Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Louisiana’

Supreme Court to hear Louisiana abortion case in 2020


Written The Washington Times | Thursday, December 26, 2019

URL of the original posting site: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/26/supreme-court-to-hear-louisiana-abortion-case-in-2/

In this June 17, 2019 photo, The U.S. Supreme Court is shown in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

In this June 17, 2019 photo, The U.S. Supreme Court is shown in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) more >
A case testing abortion access in Louisiana will come before the Supreme Court early next year, giving President Trump’s two appointees their first chance to leave a mark on the topic.

Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh were not on the court in 2016 when its justices last grappled with hospital admitting privileges and requirements for medical professionals administering abortions in Texas.

This time, the pair of Trump appointees help create a conservative majority on the high court for its second go at those types of restrictions imposed by a Louisiana law.

Penny Nance, president of the pro-life Concerned Women for America, said her side welcomes the opportunity for the Supreme Court to weigh in again.

“It’s definitely the biggest abortion case that has been in front of Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh, and this will be very telling on their judicial philosophy on these kinds of cases,”Ms. Nance said.

The legal battle scheduled for oral arguments on March 4 will give the full bench a chance to take a look at a Louisiana law requiring doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital no farther than 30 miles from the women’s clinic.

The high court, in a 5-4 decision, halted the law from taking effect this year. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. sided with the four Democrat-appointed justices on the court in that case.

Abortion providers have challenged the legislation, saying it resembles a Texas law that the high court struck down in a 5-3 ruling three years ago. That time, it was Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who has since retired, siding with the more liberal wing. The late Justice Antonin Scalia had died, leaving an eight-member court.

Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, said only Justice Clarence Thomas openly disagreed with Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision legalizing abortion nationwide, in a 2016 ruling striking down the Texas requirements.

It is unknown at this point how Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh will decide — noting Justice Kennedy’s fifth vote is now gone since his retirement last year, he said.

“I think there is a chance the court changes the standing doctrine, such that only pregnant women can bring suits, not abortion clinics. This shift would radically alter the way abortion cases are litigated,”Mr. Blackman said.

Ed Goldman, a law professor at the University of Michigan, said that unless Chief Justice Roberts opts to uphold precedent since he was originally a vote in support of the Texas law back in 2016, the court likely will reverse course with the Louisiana requirements, potentially upholding the law.

“This would, of course, be a significant loss for abortion providers,” Mr. Goldman said. “This plus the current administration conscience law that has defunded Planned Parenthood would be a very significant blow leaving Roe as a right without a remedy. And it may be a way to overturn Roe.”

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also filed a brief in the case that was signed on by more than 170 lawmakers. They argued the Louisiana law runs afoul of the Supreme Court’s precedent on a pregnant person’s right to privacy.

“Such defiance undermines our nation’s confidence in the legislative process and violates the rule of law,” they said in court papers.

Message From Hurricane Harvey: Americans Helping Each Other


Reported by Joel B. Pollak | 28 Aug 2017

After three days of Hurricane Harvey, the message emerging from Houston and the Texas coast is not one of chaos and destruction, but of collective strength, as Americans help each other survive through the worst of circumstances.

For once, cable news is not dominated by talking heads shouting at each other, but by images of volunteers, black and white, arriving in flat-bottomed boats to rescue neighbors from flooded buildings. Journalists are helping to direct emergency crews to save stranded drivers rather than encouraging enraged mobs to riot against the police.

And President Donald Trump, attacked for weeks for allegedly dividing the nation, is drawing attention to its unity.

At a joint press conference Monday with the president of Finland, President Trump said:

Tragic times such as these bring out the best in America’s character.  Strength, charity and resilience are those characters.  We see neighbor helping neighbor, friend helping friend, and stranger helping stranger.  And you see that all over.  If you watch on television, you just see such incredible work and love, and teamwork.

We are one American family.  We hurt together, we struggle together, and, believe me, we endure together.  We are one family.

Finland’s leader, too, remarked: “It has been touching to watch the TV and see how people help each other. That is what we basically are built of — helping each other.”

Remarkably, President Trump is winning praise for the federal government’s management of the crisis thus far. He is planning to visit the region on Tuesday, avoiding the mistakes made by his two predecessors. George W. Bush infamously flew over the devastation of Hurricane Katrina; Barack Obama, knowing he would never be held to the same standard, golfed on Martha’s Vineyard during massive Louisiana floods until Trump shamed him into visiting. 

But the story of Hurricane Harvey is bigger than the president alone. It is also a story about the importance of state and local governments, which were so woefully negligent in Katrina, but which faced Harvey fully prepared. (In the former case, Democrats were in charge; in the latter, many — though not all — of the key officials are Republicans.)

Most of all, the story of Hurricane Harvey is about what Americans can do without government: the neighbors who are giving each other shelter from the storms; the “Cajun Navy” from Louisiana, a volunteer armada of small boats, en route to help with search and rescue efforts; the non-profit organizations organizing grass-roots relief efforts.

All of that is happening, notably, in the South — a region the left had targeted for a miniature Cultural Revolution in recent weeks, as mobs swarmed historic Confederate memorials (or anything old enough to be held in suspicion). The South was deemed by its cultural betters to be just as backward and racist as ever, a living rebuke to the nation.

Instead, the people of Texas are showing the world that beneath the mindless political rhetoric, we remain united and strong.

The political winner thus far is President Trump. The real winner is us, the United States of America.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He was named one of the “most influential” people in news media in 2016. He is the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

If Black Lives Really Matter… Why aren’t the Activist in Louisiana?


waving flagPosted on August 20, 2016

Why isn’t the well funded Black Lives Matter org saving the black people in Louisiana from dangerous flood waters sweeping the state; if Black Lives, do in fact, Matter?

So far Trump has made it there. Does Trump care more about black lives than #BlackLivesMatter?

A black man in Baton Rouge has asked, “Where are the Black Lives Matter and the Black Panthers?   I ain’t seen one Black Lives Matter boat or one Black Panther boat!  All I’ve seen is people from our own city saving and going in and rescuing people.”

He said, “We must not matter too much, because I haven’t seen ya’ll yet, when we really need ya!”

Black Lives Matter activist Deray Mckesson has been to Baton Rouge before – he went there in July to join an anti-police, Black Lives Matter demonstration and ended up getting arrested.   But since the devastating flood in the Baton Rouge area that has displaced thousands and taken the lives of at least 13 people – with black lives and white lives in desperate need – there has been no news of Mckesson returning to help the people of Louisiana.

blm

or a liar Never-Hillary-Egl-sm fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

This State Offered Free College Education. Here’s What Happened.


waving flagReported by Norbert Michel / / February 22, 2016

Aside from the subsidy/cost issue, there are many other reasons why this is bad public policy. (Photo: istockphoto)

Norbert Michel studies and writes about housing finance, including the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as The Heritage Foundation’s research fellow in financial regulations. Read his research.

Several politicians have recently been offering free goodies to voters. One of the most popular of these, oddly enough, is something that several state governments have already tackled: free college tuition.

The details vary by state, but Oregon, Tennessee, Georgia, Michigan, and Louisiana (among others) all use tax dollars to pay for at least some of their residents’ college tuition.

Louisiana provides a great case study for advocates of similar federal policies.

Louisiana provides a great case study for advocates of similar federal policies. Louisiana just so happens to be in the news right now because the governor is threatening to suspend his state’s version of free college tuition for everyone.

Louisiana’s Tuition Program

Louisiana’s plan is called the Taylor Opportunity Program for Students, or, more commonly, TOPS. This extremely popular program uses tax dollars to pay full tuition (and some fees) at any of Louisiana’s public universities. Other than residency requirements, all high school students qualify as long as they have a C average (2.5 GPA) and at least an 18 on the ACT.

So the Taylor Opportunity Program for Students doesn’t cover every student’s tuition, but it ends up covering it for a large chunk of middle-/upper-class families.

How It Started

The program started out in the late 1980s as the brainchild of oil tycoon/philanthropist Patrick Taylor. The program, which wasn’t originally named for him, started out as a tuition assistance plan only for low-income individuals.

In 1997 the state removed the income caps. At that point, all Louisiana students, regardless of financial need, were made eligible for “free” tuition at any Louisiana public college. Once in college, students had to maintain a C average to keep their TOPS awards.

As of 2010, approximately 70 percent of Louisiana’s high school graduates headed to college within one year. That’s nearly 20 percent higher than the rate in 2000.

Who’s Paying for It?

It’s easy to call the program a success because of this increase, but it’s just as easy to point out that the program doesn’t really provide free education. In one way or another, someone pays for it.

In one way or another, someone pays for it.

The eventual implosion of the program was easy to predict back in 1997 for the same reasons that pretty much any similar subsidy is destined to fail. Subsidies don’t really lower the cost of products and services; they only lower the up-front price that some people pay.

(In 1997, this program inspired my very first public critique of a government policy. Back then, I thought it was a terrible idea.)

No Such Thing as Free Tuition

A person receiving “free” tuition may not see it (or even care), but subsides actually raise the total cost of an education. The core problem is that they remove the paying customer—in this case the student—from the equation.

Without the subsidy, the paying customer receives the direct benefit for the service and bears the direct cost. If that person doesn’t think the cost is worth it, they don’t pay.

Louisiana’s program replaces this paying customer with groups of government officials. These officials neither receive the direct benefit nor endure the direct cost of obtaining an education. These groups do, however, benefit a great deal from obtaining more of your tax dollars.

And they rarely bear any direct cost from either increasing your taxes or delivering a substandard education product. (The incumbency rate is fairly high for politicians.)

On a practical level, Louisiana’s program converts tuition payments into a state budget item. In other words, a large chunk of each school’s “tuition” becomes nothing more than revenue sent in by the state bureaucracy.

In Louisiana, four separate higher education systems—each its own bureaucracy—fight over these “tuition” payments. Smaller schools inevitably get the smallest shares, but that’s kind of another story.

A Burden on University Resources

When the influx of students hits—more people going to school when tuition is “free” is pretty much a foregone conclusion—it strains universities’ existing resources. So the transfer of money has the natural tendency to lead to expanded facilities, faculty, and staff.

But these increases call for a permanently higher level of funding, and all of these effects tend to reinforce each other. That is, school officials have a built in reason to ask for larger transfers, and politicians have a built in excuse to raise taxes.

When the state’s coffers are not flush with cash, the schools’ budgets get cut. Thus, universities have every incentive to raise more money from students who are not a part of the Taylor Opportunity Program.

Of course, for any given level of Taylor Opportunity Program students, a higher posted rate of tuition results in a larger transfer from the state. If the program covered full fees and tuition for literally every student, then taxpayers would bear the full cost. But it doesn’t, so non-TOPS students bear some of the cost.

(Pretty much every student ends up paying higher fees directly, too, but that’s almost an aside.)

Non-subsidized markets don’t work this way—prices can actually fall in response to changes in demand and supply. Subsidized systems, on the other hand, are destined to result in higher—not lower—tuition.

Recent numbers support this explanation. The Taylor Opportunity Program has nearly doubled in cost since 2008, and most of that increase has been due to higher tuition.

What I failed to fully appreciate in 1997 was how bad of a deal the Taylor Opportunity Program would end up being for the smaller schools. Then I spent almost a decade teaching at Nicholls State University, a regional state school in Thibodaux, La.

Small Universities Are Hardest Hit

In one sense, the Louisiana program amounted to a cruel trick for these institutions. Smaller schools are the ones least able to sustain the permanently higher costs associated with the new TOPS-generated revenue stream.

When the state budget goes south—and it always does in Louisiana—smaller schools get slammed. (Louisiana State University has more than 25,000 students, so small changes in per-student fees go a long way).

No matter how much we want it to, subsidizing something simply doesn’t make it more cost-effective.

The Taylor Opportunity Program does give certain people a better deal on tuition at one point in time, but then it makes up for it somewhere else.

Ironically, the earlier waves of Taylor Opportunity Program graduates are among those about to get hit with a tax increase. That’s what politicians mean by free.

Ironically, the earlier waves of Taylor Opportunity Program graduates are among those about to get hit with a tax increase. That’s what politicians mean by free.

Aside from the subsidy/cost issue, there are many other reasons why this is bad public policy.

First of all—and I know this sounds crazy—everyone should not go to college. Some people simply aren’t cut out, and many just don’t need to. Yes, people with college degrees tend to earn more than those without, but it does not follow that everyone should go to college.

When the program was started, Louisiana public universities offered students a good value because they were relatively inexpensive. Now that Louisiana taxpayers have spent more than $2 billion on the program, tuition rates are out of reach for many students that don’t qualify for the program.

While the best solution for Louisiana would be to get rid of the program altogether (unlikely since politicians love the program), the best residents can hope for now is an increase in the program’s academic standards and some form of means testing. At least these changes would better direct subsidies to academically prepared students with more financial need.

big Die Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

In Wake of Paris Terrorist Attacks, Here’s a Map of the States Shutting Their Doors to Syrian Refugees


waving flagReported by Kelsey Harkness / / November 16, 2015

On Monday and into Tuesday, more than two dozen governors moved to block Syrian refugees from entering their states. (Photo: Kelsey Lucas/Visualsey)

In the aftermath of Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris, governors across the United States are attempting to shut their doors on Syrian refugees looking to find a safe haven in the country. As of Monday evening, more than two dozen governors announced opposition to policies that would permit Syrian refugees to enter their states amid concerns they could have ties to terrorists.

Thus far, states whose governors oppose more Syrian refugees include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, GeorgiaIdahoIllinoisIndiana, IowaKansas, Louisiana, MaineMassachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Maryland, NebraskaNew HampshireNew Jersey, New MexicoNorth Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, TennesseeTexas, and Wisconsin.

Kentucky Gov.-elect Matt Bevin, who will take office Dec. 8, also said he opposes resettlement efforts.

The movement, which was overwhelmingly spearheaded by Republican governors, came after French prosecutors discovered a Syrian passport on one of the suspected Islamic State suicide bombers in Paris. That finding raised concerns that terrorists are embedding with refugees to enter Europe and other nations.Do you want

The series of attacks in Paris on Friday night left more than 130 dead and hundreds others injured. French President François Hollande called the attacks an “act of war” and launched airstrikes against ISIS.

President Barack Obama sharply pushed back against the growing number of states attempting to undermine his policies surrounding Syrian refugees, saying Monday at a press conference in Antalya, Turkey, that it would be “shameful” and “not American” to close America’s doors on Syrian refugees.

“When some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution, that’s shameful,” he said. “That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”DELUSIONAL

In September, Obama vowed to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees into the United States next year.

As of Nov. 3, there were more than 4 million registered Syrian refugees, according to the U.N. Refugee Agency.

Those issuing executive orders to block refugees pushed back on the president’s narrative while announcing their decision.

“Michigan is a welcoming state, and we are proud of our rich history of immigration,” said Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. “But our first priority is protecting the safety of our residents.”

In a letter addressed to the president, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said, “Neither you nor any federal official can guarantee that Syrian refugees will not be part of any terroristic activity. As such, opening our door to them irresponsibly exposes our fellow Americans to unacceptable peril.”Islam is NOT

While their responses send a clear message to the president, John Malcolm, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said the practical implications blocking refugees are limited.

“Governors can certainly order state agencies to stop doing anything to assist federal authorities with their resettlement efforts, but they cannot stop federal authorities from continuing those efforts, nor can they stop immigrants who are lawfully admitted to this country from moving to and settling in those states,” Malcolm said. “They can, however, ask state law enforcement authorities to keep an eye on the refugees who settle in their states, so long as those authorities do so within the bounds of the Constitution.”

“It’s abhorrent for the federal government not to consult with and consider the interests of the states,” added Jim Carafano, a foreign policy expert at The Heritage Foundation. “Particularly the views of governors, as it impacts the welfare and public safety of their citizens.”America Never Forget

Florida Gov. Rick Scott addressed those concerns in a letter sent to House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Leader Mitch McConnell. In that letter, dated Nov. 16, Scott wrote:

[I]t is our understanding that the state does not have the authority to prevent the federal government from funding the relocation of these Syrian refugees to Florida even without state support. Therefore, we are asking the United States Congress to take immediate and aggressive action to prevent President Obama and his administration from using any federal tax dollars to fund the relocation of up to 425 Syrian refugees (the total possible number of refugees pending for state relocation support at this time) to Florida, or anywhere in the United States, without an extensive evaluation of the risk these individuals may post to our national security.AMEN

muslim-obamaIn response, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced legislation on Monday afternoon that would suspend issuance of visas to refugees from countries with a high risk of terrorism until the U.S. Department of Homeland Security meets certain standards. Those standards include fingerprinting and screening all refugees, implement a tracking system “to catch attempted overstays,” and enhancing security measures that are already in place.

“The time has come to stop terrorists from walking in our front door. The Boston Marathon bombers were refugees, and numerous refugees from Iraq, including some living in my hometown, have attempted to commit terrorist attacks,” Paul said in a press release.

Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, also called to suspend the refugee program.

“The Syrian refugee program should be suspended until the American people are satisfied that they know exactly who the president is admitting into the country via this program,” Burr said. “There is simply too much at stake, and the security of the American people should be our top priority.”

This article and its accompanying map has been updated to reflect the growing number of governors who do not wish to permit Syrian refugees into their state. of domenstic terrorist

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Full, Unedited 8th Video Confirms Planned Parenthood Sells Fully Intact Aborted Babies


waving flagPublished by Steven Ertelt   Aug 28, 2015   |   Washington, DC

Today, the Center for Medical Progress released the full, uncut video of the conversation between undercover investigators form CMP and top officials with StemExpress, which buys aborted babies and their body parts from Planned Parenthood. The full footage is of a shorter video that summarized the meetings earlier this week.

The release of the full, unedited video also comes one day after Planned Parenthood released a new report claiming the eight videos released exposing it were “altered.” The abortion giant says the videos were manipulated and therefore not eligible for serious inquiry by Congress, which has launched two joint investigations of the abortion corporation. Still, Planned Parenthood’s own paid for experts admitted that there was no evidence of any manipulation of the audio in any of the eight shocking videos.

The full two-hour-long video appears below:

full

While the videos have focused on the Planned Parenthood abortion business, the biotech firm StemExpress, which buys and resells aborted baby body parts from the abortion giant, has filed a lawsuit seeking to block some information the Center for Medical Progress obtained in its three year undercover operation. Just a short time after a judge issued a ruling that the biotech firm StemExpress can’t block the Center for Medical Progress from releasing videos, it put together a preview of its latest installment.

StemExpress is a for-profit biotech supply company that has been partnered with Planned Parenthood clinics across the country to purchase human fetal parts since its founding in 2010. StemExpress’ Medical Director, Dr. Ronald Berman, is an abortion doctor for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte in California.how many body parts

PP MonsterIn the video, Cate Dyer, the CEO of StemExpress, is shown in a lunch meeting with undercover operatives posing as representatives of a biotech firm. Dyer is laughing about how StemExpress purchases fully intact aborted babies from Planned Parenthood. She laughs about how shippers of the aborted babies would give a warning to lab workers to expect such a baby.

“Oh yeah, if you have intact cases — which we’ve done a lot — we sometimes ship those back to our lab in its entirety,” she says.

“Tell the lab its coming,” she laughs about the intact unborn babies. “You know, open the box and go ‘Oh my God,’” Dyer adds.

The eighth video in the ongoing controversy over Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted fetal body parts shows the CEO of StemExpress, a major buyer of fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood, admitting the company gets “a lot” of intact fetuses, suggesting “another 50 livers a week” would not be enough, and agreeing abortion clinics should profit from the sale.

In the video, actors posing as another human biologics company meet with StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer, plus Vice President of Corporate Development and Legal Affairs Kevin Cooksy, and Procurement Manager Megan Barr. StemExpress and the actors are discussing a potential partnership to supply extra fetal body parts to each other.

“So many physicians are like, ‘Oh I can totally procure tissue,’ and they can’t,” expresses Dyer, seeming to indicate that abortion doctors must do the procedure in a special way to obtain useable fetal parts. Federal law requires that no alteration in the timing or method of abortion be done for the purposes of fetal tissue collection (42 U.S.C. 289g-1).

“What about intact specimens?” asks one of the actors. “Oh yeah, I mean if you have intact cases, which we’ve done a lot, we sometimes ship those back to our lab in its entirety,” replies Dyer. “Case” is the clinical term for an abortion procedure. An “intact case” refers to an intact abortion with a whole fetus. “The entire case?” asks an actor. “Yeah, yeah,” says Dyer. “The procurement for us, I mean it can go really sideways, depending on the facility, and then our samples are destroyed,” she explains past botched fetal dissections, “so we started bringing them back even to manage it from a procurement expert standpoint.”What did you say 05.jpg

Feticidal chemicals like digoxin cannot be used to kill the fetus in a tissue procurement case, so a fetus delivered intact for organ harvesting is likely to be a born-alive infant.

“What would make your lab happy?” asks one of the actors. “Another 50 livers a week,” says Dyer. “We’re working with almost like triple digit number clinics,” Dyer explains, “and we still need more.” She later notes, “Planned Parenthood has volume, because they are a volume institution.”

Dyer also agrees that payments to abortion clinics for fetal body parts should be financially beneficial to them.

“Do you feel like there are clinics out there that have been burned, that feel like they’re doing all this work for research and it hasn’t been profitable for them?” she asks. “I haven’t seen that.” StemExpress publishes a flyer for Planned Parenthood clinics that promises “Financial Profits” and “fiscal rewards” for clinics that supply aborted fetal tissue. It is endorsed by Planned Parenthood Mar Monte Chief Medical Officer Dr. Dorothy Furgerson.Hate Merchants

The sale or purchase of human fetal tissue is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2). The Sacramento Business Journal reported in June that StemExpress has an annual revenue of $4.5 million.

David Daleiden, the head of CMP, commented on the newest video in a statement to LifeNews.

“StemExpress is the ‘weakest link’ that unravels Planned Parenthood’s baby parts chain–they readily admit the profit-motive that Planned Parenthood and their proxies have in supplying aborted baby parts,” he said. “Congress and law enforcement should immediately seize all fetal tissue files from StemExpress and all communications and contracts with Planned Parenthood. The evidence that Planned Parenthood profits from the sale of aborted baby parts is now overwhelming, and not one more dime of taxpayer money should go to their corrupt and fraudulent criminal enterprise.”

After the swarm of negative publicity surrounding Planned Parenthood selling aborted babies and their body parts, StemExpress was forced to cut ties with the abortion company.

Meanwhile, two committees in the House of Representatives have already launched investigations of Planned Parenthood. One committee is looking into whether or not the abortion business is breaking federal law by altering abortion procedures to better obtain aborted baby body parts for sale. Another committee, among other things, is investigating the Obama administration and whether there is any connection between it and the abortion giant.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform wants to know if the Obama administration, via the Department of Health and Human Services, provided any federal grants to Planned Parenthood that ultimately went to pay for the sales of aborted baby body parts and if they were used by Planned Parenthood to “support transactions involving fetal tissue.”

The expose’ videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all eight:

  • In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
  • In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
  • In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
  • In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
  • In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.”
  • In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”
  • In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must Investigate Planned Parenthood for Selling Aborted Baby Parts

So far, 12 states have responded to the Planned Parenthood videos and launched investigations into their abortion and organ harvesting business including South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, Massachusetts, KansasMissouri, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Georgia, Texas and Louisiana. The district attorney in Houston Texas is also investigating after the Houston-based Planned Parenthood abortion facility was caught selling aborted babies.

Congress has expanded its investigation into the Planned Parenthood abortion business and five states have revoked taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood’s abortion business, including Utah, Arkansas, Alabama, New Hampshire and Louisiana and Iowa’s governor has ordered a review of Planned Parenthood funding.

The full, unedited videos have confirmed that revelations that some aborted baby remains sold by Planned Parenthood go to biotech companies for the purpose of creating “humanized” mice. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood has been exposed as having sold body parts from aborted babies for as much as 15 years.

The federal law that technically prohibits the sale of aborted babies and their body parts was written by a pro-abortion Congressman decades ago and essentially spells out a process by which sellers of aborted baby body parts can meet certain criteria that allows the sales to be legal. That’s why a Colorado congressman has introduced legislation to totally ban the sales of aborted baby body parts.

Which kills more blacks comparison In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Bipartisan House Resolution Calls For Purple Hearts For Those Killed In Chattanooga


waving flagReported by Photo of Kerry Picket Kerry Picket, Reporter, 07/28/2015

U.S. flag flies alongside a sign in honor of the four Marines killed in Chattanooga, Tenn., July 17, 2015. (REUTERS/Tami Chappell)

U.S. flag flies alongside a sign in honor of the four Marines killed in Chattanooga, Tenn., July 17, 2015. (REUTERS/Tami Chappell)


WASHINGTON — In an effort to expedite the awarding of purple hearts to the four Marines and Navy sailor killed in Chattanooga last week, Tennessee Rep. Chuck Fleischmann proposed a bipartisan House resolution to award the decoration to the military personnel. “It’s a resolution really calling for a sense of Congress to encourage all of the parties, who have say in the process, to award our five fallen heroes in uniform who have died purple hearts,” Fleischmann told The Daily Caller Monday. “We don’t want a situation similar to what happened with the heroes who got killed at Fort Hood and they had to wait a very long time to get a purple heart.”

Nidal Malik Hasan fatally shot and killed 13 service members and injured 30 others in 2009 at the Fort Hood Army Base in Texas. The Obama administration refused to call the incident an act of terrorism and therefore denying those killed and wounded Purple Hearts for six years after the tragic events.

Despite the FBI currently calling the gunman, Mohammed Abdulazeez, who killed all five men in Chattanooga a “homegrown violent extremist” as opposed to a terrorist, the resolution will state that Abdulazeez’s actions constituted a terrorist act.

“We are affirmatively stating in there that this was a terrorist act. And it’s my hope that the FBI classifies it as such. I classify it as such. When someone does what this shooter did at two locations to cause such horrific terror and carnage, to me that’s an act of terrorism and I think it must be deemed so.

However, ultimately, Congress is not the final arbiter of what is considered to be a terrorist act; the Executive branch makes that final call a Congressional aide noted. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 allows the Purple Heart to be awarded “to a member of the Armed Forces killed or wounded in an attack inspired or motivated by a foreign terrorist organization.”

The Daily Caller placed an inquiry to The White House and did not receive a response as to whether the president will allow the five members of the military killed in Chattanooga to be awarded the Purple Heart.

“I think right now the FBI is trying to get further Proof as to whether it was a — they opened it as a terrorism case. My argument would be if it is an act of terrorism on American soil, they deserve the Purple Heart. Major Hassan admitted he was a terrorist. And it was a terrorist act,” Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee Mike McCaul told TheDC.

“I think in this case so far we have seen his online radicalization with Anwar Alaki and other militant sites. I think for Purple Heart purposes, it would probably be good to see the investigation play out. But in my judgment this guy is a terrorist. He was ISIS-inspired,” McCaul added.

The Purple Heart also includes medical benefits to wounded military as well as surviving family members of killed in action military members. Fleischman’s resolution would ensure that the benefits would also be included along with Purple Heart honors.

“I actually spoke to the Department of Defense to day and told them we were going to be doing a resolution and, obviously, they’re going to review that, but it’s my understanding that the Marines have already prepared packets,” Fleishman said. “We had four Marines and one Navy sailor killed. In addition to that, there was an additional service person wounded and this would also make him eligible.”Heart

muslim-obamaHouse Armed Services Committee member Louisiana Rep. John Fleming says that Congress will likely have to go through both the Department of Defense as well as State Department to get the ball rolling, but it will be difficult to legislate something that the president can only decide. Fleming also wonders why it took the president five days to call for the lowering of the American flag to half mast on government buildings to honor those killed in Chattanooga.

“These men lost their lives and there was a delay of lowering the flag at half staff and it is just inexplicable. And certainly we should decorate them and acknowledge them for what they do and sacrifices they make,” Flemming said. “They were in the line of duty. They we’re doing what they do in the military by recruiting. It wasn’t as if they were in a grocery store or something. They were targeted as military members.”

Lafayette Theater Is a Gun Free Zone, Bans Firearms for Customers with ‘Permits’


waving flagby AWR Hawkins23 Jul 2015

The Lafayette, Louisiana, Grand Theatre–site of the tragic July 23 attack in which a gunman killed two, wounded at least seven others, then took his own life–is a gun free zone.

The movie theater chain does not even allow law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits to carry for self-defense. According to the “Conduct Policy” for all Grand Theatre locations, the “possession of firearms or weapons of any kind” are completely banned and the ban applies regardless of whether the firearm or weapon is carried “openly or concealed, with or without a permit.”

grand-theatre-policy

cropped-george-washington-regarding-2nd-amandment.jpgThe Conduct Policy also forbids “violence, intimidation, or physically threatening behavior,” as well as “unlawful conduct.”

One thing we know even now, just hours after the tragic shooting took place, is that the gunman did not adhere to the Conduct Policy. He ignored the gun ban, he ignored the bans on violence, intimidation, and physically threatening behavior, and he ignored the rules against “unlawful conduct.”

Just like so many attacks before–from Nidal Hasan’s 2009 Fort Hood attack to James Holmes’ 2012 Aurora theater to the 2013 attack on the DC Navy Yard–gun free zones put law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage because law-abiding citizens are the only ones who obey them. People with criminal intent are not phased by “No Guns Allowed” signs or a Conduct Policy that says no firearms can be brought into the theater.Makes sitting ducks

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.freedom combo 2

At least six U.S. states move to arm National Guard offices


Reporting by Kevin Murphy in Kansas City and Alex Dobuzinskis in Los Angeles; Editing by Alan Crosby and Jonathan Oatis

“It is painful enough when we lose members of our armed forces when they are sent in harm’s way, but it is unfathomable that they should be vulnerable for attack in our own communities,” Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin said in a statement.

Governors Rick Scott of Florida, Greg Abbott of Texas, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas and Mike Pence of Indiana issued similar orders for National Guard members after four U.S. Marines and a Navy petty officer were shot and killed on Thursday in Chattanooga, Tennessee. One site where the shootings occurred was a recruiting office in a strip mall.

All six of the governors are Republican.

In Florida, Scott ordered six storefront Florida National Guard recruiting centers to be moved to the nearest Guard armory buildings. The governor said Guard members who do not carry weapons should get them and obtain expedited concealed weapon permits, if necessary. In his executive order, Scott said bulletproof glass and better video surveillance equipment are among steps that should be considered to make recruiting offices safer.

Pence ordered the arming of military personnel at all Indiana National Guard facilities and recruiting storefronts, and Oklahoma Governor Fallin’s office said her executive order also included military recruiting offices. Military personnel in uniform would not usually have authorization to carry a personal weapon while working in recruiting offices, the Pentagon said on Friday. “It has become clear that our military personnel must have the ability to defend themselves against these type of attacks on our own soil,” Abbott said in a news release.you think

“Arming the National Guard at these bases will not only serve as a deterrent to anyone wishing to do harm to our service men and women, but will enable them to protect those living and working on the base,” he added.

AMEN

No-weapons-590 freedom combo 2

 

States move to counter gay marriage ruling


By Tim Devaney06/30/15

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/246582-states-move-to-counter-gay-marriage-ruling

burke

More than a dozen states that saw gay marriage bans struck down last week by the U.S.  Supreme Court are vowing to protect religious liberty, even though they grudgingly accept that the ruling is now the law of the land.

  • In the wake of Friday’s decision, Texas’s attorney general told county clerks in the state that they have a statutory right to refuse marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they have religious objections to gay marriage.
  • In Alabama, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore — a staunch opponent of same-sex marriage — said a new state court order could temporarily delay the practice, only to walk back the remarks.
  • And in Louisiana, the attorney general contends there is nothing in the Supreme Court’s ruling that renders it effective immediately, raising questions about how soon the state would have to comply. Leftist Giant called Tyranny

Many other states across the South and upper Midwest are criticizing the ruling as an encroachment on states’ rights and religious freedom, though most acknowledge they cannot ignore it. “Ultimately, my position is that the state should have been legally entitled to define marriage,” South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley told The Hill. “I feel the state has traditionally held that role, and certainly when it’s in the state’s constitution it should be respected.” “But we are a nation of laws and we must respect that,” he added.

Before the Supreme Court’s ruling last Friday, those states and 11 others — Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio and Tennessee — had laws prohibiting same-sex marriage. Though not outright defying the high court’s decision, states are now seeking to make clear the limits of its scope. “The ruling does not tell a minister or congregation what they must do, but it does make clear that the government cannot pick and choose when it comes to issuing marriage licenses and the benefits they confer,” said Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway.Giant Government Compliance Officer

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the state would issue exemptions to county clerks, judges and justices of the peace who express religious objections to issuing gay marriage licenses, promising to “defend their religious beliefs.” The government cannot force them to conduct same-sex wedding ceremonies over their religious objections,” Paxton said, accusing the Supreme Court of “ignoring the text and spirit of the Constitution to manufacture a right that simply does not exist.”

In cases where there are objections, however, other public officials would issue the documents.

A federal judge ruled in May that Alabama’ s same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional and stayed her opinion until the Supreme Court ruled on the issue. This week, Moore — the state Supreme Court’s chief justice — initially said a new motion in the earlier case would effectively table Friday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage, a case known as Obergefell v. Hodges.
But same-sex marriage advocates argued that the order has no tangible effects thanks to a federal injunction, and Moore later backed away from the assertion. “In no way does the order instruct probate judges of this State as to whether or not they should comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell,” he said.SCOTUS GIANT

Still, Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange accused the Supreme Court of “overturning centuries of tradition and the will of the citizens.” “I expect the focus will now turn to the exercise of one’s religious liberty,” Strange said.

A number of attorneys general also complained that the Supreme Court’s decision infringes on states’ right to define marriage how they see fit. Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell said the court’s ruling “overturns the will of the people of Louisiana, and it takes away a right that should have been left to the states.”

Caldwell is threatening to essentially disregard the Supreme Court’s ruling for the time being, saying there is “nothing in [the] decision that makes the court’s order effective immediately. Therefore, there is not yet a legal requirement for officials to issue marriage licenses or perform marriages for same-sex couples in Louisiana.”

Gay rights activists warn that any acts of perceived defiance would threaten to undermine the legal system. “It’s a dangerous message for southern governors to disobey an order from the Supreme Court,” said Marc Solomon, national campaign director at Freedom to Marry. “The notion that public employees get to pick and choose which laws they follow based on their religious beliefs is a really dangerous precedent and a terrible public policy,” he added. “If you’re a public official, you need to carry out those laws, and you don’t get to decide whether they’re right or wrong.”
Big Gay Hate Machine
The attorneys general in North Dakota and Mississippi both said they are waiting on other court cases to be resolved before they enforce the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage. Other states like Ohio and Nebraska expressed disappointment that the Supreme Court was interfering with their marriage laws but also indicated they would respect the ruling.

And top officials in a handful of states that formerly banned gay marriage are now welcoming the Supreme Court’s ruling. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster said he would move swiftly to recognized same-sex marriage in the wake of the court’s ruling. “The history of our country has always been one of moving toward inclusion and equality,” Koster said in a statement. “I applaud the court for their courage and strong sense of fairness. Missourians should be seen as equals under the law; regardless of their gender, race, or whom they love.”It HasNever Been About Marriage

Austin Yack, Hanna Krueger, Kate Hardiman and Rachel Ravina contributed.

freedom combo 2

SOUTH CAROLINA Democrats Oppose Legislation That Would Ban Islamic Sharia Law from State Courts


 Reported By

Islamization

The Republican-sponsored anti-sharia legislation which would ensure that Islamic and other foreign laws are kept out of consideration by South Carolina courts is being stonewalled by Democrat panderers who seek to appease Muslim supremacists pushing hard to get sharia law recognized by American courts.

Post and Courier: A vote on the anti-Sharia law bill was postponed until Tuesday at the earliest after an hours-long debate over Charleston Republican Rep. Chip Limehouse’s proposal. Limehouse has said a law is needed to prevent radical Islamic beliefs from infiltrating state courts. Democrats said the bill showed why the GOP was unfit to govern and why South Carolina is the butt of late-night television jokes. They accused Republicans of legislating off of Internet rumors.

Rep. James Smith, D-Columbia, called the bill “red meat” and “politics at its worst,” while Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg, chastised Limehouse and others for having the wrong priorities.Liberalism a mental disorder 2

Defenders of the measure said that events in Iraq and the growth of radical Islam in America mean that South Carolina should ensure that laws adhered to by militant groups like ISIS don’t end up in U.S. courts. Sharia law is also sometimes used in Muslim communities to settle contract disputes or family matters, although American courts are not bound by those rules. The terrorist group ISIS has used the 14th century laws to justify the beheading of prisoners in Syria and Iraq.

Limehouse has cited the Center for Security Policy, a conservative Washington, D.C.-based think tank, that has prompted states around the country to introduce laws banning the use of foreign or Sharia laws. The center has cited 146 cases in 32 states where Sharia law was used as a legal argument. Those states are Tennessee, Louisiana, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Washington, Alabama and Florida, according to the center.Got-Quran_thumb1-300x228

A fear of Islamic law has grown particularly among conservative groups around the country as terrorist groups have carried out attacks and spread their message on social media. Rep. Joe Neal, D-Hopkins, said Republicans were fear-mongering. “Laws in this state ought to be based on our Constitution not on fear, not on suspicion,” he said. “We’re better than this because we don’t need to give in to fear … and the kind of low-brow politics this seems to represent.”Picture9

OARLogo Picture6

Black Teens Execute Father & Son in New Orleans: Obama, Inc. Silent


waving flagReported by Katie McGuire Katie McGuire

Black teens have committed a horrible crime against a white family, The two teen thugs were arrested this weekend after shooting David Pence and his son Nicholas after a dinner party at their own home. The horrifying crime is nothing short or outrageous, yet, where is the media, Obama, Holder or even Sharpton? Probably hiding and hoping no one in the media notices this story – or their absence:

Pence

#WhiteLivesDontMatter

NOLA reported:

Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s deputies have arrested a pair of New Orleans teens for the shotgun murder of David Pence and his son, Nicholas, in Metairie.

Dexter Allen, 17, and Haraquon Degruy, 18, were arrested in New Orleans Friday (April 24) after a brief car chase, Sheriff Newell Normand announced at a press conference Sunday.

Normand said Allen gunned down the Pences Wednesday night inside their home in the 3700 block of Clifford Drive, shooting David Pence three times with a shotgun, then shooting Nicholas Pence twice.

Normand said Degruy told investigators she and Allen, who had pulled into the Pences’ driveway in a stolen vehicle, had been committing car burglaries in the neighborhood.

Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office announces the arrests of Dexter Allen and Haraquon Degruy for involvement in the murders of David and Nicholas Pence in Metairie.

Desired Race War

H/T: Gateway Pundit

OARLogo Picture6

More from the “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder” File – You Can’t Make This Stuff Up


ACLU Attorney: Religious Liberty Laws Could Let Husbands Hit Their Wives

 by Dr. Susan Berry, 10 Apr 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/10/aclu-attorney-religious-liberty-laws-could-let-husbands-hit-their-wives/

Leftwing opponents of religious freedom legislation are continuing a trail of fear mongering that led Indiana lawmakers and Gov. Mike Pence (R) to cave to demands to change that state’s law last week.

Michael Reed, Communications Director for Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) said in a statement sent to Breitbart News that Esman’s comment is “an example of the absurdity of the Left and the length they will go to spread lies about laws to protect individual religious rights from adverse action by government.” …. “This comment is shockingly reprehensible – but fortunately quite absurd and misinformed,” Reed added.

House Bill 707, introduced by Louisiana state Rep. Mike Johnson (R), would create the “Marriage and Conscience Act,” and “create a cause of action for the protection of the right of conscience as relates to marriage.”

“House Bill 707 doesn’t change any law to allow people or businesses to do anything that is currently against the law, be it spousal abuse, or breaking and entering, or jaywalking,” continued Reed. “The bill that has been filed simply ensures the state cannot deny a license, certification, accreditation, contract, etc. to an individual or business on the basis of a sincerely held religious belief about marriage.”

In a written statement to Nola.com, Johnson said the ACLU and those supporting the militant LGBT agenda are intentionally engaging in a campaign of fear, intimidation and misinformation about this bill.”Liberalism a mental disorder 2

“The language of HB 707 is very clear: it is squarely and only about preventing the government from discriminating against any citizen for their views about marriage,” he added.

According to Nola.com, the Human Rights Campaign—advocate for the LGBT agenda—wants Louisiana lawmakers to kill the religious freedom bill themselves, but they’re willing to contact national business and industry groups such as Walmart and others that forced Indiana lawmakers to cave on their bill for fear of damaging the state’s economy.

“If the Legislature takes up the bill and starts seriously considering it, then we would consider something,” said Sarah Warbelow, who leads the legal team at the Human Rights Campaign. “Many state legislatures have chosen not to take [similar bills] up.”

Politico’s chief political columnist Roger Simon also did his share of fear mongering this week by referring to religious freedom laws as a “poison pill” bogeyman for Republicans.

“There is a poison pill inside the Republican Party and if its presidential hopefuls keep swallowing it, they are going to choke off their chances for the White House,” Simon warned ominously. “The religious right has managed to convince some potential candidates that it is extremely powerful. It has convinced the more gullible ones that they must grovel, kowtow and genuflect before it.”more evidenceLeftist determonation to destroy freedom of religion

Last week, Breitbart News Senior Editor-At-Large Ben Shapiro observed the consequences states such as Indiana suffer when they cave to the demands of the left.

Shapiro said that, as a result of changing its law:

“…Indiana actually enshrined more special rights for gays and lesbians than had existed before the RFRA was passed. Indiana law made no reference to sexual orientation in its anti-discrimination statutes prior to the RFRA; now the RFRA itself will be used as a weapon against religious Americans in Indiana who believe that homosexuality is a sin, since the law affirmatively prohibits a religious freedom defense with regard to failure to serve gays and lesbians.”Picture6

GOP Candidate Releases Video Calling Global Warming ‘The Greatest Deception In The History Of Mankind’


Trigger the Vote

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/26/gop-candidate-calls-global-warming-greatest-deception-ever-video/#ixzz35sttoey5

Lenar Whitney, who is running as a Republican in the crowded Sixth Congressional District in Louisiana

Photo of Alex Pappas<img class=”avatar avatar-96 photo” width=”64″ height=”64″ src=”http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/user_photos/pappas-924224717.jpg” border=”0″ alt=”Photo of Alex Pappas” />

Alex Pappas

Political Reporter

In a move sure to inflame the left, a Republican congressional candidate in Louisiana is releasing a nearly five-minute long video railing against liberals and calling global warming a “hoax” that might be “the greatest deception in the history of mankind.”

The video comes from candidate Lenar Whitney, who is running as a Republican in the crowded Sixth Congressional District race in the state.

“A spectre is haunting America,” Whitney says in the video. “It is perhaps the greatest deception in the history of mankind. It has been almost 10 years since failed presidential candidate Al Gore put out his propaganda film, ‘The Inconvenient Truth,’ proclaiming that the actions of America’s energy industry are causing a catastrophic rise in the earth’s temperature.”

“But quite inconveniently for Al Gore,” Whitney continued, “and for the rest of the politicians who continue to advance this delusion, any 10-year-old can invalidate their thesis with one of the simplest scientific devices known to man: a thermometer.”

Talking about Gore, Whitney adds: “The earth has done nothing but get colder each year since the film’s release.”

WATCH

global warming
Truth The New Hate SpeechGoreWE MUST NEVER FORGETVOTE 02

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: