|
Title: The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 Post by: nChrist on August 25, 2012, 12:45:26 PM ____________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription (http://link.patriotpost.us/?136-160-160-217154-660) ____________________________ The Mediscare Advantage August 24, 2012 "The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public moneys." --Thomas Jefferson Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate made clear that the presidential race would not only be about what a lousy job Barack Obama has done but also about the future of our great nation. We welcome the choice, not least because it drives the Left absolutely batty. Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, knows the federal fiscal situation inside and out. Indeed, he schooled the president during last year's debt ceiling negotiations and during the February 2010 bipartisan health care reform meeting. Not that Obama can be taught -- he's an extreme leftist Keynesian through and through. The campaign now will center on how to fix Obama's abysmal record of setting a new spending floor with more than triple the highest Bush deficit and driving up national debt by nearly $6 trillion in his all-too-long three-and-a-half years in office. Ryan has a plan to put the brakes on this bullet train. It's not a miracle plan that will suddenly restore constitutional boundaries to federal spending, and it's certainly not a plan to "end Medicare as we know it" or to "dump grandma off a cliff," as the Left would have us believe. It also won't cost seniors another $6,400 a year, as Obama falsely claims. But it is a plan that will rein in spending growth and stabilize Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid for future generations. Ryan's Medicare reform plan, crafted with the help of Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), provides a premium-supported private-insurance alternative for seniors that would introduce competition to drive costs down. One downside is that it doesn't start until 2023, but his plan offers choice -- something the Left purportedly favors. Obama's record, on the other hand, is that he transferred $716 billion from the coming decade's Medicare funding to hide some of ObamaCare's massive cost. In other words, Obama and the Democrats are the ones "ending Medicare as we know it." Then again, Medicare can't continue "as we know it" -- it's going bankrupt and will take the country with it. It's ironic and outrageous that the Left built the "fiscal cliff" we're careening toward only to blame the Right for the consequences, all because we won't stand for raising taxes or running up the deficit even more. There's no doubt that Romney-Ryan can win in November. The only question is whether they can communicate their more fiscally responsible vision in a way that resonates with the American people and sufficiently rebuts the Obama campaign's attempts to divide by class, age, race and gender. This Week's 'Braying Jackass' Award "The truth of the matter is you can't just make stuff up. That's one thing you learn as president of the United States." --Barack Obama, who specializes in making stuff up Government and Politics From the 'Non Compos Mentis' File: Todd Akin's Blunder As readers are no doubt well aware, Missouri Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin completely blew it this week when asked about his opposition to abortion in cases of rape. "First of all, from what I understand from doctors," he began, pregnancy due to rape is "really rare. If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." Howls of outrage from both sides of the aisle quickly followed. Recognizing the irreparable damage he had done to his candidacy, Republicans of all stripes called on Akin to bow out of the race -- which he stubbornly and arrogantly refuses to do -- while Democrats will spend the next two months gleefully tying Akin's bumbling statement to Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and every other Republican on any ballot. It's telling, but the only two people who think Akin should remain in the race are Akin himself and his opponent, vulnerable Democrat incumbent Claire McCaskill. Where to start? It should be obvious that "legitimate" and "rape" should never be used in the same sentence, unless one is talking about punishment for the perpetrator. We suspect Akin was trying to differentiate between forced and statutory rape, but it was a terrible blunder. Akin is sorely mistaken if he thinks a woman's body can "shut that whole thing down" -- pregnancy results in 5 percent of rapes. Besides, even if he were correct, his assertion makes no sense in the context of the argument because the number of pregnancies caused by rape is irrelevant to the principle. If one is opposed to abortion in cases of rape, which Akin is (as are we), the correct answer is that the child has a right to life regardless of the circumstances of conception. The death penalty doesn't apply to rapists, but, tragically, that's not true for the innocent life created by the rape. There are at least a couple of reasons why the entire kerfuffle is ridiculous. First, Akin's position on abortion isn't outside the "mainstream," even if his reasoning is. On the contrary, the position far outside the mainstream is the one held by Barack Obama -- the president supports abortion all the way through pregnancy, including partial-birth abortion, and has even opposed legal protection for babies who survive abortion attempts. Second, it highlights the chasm separating the two parties. Akin's comments, despite his apology, earned him the scorn and vigorous opposition of his own party from leadership to grassroots. The National Republican Senatorial Committee says it will not contribute to Akin's campaign, nor will various PACs, leaving Akin to fend for himself if he continues. Democrats, on the other hand, twice nominated and elected to the presidency an accused rapist. In two weeks, Bill Clinton, who also conducted an affair with a 21-year-old White House intern in the Oval Office, will enjoy a prime-time speaking slot at the Democratic National Convention, as well. Guess which man Democrats think stands for "women's rights"? Unfortunately, Akin's goof could cost the GOP the Senate, which in turn could cost them a repeal of ObamaCare. Akin should have stepped aside for someone who's actually able to make a coherent statement about a fairly basic platform plank. Instead, he's staying in for the sake of "principle" (read: ego) and will almost certainly go down in defeat. Campaign Trail: Still Harping on Those Tax Returns The Obama re-election campaign continued its single-minded pursuit of Mitt Romney's tax returns this week, proving once again that the Republican's private sector pursuits are more important to them than a substantive debate about the economy. Obama campaign manager Jim Messina sent a letter to Romney campaign head Matt Rhoades reducing their demands to five years' worth of returns in exchange for a promise not to demand more information later in the campaign. However, there's no reason to believe that Obama's campaign would stick to that promise, and it's highly likely that Obama surrogates in the media would continue to hector Romney even if he did comply. Rhoades wisely didn't take the bait. Meanwhile, Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan voluntarily released two years' tax returns, revealing that he and his wife paid $34,233 in 2010 and $64,764 in 2011 in federal taxes, effective rates of 15.9 percent and 20 percent, respectively. No word yet from the Obama campaign about how unhappy they are that Ryan didn't provide more information. Romney Maintains Fundraising Edge Despite Barack Obama's much-ballyhooed fundraising prowess, the Romney campaign has won the fundraising battle in each of the last three months. Obama quickly took to using the embarrassing numbers to cry poverty, but his campaign has burned through an astounding $325 million since formally announcing his re-election campaign last year. By comparison, George W. Bush spent $205 million by this point in 2004. No wonder Obama has held more fundraisers -- over 200 and counting -- than his five predecessors combined. True to his governing form, Obama's campaign spent $10 million more than it took in last month, its second straight month of deficit spending. Much of that money -- $48 million -- went into a massive advertising push in battleground states. Obama's team also employed 853 staffers in July, more than twice the number Romney had on the payroll. According to FEC filings, Romney now leads with $185.9 million total cash on hand compared to Obama's $123.7 million. For all the money that Obama has spent, and all the people his campaign has taken on, one would think he would've moved the poll numbers more clearly in his favor, yet the race remains close -- at least that's what the polls would have us believe. Title: The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 Post by: nChrist on August 25, 2012, 12:46:30 PM ____________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription (http://link.patriotpost.us/?136-160-160-217154-660) ____________________________ Obama Laments Being 'Swift-Boated' Military veterans are organizing to protest Barack Obama's use for political advantage of the Osama bin Laden raid and selective intelligence leaks. Obama brushed the criticism aside, saying, "I don't take these folks too seriously," a statement that we think reflects his view of members of the Armed Forces in general. To back himself up, he advised his critics to "talk to General McRaven, who's in charge of our Special Ops." Trouble is, William McRaven serves in the U.S. Navy and holds the rank of admiral, not general. At least Obama didn't refer to him as a corpse-man. To further bolster his credentials as comrade in chief, Obama later added, "I've been criticized by some for being too vigorous in going after folks who leak information that impacts our national security." His "vigorous" pursuit of leakers has yet to yield any suspects, however, and no formal investigation has taken place. The Obama campaign has indeed been vigorous in one way: vilifying veterans concerned about intelligence leaks, especially singling out on Obama's campaign website organizations such as Special Operations for America and Veterans for a Strong America. John Kerry, whose questionable military record was exposed in 2004 by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, shamelessly denounced veterans' criticism, while leftist groups categorized U.S. Navy SEALs as "gutless." Someone's "gutless," all right, but it's not the Navy SEALs. Speaking of the SEALs, one of the members of the SEAL Team that dispatched bin Laden, wrote a book under the pseudonym "Mark Owen" detailing the raid. The former SEAL could face legal trouble, though, because he apparently didn't clear the book with the Pentagon to ensure no classified information was divulged. From the Left: Media Lapdogs Still Heel for Obama The cozy relationship Barack Obama has had with the White House press corps is starting to turn ever so slightly cooler thanks to his extended inaccessibility. Just as murmurs were spreading, however, the president made a surprise appearance at the Monday press briefing, his first appearance in the West Wing since March. He took four questions and spoke for 22 minutes, focusing on trying to refute the charge that his campaign has become excessively negative. For example, he protested, "Nobody accused Mr. Romney of being a felon," disregarding Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter's doing so last month when discussing the aforementioned tax returns. Rather than face tough questions about his failed economic policies in Washington, Obama has chosen instead to grant interviews to such journalistic stalwarts as Entertainment Tonight, ESPN and People magazine. Cutter went so far as to claim that these staged media appearances and the White House press corps are "equally important." Despite the continued snubs, however, the media obediently continue serving as Obama's lapdogs while yapping about their objectivity and the First Amendment. Hope 'n' Change: 'My Brother's Keeper' The character of the Democrat and Republican presidential candidates came into sharp relief this past week in two separate stories. The first, by writer Dinesh D'Souza, co-director of the documentary film "2016 -- Obama's America," explores the relationship between Barack Obama and his brother George. The president, who religiously repeats that "we are our brother's keeper," remains estranged from his own half-brother, who lives in abject poverty in Nairobi, Kenya. When George Obama needed financial help to cover medical bills for his son who suffers from a chest ailment, he turned to D'Souza because brother Barack refuses to even acknowledge him. The brothers last met in 2006, but Barack never offered to "spread the wealth around" with George. Likewise, since becoming president he hasn't provided any assistance to his brother -- even for George to visit his own mother in the United States. The second story explores an episode from Mitt Romney's time at Bain Capital in 1996. One of Bain's employees came to Romney with the news that his daughter had gone to a rave in New York City and had been missing for three days. Romney promptly closed the office, traveled with the entire staff to New York, and beat the streets for several days until they found the wayward 14-year-old. These two stories speak volumes about the choice American voters will face in November. One man preaches from the supposed moral high ground yet remains deliberately aloof and turns his back on his own family. The other man values close relationships with family and community and is willing to give of himself to those in his charge. The man we choose as our next president will be a reflection not only on the candidates, but on us as well. Virginia Voter ID Law Passes DoJ Muster It's not the strongest law on the books, but the commonwealth of Virginia will be allowed to enact its newly revised voter identification statute this fall. Because Virginia is one of 16 states covered in whole or in part by a provision of the Voting Rights Act requiring federal approval of state election law changes, the fact that Attorney General Eric Holder's Justice Department allowed this change on the eve of a presidential election indicates Virginia's new rules weren't worth the fight that may have ensued. The DoJ is already embroiled in contesting voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas. Holder's office may have given Virginia a pass because the state accepts non-photo forms of identification, including utility bills, paychecks, bank statements and government checks. Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell concurrently signed an executive order to send a new voter identification card to all active voters in the commonwealth. On the other hand, the new law eliminates the option of signing an affidavit to vote without any identification -- those voters can now only cast provisional ballots, counted only after proof of identification is received. With Virginia considered one of a handful of battleground states, the effect of the new law will be watched closely. When a government check can be used as identification, the number of possible Democrat voters will surge to record highs. Fast and Furious Report Reveals Further Corruption The next inspector general's report on Fast and Furious is finished and soon to be released with one detail particularly noteworthy. Former ATF official Bill McMahon remains on paid leave from the agency while drawing a six-figure salary from J.P. Morgan, the investment bank. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who are heading up the congressional investigation, are demanding answers. "Given McMahon's outsized role in the Fast and Furious scandal," they wrote, "the decision to approve an extended annual leave arrangement in order to attain pension eligibility and facilitate full-time, outside employment while still collecting a full-time salary at ATF raises a host of questions about both the propriety of the arrangement and the judgment of ATF management." Indeed, but that's the story of the whole scandal, isn't it? Economy Around the Nation: Election Posturing Pre-empts Job Creation Now that "Recovery Summer 3.0" is proving to be as much of a bust as the previous two -- unemployment increased in 44 states in July -- the Obama campaign/administration is scrambling to blame Republicans for the oncoming "fiscal cliff" that will occur if both the massive tax increases and federal spending sequestration mandated by the 2011 budget deal take effect. Meanwhile, the administration discovered unspent federal money that states have to "use or lose" by the first of October, conveniently in time for the election. The Congressional Budget Office, which admittedly is full of Keynesians that make faulty assumptions about taxing and spending, painted two different scenarios for 2013: One depends on raising taxes and cutting $100 billion in federal spending; the second preserves both the tax rates and current spending. In the first instance, the deficit drops to $641 billion but GDP growth slows to a negative 0.5 percent and unemployment jumps to 9.1 percent. On the other hand, keeping both tax rates and spending in place would leave the deficit at $1.037 trillion but the economy would creep along at a 1.7 percent GDP growth, and unemployment would plateau at 8 percent. Some choice. To help with Obama's re-election, then, the administration issued an offer for states to spend $473 million in leftover earmark cash set aside between 2003 and 2006. "These idle earmarks have sat on the shelf as our infrastructure continued to age and construction workers stood on the sideline," said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. But the money won't be available until the Department of Transportation approves the projects, so swing states and districts with vulnerable Democrats will probably be first in line to get the symbolic checks -- the real cash comes much later. The earmark funds would be perhaps the easiest way to announce budget "savings," but why do that when Obama can grease the palms of important constituents? Title: The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 Post by: nChrist on August 25, 2012, 12:47:23 PM ____________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription (http://link.patriotpost.us/?136-160-160-217154-660) ____________________________ Regulatory Commissars: EPA Gets Split Decisions in Federal Court The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia provided a mixed bag of results for the Obama administration's job-killing EPA over the last week, giving the agency a victory in its quest to force E15 ethanol blend fuel on the automotive market but losing a bid to unilaterally set cross-state air pollution rules. A diverse group of automakers, grocers and other manufacturers asked the court to toss out the ethanol mandates but were denied only because, in the court's eyes, they lacked standing to bring the case. Who are automakers, after all, to decide what fuel will damage the engines they build? Two of the three judges on the panel denied the plaintiffs' standing, while Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a George W. Bush appointee, dissented. This leaves only Congress to void the E15 rules. Kavanaugh was on the winning side, however, in the cross-state air pollution case. This dispute pitted a number of Southern and Western states against a group of states mainly along the East Coast, a cadre that blames upwind states and their coal-burning power plants for the poor air quality suffered by those in the Northeast. Yet this three-judge panel threw out the EPA rules, citing the authority of states to enforce federal limits on pollution as they see fit and not under a blanket, one-size-fits-all EPA edict. Moreover, they ruled the EPA can't force a state to do any more than its assigned share to remedy downwind states. With the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule vacated, the EPA will revert to the Bush-era Clean Air Interstate Rule. Security Warfront With Jihadistan: 'Friendly' Fire U.S. troops in Afghanistan have endured an increasing rate of so-called "green-on-blue" attacks -- "green" referring to Afghan Army forces, "blue" to NATO forces -- perpetrated by disgruntled allies or Taliban infiltrators. Some 40 U.S. and NATO troops have been killed so far this year in such attacks, and they show no signs of abating. In fact, U.S. troops are still fighting and dying at a rate of about one per day in Afghanistan, while nearly 70,000 troops will remain in the country after Oct. 1. The primary task for U.S. forces now is to train the Afghans to handle their own security. There are approximately 350,000 Afghan security forces, but it is becoming increasingly difficult for U.S. troops to do their jobs with the rise in insider attacks. Yet preventing Afghanistan from again devolving into the terrorist breeding ground it was prior to 9/11 is still America's foremost national security interest there. As it stands, however, many Americans -- apparently including the commander in chief -- would rather forget about the war than remain vigilant. DHS, Social Media and You Former U.S. Marine Brandon Raub, a veteran of both Afghanistan and Iraq, was detained (handcuffed and apparently not read his Miranda rights) last week and subjected to a psychiatric evaluation for Facebook posts he made referencing a coming revolution. There certainly may be extenuating circumstances, but short of a lot of additional evidence indicating this individual was an imminent threat, this arrest was outrageous. Yesterday, a judge agreed and ordered his release due to insufficient evidence. Raub subscribes to some unfortunate conspiracy theories, but if the FBI picked up everyone who bought into stupid theories, the entire Obama administration would be arrested for subscribing to those of Karl Marx. In related news, The New York Times reports, "Analysts for a Department of Homeland Security program that monitors social networks like Twitter and Facebook have been instructed to produce reports on policy debates related to the department, a newly disclosed manual shows. ... The 2011 manual, which was disclosed this week as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, lists a series of categories that constitute an 'item of interest' warranting a report. One category is discussion on social media networks of 'policy directives, debates and implementations related to DHS.'" The manual includes a list of keywords that analysts may look for when perusing social media sites. Of course, only the dumbest "terrorists" are unaware of the DHS social network monitoring capability, and dumb terrorists are often self-solving, blowing themselves up while trying to make bombs. Department of Military Correctness: Hasan's Beard U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, the jihadi mass murderer who opened fire at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, killing 14 people including an unborn child, has successfully delayed his court-martial -- all because of the Islamic beard he grew once put in prison. Hasan has refused on six occasions to shave, arguing that his "religious" choice trumps U.S. military code. Prosecutors are seeking to have him forcibly shaved so that the trial can proceed, but the judge has yet to rule. Ironically, the same government that is providing Islamic meals for Hasan and tip-toeing around the beard issue is the same government that decided his shouting "Allahu Akbar!" while shooting innocent people was just a case of "workplace violence." Enough is enough -- Hasan should either be shaved or permitted to appear in court as the jihadi scum he is. Justice must be done. Immigration Front: Alabama and Bloomberg's Kooky Idea With Alabama as the latest battleground in the war over illegal immigration, a federal court this week upheld parts of that state's immigration law while striking down other parts. The ruling is in keeping with the Supreme Court's recent decision on Arizona's immigration law, with the key difference that the court in the Alabama case ruled that schools cannot check the legal status of students on enrollment as this would be "a substantial burden on the right of undocumented school children to receive an education." (You'll find this "right" in the Constitution in Article -- oh, wait, never mind.) Despite ridiculous court rulings, though, some states are still standing firm. Arizona and Nebraska, for example, showed they are unimpressed with the president's recent "DREAM" executive order, announcing that they won't accept documents stemming from the order to provide driver's licenses and welfare benefits. On another note, 10 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents sued the administration to stop its DREAM implementation. Meanwhile, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has his own approach to illegal immigration -- and apparently his own reality as well. Speaking at an immigration forum in Boston earlier this month, Bloomberg claimed "nobody has come across the border in a long time." He advised would-be illegal immigrants that the best way into the country is to "get on an airplane, fly here, and overstay your visa." He also suggested that illegal immigrants be "assigned" to a city, such as Detroit, where if they can survive for seven years without taking government benefits or getting arrested, they and their families should receive citizenship. In Bloomberg's twisted universe, cracking down on sugary drinks and salt is more important than protecting our borders. Title: The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 Post by: nChrist on August 25, 2012, 12:48:22 PM ____________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 8-24-2012 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription (http://link.patriotpost.us/?136-160-160-217154-660) ____________________________ The Assange Sideshow Julian Assange, the founder of the government-document leaking website WikiLeaks, has been holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to prevent British authorities from extraditing him to Sweden to face charges of rape and sexual assault. Assange claims that, if he is extradited, Sweden will then extradite him to the United States to face torture and execution for treason. Assange's WikiLeaks published massive quantities of sensitive and classified U.S. government documents, damaging American intelligence operations and assets. Assange obtained the documents through U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning, who has been charged with a number of offenses, including communicating national defense information to an unauthorized source and aiding the enemy. In Assange's London sideshow, on a balcony in the Ecuadorian embassy, he told supporters he was the victim of U.S. oppression and demanded that the U.S. "renounce its witch-hunts against WikiLeaks." He called for the release of Manning, trying to position himself as a defender of free speech. Meanwhile, he and his supporters praise Ecuador, with its lack of a free press, for acting in accord with principles of international human rights. Culture Faith and Family: FRC Shooting After last week's shooting by a homosexual activist at the Christian-run Family Research Council (FRC) in Washington, DC, sanctimonious leftists at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) continue to call FRC a "hate group" for peacefully supporting the traditional definition of marriage between a man and a woman. In the SPLC's (and Leftmedia's) view, dissent from leftist orthodoxy warrants such labeling. As the SPLC refuses to admit any difference between violent groups and a Christian organization whose views on marriage and family are closely aligned with the majority of the country's citizens, its "hate group" designation is rendered meaningless. It's worth pondering why left-wing groups continue to demand tolerance of everyone else while they themselves practice the most intolerance against anyone with whom they disagree. Hypocrites don't deserve what they don't practice. In related and breaking news this morning, details are sketchy but several people were shot at the Empire State Building in New York City. Finally, in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik was deemed sane and sentenced to a period between 10 years and the maximum 21 years in prison for the mass shooting and bombing that killed 77 last year. Woefully insufficient, in our humble opinion. The media continue to perpetuate the myth that Breivik was a "right-wing extremist," but that was easily debunked last year. This Just In: Leftists Aren't That Charitable A recent study by the Chronicle of Philanthropy yielded some interesting, albeit unsurprising, results: Those who live in Red states give more of their income to charity than those in Blue states. The study examined individual tax returns from zip codes across the country, taking into account both religious and political affiliation. The Chronicle also found a direct correlation between religion and philanthropy. Indeed, the New England states, which are among the most secular in the country, landed at the bottom of the list. Of course, most of the media outlets covering the story made a point of saying that wealthier people, particularly those who live among other wealthy people, give less. They even quoted experts who cited a "lack of empathy" among high earners, who become increasingly focused on themselves and "less attuned" to the needs of others. That conveniently echoes what the Obama campaign has been saying about GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney -- that, because of his wealth, he is out of touch with the "average" American and especially the poor. Like so many of the Left's theories, however, it's been reduced to empty rhetoric. Romney's charitable giving dwarfs Obama's. In the years leading to his bid for the White House, Obama gave between 0.4 and 1.4 percent of his income to charity. Romney, on the other hand, gave 13.8 percent in 2010 and 19.2 percent in 2011. Ironically, his giving lowered his tax burden considerably and opened him up to class warfare attacks by the Left for supposedly not paying his "fair share." It just goes to show that leftists are always very generous with other people's money, but not nearly so with their own. It also reaffirms the generosity of those who live for something greater than themselves. People don't need to be forced by the government to give to those less fortunate. They'll do it all on their own -- as long as they're still employed. Planned Parenthood Wins a Round in Kansas In a case we documented last year, Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri went on trial in 2007 for allegedly falsifying records for patients who had late-term abortions, among other things. Further, a bombshell erupted late last year when documents critical to the case were found to have been shredded by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in 2005 -- during the tenure of then-Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who is now Obama's Secretary of Health and Human Services. At first, prosecutors appeared to have a solid case against Planned Parenthood. But in November last year, 49 of 107 charges were dropped -- including 23 felony charges -- and 26 more were dismissed two weeks ago by Judge Stephen Tatum. The entire five-year-old trial stinks of corruption after prosecutors tossed the 32 remaining misdemeanor charges -- which alleged Planned Parenthood broke state law on fetus-viability tests and illegally performed late-term abortions. In another twist, District Attorney Phill Kline -- the original prosecutor in the trial -- lost re-election to Steve Howe in the 2008 Republican primary. Kline now faces ethics allegations amid an effort to have his law license revoked because of his role in the Planned Parenthood investigation. According to LifeSiteNews.com's Kathleen Gilbert, Howe "consulted unnamed medical experts who agreed with Planned Parenthood's methods of determining gestational age, and that it was 'reasonably probable' that an unborn child would die if born at 24 weeks, and thus should be considered non-viable." The move was praised by Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards who declared, "The message is clear. You cannot use public office to warp the law to advance an ideological agenda aimed at intimidating women and the health care providers they rely on." There's an ideological agenda, all right, but the gist of the story is: Nothing to see here folks, move along. And Last... A group of Muslims in Staten Island, New York, recently gathered for prayer to celebrate the end of Ramadan, but they were dismayed to find the park unfit for their presence. As New York's WCBS-TV reports, "Before most of the faithful arrived for Morning Prayer, it was discovered that someone had scattered a quantity of raw bacon on the field." That, of course, was a job for the NYPD's Hate Crimes Task Force (sadly, we're not making that up). As Muslims are forbidden to eat (or apparently be in the vicinity of) pork, someone must have really been spreading the hate. As it turns out, however, the whole thing was a mistake. The Staten Island Advance received an anonymous confession from a man who admitted putting the bacon there. He explained, "It was going bad in my trunk and I put it out for the scavengers like the opossums and the raccoons and sea gulls, and I did not intend for that to cause anybody any problems." On second thought, this crime really is serious. How could anyone let bacon go bad in a car trunk? Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis! Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team (Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.) |