don't know what happened to her. BPR had her credibility questioned, big time, and has not been back since. sort of makes you wonder what they have other than "attacking the messenger" rather than the message. Keep the faith

Even a dead fish can go with the flow.

I've had family members to care for since before Mother's Day and other commitments, etc. Just no time or interest in responding to those who ASSUME that I'm guilty of something and sling mud.

Sort of makes you wonder what they have other than "attacking the messenger" rather than the message.

Yard, you stop "wondering"!!! If you don't know that I'm more than "attacking the messenger" by now (but if the messenger needs some correction, then I'll not shy away from doing it), then you'll never see "the message."

"Hello" to all my friends and enemies! You won't be hearing from me very often; so, Sniff will need to find someone else to make the focus of his animosity. It looks like he's after Git & Southern Baptists again.

____________________________

8-week fetus ("young one") -- Only 30-32 more weeks to go!

“Women who are experiencing an unplanned pregnancy also deserve unplanned joy.” (Feminists for Life)

"It looks like he's after Git & Southern Baptists again."

Well then, maybe you should continue your quest to eradicate fellow Christians and go slash his tires or egg his house. That would be right up your alley.

Well, you see if ignorant people (by others definition) could be eliminated or quieted, those of assumed smartness could have their way!
All those kind are fit for are to fight our wars and work hard. The Romans picked up a bunch of em along thu way to Scotland.
The fact that we don't seem to understand nothin quoted in cuts and pastes, makes us lowern dirt.
Ole Einstein failed outn school and read some hisself and tended some pay fer it school, but he was as ignorant as a spoon! He dreamt up all this stuff about sunlight having speed and sich. A loon. Ever try to cut off the room lite seitch and then git inna bed afore hit got dark?
you can't do hit--so thar no light speed--hits jeast thar. Also, I don't belief in electcity! You can't see it!
Why do the schols tich sich self agrandisment as sich?

Just no time or interest in responding to those who ASSUME that I'm guilty of something and sling mud.

Ha.

I have tried to answer most every question you have posed to me on these blogs, even when you would not capitulate (which seems to be the norm; reference college background).

One very simple "yes or no answer" type of question for you:

Did you have anything to do with contacting a blogger's employer about the content of their blogs on this forum?

Kevin "Hack" King

Whatever support you require, you have but to ask.

Those that would stoop so low need not be pitied but vanquished.

Your friends, whose numbers are many, stand ready.

The plot thickens!
It seems that there are questions about who and why someone needed to use others (employer) to do their dirty work.
Even if someone here deserved to be punished for something---which I can't picture---going that far without enormous cause is quite puzzling!

Like a fish out of water...long time no sea/see. I feel unbelievably honored that, after being away so long, you chose to answer one of MY posts on your return. Be still my beating heart. Hope all is well with you and yours. We have missed you. Sort of like..."You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore". I look forward to locking horns yet again. Keep the faith.

Even a dead fish can go with the flow.

Your post was left open on my computer for several days. I hadn't been online for quite a while and saw your comment. I guessed that others (who's "simple"?) were "suspicious," too.

But, no, all's not well here. Thanks for your concern. Have a great weekend!

"But, no, all's not well here."

Yeah, karma can be a real drag.

my prayers go out to you and yours. Hope you have a great weekend, also. Keep the faith.

Even a dead fish can go with the flow.

ratted out Muddle to his employer for being intelligent. Denise vanished, suspiciously enough, immediately afterward. BPR stayed around until someone had a good argument against her.
But are they really gone REALLY?
From what I've seen I wouldn't put it past them to log on under different names to continue their noble work of creating dissonance.

How do you know so much since you've been a member for only 1 week 4 days?

I don't know what you're talking about, but my "vanishing" is no mystery. See my post to Yard.

Don't worry. I won't use a different name, unlike you.

Are you suggesting that I am not who I say I am? I am the sausage king of Chicago.

She did not know about Abe Froeman, meat supplier to the stars.

It's understanding that makes it possible for people like us to tolerate a person like herself.

"If not for your grace Lord, there goes me". I have come to enjoy being nice. Kids like me, and dogs generally don't bite me too hard.

that particular phrase... Was it a Sir Cameron of Egypt's Land?

Mostly when it's appropriate to be something other than nice, I find that it's generally pointless because the person who ought to be kicked in the head repeatedly isn't worthy of being kicked in the head repeatedly.
So instead I'm reduced to staring blankly at a monitor and trying to figure out if I've really read what I just read.

And I use my turn signals and let people proceed through a four way stop ahead of me, even if it's my turn.

Is back as justincase. We'll recognize Denise I'm sure.

I don't need to concoct a fantasy personality for you (or for Snif or for Ms Extreme). You reveal enough about yourself/selves without my needing to resort to distortion of any kind. You flatter yourself if you think that you're the result of "the pressure of [my] needs." Not in your wildest dreams / my nightmares. There's no anxiety that I need to reduce; liberalism is another matter, though! Personification is useful in literature, not politics.

I debate your ideas, not your "personality attributes," which may or may not be commendable but are really beside the point of any debate.

______________________________

Harry Stack Sullivan, a “heavy drinker” who had an on-going homosexual relationship with a 15-year-old whom he “commonly introduced as his adopted son,” published little in his lifetime and “never acquired as much substantial reputation as many of his peers later did.”

QLBTQ (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, & queer culture “encyclopedia”) does credit him with “develop[ing] the psychiatric program used by the American military during World War II to weed homosexuals out of the Army.” “Sullivan believed that such men were not suited to military service.”

“He made his reputation based on his experimental treatment ward for schizophrenics at the Sheppard Pratt Hospital, between 1925-29. He employed specially trained ward attendants to work with the patients to provide them with the peer relationships he believed they'd missed out on during the latency period of development [according to Freud, a period (before puberty) of unparalleled repression of sexual desires and erogenous impulses when children pour this repressed libidal energy into asexual pursuits such as school, athletics, and same-sex friendships]. Doctors, nurses and other authority figures were banned from the ward. He believed there was a homosexual element to latency age peer relationships and that a failure to go through this stage led to self-loathing, a withdrawal from the world in fantasy and psychosis, and a failure to move on to heterosexual adjustment. Thus the patients, who were all young male homosexuals as well as schizophrenics, in their positive interactions with the attendants, also young male homosexuals, would heal the wounds from missing male intimacy as pre-adolescents.”

Talk about distortion of reality and “fantasy” delusions!

______________________________

The sky is low, the clouds are mean,
A travelling flake of snow
Across a barn or through a rut
Debates if it will go.

A narrow wind complains all day
How some one treated him;
Nature, like us, is sometimes caught
Without her diadem.

Emily Dickinson

When you say, “I debate your ideas, not your personality attributes.”

Actually, it seems you don’t. Even in this post, instead of debating ideas you cleverly transferred the argument into an attack on Sullivan’s personality attributes instead of his ideas.

As I remember, this all started when you contended that HR 536 and the HLA would not affect contraceptives; a blatant misrepresentation of the truth.

Several times over many days of posting, I repeatedly asked:

“Are you agreeing that HR 536 would not apply to hormonal methods of birth control, including birth control pills, the patch, the Nuva-Ring, injections like Depo-Provera and both currently available IUDs? Or is it your contention that hormonal methods of birth control, including birth control pills, the patch, the Nuva-Ring, injections like Depo-Provera and both currently available IUDs are not contraceptives?”

Instead of answering the question you instead asked what I had done besides raise your taxes, what had I done except vote support entitlement-programs-for-votes, you asked what sacrifices I had made.

After I repeated the question, instead of answering you asked if I consistently sacrificed for "the poor".

When I asked the questions again you accused me of somehow undermining capitalism.

When I pointed out again that you were not answering the simple question that I was asking, which would have made you admit that your statements about HR536 and the HLA denying contraceptives were entirely false, you posted an hysterical blog accusing me of quote: “…that you really could not be "sorry" for one abortion, even when the viable BABY is having its brains sucked out,” unquote.

When I posted that I was giving up the argument because I was way too familiar with the tactics and the argument was pointless anyway since your side will not and can not win, you posted a long series of events about protesters who were dressed in mock bloody nightshirts, Condoleezza Rice facing protestors, a marine getting his car keyed, artists against the war, some nut building a Buddha statue outside of Nancy Pelosi’s house for some reason, some Code Pink person protesting at the Petraeus hearings, someone throwing a pie at Ann Coulter, some drivel about campus censorship then you gave a link to Michelle Malkin’s silly book (oh yes, and you previously accused me of willfully remaining ignorant because I told you that I did not read the links you posted. Well, I didn’t read these either).

And who was responsible for all of these things? Whose responsibility was it to take care of them? Why, according to you it was… surprise!... me!

So just to be absolutely clear, one last futile time:

“Are you claiming that HR 536 would not apply to hormonal methods of birth control, including birth control pills, the patch, the Nuva-Ring, injections like Depo-Provera and both currently available IUDs?

Or is it your contention that hormonal methods of birth control, including birth control pills, the patch, the Nuva-Ring, injections like Depo-Provera and both currently available IUDs are not contraceptives?”

Is calling me "hysterical" one of those "parataxic distortions" you and "Sniffles" are frequently talking about?

I reviewed my posts about HR 536, and in no way did I "contend that HR 536 and the HLA would not affect contraceptives." Your contention that I did is the actual "blatant misrepresentation of the truth."

I never "contended" to be an expert on HR 536 and wouldn't expound on the legal ramifications of the amendment because I don't know.

You (not me) initially brought HR 536 up in a discussion with Cogitoergofay (the blog's been deleted but I have copies of my posts since you and "Sniffles" frequently distort my comments). I asked, “Exactly where does this amendment state that it will ‘ban the use of contraceptives’?” You responded, quoting the opinion of James Bopp, and I did not respond for or against HR 536.

You "slurred" me in your post to Git, "You and the Mrs. have fun before Denise and her crowd make it illegal.” Is this one of those "parataxic distortions"? ("I have slurred you in error Git" under "For My Condom Loving Friends," pg. 3)

I did say, "I don't know enough (i.e, EVERYTHING ) to argue persuasively for either side. National Right to Life and Georgia Right to Life [whom I assume to be supporters of this legislation] take no position on contraceptives, leaving this area to personal conscience."

"Contraceptive usage is very likely not to be part of the 'fight.' If people would not see partial-birth abortion (actually infanticide from a medical perspective) as an evil to be stopped, then I don't believe that this issue could ever gain any traction. There are 'bigger fish to fry.'" ("Jeff C -- HR 536 -- Different Thread?")

But that's just my barely informed opinion; I have no idea what others have in mind.

In answering "Sniffles," I quoted from The Human Life Amendment website (a site that I'd never looked at before you asked this question & an issue that I've not read much about): "The proposed amendment [HR 536] establishes a constitutional principle; it does not enact legislation." ("Snif -- In your wildest dreams") -- You're free to comment on the validity of this statement, but it seems valid to me.

These seem to be answers, but then maybe the flu's affecting my thinking.

That was the end of the discussion about HR 536; there was some discussion about medical definitions and "Sniffles" denigrating my intelligence and education. You (“Jeff”) did not "repeatedly ask" a question to which I would not respond. But then if you and "Sniffles" are one and the same, I can see how "Jeff" could claim that he and I had a lot more discussion than actually occurred since I made several replies to "Sniffles" about the definitions of pregnancy, fertilization, etc.

You (“Jeff”) then introduced the following topics into the discussion.

"Hysterical blog" -- You mean the one in response to your denigrating pro-life supporters, the one in which you wanted to tell me the truth ("Dumb, Dumb, Dumb")? The one in which you called us "the absolute worse," "fanatics, rightly or wrongly, who will do anything, say anything, misrepresent any position, use any tactic to discredit an opponent and tell any lie to have their agenda implemented into law"? (Another one of those "parataxic distortions" )

"Sniffles" repeated this same "fanatics" statement to me, after once again denigrating my education. "He" seems to do that a lot.

(I guess I get a little touchy when someone says that I and my friends are liars and have no moral principles.)

So, you were offended that I pointed out that "your side" has quite a few "fanatics," proportionally probably more than on the pro-life "side," but that's just my reasoned opinion.

You're misremembering / misinterpreting my posts, so I'll try to correct your "blatant misrepresentation of the truth."

(I can list all of the posts between you "Jeff" and me, in date and time order, but if you want me to include those made by "Sniffles" or others, then it will take a while to find all those posts and put in time order.)

You posted "poverty," "hunger," and "famine" videos in response to my post to Yardman and made this comment: "The problem I have with most anti-abortion groups and people is that as soon as the baby is born they don’t give a $%&* about it." (Another one of those "parataxic distortions" )

I then responded with “most anti-abortion groups”? – Name them! Corroborate that statement with FACTS. What a broad generalization. -- You didn't answer.

I responsed to your statement to Pentapenguin ("No 5penguin," pg. 2 of Git Real's "For My Condom Loving Friends"), "But if people really want to help or care for real, living, actual babies; instead of blastocysts, there is a world full of them."

First of all, blastocysts are "real, living, actual babies," just in their earliest stages of development. Any biology or medical textbook will confirm that these LIVING cells are "real" HUMAN DNA of a unique individual.

You made the accusation, "Republicans care oh so much about the baby right up to the minute that it is actually born. Then, its [sic] just some welfare mothers [sic] brat that she had just to suck the hard earned money out of you through taxes." (Another one of those "parataxic distortions" )

(You failed to consider that the welfare "mother" shouldn't have chosen to live irresponsibly and get pregnant with a child -- often 5 or 6 children, all with different fathers -- that she could not afford to raise. She could do what's best for the child and give him up for adoption. The cycle's repeated generation after generation.)

I responded to your charges with examples of many people who actually do help and care for others. I did ask you, "Exactly what have you done personally (other than political action, such as raising taxes, entitlement-programs-for-votes, etc.)? What sacrifices have you made?" [Note the CONTEXT, which is not HR 536.]

Hack was the one to question my "sacrifice" (totally unrelated to the discussion). Anyone who wants the truth can re-read my post "Jeff C -- Losing an argument." I mentioned the Dem Party, not you personally.

Jeff: "And nope, I’m not going to read the links." -- I responded: Ignorance is NOT bliss. Hint: Dollar. -- Just how is that "accus[ing] [you] of willfully remaining ignorant"?

Your support for your party's policies shows that you really could not be "sorry" for one abortion, even when the viable BABY is having its brains sucked out at the point of birth [your response: "although shocking, does not phase me in the least"] or the "defective" baby left to die in the Soiled Utility Room because he's not wanted. For that I am very sorry. [Note that this statement was made only after many other posts and NOT as a way of avoiding discussion about HR 536.]

Have I misunderstood your position (which seems to be the same as Sen. Clinton's and Obama's), or have you actively supported the "partial birth" (infanticide) ban? Just how have you worked to make abortions "rare"? Did you support the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act? Is there any abortion that you find abhorrent?

Also, I did discuss your ridiculous "parataxic distortions" charge; you just didn't agree with my debunking your psychobabble. And drunkenness and debauchery are not "personality attributes" but reflect on the character of the man you referenced.

You and "Sniffles" do have a way of "blending" my comments and mixing and matching to come up with something other than what I actually said. And that would definitely seem to be a "blatant misrepresentation of the truth."

“Exactly where does this amendment state that it will ‘ban the use of contraceptives’?”

Of course HR 536 does not say that it will ban the use of contraceptives. To explicitly state that would doom the legislation from the beginning. The intent of the legislation is couched in clever terms so that it could be dissembled and lied about. These are the standard tactics your side uses in the anti-abortion argument. For instance, does HR 536 come out and say it wants the death penalty for doctors who perform abortions. No, of course not. It says the penalties should be the same as another piece of legislation and that legislation calls for the death penalty. SOP from these fanatics. This is precisely why I posted the links from legal and medical scholars. Repeated protestations from you that you didn’t know or didn’t understand what you were talking about, even when highlighted in bold print, is hardly my fault.

Now, of course, everybody has caught on:

Fetus 'personhood' sought

And you didn’t like my characterization of the fanatics? They are not only fanatics but dangerous fanatics.

Damage From U.S. Extremists a Concern

Your accusation that I mix and match your comments to come up with something other than what you actually said was amusing; particularly since you had just characterized my position as the following:

“Your support for your party's policies shows that you really could not be "sorry" for one abortion, even when the viable BABY is having its brains sucked out at the point of birth [your response: "although shocking, does not phase me in the least"]”

Kinda makes it seem like I was saying that sucking the brains out of babies didn’t phase me in the least doesn’t it? Of course I was saying nothing of the kind. I was clearly referring to “your silly and baseless accusation” not to abortions as anyone who cares to check it out can plainly see:

And so be it Denise

It did remind me of one of my previous statements about "fanatics, rightly or wrongly, who will do anything, say anything, misrepresent any position, use any tactic to discredit an opponent.”

You have successfully drug me back into the controversy and I am again getting out of it. The legislation has now been exposed. It cannot pass now no matter what deceit and subterfuge is attempted. I’m not going to argue lost causes. Feel free to carry on if you want though. Start another file if you wish.

As I said before, it is nearly impossible to give Americans a freedom and they take it back. And I like it that way.

My, how time flies when you're having fun! I didn't realize that I'd not answered you sooner.

"Repeated protestations from you that you didn’t know or didn’t understand what you were talking about, even when highlighted in bold print, is hardly my fault."

Your DISTORTION is that I was the one talking about HR 536; you/"Siffles" are the one(s) focused on it. I refused to agree 100% with your interpretation, and that's what infuriated J.C. Sniffles.

"Deceit and subterfuge"?

Human Life Amendment Exemptions

* “Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the right of the state of Georgia to use capital punishment to enforce the laws of this state.”

* “Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the right of the state of Georgia to allow and regulate the use of advance directives or living wills.”

* “Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the right of the state of Georgia to allow and regulate the use of contraceptives.”

______________________________

Also, what you characterize as "clearly referring to 'your silly and baseless accusation' not to abortions" was not as "clear" to me as it was to you. Since you say that your awkwardly worded sentence (IMO) was referring to my "silly and baseless accusation" I will say that I unintentionally mischaracterized your position. I quoted my original statement to you and then inserted what I thought was your response.

So, is a "partial birth" abortion "shocking" and does it "phase [you] in the least"?

Mischaracterization Score: Denise, 1 / "Jeff C. Sniffles," 100+

“Delusional Democrats: The Warm Fuzzies of Infanticide”

______________________________

What about "the standard tactics your side uses"?

Calling the developing child "POC" = products of conception, a glob of bloody tissue that's not a human being.

Of course, that lie (which continues to be used by abortionists) became apparent when technology, especially ultrasound, made a window into the womb available.

A few years ago a 7-8 week fetus resembled a "glob of tissue." Now, with state of the art technology of 4-D and transvaginal sonography, we can observe fingers, toes and organs. We can watch the child kick, jump and wave his arms and legs! An actual "Window to the Womb!" Just see for yourself as I take you on this incredible journey as you witness the wonders of human life in the depths of a mother's womb.

WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH YOUR BABY

Week 6 from LMP (4-week-old baby) -- heartbeat around 100-115 beats per minute (bpm)

"Your baby's heart is now beating and blood circulation is evident."

Week 7 from LMP (5-week-old baby) -- "Your baby's brain is developing rapidly."

Week 8 from LMP (6-week-old baby) -- "Your baby's head is quite big, due to the rapid growth of the brain."

"Muscle contractions are beginning, but these early "movements" are not yet perceptible."

Week 9 from LMP (7-week-old baby) --

"This week, your baby-to-be [?] grows to between 20 and 28 millimeters from crown to rump, or about an inch. Weighing in at one gram, your baby is very active, although you can't feel its movements. He or she now has all the major organs, muscles and nerves. A Doppler may be able to identify the heartbeat. While testes and ovaries are formed, external genitalia appear sexless, which is why it is too early for an ultrasound to reveal gender. Eyelids are beginning to form and the trunk is straightening and elongating."

Week 10 from LMP (8-week-old baby) -- "By the end of this week, your baby will have verifiable fingers and toes."

"Your little one weighs in at a hefty four grams! At the end of the eighth week of gestation your little one is no longer an embryo; from now on he or she is refered [sic] to as a fetus."

______________________________

"Window to The Womb"

Ultrasound has exposed the life in the womb to those of us who didn't want to see what abortion kills. The fetus is squirming, and so are we.

.......

[Justice Anthony M.] Kennedy noted that the selective ban was rational because partial-birth abortion, unlike internal dismemberment, "occurs when the fetus is partially outside the mother" and therefore has a "disturbing similarity to the killing of a newborn infant."

In other words, it's rational and constitutional to ban abortions based on how they look, not what they are. Killing the fetus inside the womb is okay, because the public won't see it.

But you can see an actual abortion:

THE SILENT SCREAM Video, Part 1 of 5

______________________________

"As I said before, it is nearly impossible to give Americans a freedom and they take it back. And I like it that way."

Just how much "freedom" does an unborn child have if he or she can be hunted with a suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) or forceps and then torn apart and sucked out?

______________________________

"J.C. Sniffles," I know what your response will be: "I’m not going to read the links." (Sounds just like Dollar!) But the links aren't for you!

______________________________

"Jeff": The problem I have with most anti-abortion groups and people is that as soon as the baby is born they don’t give a $%&* about it." (Another one of those "parataxic distortions" )

I'm still waiting for you to corroborate that statement.

Denise Conner points us to an article that claims that the odious HR536 legislation (which will ban contraceptives) has somehow been amended to specifically disclaim that “Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the right of the state of Georgia to allow and regulate the use of contraceptives.”

Yet when you click on the legislation link in the actual article itself, there is no language at all saying that.

Either the legislation updates have yet to be posted online (after 8 days?) or Denise Conner is lying once again.

In any event, the AJC reported on Sunday that this legislation (HR536) has been tabled for the year, so it unlikely we will see a ban on birth control pills this year.

"Jeff" (the one to whom the post was addressed), all that's "odious" is your attitude.

I referenced a reliable source, Insider Advantage. Take your complaints up with the editors.

"Hearing on 'Human Life Amendment'" (WCTV / AP)

"The latest version of the amendment, unveiled yesterday, includes specific exemptions for the death penalty, living wills and the use of birth control."

"Lawmakers Eye Abortion Amendment" (11 Alive News / AP)

"The latest version of the amendment, unveiled Monday, includes specific exemptions for the death penalty, living wills and the use of birth control."

Maybe I should give you GOOGLE lessons (found these within 5 minutes), along with reading comprehension.

"Denise Conner is lying once again."

Just who is “Sniffles”?

Is plagiarism and/or pretending to be Jeff Carter "wrong"?

I personally heard Rep Martin Scott (the author of HR 536) introduce the amendments at the Judiciary committee hearings.

Can't speak to the legislation links, but I have noticed that the Ga Dept of Revenue is often months behind in updating their website.

I view Jeffc's comment
But if people really want to help or care for real, living, actual babies; instead of blastocysts, there is a world full of them."

as an artful dodge of the real issue. Even if one is unwilling to understand that we are talking about a genetically complete human being (albeit at an early stage of development), a just society never assigns the right to live based on how young (or how inconvenient) you may be. Most of us would agree that a 4 year old is not as developed as a teenager. Yet we would not debate that one is less worthy of life than the other.

Indeed, most people agree that the 4 year is deserving of more protection because of their less developed state.

Given the presence of a heartbeat at 18-21 days, every successful abortion stops a living,beating,and human heart.

Here's an interesting "man on street" interview demonstrating that fact.

This is the way to blog!

"And you didn’t like my characterization of the fanatics? They are not only fanatics but dangerous fanatics."

I see that you linked to the AJC ("Damage From U.S. Extremists a Concern"), which quoted Planned Parenthood, the leading provider of abortions and contraceptives (i.e., financial profiteers from these "services").

“Planned Parenthood Sells Sex” Video

The AJC article does seem to be biased, though. It’s suspicious that there were no specific examples of abortion "terrorism" given. Why are they always called "right-wing extremists" instead of activists, the noble-sounding term for leftists?

__________________________________

“AP Hints Pro-Lifers Bigger Terrorists Than Foreign Radicals”
(Go to link for additional links.)

Let me get this straight: On September 11, 2001, terrorists brutally exterminated nearly 3,000 Americans, obliterated the landscape of lower Manhattan, and pummeled the headquarters of the United States's national defense. And since that same date nearly six-and-a-half years ago, pro-lifers have committed a grand total of zero murders, attempted murders, and bombings directed at abortion workers and clinics across the United States and Canada.

So the Associated Press implies that the bigger threat of terrorism to this country comes from ... pro-lifers? Here's how the AP tells it:

When it comes to fears about a terrorist attack, people in the U.S. usually focus on Osama bin Laden and foreign-based radical groups. Yet researchers say domestic extremists who commit violence in the name of their cause — abortion or the environment, for example — account for most of the damage from such incidents in this country.

The AP's reporting is simply a smear. Violent episodes against abortion clinics have been quite rare, especially in the last decade. Even the stats from National Abortion Federation [pdf] reveal this.

In his book On Message, Life Dynamics' Mark Crutcher sums it up best: "The image of abortion workers having to dodge a hail of automatic weapon fire just to get from their car to the clinic door is utter nonsense." Crutcher notes that in the years 1993 and 1994, the worst period of violence in pro-life history in which five abortionists and clinic workers were killed, more farmers and twice as many hairdressers were murdered on the job. (The total number of murders that have occurred since Roe v. Wade passed in 1973 is seven.)

We've addressed this kind of attack against the pro-life movement before.

“Bias, Misinformation, and Ugly Stereotypes Rampant With LA Times and Abortion Issue”

[According to CDC figures, in 1972, the last full year before the Roe v. Wade decision, 39 women died from illegal abortions. Meanwhile, 35 years later, women continue to die from legal abortions.]

The AP owes its readers an explanation, but we won't hold our breath. As NB's Warner Todd Houston reported a while back, the MSM has ignored physical violence against pro-lifers by abortion supporters.

“See No Evil”

Abortion: Violence against pro-life activists goes unreported by the mainstream media

__________________________________

As for environmentalist extremists, I do recall hearing about them in the news.

“Animal Rights Activist: 'Kill the Researchers'” (which would be "'morally justified.'" Jerry Vlasak, spokesman for the Animal Liberation Front [ALF], testifying before the Senate Committee, "compared the life of lab animals to African American slaves and the Jewish victims of Nazi concentration camps.")

"Animal Rights Activists Step Up Attacks in N.Y.: Families of Drug Executives Are Harassed"

“Animal Rights Activists Admit Attack on Grandmother”

“US Animal Rights Activists Indicted for Stalking”

BOSTON - A dozen animal rights activists have been indicted for stalking an insurance company executive, calling him a "puppy killer" and threatening to burn down his home, prosecutors said.

“7 Things You Didn't Know About PETA”

* PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified "domestic terrorist" group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) activist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing recommendation, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. And PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich told an animal rights convention in 2001 that "blowing stuff up and smashing windows" is "a great way to bring about animal liberation."

* PETA has repeatedly attacked research foundations like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, because they support animal-based research that might uncover cures for birth defects and life-threatening diseases. PETA president Ingrid Newkirk has said that "even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we would be against it."

Activists Costs Taxpayers Millions and Endanger Lives

“According to the GAO, 84 interest groups [environmental activists, such as anti-logging groups, including the Sierra Club, Alliance for Wild Rockies, and Forest Conservation Council] filed more than 400 appeals of Forest Service proposals. The appeals delayed efforts to treat 900,000 acres of forests and cost the federal government millions of dollars to address.”

Forest Service officials estimate they spend nearly half their time, and $250 million each year, preparing for the appeals and procedural challenges launched by activists.

“The report demonstrates that the appeals needlessly delay federal efforts to prevent wildfires, and if the process is not streamlined, millions of acres will be lost this summer [2003],” said Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-New Mexico).

“Almost every major forest-thinning project in Arizona has been blocked by a near-constant chain of lawsuits brought by environmental groups,” the newspaper noted. Catastrophic wildfires, such as last year’s Rodeo-Chediski fire, have devastated forests while USFS thinning projects have languished in court because of activist group challenges.

“Environmentalists Classified as Terrorists, Get Stiff Sentences”

“The pair were part of a group that admitted to setting fire to a forest ranger station, a police substation, a dealership selling SUVs and a tree farm.”

[They were] linked to the Earth Liberation Front [ELF] and Animal Liberation Front [ALF]. The group is suspected of 20 arsons in five states that caused $40 million in damage.

Radical environmental groups, including the Earth Liberation Front and an associate network, the Animal Liberation Front, have been called "the No. 1 domestic terrorism threat" in America by the FBI. Their members include four of the Bureau's 11 most wanted homegrown terrorists.

The Unabomber, as I recall, had a “well-used and heavily underscored” copy of Al Gore's book Earth in the Balance, in his cabin. He advocated returning to a “happier, simpler life close to nature.”

For just a FEW more examples of the Left's fanaticism ... I mean, "tolerance"

__________________________________

And wouldn't the Berserkly City Council and Code Pinko "ladies" be called LEFT-wing extremists?

“Berkeley to Marines: You're 'not welcome in our city'”

The Berkeley City Council: "If recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

The council applauds residents and organizations that "volunteer to impede, passively or actively, by nonviolent means, the work of any military recruiting office located in the City of Berkeley."

{The council voted to give Code Pink ("old hippies dressed in pink reliving the antiwar years of the sixties") designated parking spaces directly in front of the recruiting station, as well as a sound permit, to make sure that access to the office would be impeded.

“The frightening people were the young . . . dressed in black shirts with orange bandanas. They were cursing and running into Blue Star moms and veterans with skateboards.

“They would get face to face with an older man or woman and chest-bump them trying to provoke an altercation. I saw one rip an American flag from a 46-year-old Blue Star mom and later set it on fire,” [Vietnam veteran] said. “This was all witnessed by the Berkeley police, who did nothing to stop these radicals. Later I learned that they were Berkeley High School students who were brought there by their teachers.” (“Wounded Marine Conquers Berkeley”)}

Berkeley's declaration, which was introduced by the city's Peace and Justice Commission, accuses the United States of having a history of "launching illegal, immoral and unprovoked wars of aggression and the Bush administration launched the most recent of those wars in Iraq and is threatening the possibility of war in Iran."

It adds, "Military recruiters are salespeople known to lie to and seduce minors and young adults into contracting themselves into military service with false promises regarding jobs, job training, education and other benefits."

[Those Air Force Academy recruits just think that they're getting an education? And those many pilots who are former military (and present, like Hack) didn't get job training? ]

This is all very confusing. Denise raised a very good question and made a very cogent argument with the following statement of fact:

"Sniffles5" wrote to Git on Mon., 02/04/2008:

Well Denise

Can anyone shed more light on this? Is it true that several bloggers here are the same person with multiple screen names? How does this happen?

Insight is welcome.

Frankly, I think Sniffles owes me/us an explanation. The original post made Saturday under JeffC is mine.

I assure you that I am not him/her.

Off to Florida again! Didn't you just get back? Ya know I can only prop you and your company up for so long, you need to be in the office more. Uhhhh, I'm gonna need more time off!

Is that all you want?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

This guy is out of the office way to often. So based on monkey see monkey do . . .what can I say!

"I don't need to concoct a fantasy. I have one. It's called a week in Orlando over winter break with three lovely ladies."

Better clarify for perverts: the FANTASTIC Mrs. Git + 2 Gitlets = 3 lovely LADIES!

Enjoy the sun! No comment on your analysis . . . .

Well, calling me "nuts" is a little extreme. That puts me in $'s category!

You know I was kidding.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

Hutch is still waiting for your "intelligent" solutions.

I'd be wasting my time trying to teach you anything because, as you say,
you spend your time acting "foolish."

But you do have better-than-average vocabulary about once every thousand posts (I'm trying to be generous). Probably just took your meds.

$Nit1 has changed one of his names to "sageadvice".
???

Hutch reads my many solutions but since he doesn't agree with them, he ignores and forgets them instantly. Sign of someone who is closeted minded! No, I didn't mean closed minded!

What is your solution for this post?

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Point out just one solution

I yam what I yam....Popeye

You read them again with a pencil and paper in your hand, and just write down the recommendations!
All I ever see from you are snide remarks!

You've changed your name again, what is this number 6 now?

I yam what I yam....Popeye

How ya doing?
Dang, comments on the blogs are out of this world! Well, sage sounds better than dollar/nitpicker1,2,3/bonkers.

He's passed the Three Faces of Eve stage and is moving into The Sybil zone, maybe we should call Joanne Woodward and Sally Fields about him. If they all get junk mail they must have one very crowded mailbox. Is it against the law for that many separate people to live together in one house, let alone one head? You forgot ole D.Smith700.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

I am ONLY sageadvice! Who are you? Why are you concerned?

then why is your name on Snit1 post to me from just last week? Did you hijack his posts? Should we notify Cal about this posting larceny? Do you have any explanation for this.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

I don't need any explanation!
Jist post your one-liners and let us pros do the work!

I yam what I yam....Popeye

I can't write down what was never there, BTW I'm still waiting for a reference on your definition of joist.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

You are pretty slow and lazy!

I took the time to do it for you:

from the latin, jacere...to lie (could also mean to be lying there)

noun use of the feminine PP of gesir

1294 Anglo/Latin

There is more in the world than wooden framing!

How does joist fit in there?

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Joisting? You building a floor?

I yam what I yam....Popeye

An old meaning of "to lie." "parsing and lying"
Modern use is for use of lumber or other products for beams.

where would you find that definition?

I yam what I yam....Popeye

I think he means something like, "Surely you joist".

This is a serious matter.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

It must be those silk boxers.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Why do you have to bring that up? It could be taken out of context.

________
In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

Out of context only by certain people.

______________________________
"Hope Changes Everything"