Abortion Number One Cause Of Death Globally

Over 41 million abortions were performed last year world-wide, according to an estimate by Worldometers, a statistics tracking service that utilizes data from the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations (UN), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other organizations.

The number of abortions far surpasses the number of global deaths from cancer, malaria, HIV/AIDS, smoking, alcohol and traffic accidents combined. And you could throw in a number of other causes, as well.

Not one single fatality could be directly tied to man-caused global warming.

Nor to “microaggressions.” Or “mis-gendering.”

The world recently, if shakily, “committed” to spending trillions of dollars to fight man-caused global warming. At least the West did. We, rightly, spend enormous amounts of money to fight cancer and AIDS. The U.S. spends millions in the fight against alcohol abuse and for smoking prevention programs. (Though we are encouraging the consumption of marijuana). Cars are being loaded up with costly computers and driver assist systems featuring cameras and sensors. Autonomous vehicles will soon literally be coming down the road in large numbers. All purportedly in an effort to cut down on traffic accidents and fatalities.

Yet we spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year to fund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. This is not possible for a moral person to rationalize. We pay through the nose to fight virtually every other cause of death, some of which are not entirely preventable, yet we subsidize the biggest cause of death, which is entirely preventable and elective. For our convenience. Crazy. Monstrous.

We may well not be able to do a damn thing about climate change, no matter how hard we try. The climate has been changing on its own for millions of years. But it’s easy to prevent abortions: don’t have one. Or don’t have sexual intercourse. Or take precautions.

We focus on transgender rights and the fragility of a planet that’s been around for 4.5 billion years while disdaining the rights of the little people who’ve been in their mother’s womb for a few weeks or months.

This Holocaust must end. At the very least, we must stop subsidizing it with taxpayer’s money.

Pink Salmon Too Abundant Researchers Say

                Amid all the panic about extinctions, habitat loss and ocean pollution, yet another peril has appeared: there are too many pink salmon. Why? Because they may impolitely consume more than their fair share of zooplankton, the foundational building block of the ocean’s food chain. Zooplankton provide sustenance for everything from seabirds and small salmon to gigantic whales. Biological oceanographer Sonia Batten has examined 15 years of data from the North Pacific and found that zooplankton were far more abundant in even-numbered years than in odd-numbered years. Moreover, she concluded that just one predator fit the profile of the gluttonous culprit: pink salmon.

                Researchers say that pink salmon are voracious eaters—almost Trump-like-- and thrive at the expense of other salmon, seabirds and species that share their diet. A 2018 study estimated that roughly 665 million adult salmon swim in the North Pacific, pink salmon accounting for about 67% of that number. Greg Ruggerone, president of Natural Resources Consultants in Seattle, Washington, has been analyzing salmon interactions since 2009 and says the results show “there is this link between sockeye salmon and pink salmon related to competition for food.” Duh! A decade-long scientific analysis revealed that animals compete for food??!! My God, what truths-- what natural phenomena—will science uncover next?! The Earth is flat? Water is wet? Climate changes over time?

                Something’s fishy here, though. Do we really feel the need to pick winners and losers among the salmon species? Is it logical and practical to attempt to determine the exact population composition of various species of the same family? It is so pathetically typical of progressives to believe they know best for other people-- and other species—that they may well decree that “pink salmon should comprise no more than 47% of the overall population of salmon in the North Pacific, whereas sockeyes should be no less than 20% and no more than 25%. King salmon should be capped at 18% while the rest of the salmon species together should number between 10% and 15% of the total. I have spoken.”

                I feel sorry for pink salmon. They are essentially being accused of “pink salmon supremacy.” I hope they don’t unveil a sign reading “All Salmon Matter.” If they do, progressives may aid in their extinction.

College Coach Asks Ray Rice To Speak To Team About Domestic Abuse

                Nick Saban, head coach of the University of Alabama Crimson Tide football team, recently invited former Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice to speak to his team about “how to treat the opposite sex.” Ironically, Rice’s pro career ended in 2014 after he viciously punched his then-fiancée in an elevator, knocking her out, an act of violence caught on a surveillance camera mounted inside the hoist.

                According to a foxnews.com report, Saban invites at least one “Title IX speaker” a year to discuss various topics with his perennially dominant SEC squad. Rice was, apparently, Saban’s third choice and was selected only after Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein both became unavailable. Saban has already chosen Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) to talk to his team about the proper treatment of Jews in the coming months. Sources say he has also asked Peter H. Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan, to talk about Christianity and has a commitment from Cheech and Chong to expound on the evils of Marijuana use.

Regularly Sporadic Current Events Quiz...#6

Regularly Sporadic Current Events Quiz….#6

Can you answer all the questions correctly?

1)      President Trump thought Hurricane Dorian would hit what state?

a-       California

b-      Alabama

c-       West Virginia

d-      Nebraska

2)      CNN thought Alabama was what state?

a-       Alabama

b-      Nebraska

c-       Mississippi

d-      North Dakota

3)      Bernie Sanders wants to eliminate what to lessen climate change?

a-       Red Meat

b-      Fossil Fuels

c-       The Sun

d-      Humans

4)      Elizabeth Warren wants to eliminate what to lessen climate change?

a-       Nuclear Power

b-      Hundreds of Thousands of Good-Paying Jobs

c-       Bernie Sanders

d-      All of The Above

5)      Andrew Yang’s plan to retard global warming involves which of the following?

a-       Giant Fans and Blocks of Ice

b-      Large-Scale Cloud-Seeding and Copious Amounts of Kool-Aid

c-       Massive Mirrors Placed in Earth’s Atmosphere to Reflect Sunlight

d-      Attempting to Blast the Planet into An Orbit Further from The Sun

6)      Joe Biden’s plan to retard Elizabeth Warren involves which of the following?

a-       Referring to her as “the candidate formerly known as ‘Pocahontas’”

b-      Embellishing stories and making himself the hero

c-       Forgetting her name, title and state she represents

d-      Staring her in the eyes during the next debate and exclaiming, “Bitch can’t dance!”

7)      Russia recently tried to downplay what tragic event?

a-       An explosion of a nuclear rocket engine

b-      An explosion of a nuclear submarine

c-       Vladimir Putin exploding

d-      A sudden spike in the price of vodka

8)      What caused a million people in Hong Kong to take to the streets in protest?

a-       An amendment that would allow the extradition of fugitive offenders to China

b-      The impending imposition of a Chinese-style social credit score system

c-       They are sick and tired of being called the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China (HK SAR, PRC) and want to once again be called…Hong Kong

d-      Alcohol

9)      Macron & Merkel are which of the following?

a-       A European law firm

b-      An obscure comedy duo

c-       Leading Europe into oblivion by their open borders, one-world policies

d-      All of the above

10)   Justin Trudeau is…?

a-       An empty suit

b-      Prime minister of Canada

c-       Plagued by a corruption scandal involving his former attorney general

d-      All of the above

11)   Joe Biden recently referred to President Trump as…?

a-       Donald Rump

b-      Donald Hump

c-       President Obama

d-      That guy from New York with the funny hair

12)   President Trump recently wanted to purchase which of the following?

a-       Mexico

b-      China

c-       Greenland

d-      The Swedish Bikini Team

Thanks for taking the quiz! Here are the correct answers: 1) b, 2) c, 3) d, 4) d, 5) c, 6) b, 7) a, 8) a, 9) c, 10) d, 11) b, 12) c

De Blasio Asks Voters To Choose The Tallest Candidate

                CNN’s Ana Cabrera kicked off a recent town hall meeting by telling 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and current New York Mayor Bill de Blasio: “you are really tall.” Cabrera noted that, if elected, de Blasio would become the “tallest president ever,” his 6’ 5” height besting Abraham Lincoln by an inch. She then, somewhat cheekily, said to Mayor Bill: “How is that height advantage working out for you?” (de Blasio received the support of only one percent of likely Democratic voters in the latest Fox News poll).

                De Blasio responded: “Remember, the taller candidate has won every general election for president, but I think three times only. There’s only three exceptions in the history of the republic. So if you want to get rid of Donald Trump, choose the tallest candidate.” Of course, de Blasio is the tallest candidate among the veritable plethora of 2020 Democratic presidential aspirants, one inch taller than former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke. (President Trump is 6’ 3”).

                So, de Blasio says to “Choose the tallest candidate” if you want to get rid of Donald Trump. This is fascinating when one considers that Bernie Sanders is essentially urging voters to “choose the reddest candidate” if they want to rid themselves of Trump, while Kamala Harris and Cory Booker are asking those same voters to choose the blackest candidate. Moreover, Andrew Yang is pleading with voters to choose the most Asian candidate at the same time Mike Gravel is imploring folks to choose the oldest…and therefore wisest candidate. Marianne Williamson is attempting to persuade people to choose the most new-agey candidate, while Beto O’Rourke appears to be begging people to “choose the most insane candidate.”

                Elizabeth Warren had earlier attempted to define herself as the candidate with the most Native-American blood, but test results show Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong and the Pillsbury Doughboy all had more tribal blood in them then Pocahontas possesses. This has caused Warren to demand citizens choose the oldest female candidate. Pete Buttigieg is imploring voters to choose the gayest candidate, etc., etc.

                Oddly enough, the Democratic candidates never ask voters to choose the most intelligent, most patriotic, or “most American” candidate. As late as the fall of 2001, most Americans were proud of their heritage and the country was fairly unified in many respects. It is a far different-- and sadder-- story today, however, due to progressives’ limitless ability to be offended and their unceasing demand for “intersectionality.”

                E Unum Pluribus. Out of one comes many. And this divided house cannot stand much longer.

CNN Hosts Climate Change Town Hall

                CNN recently gave the ten remaining Democratic presidential candidates a seven-hour televised forum for their proposals on how best to deal with climate change. The seven-hour Town Hall marathon was long enough that the climate actually did change during the assembly-- and light turned to darkness, which is precisely what they intend for America.

                The ten Trotskyites’ tactics for slowing global warming would necessitate that the U.S. abolish offshore drilling, fracking, all other forms of oil extraction, and the usage of natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy. Factory farming, the raising and consumption of red meat, plastic straws, combustion engine vehicles, and light bulbs would also be banned. Well, we won’t need combustion engine vehicles or light bulbs, because we won’t have any way to power them. But, nuclear power? That is a safe, carbon-neutral energy source. Hell, the French generate most of their energy via nuclear power.

                All of the Democrat’s schemes to cool the planet were truly preposterous, yet Andrew Yang’s managed to stand out. (Yang may be the yang to Elizabeth Warren’s yin. He is a young male of color, she is an old white woman. A balanced ticket). Yang wants to place a vast array of giant mirrors in the atmosphere to reflect sunlight back into space.

   “Mirror, mirror, in the sky, name me someone crazier than I?”

   Upon reflection, all the Dems’ proposals were nothing but smoke and mirrors, designed to appeal to those who can barely fog one.

Democrats Use Hurricane Dorian For Political Gain

                Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) recently tweeted out a video showing the horrific damage Hurricane Dorian inflicted on the Bahamas, using the natural catastrophe as yet another excuse to climb back up on her carefully crafted soapbox. Ocasio-Cortez blames “man-caused climate change” for nearly all ills, much the way Hitler blamed the Jews, and with just as little reason.

                AOC wrote: “This is what climate change looks like.” No, girl, this is what tragically bad weather and political opportunism looks like. The former is unfortunate, if historically unavoidable. The latter is inexcusable. She then claimed climate change “hits vulnerable communities first.” How? Does she think it is a sentient being? Is “climate change” selectively local and ergo not a global-scale problem? That seems counter-intuitive and is certainly not what alarmists have been telling us for years now. Or perhaps she believes President Trump and his evil cadre have somehow figured out a way to harness and direct hurricanes in the manner of radio-controlled devices such as cars and planes.

                The Wacky One further opined: “We either decarbonize & cut emissions, or we don’t & let people die.” That is not the choice we face. One might ask her how many people existed before the industrial revolution started releasing man-caused greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Answer: the population of the world was under 1 billion in 1790, just prior to the start of the Industrial Era. It is 7.7 billion today. Hmmm. What percentage of the global citizenry was mired in poverty in 1790? Today? What was the average global life expectancy—in years-- prior to the industrial revolution? What is it today? What are the respective infant mortality rates (not counting abortions, a recent, totally man-caused genocide).

                Proving that old white men can be just as ignorant as young women of color, presidential candidate and socialist stalwart Bernie Sanders tweeted, “Let us be clear: Hurricane Dorian has everything to do with climate change, which is the existential crisis of our time.” No, Bernie, “the existential crisis of our time” is the combination of ignorance, arrogance, and shamelessness that defines the modern Democratic Party.

                If a meteor hit a gay bar, do you really think a conservative politician would race to get in front of a camera to say, “this is what the wages of sin looks like?” Or take to Twitter to tweet, “Let us be clear: this has everything to do with culture change?”

Writer Says "Normal" People Should No Longer Wear Red Hats

                Rebecca Makkai is an American novelist and short-story writer who lives outside of Chicago. Her writing has been translated into seven languages, celebrated in O Magazine and anthologized in The Best American Short Stories. Her first novel, The Borrower, was released in 2011 and was a Booklist Top Ten Debut, an Indie Next pick and one of Chicago Magazine’s selections for best fiction of 2011.

                Yet this accomplished author tweeted that she’d “still never seen a MAGA hat in real life” despite “traveling a whole hell of a lot over the past couple of years.” She added: “This strikes me as super weird, but then I remember that there are Americans out there who think they don’t know a gay person and have definitely never met a Muslim. What even is this country.” Say what?

                A fellow social media justice warrior replied that, while in Des Moines, he saw a man “in a baseball-style jersey that said TRUMP 45 on the back.” He noted that there was an American flag on each sleeve and characterized the garment as “very tacky.” Makkai responded, “Ewwwwww.”

                Makkai went on to ask, “Is anyone else made really uncomfortable these days by anyone wearing any kind of red baseball cap?” She further remarked, in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-like fashion, “Like, I see one and my heart does weird shit and then I finally realize it only says Titleist or whatever.” She went on to suggest, “Maybe don’t wear red caps anymore, normal people?”

                The hypocrisy of those on the left is unbounded even by the edges of the universe. They routinely decry the term “normal” and shout “let your freak flag fly,” while applauding the acknowledgment of 63 genders and countless sexual perversions, yet seriously state that “normal” people shouldn’t wear red caps??!! Is it okay for “normal” people to wear any hats anymore, Rebecca? What about the St. Louis Cardinals major league baseball team? Should they be forced to abandon the red baseball caps they’ve worn for many decades……that they might avoid offending you? Does the depiction of “red states” on electronic screens bother you, as well? Does the term “redneck” make you see red? Should we expunge from history the names “Red Skelton” and “Redd Foxx?”

                And what of “MAGA?” Would this acronym be any less offensive to Makkai and her ilk if it were on a blue hat? Probably not. Perhaps she would be more comfortable if the letters “m,” “a,” and “g?” were excommunicated from the English language, rendering her own name “Rebecc Kki?”

               

The DNC Passes Resolution Praising Humanists, The Religiously Unaffiliated

The Democratic National Committee recently passed a resolution extolling the values and virtues of “religiously unaffiliated” Americans, noting that they comprise the “largest religious group within the Democratic Party.” Ironically, most of those in the “largest religious group” in the Democratic Party are utterly irreligious except for their belief in big government-- and their own infallibility.

The resolution praising the ungodly was passed unanimously at the DNC’s August 24 meeting, appropriately held in San Francisco, California. This elated the Secular Coalition of America, an organization that lobbies for public policy benefitting agnostics, atheists and humanists. The SCA touted the DNC’s action as the first time a major party “embraced American nonbelievers.” It is easy to believe the Democratic Party is now formally wooing nonbelievers, embracing non-embracers. In 2012, Democratic National Convention attendees actually booed the mention of “God.” At their 2016 Convention, a preacher was heckled while giving the opening prayer. And, earlier this year, Democrats reintroduced the “Equality Act,” which if passed would effectively repeal the First Amendment to the Constitution, destroy the concept of religious liberty and force the devout to ignore their consciences. (The freshly radicalized Taylor Swift, on tour promoting her new album “Lover,” recently opened a concert by performing “You Need to Calm Down,” an LGBTQ anthem she co-wrote mocking Christians as uneducated, unsophisticated, homophobic rubes. Large gold letters on the stage spelled out “Equality Act”).

The DNC’s resolution unironically states: “Religiously unaffiliated Americans overwhelmingly share the Democratic Party’s values,” and notes the need to advocate for “rational public policy based on sound science and universal humanistic values.” Satanists almost universally share humanistic values and almost universally vote for Democrats. When will the party officially seek the Church of Satan’s endorsement? Fittingly, the “church” of Satan was established in San Francisco in 1966. The circle is unbroken!

SCA’s director of governmental affairs, Sarah Levin, lauded the resolution as a way “to ensure that policy is driven by science and evidence, not sectarian beliefs.” Because we know scientists are unbiased and more trustworthy than God.

The Democrats are targeting nonreligious voters as part of their strategy to beat President Trump, in part because Trump appears to have the evangelical vote locked up, and in part because it is who they are. Levin also said that “America was founded as a secular government,” an assertion so preposterous it buggers description. For Levin’s benefit, here is the definition of ‘secular’: “denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis. Contrasted with sacred.”

Final sentence of the Declaration of Independence: “We Mutually Pledge To Each Other Our Lives, Our Fortunes And Our Sacred Honor.” (Italics mine).

John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

George Washington, ‘father of his country,’ in his Farewell Address: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports……And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.”

Levin further added, of America’s supposed secularism, “I am proud to see the Democratic Party take that to heart by bringing secular Americans into the fold.” Note to Levin: it’s not hard to bring secular Americans into the fold. All you have to do is eliminate all standards and promise them free stuff.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation, on whose website an “unabashed atheist” appears by the words, “Not Afraid Of Burning In Hell,” released a statement saying it “is optimistic that the DNC resolution is a sign of bigger and better things to come for freethinkers and would like to see every party at every level of government adopt similar resolutions.” Bigger and better things to come for freethinkers? Doubtful. For free-lovers, freebasers, and freeloaders? Maybe.

Researchers Say Term "Cyclist" Dehumanizing

                Researchers at Australia’s Queensland University of Technology examined the way Australians characterize their interactions with Bicyclists and determined that those who call themselves “cyclists” are actually dehumanizing and demeaning themselves. The Daily Mail reported that the online survey of 442 people found that one in five drivers “deliberately blocked” cyclists and one in ten admitted to using their car to cut off a cyclist. Still others copped to lesser offenses like shouting and throwing things at cyclists.

                Survey researchers used a “dehumanization trait scale” to measure motorist’s agreement with statements such as “I feel like cyclists are mechanic.” (huh?). A majority of non-cyclists called cyclists “not completely human,” prompting QUT professor Narelle Haworth to say that the language used to describe bicycle-riders needs to change. Haworth prefers the lengthier term, “people who ride bikes,” averring that her term “is more human-like and less like a species,” (huh?) and will change how drivers see those atop a bicycle.

                Brilliant.

                Haworth added, “There is need to grow a culture of mutual respect for people on bikes.” So, apparently, it’s the nomenclature we need to change, not the “cyclists’” or “motorists’” behavior.

                Well then, in that same vein I propose that we replace the dehumanized term “abortionist” with the lengthier term, “people who kill small babies.” Or does that not work as well? Certainly, the dry and ideological term “leftists” could better be replaced by the more organic—and accurate-- “people who hate freedom.”

                “Politician” could be replaced by “people who disdain truth but worship money and power while claiming they are honest and utterly unaffected by money and power.”

                “Republican?” Easy: “People who lack spines.”

                “Journalist?” Even easier: “Ideological-- and easily offended-- people who create fake news while preaching their objectivity and integrity.”

                “Psychiatrist?” No problem. Two alternatives, in fact: 1) “People who are trying to heal themselves while purporting to help others.” 2) “People who feel better about themselves while engaging in an apparent attempt to help those possibly even more screwed up than they are.”

                I think “academic” should be replaced with the less like a species term, “People who are too dumb to get and keep a real job.” “Entertainers” would become “People, typically under the influence of drugs and alcohol, who are even more ignorant than academics but engage in non-stop virtue-signaling.” “Artist” would be supplanted by, “People who take it upon themselves to shock and offend others by ‘pushing the envelope,’ and believe they are doing the world a favor by revealing a heretofore unknown ‘truth,’ such as ‘good is evil’ and ‘there are a limitless number of genders.’”

                Finally, “writer” should go the way of the Dinosaur…to be replaced by the more human-like phrase, ”Tortured soul who feels the need to put words to paper or screen in the usually unfounded belief that he or she  can persuade, amuse, entertain or enlighten.”