Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | April 28, 2013

Gosnell Trial To Graphic For The Media?

Another day has gone by, and the media is continuing their avoidance of the Kermit Gosnell murder trial that is taking place in Philadelphia, PA.

If you have not heard, Kermit Gosnell, a doctor who performed abortions at his office is currently on trial facing 8 murder charges.  One for a patient that died in his care, and the other seven are babies that he murdered.  Reports have been continuing to come out on the horrific deaths of babies at the hands of Mr. Gosnell.

Thus far we have not heard a peep from the White House or any big news source other than Fox News.  Then even when Fox News covered it, the anchor did not want to go into the horrific details, which on some level is reasonable, and it is good that they chose to set aside time to talk about this trial.

But does that leave everyone else exempt?  Do they think it is too horrific to talk about, or that it is just a local story that is not worth their time?  The Washington Post had been throwing the story off and labeling it is a local story and apparently wasn’t worth their time.  But they recently gave in after receiving criticism from its readers.

Speculation does not do much good, but let’s say that the story is to violent for places like CNN to cover.  In a culture that promotes violent films in which murder is common place and is now even used for comedy, how does this explanation even make sense?  Our society has become morally bankrupt and to say that they refuse to cover something because of the horrific content denotes that a sense of morality was used in the decision.  But we all know that this is certainly not the case.  It is a well-known saying in the media the if it ‘bleeds it leads’.  Any heart wrenching story is almost immediately picked up to major news outlets and sometimes carried across the country.

I have a strong feeling that the reason behind the medias blackout of the Gosnell trial is not because of the horrific content of the trial.  It is because it sheds a bad light on the abortion industry and hurts the liberal claim that banning abortions would force women into going to back alley abortions and having a bigger chance of dying.  The fact is women are still dying from abortions, we just never hear about them, as the stories are swept under the rug and forgotten about.

That President Obama and other major political figures are ignoring this trial, shows where they really stand in the quote on quote, “War on Women”.  If they respect women as much as they claim, then this trial would be at the top of their list, and they should be concerned about other women who could have been hurt by this alleged doctor.  The fact that they’re ignoring this trial, and the death of one woman and a countless number of infants is very telling and people should take notice.  Call your congressman, your senators, and for PA call your local representatives, if they have ignored this story and ask them why.  This so-called doctor got away with murders for years, and also got away with not having his “clinic” inspected for over a decade and got away with it.  Let’s not let him get off the hook as the media blacks his trial out.

Now, so far, this story has been promoted very well over social media and by great conservative blog sites like Breitbart.com and Twitchy.  And I would to say thank you to the countless number of citizens who will not let the terrible actions of Kermit Gosnell go quietly into the night.  Also, I must commend Fox News on mentioning and talking about the story as no other major cable channel will do.

A personal request – Make sure that you keep posting on Facebook and using the #Gosnell hashtag!  Please see to it that everyone knows who Kermit Gosnell is and hat he has done.

About these ads
Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | March 11, 2013

New York Judge Overturns Soda Ban

As many of you are aware, New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg has been touting one of his key pieces of legislation for the past couple of months.  The soda ban, which would have taken effect tomorrow, bans all sugary drinks that are larger than 16oz.

The ban was stopped today when a New York judged overturned the ban, stating that the mayors attempts at “portion control” were both “arbitrary” and “capricious”.  This ruling has taken a little of the wind out of Bloomberg’s sails, but he is not finished.  He will certainly hit back with another ban of some kind.

One thing that we can learn from this is that there are still intelligent judges in our judicial system that can recognize bad legislation when they see it.  And that some semblance of common sense still exists.

The people of New York City will no longer have to fear a soda ban, but have they truly learned their lesson?  Have they yet realized that politicians like Bloomberg will stop at nothing to do what he feels is in the best interest, when in actuality it is bad idea that hurts consumers?  If they have not realized this than this judges overturning of the ban will have meant nothing, and he might as well have let it go through so the people of the city realize what they when they reelected Bloomberg.

Another thing that I would like to note is while soda is certainly not the healthiest thing in the world for you, and I myself have chosen to refrain from drinking it.  You should never ban it, or any other thing, for the sake of “portion controls” or for any other reason.  It is not now and never will be the governments place to tell the American public what they can and cannot eat and drink.

Though I choose not to drink soda, I do not forbid any of my friends from drinking it, or admonish them if they get a large drink of soda.  This is the United States of America and they and anyone else can choose whatever they like to drink, as I choose for myself.

So in closing my final thoughts are towards the people of New York City.  Learn from your mistakes of the past, and use them for the future.  For if you do not then your city will surely go under.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | March 5, 2013

President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez Dies At 58 of Cancer

President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela passed away today due to a form of cancer that he had been fighting for two years.  The socialist party leader just recently won re-election as president of the country.

To many, Chavez was a dictator and ruled Venezuela for some 14 years, and his party will most likely remain in power.  Since he did not take the oath of office after winning the presidential election last year, a special presidential election will have to take place to fill the seat left by him.

For conservatives in American, this is a small victory.  Now, we do not revel in the death of others, we pray for such people and hope that they have a realization of the harm they caused before they die.  This is a small victory as Chavez was a close ally of Pres. Obama, and this may shake things up for him on the national scale.  Though most likely the socialist party will pull more strings and have their candidate win in the special election.  Chavez passed laws in Venezuela that made it so that television stations had to carry his hours of speeches by law, and that if any media became critical of his rule it was shut down, and was a well-known for opposition to the United States, namely the president at the time, George W. Bush.

If anyone remembers back in November, Hugo Chavez’s challenger had been ahead in the days leading up to the election.  But Chavez managed to somehow beat him by a good margin on the day of the election.

He ill be missed by some, those who supported him and his family, and for others it is a brief sigh of relief as we wait and see who will take his place in the coming months.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | February 22, 2013

Pennsylvania Voter ID Law On Hold For Another Election

The battle over Pennsylvania’s Voter I.D. law continues and will prevent the law from going into effect for another election as the state nears its May 21st primary. The law was first implemented last year and was almost in effect for the 2012 November election, but a lawsuit that was brought about by the ACLU pulled the rug out from under those who had hoped that the law would be able to help with coming elections.  So the law is in limbo until this lawsuit is over, which will hopefully end soon.

As a resident of Pennsylvania, this bill is a long-awaited solution.  Though it has been downplayed, voter fraud is very rampant, especially in the Philadelphia area and somewhat in the Pittsburgh area.

And also, to have a conservative law as the Voter I.D. law pass here is a major success, but it was not a big surprise that people from out-of-state came in to prevent it.  So now, we fight, hope and pray that the lawsuit will end and our Voter I.D. law will be able to go into effect and help keep voter fraud, at least a portion of it, out of our elections.

This is an issue that we have been dealing with for years.  States pass good legislation that will improve their state, and then outside groups like the ACLU fly in like a murder of crows to try to ‘fix’ things and do what they feel is right. I have a feeling that this will never end, but that does not mean that we do not have to sit back and say ‘oh that is life’.  It is ‘only life’ if that is hat you want it to be.

We must learn that we can no longer tolerate people coming in and telling us what we can and cannot do with our laws that were passed by legislators that we the people voted in to represent us.

So right now, we must fight for what we believe in and do not let progressive groups push us around.  It is time that we push back.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | February 12, 2013

The Right To Kill?

Just recently, DOJ documents were released, revealing what the administration can do with drones against specifically American citizens.  The memo is 16 pages long and gives justification in performing drone strikes on American citizens.  The specific paragraph in which the document mentions carrying a ‘lethal’ operation is at the end of the DOJ’s ‘White Page’ document, and reads as follows. -

In conclusion, it would be lawful for the United States to conduct a lethal operation outside the United States against a U.S. citizen who is a senior, operational leader of al-Qaeda or an associated force of al-Qaeda without violating the Constitution of the federal statutes discussed in this white paper under the following conditions: (1) an informed, high level official of the U.S. government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States; (2) capture is infeasible, and the United States continues to monitor whether capture becomes feasible; and (3) the operation is conducted in a manner consistent with the four fundamental principles of the laws of war governing the use of force.  As stated earlier, this paper does not attempt to determine the minimum requirements necessary to render such an operation lawful, nor does it assess what might be required to render a lethal operation against a U.S. citizen lawful in other circumstances.  It concludes only that the stated conditions would be sufficient to make lawful a lethal operation in a foreign country directed against a U.S. citizen with the characteristics described above.

If you would like to read the entire document, then you can follow this LINK.

This paragraph in itself is rather scary.  Looking at it on the surface, it looks as though it is targeted at al-Qaeda and other such terrorists.  But when it states that the targeted individual ‘poses a imminent threat of violent attack’…that is when it starts to get fuzzy.  It casts a large net and makes you wonder what people this government would think is a possible threat.  As Rush Limbaugh mentioned when he was talking about the document,  you don’t really have to be a part of al-Qaeda.  What is necessary is if you hate America and you could be linked as a ‘associated force’.

It is not all that surprising that these documents are leaking in the beginning of Pres. Obama’s second term as president.  I admit that it is not everyday that a secret document is leaked.  But, this document reveals something.  The administration has an open hostility towards terrorists and those who they have pegged as terrorists.

Below is a clip from Greta Van Susteren’s show in which she plays the clip of Rush Limbaugh’s reaction and interview with former Sen. Rick Santorum.

Rush makes two good points.  If this document was in place during Nixon’s term, then he could have legally had Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground taken out, he could have taken out the New Black Panther Party.  And also, that when Bush was in office, the Democrat side had heated arguments over the water boarding that went on.  And yet, this has not received much of a peep from the left.

I want all of you to be on guard and keep an eye out.  As you know I am not a conspiracy theorist, but this document does raise questions.  Specifically about the recent tragic home explosion in Indianapolis, Indiana which is being purported as a gas explosion.  But most are suspicious and wonder if it was possibly a drone strike.  There is no factual evidence of this at the moment, but again, the document does raise the question of the possibility that the United States has already used this document.

As I’ve said, these are trying times that we live in, and we must trust and pray that we can make it through.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | February 4, 2013

Senator Ted Cruz Sweeps The Floor At Gun Control Hearings

Earlier this week freshman Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas was part of the gun control hearings that are being held on Capitol Hill.  And when it came time for him to ask questions, he did not waste a minute.  Below is the full clip of him at the hearing -

In the clip from the hearing, Sen. Ted Cruz shows that he ran for senate for a purpose, and that is to help the people of his state and all citizens of the United States.  He gives a clear description of the system in D.C. for working in what he calls a ‘fact free zone’.  In which he said “Emotion often leads to bad policies.  When a tragedy occurs, this body rushes to act and at times it seems the considerations of this body operate in a fact free zone.”

So for once, there is a senator who is actually invested in doing his job which is to protect the U.S.A. and her citizens.  And to also uphold the constitution and make sure that things are done the way our forefathers intended.

Further in his statement and questioning, he pressed the point that we need to be ‘vigorous and unrelenting’ in working to prevent and deter violent criminals.    Cruz spoke on his experience in law enforcement and the violence that he has seen in his years on the job.  Next he said these words,

“At the same time I believe we should remain vigilant in protecting the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.  And I think far too often the approaches that have been suggested by this Congress to the issue of gun violence restricts the liberties of law-abiding citizens, rather than targeting violent criminals that we should be targeting.”

Sen. Cruz goes on to make many other good points, about how the passion shown by some of the members of the committee should just as equally be shown in a confirmation hearing.  Which is very true.  If these politicians are going to be this hard in a gun control hearing then they should be just as hard in a confirmation hearing where violent crime is involved.

One of the more important moments comes in the question when Cruz questions how the gun ban, like the gun ban of ’94, would work.  Comparing a regular rifle which would still be legal under the ban, but if it had a plastic grip attached it suddenly becomes banned.  When put in light, the gun ban does nothing but ban guns that essentially just look scary.

All of the new gun bans and gun laws that politicians have been putting up in the past month are ridiculous and not necessary.  What we really need to be doing is enforcing the gun laws that we already have in place.  Banning guns is not going to get you anywhere good.  By banning guns you will be taking fire arms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, and leaving them defenseless against criminals who do not care what the law says.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | January 21, 2013

Let’s Takeover Twitter For The Unborn!

Most of you might not have heard, but tomorrow is the Pro-Life Twitter Takeover Day.  All day the pro-life community of Twitter will post tweets with specific hashtag’s that pro-life related words or messages.

In our digital age it is more important than ever that we utilize the tools that have been set before us, to help promote the causes that we believe and care about.  Tomorrow we stand for life.  Below is the list of hashtag’s that we will be using all day with our tweet’s.

Even if it is one tweet, it could make all the difference.  I will be tweeting as much as I can tomorrow.

And if you do not have a Twitter account, than I encourage that you get one to help promote the Pro-Life message throughout the digital world.  Also, if we get enough people tweeting with these hashtag’s, we will make it to the Trending Topic’s on Twitter.  If we can achieve that, then potentially thousands of people will see our message!

Please take a stand and defend life!

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | January 18, 2013

What Is Wrong With The 2nd Amendment?

Over the past month since the Sandy Hook tragedy, there has been a big national debate on guns and the 2nd Amendment.  And as I have watched people debate it on television, I have been debating it myself with people over the internet.

One individual told me that the 2nd Amendment quote, “it doesn’t cover assault rifles.  It referred to flintlock weaponry.  So if you’d like, you can keep those.”

This tweet, out of all that I’ve seen between everyone, has made me stop and think.  What did we do wrong that people where never taught what the 2nd Amendment, or what any of the amendments really mean?  And also, what happened to understanding simple text?  It is not as if it is hard to understand the 2nd amendment.  The words are as clear as day.  Take a look for yourselves.

Amendment II

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

No where in the 2nd Amendment is ‘flintlock weaponry’ mentioned.  It is described as arms, in general.

Notice how it states that ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.’  It does not say that it can be meddled with, or that they can take certain guns away.  It says the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed ever at any time.

The 2nd Amendment is very clear, as our founding fathers wanted it to be.  Though if they would have had the foresight to see someone like Piers Morgan making ridiculous claims about the 2nd Amendment and blowing issues way out of proportion then they probably would have worked to make it even more painstakingly clear.

But even then, Piers and other anti-gun enthusiasts would still manage to find a way to argue the amendment and call for bans on almost all weapons, eventually leading to the ban of all guns.

That is hardly something that would ever happen, but back in the day nobody thought that liquor was going to be banned either.  If it ever did come down to that, you could bet that as there were individuals who hid bottles of liquor in their houses, then you would have guns owners retain their fire arms.  Though with the majority that we have in the house and in conservative states, it is unlikely that we would face that.

Currently there are states that are working on laws that will prohibit the federal government from telling their citizens what they can and cannot do with their guns.  So we will certainly not face a full-out prohibition or ban of guns.

And if people can, they will move out of their anti-gun state and move into a state that is pro-2nd Amendment.  If they have the means to do so in this economy.

One thing that you can always bet on in America, is that people will always fight for their liberties, and they will not let them be taken away without a fight.  These are the rights that our founding fathers gave to us.  They may try to fight us to the grave, but there will be always a younger generation of lovers of liberty willing to heed the call work to keep the United States of America the country of freedom and hope that it has been for over 200 years.

So, an answer to the title of this post.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 2nd Amendment.  It was written very simply and very straightforward.  And should be taught in schools, as all of the historical documents created by our founding fathers should be.  It is part of our great history after all.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | December 21, 2012

Drugs, Not Guns, Are The Problem In Shooting Massacre

What took place at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown,  Connecticut as a true tragedy.  And this in no way downplays the tragedy.  But the media and most everyone has gotten this wrong.

To the media and all the talking heads, this tragedy is only about guns.  But in reality, this tragedy was about something else, drugs.  Now I’m not talking about the type of stuff that people smoke illegally, and grow secretly in their basements.  I’m talking about medication prescribed to people by doctors and psychiatrists on an almost daily basis.

Now, where you aware that Adam Lanza was taking anti-psychotic medication?

He was prescribed Fanapt said his uncle, according to a report by the New York Daily News.  Though since the publication of the article the author of the piece removed the quote uncle, because they believed him to be an “imposter”.

The drug that Lanza was taking, Fanapt, is a controversial drug.  It originally got the non-approval stamp from the FDA before getting passed and mass-produced.  One of the problems cited was that it caused severe heart problems.

Here is more information about Fanapt-

From Drugs.com, side effects of the drug Fanapt:

Psychiatric

Psychiatric side effects including restlessness, aggression, and delusion have been reported frequently.  Hostility, decreased libido, paranoia, anorgasmia, confusional state, mania, catatonia, mood swings, panic attack, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, delirium, polydipsia psychogenic, impulse-control disorder, and major depression have been reported infrequently. (Emphasis added)

As you can see from the list of side effects, this drug is really no help.  And when prescribed most people probably add emphasis on the part that says ‘infrequently’.

Yet, this is not brought up by anyone, it is over looked and tossed to the side as if it does not matter.  When in fact it matters greatly.  If this got out and would be talked about as it should then the whole gun violence topic would almost become obsolete.

Also, the big pharmaceutical companies would lose out on their big money makers if all of the drugs linked to mass shootings were actually talked about and made known to the public.  There are a lot of different antipsychotics that are linked to mass shootings, it is just that no one has really worked to make it public knowledge.

Below is a video showing the type of drug(s) linked to different mass murders, homicides and suicides going back to the 1960′s.

This now falls to us to make people aware.  It comes to the new media, the American people.  Share this information with everyone that you know.  Don’t let the media dictate the narrative.

Posted by: Shawn_the_Writer | December 11, 2012

Gov. Rick Snyder Signs Michigan Right-To-Work Legislation

Earlier this afternoon, Republican Gov. Rick Snyder announced that he signed the right-to-work legislation that was passed late last week by the Michigan State House and later the State Senate.  Officially making one of the most union friendly states in the U.S.A. a right-to-work state.

“This isn’t about us versus them,”  Gov. Snyder said in the news conference, “It’s about Michiganders.”

Snyder’s signing the right-to-work legislation officially makes Michigan the 24th right-to-work state in the whole United States of America.

The legislation has been clarified over the few days it has been discussed, and it has been clarified that the first House bill ban workplace rules that make union membership a condition of employment for government workers.  The second House bill covered the same thing except it covers private-sector employees.  The bills also make payment of union dues voluntary.  In simple terms, the bills offer Michigan citizens the choice of joining a union, or not joining a union.  The bills do not deal with collective bargaining as they did in Wisconsin.

In the news conference, Gov. Snyder sad that, “It’s a good thing,” and, “I think it’s pro-worker.”

Even the fight from keeping the legislation from becoming law has failed, the unions are still heavily present in the state capitol of Lansing.  When the vote itself was taking place, thousands of union workers flooded the city.  s a result of the union influx, schools in three districts had to shut down because so many of their teachers and other staff were at the protest in Lansing.

One thing the that Michigan police made sure of was that there state capitol did not end up looking Wisconsin’s did.  In Wisconsin union protesters occupied the capitol around the clock for almost three weeks.

I commend the police officers and also the legislators for being prepared, and avoiding a Wisconsin mess.  They new that they had the majorities needed and they got the job done in good time.  Keeping the unions from pulling together and creating a mess.  Also they did not have a problem with state representatives jumping the state line to try and withhold a vote.

Older Posts »

Categories

%d bloggers like this: