This is What Planned Parenthood Teaches Children: UPDATED The Video has been fixed


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

The following video features “educational” materials that are given to children.  As such, they are completely innapropriate for children.


Consider yourself warned.

The video is correct.  This is not education- it is marketing.  And from the content, you can clearly see what is being sold.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

From a historical context, this is all part of the culture war that has been waging for decades.  Regular readers here will remember my discussion of Cultural Marxism.  The story of that movement starts with the pre-WWI prediction that the Western nations would fall to Communism.  That did not happen, so the Communists were left scratching their heads as to why.  For more, here is an excerpt from The American Thinker…

By the end of WWI, socialists realized that something was amiss, for the world’s proletariat had not heeded Marx’s call to rise up in opposition to evil capitalism and to embrace communism instead.  They wondered what had gone wrong.

Separately, two Marxist theorists-Antonio Gramsci of Italy and Georg Lukacs of Hungary-concluded that the Christianized West was the obstacle standing in the way of a communist new world order.  The West would have to be conquered first.

Gramsci posited that because Christianity had been dominant in the West for over 2000 years, not only was it fused with Western civilization, but it had corrupted the workers class.  The West would have to be de-Christianized, said Gramsci, by means of a “long march through the culture.”  Additionally, a new proletariat must be created.  In his “Prison Notebooks,” he suggested that the new proletariat be comprised of many criminals, women, and racial minorities.

The new battleground, reasoned Gramsci, must become the culture, starting with the traditional family and completely engulfing churches, schools, media, entertainment, civic organizations, literature, science, and history.  All of these things must be radically transformed and the social and cultural order gradually turned upside-down with the new proletariat placed in power at the top.

One of the chief subjects for attack was Christianity, and the Communists found an effective weapon against God…sex education.

In 1919, Georg Lukacs became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun regime in Hungary.  He immediately set plans in motion to de-Christianize Hungary.  Reasoning that if Christian sexual ethics could be undermined among children, then both the hated patriarchal family and the Church would be dealt a crippling blow. Lukacs launched a radical sex education program in the schools.  Sex lectures were organized and literature handed out which graphically instructed youth in free love (promiscuity) and sexual intercourse while simultaneously encouraging them to deride and reject Christian moral ethics, monogamy, and parental and church authority.  All of this was accompanied by a reign of cultural terror perpetrated against parents, priests, and dissenters.

Hungary’s youth, having been fed a steady diet of values-neutral (atheism) and radical sex education while simultaneously encouraged to rebel against all authority, easily turned into delinquents ranging from bullies and petty thieves to sex predators, murderers, and sociopaths.

It seems pretty clear, doesn’t it?  Of course, the standard American leftist will not always understand that they are pawns in a war waged by long dead purveyors of an evil concept.  So they will miss the obvious political and historical evidence for their useful idiocy.   But for those of us that study such things, we are again confronted with people that had a stated intent, created a plan of action to achieve that intent, and then followed through with those plans. And now, we see the predictable results.
H/T: Hot Air

The Pretender and the Real Deal


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

So, like most every other  Conservative Blogger on Earth, I watched the ObamaCare is OMG SUPER MEGA KOOL SPEECH tonight.  Let’s review some highlights…

  • He lies about saving the economy.  On one hand, the left claims that Porkulus hasn’t had time to take effect yet, now, even though the bleeding hasn’t stopped, they are now saying that the Porkulus has saved the economy?   Which is it folks?
  • “The time for games is over…”  Does that mean that you’ll stop playing them?
  • Lies about “scare tactics.”  For the left, “scare tactics” consists of quoting the POTUS and members of congress, reading and quoting HR 3200, quoting Ezekiel Emanuel, and so on.
  • “nothing in this plan requires you to change your insurance…”  Except the fact that your plan will make it impossible for private insurance companies to compete.  Which, of course, will make it too expensive for employers or  employees to afford it.  Of course, the public option will always be there!
  • Tries to spin the young not getting insurance and companies not offering it as being “unfair.”  This of course, is thinly veiled Marxism.   By suggesting that we all pay for that in the end, he turns us against each other, and against liberty.  Are we free to choose or not?
  • Do you think that you can use the commerce clause to force people to buy something that they do not want?
  • Lies about the “Death Panels.”  Of course he can say they don’t exist…they aren’t called death panels!  If it isn’t about withholding care, why does Ezekiel Emanuel work for you?  He recommends that!
  • He lies about single payer.  Do we have to pay all the videos of you, Barney Frank, and the others sir?  You know, the ones where you all claim that the plan is to eliminate private insurance?
  • Lies about competition.  Why not open up the market to all companies?  You propose keeping the status quo, with the only addition being your public option.  You say that is Alabama, 90% of people are with one company, why not allow all insurance companies to compete.  There’s over 1500!  Why do you only want your public option as the competition?
  • You try to be slick and define capitalism as evil when you don’t openly say it.  Do we need to start talking about the horror stories about government run health care in Canada and Great Britain?  Insurance can be de-emphasized with HSA’s, but you don’t mention that!
  • When you say that you want to make insurance companies “accountable,” but you really mean to raise costs so no one can afford them.
  • You mention “overhead” like profits and corporate pay as a problem, yet you fail to mention “overhead” like $1oo,ooo,ooo,ooo in waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid.  Did I mention that the monetary figure is a YEARLY figure?  The government has had 40 years to reign that in, but they haven’t been able!
  • You lie about it not being tax funded.  The CBO says this is a loser.  How are those shortfalls going to be covered?  After all, the cost projections for Medicare and Medicaid have been spot on…right?
  • You throw a bone to the right, albeit reluctantly, with Tort reform.  However, since the trial lawyers give the Democrats enough money to AIR CONDITION HELL, I have a hard time believing your sincerity.
  • You lie about tax cuts being spending.  They are not.  I know your economic vision is reality optional, but the Bush tax cuts increased government income.
  • He invokes the ghost of Kennedy, transparent and revolting.
  • You mention medicare, but fail to mention the cost over-runs and fraud.

Well, those are the lowlights.  My assessment that this is nothing new.  The Tort Reform is a sham.  He’ll try to use it to get the Republicans to go along with the plan.  Once the plan is passed, they’ll either eliminate it or cause it to fail so they can spend the next 15-20 years saying that Tort reform failed, and should therefore never be re-visited.

Well, we went over the speech.  I had to waste an hour of my time on this, and I need some inspiration.  Here’s some Reagan.

Government intervention fails at every level, just as we argue now.  Government growth is a threat to freedom, just as we argue now.  The left was attempting to move to socialism, just as we argue now.  Reagan knew then, we know now.  Will the people respond?


Projection, Denial, Groupthink, and the Left

The official logo of the Angry Mob!
The official logo of the Angry Mob!

Projection is a form of defense in which unwanted feelings are displaced onto another person, where they then appear as a threat from the external world. A common form of projection occurs when an individual, threatened by his own angry feelings, accuses another of harbouring hostile thoughts.

Encyclopedia Britannica

The above definition should be very familiar to Conservatives, as the left frequently accuses the right of doing what they themselves do. As of late, the left has been accusing the health care protesters of being a “paid, angry, and unruly mob.”  Are they angry?  Yes. Are they unruly?  Sometimes, but never to the degree of a typical leftist protest.  Paid? Obviously, the left has not presented a single shred of evidence to support that claim, yet the media continues to promote and exaggerate all of them as fact.  It would seem that the goal is to repeat these claims until they become the “truth.”  Ironically, the left has committed the only violence at these events, specifically, the union thugs.  No matter how baseless, this course of action has some potential benefits for the left:

  1. The accusation clouds public opinion against the right.
  2. The accusation takes the publics attention off the actual subject matter, and on to people. People can be discredited and their message therefore disregarded.  Ideas can be proven by observation.  If one cannot defeat an idea, as it can be proven, one can discredit the messengers, causing the idea to be never considered or tested.
  3. The opposition then has to redirect time and resources to defending themselves, rather than advancing their agenda.
  4. By accusing the right of being a “mob,” they hope to immunize themselves from being referred to as a mob, even when they actually act as one.

To illustrate this a bit further, let’s take a look at some images of leftist protesters, as well as some of the alleged “angry, unruly, and paid mobs.”

Real Grassroots Protesters Have Identical Professionally Printed Signs!
Real grassroots protesters have identical, professionally printed signs!
Identical shirts are a sign of a true grassroots protester!
Identical shirts are a sign of a true "grassroots" protester!
Real grassroots protesters wear identical visors!
Real grassroots protesters wear identical visors and identical signs!

Here are some of the Tea Party folks that are allegedly funded by the insurance companies, the RNC, big Pharma, and lobbyists:

The insurance companies apparently cannot afford signs!
The insurance companies apparently cannot afford signs!
The RNCs identical shirt fund must be broke!
The RNC's identical shirt fund must be broke!
Those pesky lobbyists forgot the uniforms!
Those pesky lobbyists forgot the uniforms!

As you can see, the protesters from the left have identically printed signs, and, in many cases, identical shirts!  The protesters on the right, have very few, or no printed signs (in fact, vendors have cropped up to sell signs-Capitalism!), nor to they appear to be in “uniform.” Obviously, the leftist protesters have to be subsidized and organized.  Signs have to be printed and printers have to be paid.  Tee shirts and other materials have to be purchased and prepared.  They leftist protesters are often bussed in from other locations.  This is easily observed, and has been caught on camera.  The left claims that their opposition is bussed in, yet offers no evidence of this.

One might ask, “why lie and invent these rumors when they are so easily disproven?”  For the answer to that question, we have to go to Saul Alinsky, the “original” community organizer.  Mr.  Alinsky’s book Rules for Radicals, has been the “playbook” for the left for decades.  For how Alinskyi deals with “truth,” here is an excerpt from an excellent article by blogger Jesse James at Western Front America:

Take for example the idea of “truth”. The conservative approaches truth as something that can be verified, tested and believed in and although they understand that “truth” may be flavored by a persons perspective they still believe that there is an independent truth that exist. Thus a conservative who approaches an issue, say the current manufactured lunacy that suggest America never landed on the moon will point to specific facts and provable reality. Like the fact that the Lunar Lander is sitting on the moon right where we left it and it should be viewable through the recent remote moon survey projects being conducted by a number of countries. So to a conservative for any question you should be able to establish some parameters for investigation that could be carried out and proven, one way or the other.

A “realistic radical” of the Alinsky school is completely unconcerned with the verification of “fact”. Alinsky states in respect to a community organizer, “he does not have a fixed truth-truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing. He is a political relativist.” Their concern would be first to determine which opinion would be the most useful to their immediate and long term agenda. That the Lunar Lander is still sitting on the moon or not is of no interest to them. What is critical is the usefulness of stating that the entire moon landing program was a lie by the government and further reason that you should not trust the status quo and to undermine your sense of national pride at having accomplished such a magnificent feat of human science and exploration. The radicals purpose would be to sow discontent, mistrust and shame for attempting to mislead the world so that they could use the moon landings as another wedge issue in the furtherance of their revolution. This willingness to arrogantly disregard verifiable truth in service of a greater revolutionary “truth” is a central aspect of Alinsky’s tactics.

It often infuriates and confuses conservatives that socialist claims and projects are so often obviously fraudulent and verifiably so and yet maddeningly treated as fact by the media, academia and other socialist organs but that is exactly the point. The revolutionary SEEKS to create an environment of unreality exactly so that by obscuration and fantasy thinking they can influence the generally ignorant population to support political goals that would otherwise be unsupportable in the face of fact.

As you can see, the truth holds no relevance to the left.  Perception does.  It matters little if something can be verified, proven, or observed-the end game goal must be achieved.  If observable facts interfere with this goal, it must be denied, attacked, portrayed as a conspiracy, and those that profess it must be discredited and vilified.  In creating this sense of “unreality,” the left is able to deny observable fact, and attempt to craft public perception in a way that denies observation and verification, substituting the perception of the “now” in place of fact.  The current example is the current White House position that the POTUS has never said he was in favor of single payer.  The fact that there are multiple videos of the POTUS saying that he does support it is irrelevant.  Instead, those that post said videos are written off as people that have “time on their hands,” or are “selectively edited” The fact that the left has violent, organized protests and regularly shout down anyone that disagrees with them is to be ignored.  They will instead claim that their opposition does the same thing.  Facts or reality have no place here, only the perception that the left seeks to manufacture.

So, is this projection?  For some, it probably is.  It’s more comforting to attribute one’s negative characteristics upon another.  That, and one can always claim the moral high ground. For others, groupthink is a factor.

William H. Whyte coined the term in 1952, in Fortune magazine:

Groupthink being a coinage—and, admittedly, a loaded one—a working definition is in order. We are not talking about mere instinctive conformity—it is, after all, a perennial failing of mankind. What we are talking about is a rationalized conformity—an open, articulate philosophy which holds that group values are not only expedient but right and good as well.

Irving Janis, who did extensive work on the subject, defined it as:

A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.

Our “leaders” spend much of their time in Washington DC. Their staffs are likely filled with sycophants that will parrot the views of the status quo.  They meet and dine with each other, as well as their supporters.  At each step-at each function or speech, they are met with the accolades of power, and are fawned over by the media.  Then, they go home and expect to be met with more supporters.  They are in an environment that supports and reinforces the thinking, no matter how flawed, that their policies are overwhelmingly supported by the public.  Given that assessment, their shock and surprise that there would be any dissent from the public is understandable.  This of course, explains why many are now having “invitation only” town hall meetings, or just barring any dissenting opinions by filling halls with union thugs or community organizers. In so doing, they seek to bring their DC  “hugbox” with them. Denial then sets in, and a way must be found to explain this dissent. Since “it could not possibly be” that there is actual opposition to them, a rationalized explanation must be found.  Firing false accusations against their own constituents, no matter how outlandish, is far more comforting than actually contemplating the failure of the policies they support.  In addition, their electoral victories and resulting majorities caused them to think that they have a mandate to do as they please.  In this environment of “unreality,” it is easy to see that some cannot grasp the fact that the protests against them are real.

There are those members of the left, completely cynical in their view of humanity, who will intentionally craft this type of manipulation and fabrication upon the people.  For many, especially the POTUS, that TAUGHT Alinky’s tactics during his time as a community organizer, this is a tool to achieve an end.  They know that the “public option” will lead to single payer.  They know that Cap and Trade will destroy the economy, and that the underlying premise if false.  They know that the tax increases will cost jobs.  Their end game goal is socialism, and their tools are deceit and the created crisis.  They count on the public to be compliant and easily coerced.  When that fails, they attempt to discredit their opponents.    What better way to discredit their opposition than by accusing said opposition of doing what they themselves do?


Irony That the Media Misses


Remember when folks on the right were telling everyone that the messiah was using the porkulus to pay back his supporters?  Remember that no one listened?  Well, the pork has returned to the stimulus.  This from the USA Today:

WASHINGTON — Billions of dollars in federal aid delivered directly to the local level to help revive the economy have gone overwhelmingly to places that supported President Obama in last year’s presidential election.

That aid — about $17 billion — is the first piece of the administration’s massive stimulus package that can be tracked locally. Much of it has followed a well-worn path to places that regularly collect a bigger share of federal grants and contracts, guided by formulas that have been in place for decades and leave little room for manipulation.

Yes, yes, of course, the porkulus money goes to the places that supported the messiah, but at the same time, it was supposed to go there anyway?

But wait!  There’s more!

“There’s no politics at work when it comes to spending for the recovery,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says.

Counties that supported Obama last year have reaped twice as much money per person from the administration’s $787 billion economic stimulus package as those that voted for his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, a USA TODAY analysis of government disclosure and accounting records shows. That money includes aid to repair military bases, improve public housing and help students pay for college.

The reports show the 872 counties that supported Obama received about $69 per person, on average. The 2,234 that supported McCain received about $34.

The funny thing is that this article point out details of this, but in the next paragraph, tries to explain it away.

So, the porkulus monies go to places that supported the messiah.  Not a big surprise, the USA Today article stated that these areas tend to get 50% more funding anyway, so even factoring for that, the nearly doubling on the per-person amount demonstrates an increase in that percentage.

Now for the real zinger…

Unemployment in June remained approximately 20 percent higher in states won by President Obama in last fall’s election than in states won by Republican candidate John McCain, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data released Friday.

Meanwhile national opinion polls are continuing to show Obama’s approval ratings are dropping.

According to the table below, the unemployment rate in June for states voting for Obama averaged 9.34 percent, compared to 7.91 percent in states that voted for the Republican candidate, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

How ya likin that change?

So, the money does go to places that supported the messiah, and the result?  That’s pretty obvious.  Now, the libs will say that “they money hasn’t gotten out yet!”  My response would be that the messiah himself said that the porkulus was for projects that were “shovel ready.”  Well, what happened to the shovels?  What happened to the hundreds of thousands of jobs that were promised?  After all, the thing JUST HAD TO BE PASSED FREAKIN IMMEDIATELY to keep unemployment below 9%!   The libs have put themselves into a bind  to explain away the failure, because to explain away the fail, they have to point out that the messiah lied.  It’s fun!


The Libs Give Kindly Advise


The libtards have been soooo kind lately!  How, you might ask?  They’ve been giving the Republicans advise on how to be more successful!  That is clearly an act of kindness in these polarized times.  Not only that, the Legion of Doom has been repeating all these tidbits of wisdom- informing the sheeple of just how REALLY NEAT they all are.  Here are some of the sagely statements made to the Republicans

1.  To be successful, you have to appeal to moderates.

2.  You have to “disown” Rush Limbaugh.

3.  You have to ignore that “radical” Conservative  wing of the party.

4.  Ya better not challenge the SCOTUS  nominee or pay attention to her record and  public statements.

Aren’t the libtards just great!  I mean, they’re being so magnanimous in their victory that they can offer advise to the lowly Republicans!  Kinda makes ya want to shed a tear, amirite?

Well friends, this got me thinking.  What if the Legion of Doom covered EVERYTHING like this, and what if everyone talked like the libtards?  Let’s take a look, shall we?

The following is a presentation of the messiah Sports Commune

Bringing You Bread and Circuses Since 2009.


Generic Commentator: “Hello everyone, we’re here to interview Coach Mike Tomlin of the Pittsburgh Steelers.  We’re interested in knowing about the upcoming Super Bowl against the Arizona Cardinals.  Welcome Coach Tomlin.”

Mike Tomlin: “Thanks, glad to be here.”

Generic Commentator: “You’re welcome Coach Tomlin.  What advise would you have for the Cardinals as they face your Steelers next Sunday?”

Mike Tomlin: “Well, I would recommend that they completely ignore James Harrison.”

Generic Commentator: “Really?  Isn’t he a force at linebacker?”

Mike Tomlin: “Well, we have polling data that indicates blocking or interfering with James Harrison would be considered “divisive.”  In these difficult times, we can’t afford to be separated by petty arguments about whether or not the quarterback is crushed. ”

Generic Commentator: “I see, what else would you tell the Cardinals coaching staff?”

Mike Tomlin: “Well, we have seen that throwing the ball to Larry Fitzgerald seems to make things unfair.  I’ve appealed to the commissioner to see if that can be banned.  With Fitzgerald catching so many passes, the other receivers don’t get a chance.  It’s a question of “fairness.”  This ought to be a “doctrine,” in my opinion. ”

Generic Commentator: “Amazing!  Any parting words of wisdom?”

Mike Tomlin: “Yes!  Don’t cover Santonio Holmes!  I guess I would also add that they should always throw the ball to Troy Polamalu!”

Generic Commentator: “Thanks Coach Tomlin.  It should be a great game!”

Mike Tomlin: “Why yes, it will!”

This interview was brought to you by the messiah Sports Commune

Citizens, don’t forget to report any independent thought to your local messiah Youth Corps Community Organizer


Well, well, well, a pattern emerges.

Disclaimer: I am a life-long Steelers fan.  GO STEELERS!!!