Stop Helping Liars Get A Definition Of Lying That Helps No-One

1) One knows of a treachery occurring in a neighbor's home. That treachery is the abuse and sexual slavery of minor girls. Would the action of one to stop the treachery be a sin ?

2) One knows of a treachery occurring in a neighbor's home. That treachery is the abuse and sexual slavery of minor girls. Would the action of one to uncover that treachery in a way that valid authorities may use to stop that treachery be a sin ?

Since no one presumes that the villain will act in a manner accorded gentlemen; no one ought to be expected to accord them the courtesy of gentlemen. The use of subterfuge to extract the plain truth from a villain is often necessary.

To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error.

Error is the state of being wrong in conduct or judgment.

To lead someone into error is to lead them away from God.

To use subterfuge to extract truth that will open the eyes of those that know truth, and in like manner help those heretofore involved in villainy, is an act of charity and leads to truth. Leading to truth is leading away from error.

Were one to say that a child was a victim of rape when the truth was that the child was owned as a sex slave, that is a lie. It is told to lead the hearer in error. Told in order to keep the sin of the teller from view of the hearer. Told in order to get benefit for the child's abuser.

Speaking to an abettor of child abuse in a manner that draws them into your confidence in order to greater expose their crimes is not lying.




Dr. Gerard Nadal articulates what I was trying to say.

Not That There Is Any Real Surprise

But if there was a lack of evidence that we as a nation are in dire straits, one look at this will be enough.

Over 50 % of voters that call themselves Republicans consider Health Care, The Financial System(whatever that means) and Energy as important issues in the upcoming Congressional election. We all expect, and receive, that type of un-Constitutional feeling from Democrats. Now it is plain to see that Republicans feel that way too, and are also unworthy of the franchise.

More than one radio talker makes a good living spouting the thoughtless statement "it is time to take back the Republican Party". Take it back from whom, exactly ? This is not just a bunch of corrupt men at the top. Nor is it a bunch of good minded men that were corrupted by the system. This is the Republican Party. If you dream of, wish for and want an America that you claim to want; one with the ideals of the founders and the vigor of those that built her to greatness, then speak the truth to all. The Republican Party and the Democrat Party are one and the same.

They may differ on how fast we achieve Socialism, but they are both taking us there.

חֻצְפָּה

Lookup Chutzpah and you will see this as the definition:
Murderer Seeks Protection From Murderers


To whom were the unborn to cry to for help, you ugly bastard ?!?!?!?






H/T: Jill Stanek

In Case You Missed It

And there is little doubt that you did, because this story does not fit the narrative of anti-choice murderers of children:

Dozens of people who were blinded or otherwise suffered severe eye damage when they were splashed with caustic chemicals had their sight restored with transplants of their own stemcells

For those impaired by liberalism/progressiveism that means ADULT STEM CELLS !!!!!



H/T: Coming Home

Because This Can Never Be Said Enough

Each and every child is a special gift from God and we should be thankful to Him for each one.

When The Left Speaks Slowly It Is Because They Cannot Think Very Quickly

Too bad for them they cannot think very well either.
By far the greatest outcry against the "evil corporation" following the West Virginia mining disaster has been by Progressive/Socialists.
One brainiac went so far as to say that if there were 15-20 Wall Street brokers dying every year or that same number of political radio commenters were suffering horrible deaths there would certainly be a call to do something. He spoke this nonsense in a slow thoughtful cadence that surely was meant to give the listener a sense of how profound he was.
He forgets, as they all do, that there is a far greater danger involved with going underground than sitting behind a computer screen and/or a microphone.

However, I am completely unable to understand how these very same clowns that are calling for criminal investigations of Massey Energy can stand four-square against parental notification, become indignant when legislators pass laws requiring full disclosure of all medical facts regarding the fetus and cry foul when clear-headed, right-thinking lovers of all human life wish to protect our pre-born brothers and sisters.

Using language condemning Massey Energy specifically, and all large corporations generally, for putting profit ahead of human life these same self-professed nurturers of all things good have no anger towards the profits raised by Planned Parenthood generally, and any abortion mill specifically, directly due to the destruction of human life.

One day Americans will, I pray, wake up to this cognitive dissonance, at best, in the culture and in themselves.

The Question Isn't Would Reagan Be "Reagan Enough", It Is When Will The Republican Party Stop Supporting A Scozzafava Over A Hoffman

There is still way too much whining going on about conservative voters wanting to get candidates that represent their conservative values.
Including such nonsense about Reagan not being "Reagan enough".
Please.
In the 1976 Republican primaries Reagan was not "Reagan enough" to beat Gerry Ford for crying out loud. The Gerry Ford that couldn't beat Jimmy Carter. 0bama without the hate America streak.


Stop with the whining about there being too much call for conservative values and get on with giving voters a conservative option to the Democrats Progressive/Socialist.


After buying the bill of goods that was 1994, conservatives all went along with the "Party over principle" idea.
This was done in the 1996 and 1998 and 2000 and 2002 and 2004 elections.
Slowly we all woke up and realized that the Party had left our conservative principles behind. Some of us woke up earlier than others.
In 2006 conservatives did not vote for the lesser of two evils in the percentages that they had in the past five elections; so much less that the Democrats regained control of Congress.
In 2008 the Republican Party still hadn't shown much concern for principles that matched the conservative principles of Republican voters, but some Republican candidates did.
Those candidates were supported.
Now here we are with the 2010 election cycle in full swing and we are being told to keep holding our noses and vote R just so a D doesn't win. (NY-23 anyone? The RNC supported Scozzafava. See Post Title) Hell no.
We already see what we get when we voted Socialist lite from 1996-2004. That wasn't very good.
Many "Republicans" then ask was it better than we got in 2008 ?
Yes, but the elections of 2006 and 2008 would not have resulted in the debacle we are in had the Republican Party stayed true to their constituency. Now, out of power, all the Republicans are crying that we have to stick together and support them.
Where were they when we called for Fiscal Responsibility and Laws that re-established The Congress as the Legislative Branch not The Supreme Court ?!?!?!?
For nearly 37 years the Republican voters of this nation have sought for and end to unlimited, unfettered destruction of pre-born babies. We are still waiting and praying.
If the Republicans do attain power, they will not repeal the monstrosity that is "Health" "Care" "Reform"any quicker.
There is power and control over the people in that law and they will be in power and they will want that power to remain. They were the Party that got the great example of individual liberties The PATRIOT ACT passed. When the Republican Party presents candidates that represent conservative principles conservative voters will vote for them.
The Republican Party can be and is a "big tent".
Scott Brown does not represent the conservative values held by the majority of Utah Republicans but he won election in his own home State of Massachusetts because he represents the values of Massuchusetts Republicans and very many non-Republicans.


That is how Republicans will win elections.


By representing the values of the voters. Before and after elections.

Just A Little Reminder For All Of The Fair-Tax Fans Of The Insanity Of Keeping The I.R.S. Infrastructure For Their Beloved Prebate

When they impose "the one-child policy" all that will be required is the use of the I.R.S.

With the simple ruse of imposing a tax every single one of our "rights" evaporate.

As we approach the 100th Anniversary of the monstrosity of The 16th Amendment's Income Tax, keep in mind that a large portion of the the fanfare surrounding this 0bama "Health" "Care" "Reform" law is how it took nearly 100 years to get it done.

I can hardly wait to see how the Progressives/Socialists celebrate that anniversary.

Funny Thing About Names

Michael Savage has on occasion said that there is a correlation between the spelling and/or sound of your name and the kind of person you are.


Rep. Stupak has achieved his great fame, especially of late, due to his being stupid enough to believe that people have no access to his prior speeches.


What is truly sad is that this was kept so under wraps that he had been awarded a "Defender of Life" by the Susan B. Anthony list. Only his reaction to the awarded being rescinded was sadder as he claimed that "I stood on my principle. I don't need an award." Some principles there Rep. Stupak.

New Medical Guidelines For The Next Generation

If they survive until birth.

Because the Congress is insistent upon taking our money to seek their destruction.

Ghouls. That is what currently is the Democrat Party.

The Party of Annihilation.

To think that calling the Republican Party the Party of No was supposed to be a bad thing. These ghoulish inhabitants of the Party of Death demand that YOU pay for the destruction of your fellow Americans.

Anyone that continues to call themselves a Democrat while this is their raison d'être is deserving of the (God willing) upcoming forced career.


H/T: Chicks on the Right
Flopping Aces
Another Black Conservative

Not All Conspiracies Are A Group Of Powerful Men Sitting Around A Large Table

More likely than not they aren't conspiracies at all.
Rather they are the separate plans of the like-minded.

Here are three stories about ideas that seem to have been arrived at in completely different circumstances at completely different times. Yet, they all go together in a very cohesive manner.

Striking number of obesity risks hit minority kids
Hidden Healthcare Reform Objective: Feds Want to Know Your Number
Planned Parenthood to Open Largest Abortion Business Soon in Houston, Texas

Like-minded, evil, inhumane, obscene, minds.

Before We Go Looking For A Scott Brown Here In Illinois

Or, anywhere else, for that matter.

We all need to remember that there is a HUGE difference between a New England Republican and a Liberty-minded Freedom Loving Conservative.

Among these differences is the primary and fundamental belief in the Sanctity of Life and the knowledge that the purpose of government is to support the God-given rights of Life and Liberty for all men.

While it may appear that saying he is against Federally funded abortion he is Libertarian in his leanings, there is no way that anyone can demand that their tax dollars are not used in that manner. Taxes go into a big pot and after the graft those dollars get doled out according to the whims of the current Congress.

Those supposed Libertarian leanings are just pandering to the center left. New England style.

As far as being a Republican, keep this phrase in mind : "Brown has said the GOP shouldn’t take his vote for granted on every issue. He says he’s fiscally conservative but more moderate on social issues."

Why be a Republican, then, except for the only reason any of them are: Ballot Access !

Has Justice Been Done, Or Has It Been Disregarded To Produce The Desired Result ?

There are some that find the actions of Scott Roeder reprehensible. There are some that find his actions to be understandable while not in line with the beliefs that drove him. There are some that see it as a multiple Human Tragedy.
There are some that find his actions the expected even necessary ends given the obscenities of George Tiller's chosen profession.

I find the decision of the jury to be disheartening.

But, even more than that I find the actions of the judge to be disturbing.

I've read that the presiding judge instructed the jury to disregard the defense's contention that Mr. Roeder's actions were to protect life because his actions were to stop a lawful threat.

The judge even reminded the jury that the victim posed no imminent threat to anyone as he stood in his church.

Both are true according to Kansas Statutes. But, is the judge's decision to disallow the “necessity defense” at trial not, "clearly castrating a jury of the defendant’s peers to not allow them to hear the full defense, and the defendant’s justification (in his mind) for doing so…simply because the activity he criminally disrupted was immoral to him." There are yet to be seen consequences of disallowing a defense because "what Tiller did at his clinic Monday through Friday is lawful in Kansas."

Moreover, I have yet to read that the judge instructed the jury of their right to nullify said statutes.

Because he also instructed the jury that they could not consider lesser charges; its only choice was to convict or acquit on first-degree murder.

Every member of the jury knew, as they were reminded by the defense, "The state…has proved that Scott Roeder killed George Tiller. But only you, collectively, can determine if he murdered George Tiller"

With so much evidence that Mr. Roeder had indeed caused the death of Mr. Tiller in a pre-meditated manner, there is no doubt that the jury could not find Mr. Roeder innocent. Unless they were fully knowledgeable about their right to nullify any law.

To those who will say that is allowing Mr. Roeder to get away with murder, I reply, simply, no it is requiring the State to file charges consistent with the sensibilities of the people.

But, did the jury understand the right of nullification ? Did the judge overstep his position ?

We must wait for the appeals to be filed to understand whether or not the defense thinks that there was a grave injustice done here.

We Now Know What It Takes For Progressives To Admit That There Is A Constitution

Sen. Schumer (D-NY) has pitched a fit following The United States Supreme Court finding a part of McCain-Feingold unConstitutional.

In a 5-4 decision SCOTUS found that union and corporate paid issue ads cannot be banned in the closing days of campaigns.

"They also overturned two earlier decisions and threw out parts of a 63-year-old law that said companies and unions can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to produce and run their own campaign ads urging the election or defeat of particular candidates by name"

So, old Chuck has decided that A): There should be hearings on this "un-American decision" and B): "we need to consider a Constitutional amendment"

What a guy !
He has come to believe that there actually is a Constitution (a real one, not the fake "living" one), and that now it needs to be Amended - almost Founder-like, WOW
Plus
He has come to realize that The Supreme Court is not the final arbiter of all things Constitutional - which up until now was the left's second sacrament, second only to abortion, but I digress.

Just as soon as Chuckie goes and flips his lid along come 0bama with some brilliance.

This will lead to a “stampede of special interest money in our politics.”

In his calling it a victory for Big Oil and Big Banks and Big Insurance and Big Other Things, he left out the fact that there was no crying from the left about Big Union having that freedom in the past and all this did was level the playing field.

But, the left does not do so well when the playing field is level, now do they ?

Greed May Be The Deadliest Sin

Abortion as a means of birth-control has always been about money.
While there have been other reasons used to rationalize the use of abortion, there will always be at it's root cause one thing - money.

How can I afford a(nother) baby ?
How can I afford a special needs baby.
Usually, as I said, intermingled with the compassion of how can I bring a(nother) baby into this world, especially a special needs baby ?

All the while, of course, calling it a mass of cells or some such way of denying the truth.

I will be alone if I do not abort it, my "man" will leave me.

This one can all by itself fill days of explaining that ain't a man. What the hell are you thinking being with a guy that would kill a baby just so he can keep his toys ? This guy will kill a baby, what the hell do you think he thinks of you ? Forget the dream of a long train on your wedding gown and the beautiful veil, this guy has and will kill all of your dreams.
See, it becomes pretty obvious that is a boy; a spoiled rotten little boy. But, truly what did you all expect to happen when the feminist (there is a great misnomer) movement pushed their emasculating agenda on the culture ?

So very compassionate to determine that your own needs trump that of anyone else, but surely they are more important than a baby's.

Now, if only all of the women that choose abortion just come to grips with the real reason.

It is several thousand dollars less expensive to abort than to raise a child.
At what price ?
Future episodes of depression and an increase in the chances of contracting breast cancer. Leaving out the damage to your immortal soul, is it really worth it ?

In fits of anger, I say let the liberal idiots kill themselves off.

Then I am overwhelmed with feelings of shame and guilt and repent of such hateful thoughts, because they are not killing themselves off. They are killing others at the altar of their own making.

Liberal compassion is killing the weakest so that they have more for themselves.

That is the essence of abortion.


Greed.
Greed in a manner only Satan can smile at.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

A Virginia woman suffocates her newborn. She is not charged with any crime.

You see,

“In the state of Virginia as long as the umbilical cord is attached and the placenta is still in the mother, if the baby comes out alive the mother can do whatever she wants to with that baby to kill it,” said Investigator Tracy Emerson. “She could shoot the baby, stab the baby. As long as it’s still attached to her in some form by umbilical cord or something it’s no crime in the state of Virginia.”

NO, there is no Unintended Consequence of a baby dying, that was the full intention of the law. That is WHY the law was written in such a manner.

As Uncle Di so aptly points out:

"Because the mother and baby were still connected by the umbilical cord and placenta, state law does not consider the baby to be a separate life." They're saying, in short, state law does not consider the baby to be a baby.

Put that way, something looks wrong.

The Unintended Consequence was that there would be reporters needing to resemble pretzels to write about it.

Our Lady of Guadelupe pray for us.

A very simple explanation of what the Democrat Party stands for

Gregory of Yardale, sums it all up so brilliantly I am still amazed by how succinct his words are

If the Democrats can't kill the kids in the womb, they sentence them to the worst possible schools.

'Nuff Said !

Calling a Spade a Spade !

Van Helsing minces no words

But don't call him an abortionist…

Hern explained to Richardson that the "abortionist" label is now "a degrading and demeaning word that has the same negative connotations as the most despicable racial epithet."

Now can we stop with the "pro-choice" nonsense ?

Liberty and Freedom are still celebrated on this day

For all of those Puritanical prudes who harbor ill will towards Gov. Sanford, have no fear, there is still greatness in SC.

I give you the Honorable Senator Jim DeMint

While we are talking about Mark Sanford, I am sure if you came here you have read the bloggers that see no difficulty in "ventilating" that sorry "S.O.B.". I am also sure that you read those self-same bloggers go on and on about how wrong it was to "ventilate" "Dr." Tiller.

I am personally at a loss to understand how it is pro-life to wish harm to a confessing adulterer while proclaiming it an awful tragedy to have done harm to an admittedly proud late-term abortionist.

These bloggers went on about how it is murder to have killed "Dr." Tiller because he did nothing illegal.

To all of you I ask, what illegal activity did Mark Sanford engage in that warrants his "ventilating" ? If you are going to try to wiggle out of it by saying that it isn't a call for his death, just what exactly are you calling for ? Are you saying an attempted murder is OK if it is unsuccessful ? That is quite the knot into which you tie your logic.

Thankfully, all y'all do not comprise most juries.

But, I digress.

¡Viva Libertad!

More, and more on topic, at Legal Insurrection

AND another great site, pointed to by Legal Insurrection Honduras Abandoned

What She Said !!!!!!

Hurrah for Jill Stanek !