Gorkov, who is close to Putin. Kushner also privately asked the Russians about using Russian equipment to establish a secret communications channel to the Kremlin.

10. Trump aides falsely denied contacts. Campaign officials denied innumerable times that there had been any contact with Russia. “Of course not,” said Mike Pence shortly before the inauguration. “Why would there be any contacts?”

Good question. In fact, there were at least 51 such contacts, including 19 face-to-face interactions, by the count of CNN.

11. Russia is still at it. Russian bots are joining Trump supporters in tweeting hashtags like #MAGA and #FullOfSchiff. These same Russian bots are promoting Fox News links that disparage the Russia investigation.

12. This is not normal!

Actually, I doubt that there was anything so straightforward as a secret quid pro quo. Indeed, some of these links are so blatant that they seem confusingly exculpatory: Why would anybody conspiring with Putin raise suspicions by publicly praising him?

Yet the Russian interference itself is beyond doubt. The Mueller investigation has led to two guilty pleas and two indictments so far, and it must continue. Frankly, it’s suspicious that Trump is throwing up so much dust and trying so hard to delegitimize the investigation.

He is not acting innocent”…….THE END OF THIS KRISTOF STORY TELLING!

ghr:   Yes, we do now know that “the Russian interference itself is beyond doubt”.    Light-weight Nicki must have forgotten that the vast corrupt part of the Hillary election team had indeed had their FBI team collude with Russia and a FISA judge or two or three, not Our Donald,   to   dump Trump with  the election or if, GOD FORBID, Our Donald were elected,  Democrats and their scoundrels at the FBI  could  remove  from the man from the   office asap.

But, horrors to America’s university Stalinists and leftist Democrats everywhere, Our Donald didn’t lose this election.   That is when the Kristofs and worse throughout our USA, went  bananas;    when  Our Full Blooded American Guy, Donald Trump, became the 45th President of these United States!


A Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit Against the FBI Begins!


by Scott Johnson at PowerLine:

CNN, USA Today, the Daily Caller, Judicial Watch and other outlets brought a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the FBI to obtain copies of the memos former FBI Director James Comey wrote to document his conversations with President Trump. Comey, you may recall, strategically leaked a memo or two to his friend Daniel Richman, a professor at Columbia Law School, under orders to leak the contents to the New York Times. When President Trump fired Comey, Comey sought the appointment of Special Counsel to remove Trump from office. And not just any Special Counsel — Comey desired the appointment of his friend Robert Mueller.

Richman followed orders. He called the Times. He read parts of one or more of the memos to the Times. The Times published a page-one story by Michael Schmidt with Comey’s account. The appointment of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel ensued. Comey is, let it be noted, one sophisticated operator.

The FBI has refused to produce the requested memos. It asserts that the release of the memos would interfere with the Mueller’s ongoing investigation into links between Russia and Trump’s 2016 campaign team.

Both sides put the issue to Judge James Boasberg of the DC federal district court. Judge Boasberg himself reviewed the memos. He took evidence in the form of two affidavits from David W. Archey, a Deputy Assistant Director with the Counterintelligence Division, who currently supervises all FBI personnel assigned to the investigation into Russia’s interference with the election. He also heard from Mueller attorney Michael R. Dreeben. The affidavits and testimony were submitted to the judge outside the presence plaintiffs’ counsel (ex parte) and have been sealed.

The Freedom of Information Act includes nine numbered exemptions. Judge Boasberg’s opinion recounts the factual and procedural background of the case and sets forth the legal analysis applicable to FOIA exemption 7(A), the exemption that protects from disclosure “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings…”

Judge Boasberg holds that the Comey memos, “at least for now, will remain in the hands of the Special Counsel and not the public.” Judge Boasberg notes: “Although the Government has been tight-lipped in its briefing about exactly why the Special Counsel compiled these Memos, the First Archey Declaration confirms that the Office did so for law-enforcement purposes — i.e., in service of that investigation.”

If I didn’t say so, someone would emphasize that Judge Boasberg is an Obama appointee and suggest that there is something nefarious about his ruling. I think his opinion is well written and well reasoned. Perhaps the most arguable portion of his ruling relates to his withholding of the memo(s) leaked to Richman, discussed at pages 17-21, but even here the opinion is strong.

Richman, incidentally, says he has returned the memos to the FBI. Having been inserted into the middle of this affair by his good friend Comey, Richman served his purpose. Now he has extricated himself. He too knows what he is doing.

In any event — and this is my point — Judge Boasberg’s opinion provides a preview of coming repulsions. The rationale of the Mueller investigation is the removal of Trump from office. Whatever collusion there was with the friends of Vladimir Putin among the presidential campaigns, Democrats were doing the colluding. Mueller has moved his chips to obstruction of justice and now guards the evidence from Trump. If one reads between the lines here, one can see quite clearly the train that is hurtling down the tracks toward the president….”



Say NO to Professional Football and its Black Racist Rebellions!

I am a Minnesotan, born and raised in God’s country eighty plus years ago.    At age eight when THE WAR began I suddenly became director, planter, caretaker, weeder, harvester of a quarter acre Victory Garden across the alley from where I was raised in St. Paul, Minnesota.   My father, who was too old for battle,   worked 60 hours a week managing a Liggett Rexall drug store downtown.  Yet, he  had signed an agreement with the City as part of the HOME FRONT of the WAR effort.  (He also volunteered to join the  local air raid warden volunteers, helmet and vest to wear to make certain our neighborhood lights were turned off for an hour or two following sunset.)

The City would plow the quarter acre each Spring of the War.  It also supplied most of the vegetable garden seeds for the first two seasons of war time.  The Victory Garden volunteer leader, in this neighborhood my dad,   would be responsible for the garden upkeep, fertilizing, weed and insect control, and harvesting.   The agreeing gardeners responsible for the plots could keep half of the produce for themselves.   The rest of the harvest would be made available to the immediate neighborhood without cost.

Nearly every Mother in our neighborhood canned…..War or NO War…Tomatoes, pears, peaches, raspberries, apples.  Ice boxes, not refrigerators were the kitchen storage structures during the week.  Milk was delivered to the doorstep twice per week.

My Mother was an experienced, big time flower and tomato  gardener….typical of Mothers of that neighborhood’s day.  They had kids to care for.  Divorces were not available except for Hollywood creeps of the time.  Fathers under age 40 and sons over age 16 were off to WAR.

But my mom worked part time afternoons.  So, who was going to be responsible for keeping the grounds harvestable!

Yours truly.   Leaf lettuce, radishes, peas,  and tiny carrots were edible by late May.  Then came white potatoes, tomatoes, sweet corn, acorn squash, egg plant, okra, and billions of cucumbers and more.

I was first sent to care for and harvest the garden by punishment…..such as asking Mother questions while  she was trying to listen to her static-filled Classical music, Beethoven and such,  from Chicago radio from ten to eleven in the morning.

I had to fertilize, weed, pinch off the potato beetles and such, seed, water, when needed, throw stones at the rabbits and such……and…. I had to harvest.

I loved being there from the very first days of the punishment.  Harvesting white potatoes was like hunting for treasure.  I became important to the family and the neighborhood….The Victory Garden became my personal playroom, so I gladly sulked while agreeing to her punishment to cross the alley and spend an hour or two playing games with the plants and their pests.

The first football game I remember listening to on radio, was in October, 1945, when the University of Minnesota Golden Gophers beat Nebraska, 61-7.  I was torn between listening to the game with my Dad, or  “slaving” in the Victory Garden harvesting where I could play  dive bombing Colorado Potato Beetles squishing each with my fingers as I threw the remains into a oily tin can.

College football was fun to watch then.   When the University of Minnesota was attacked by anarchists in the late 1960s I quit Big Ten football watching. eventually turning  to football for sport entertainment.

During the first days of television, 1947,  here in the Twin Cities, I was captivated by Roller Derby both male and female competitions as my televised game of sport.   I began a Viking fan in the late 1980s because of the skills of the sport and began buying season tickets in the 1990s continuously until last year when I passed them on to one of my sons.  I did attend four home games this season….all winners.

I have watched every televised Super Bowl game over  the past 40 years.   Had our Minnesota Vikings won the NFC, I had planned NOT to watch this year’s Super Bowl….yet I would have been tempted to see a good team and coach play the Patriots.

Black Racism has become a political and social disease in our once United States of America.   Black Racism, its violence, ignorance, hate and intolerance  is an evil now supported by one of the two major political parties

Why would I or any other civilized American want to watch Maxine Water’s racist motor mouth kneeling  in uniform at today’s Super Bowl, or any day’s National Football League game?

Why would I want to watch  any professional football players  showing off  white KKK hoods over their heads!  WHY WOULD YOU, unless you are a Congressional Democrat?






Senator Herod

by Jennifer Hartline   at the Stream:                     (Article sent by Mark Waldeland)

“To every senator, and especially those 14 so-called Catholic senators, who last week refused to protect the child in the womb from dismemberment:

Shame on you. You voted for barbarism. You voted for something only the most heinous of uncivilized people would ever conceive of doing to a helpless child. You voted in favor of chopping a living child into pieces.

You voted in favor of reaching into the womb with weapons and showing no mercy to the defenseless person living there. You voted in favor of armed invasion and brutal slaughter. Slaughter not of a powerful and wicked enemy, but of an innocent and powerless infant.

You voted for the continued dehumanization of a group of human beings you’d like to keep from gaining any rights at all. What hostile, oppressive bullies you are.

You’re Deceiving Yourselves

No doubt you reject my appraisal of your vote. I’m sure you take umbrage at my description of what you favored by your vote. You can only do that because you deceive yourselves, and you are either too drunk on your own power or too spineless to stand up for what’s right. I couldn’t care less which it is. I only know that I’m sick and tired of hearing you say you did it for me.

That you would use your political and legal power to preserve some grotesque “right” to tear a child into pieces is utterly revolting and vile. Don’t you dare hide behind the lie that you did it for women.

Either you have the integrity to protect the most innocent and helpless among us or you do not. Clearly, you do not. You have chosen to accept the warped idea that the “autonomy” of women grants them the “right” to have another person butchered to death.

Even if every woman in America believed that demonic lie — and I assure you, we all do not — it does not excuse your cowardice before the truth. You are obliged to see the humanity of the child in the womb and act to defend that child from slaughter.

Every one of us is obliged to see the humanity of the child in the womb, just as we are obliged to see the humanity in every person on earth. Just as we were obliged to see the humanity of the slave, and bring an end to the wicked injustice of slavery in America. How many of you would have been so eager to support legislation to safeguard the “right” to take an ax to a slave’s arm or leg and just keep chopping until he was dead?

Don’t delude yourselves about what you did. You weren’t acting in the interest of “choice.” You aren’t valiant defenders of liberty. You had a tiny, growing baby in your hands and you gave him over to the hatchet man.

Stop smiling and high-fiving each other in congratulatory glee, then looking straight-faced into the camera solemnly swear you had to endorse this barbarism for women’s sake. You’re happy to cloak yourself in the noble garment of “Women’s Rights,” then fling off any moral guilt over the tiny body parts because you say you did it all for women.

Women Deserve Better Than Abortion

No woman should ever be told that choosing death for her child is in her best interests. No woman should have her baby’s violent death portrayed to her as her best option. No doctor should ever tell a mother that cutting her baby into pieces is the right thing to do.

No women should be encouraged to turn her womb into a torture chamber. And women should not be deceived into thinking that this barbaric “procedure” is ”health care.” The white lab coats do not disguise the brutality, and women deserve to be confronted with the brutality. If you truly believe women are entitled to make informed decisions, then make sure those decisions are truly informed with the facts.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity.Support The Stream »

There is no abortion fairy who waves her magic wand and Poof! The baby just disappears! It isn’t just a lengthy D&C. It isn’t just a heavy menstrual period.

It’s a brutal act of violence. A thumb-sucking child with a beating heart, functioning brain, kicking arms and legs, working bladder and kidneys, and an up-and-running nervous system will be ripped out of the womb in pieces.

Despite the propaganda the abortion industry peddles, it is never necessary to kill the child in order to save the mother’s life. Never.

You Failed in Your Duty

You occupy the seats of power in our nation, and you are obligated before God to protect the weak and vulnerable. Do not think you enjoy the moral support of your Church. Do not think you have fulfilled the commandments of God in what you’ve done. You have facilitated the slaughter of innocents. You could have helped stop it, but you chose to follow Herod rather than Christ.

Women deserve so much better than a system of government that champions violence against their own babies and calls it a victory.