OctoberBaby

OctoberBaby

Monday, January 24, 2011

The Fourth Estate Pleads The Fifth

As I sat here and watch the 38th annual March for Life that started with a mass at the Verizon center, (all the more reason to go back to Verizon and leave Cablevision) to the rally point in front of the Supreme Court building and in front of the Capital building and White House where there were hundreds of attendees I found that not one major news organization (I didn't get to check Fox News) even carried the story. It is really astonishing how public perception is shaped or as Noam Chomsky would say how consent is manufactured.

Perhaps it will be on later this evening but I found it eerie how not one station carried the story. President Obama made some public comment on the White House web page of how he "affirms a fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters." This is something he can affirm for the crime families of New York and around the world for what he is allowing to take place is murder. Murder, a capital crime is taking place here but people are looking the other way. Yet when it came to the pedophile scandal in the Church where exactly one murder was committed and that against a Fr. John Geoghan in prison there was a great cry of moral injustice. In fact, some were seeking to extend the legislatively imposed statute of limitations on pedophilia in order to get more convictions.

Roe V. Wade was a decision made in 1973, which was really tragic since the A-mode scan which can detect a fetal heart beat, cephalometry and placental localization was used in Europe, Britain, United Sates, Japan, China, USSR, Poland and Australia as fat back as the early sixties.
"The ability to recognise and confirm the presence of fetal cardiac action in early pregnancy was considered to be one of the most indispensible use of ultrasonography (and still is). "¹ It would appear that although these technological breakthroughs were making it more and more obvious that the fetus was indeed alive and human the Roe V. Wade decision was made with little or no input with regards to this scientific information. The use of these technologies actually deter any need for a 'theory of life' as stated in the Roe decision. In fact, the entire Roe decision was constituted without any technological input at all. While the Roe decision took issue with the Churches concept of 'quickening' it all together failed to take into consideration that indeed a fetal heart beat was fully accessible to the physician. How can the detection of a heartbeat, completely independent of the mother's not make the case that the human fetus was in fact (a) alive and (b) distinct from the mother? Nothing since chattel slavery in the United States could be a more willful ignorance to the bare facts of nature as the Roe decision in 1973. We are now at the point where 53 million lives have been taken and never before have we had at our disposal such advanced technological and scientific evidence that the human fetus is indeed alive and independent of the mother if even in a symbiotic relationship.

Yet while many liberal organizations bemoan the Supreme Court decision to allow corporations to unrestricted funding of a political candidate, in the Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission in 2008 and are trying to have it over turned, they see nothing wrong with legalizing abortion (and embryonic stem cell research) and having these atrocities funded by the government. The abortion issue is characterized by President Obama as an issue concerning "women’s health and reproductive freedom". It appears that a child is a health risk and detrimental to woman's health, no doubt under the premise that a woman's health could be jeopardized due to complications with the pregnancy. However, as Bishop Thomas J. Olmstead of Phoenix made clear when he revoked the Catholic status of St. Joseph's Hospital in the Diocese of Phoenix, abortion is not a remedy or treatment for any prevailing health condition a woman (or anyone else) might have. The expression "reproductive freedom" is actually a euphemism, replacing the 'freedom' to reproduce with a license to kill.

President Obama goes on to say, "I hope that we will recommit ourselves more broadly
to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, the same
freedoms, and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their
dreams.”
Where, as if suffering from a god complex, he 'grants' the same 'rights, freedom and opportunities' to girls as he does to boys. Yet, he avoids the obvious reality that only girls can get pregnant and thereby converts a natural reality into a social injustice. All this time, President Obama and his liberal allies have painted this picture that a large social conspiracy was about. Conservatives and their kind were the cause of female and homosexual oppression. With this perception there is the idea that if only the Catholic Bishops were out of the way pedophiles would not exist to molest young boys, if only the Church was not in the way homosexuality would be completely tolerated and young homosexual men would not commit suicide. If only everyone purchase health insurance people would not suffer from cancer, Alzheimer's disease, the common cold or 'punished' with a baby they did not plan on having.

However, now it does not seem unjustified if many Catholics perceive a conspiracy amongst the liberal media elite. It seems, very similarly to the Roe decision made just as the technological means of establishing the human fetus a living human being was reaching a crescendo before the 1973 decision and was ignored, that the major media outlets have also deliberately ignored the staggering March for Life turn out that was right in front of the Supreme Court building in the heart of American politics, Washington D.C. At this point the conclusion has to be drawn not that the evidence for the right to life of the fetus is not present, it has been present since before 1973 but that the Pro Choice advocates want to have the 'right' to make the choice over whether that human fetus lives or dies and they refuse to extend that choice to the human fetus or anyone else. No different than a murderer or serial killer, the Pro Choice advocates want to maintain the only option available to them, murder, as they have no choice over the actual pregnancy for which the woman either is or is not experiencing. They are no different than an organized crime family who reserves murder as a contingency in a dilemma.

What became startingly and tragically clear in the investigation of the Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell who made millions killing many delivered babies through induced labor of women in their sixth, seventh and eight month of pregnancy then cutting into the back of their neck with a scissors and snipping their spinal cord was that he and others who perform abortions are hired specifically to insure that viability, the standard for life, was never an issue. He clearly understood his job as an abortionist was to eliminate any possibility of child living independently from the mother even when he or she could.

The Pro-life advocates which seem to always be in a debate with one rationalization after another, whether the fetus is a human child or not, at what stage of development is the human fetus able to live independent of it's mother or not (certainly a question that seems to have been answered with the first test tube babies) or whether the human fetus feels pain have all been mere tactics used by those who really have no interest in the life of the child at all. There are day time television shows which are nothing more than a series of paternity test to prove whether a certain man is the father of a woman's child. How then is it possible that after one sexual encounter with the woman that there is a "part of her' that has a genetic link to a man completely outside of her? Would that prove true of her hair tissue or tissue samples from her liver, lungs or kidneys? Absolutely not, yet although we have known from the sixties that the human fetus has an independent heart beat and we know today much about it 's unique DNA we are supposed to think of the human fetus as a mere extension of the mother, like an appendix with eyes and a heartbeat. Similarly to the pedophile scandal where there is a legitimate skepticism as to whether tort attorney Jeff Anderson and his advocates have any interest in his client/victims or if rather, the suffering of these children are only a means to a political and financial end. In the pedophile scandal in the Church there are certainly those that would like to see the Church politically and financially crippled. In the abortion debate there are those who perceive a woman's right to choose as the corner stone of a woman's political power. This push for independence, this high price for freedom like the American, French, Russian and Chinese revolutions amongst others, these all seem to come at the cost of human bloodshed and death. Yet unlike the one sacrifice of Christ, the deaths are interminable, they have become standard fare carried out daily. What's more, the freedom that the United States cherished so greatly, freedom of speech, freedom of the press has today, during the 38th annual March for Life proved muffled by those very advocates. Nothing is free, the press is certainly not free because today it has become clear that they are bought and paid for by the liberal sector of American politics, where "All The News That's Fit To Print" will like the lives of the unborn be chosen by a select few to encourage, propagate and establish a distinct political view. No different than the skewed coverage of the Pope's historic state visit to Great Britain which was distorted by CNN, BBC and other leading news agencies, that went so far as to air rehashed 'specials' about the pedophile scandal (as if no one else in the world had had these troubles and experiences) so removed from the visit itself. Simultaneously these same agencies will report on the decline of the American educational system and yet deliberately distort history in the making. What better way to make history come alive for Jr. high or high school students concerning the events of the reformation (the revolt), King Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon than the then current event of the Papal state visit?

The 38th March For Life was hardly covered to the extent it clearly earned given the number of people I witnessed on the only station affording it live coverage, EWTN. Even as I write this blog as late as 5:20 in the evening I can find an article only from the Washington Post, which incidentally is one of the few papers that actually has a religion section and editor. The other website to publish about the March For Life was the conservative journal, "Human Events" which had a magnificent take on this incredible media black out which even communist in Stalin era Soviet Union would have been proud.

There is no question that we live in a divide America. However, the good news suggest that the split is not evenly divided, with the thousands of mostly young people who showed up to the March For Life in Washington D.C. today. No matter what the media may not want to bring attention to they cannot deny the fact that quantity of young men and women that were in attendance on one of the coldest days of the year. Hallelujah! Still, it must be brought to the fore of our minds that the divide in media attention is so overt that there is now an organization that specializes in bringing this very fact to the attention of millions by staging an open protest against the left wing media. The "Tell The Truth Media Research Center" founded by Brent Bozell literally parks bill board advertisements in front of the leading news corporations around New York City and elsewhere. If this isn't a call for America to wake up that in fact we are in the midst of what can only be called a cold war than what would be? Certainly, the United States did not have such deep division in the media nor was there such a distrust of news organizations twenty years ago. In fact, there was a time when both the left and the right trusted the same media outlets. For the most part many people trusted figures like Walter Conkrite and Edward R. Murrow, today that is not the case. Today many people choose to watch either one news organize to the exclusion of the other or go out in search of news from what were considered non-news sources such as Comedy Central. The irony of this current event is that there isn't any one place to broadcast this division in news reporting.

During the President State Of The Union Address today several of the representatives have decided to 'sit together' even though they are from opposing parties. The gesture I am afraid falls way short of instilling in most any sense that cooperation between the two parties and those whom they represent is possible. In part because the left deliberately set out on an agenda of manipulating public opinion on issue such as gay rights and stem cell research and abortion. In most cases there has been little follow up amongst the people and where the propaganda failed the courts, particularly the ninth district courts of appeal stepped in to complete the effort. In the California proposition 8 debate, seven million people voted in favor of it but yet Judge Vaughn Walker, himself a homosexual, struck down this democratically chosen law to keep marriage between a man and a woman and reject "homosexual marriages'. As for the repeal of DADT, the military leadership, most but not all acted in accord to promote this change, yet it does not seem to have been as widely accepted as they may have hoped. For the most part it seems that the 'progressives' are in a minority yet they hold key places in government and the fourth estate by which they attempt to change and manipulate the democratic rule of governing America had professed before the world. What can not be doubted is that indeed many of the population are being maneuvered like cattle into the development of an America they have in no way chosen for themselves. This is the strange reality of America come clean. Have we ever been a free country?


¹Woo,Joseph Dr. A Short History of the Development of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1998-2001

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Friday, January 14, 2011

Liberal Media: All The News That Fits Their Political Agenda

It seems odd that of all the media that is out there in particular the liberal media that the cause of the shooting in Arizona was due to conservative punditry. It has nothing to do with first person shooter games or pot smoke or irreverent and disgusting morally eroding animation like Family Guy or Odd Jobs. It isn't pornography that should be curbed in any way because that is not leading to physical violence which is the one thing that liberals fear most. It is the Rush Limbaugh show.

This is the second time that the liberal media has taken the opportunity to exploit a tragedy and suffering of others. When it came to the pedophile scandal in the Church the same used the opportunity to attack their political opponents the Church. Never mind the fact that we have the simply minded way of perceiving that if a political figure gets hurt we think that the motives are political if a priest does the rape than we think that there is a moral falling in the the Church and we can therefore be critical on those grounds. We do not perceive in mass media however that the young man that shot Congresswoman Gifford had a direct encounter with the Congresswoman and may have had a affective response to his encounter which motivated his actions. Nor do we attack marijuana which many of the liberals espouse is supposedly so good for one. Nor do we look at the fact that we have a person who is so emotionally ill that his parents, friends and even teachers could tell. No, the problem is the Rush Limgaugh show. The problem is that Sarah Palin has cross hairs on a map because circles on a map mean an entirely different thing.

When we watch Peter Werherner debating Bill Press on C-Span's Washington Journal it seems clear that Bill Press is intent on making a case for the liberal Democrats at the expense of the shootings. In fact the common trait has been that these liberal Democrats have no affection at all for the victims, they are merely tools to further their political agenda. http://www.c-span.org/Events/Washington-Journal-for-Sunday-Jan-9/10737418805-3/

Bill Press says that 'violent talk produces, not always, violent actions". This is the problem that the liberals have it is their perception of violence perpetuating out of language because they hold that language in a way leads to the key reasons for action and belief. They believe that if you change the written definition of a psychiatric illness like homosexuality then the reality of the sexual behavior is amended. They have confused the ideas from the beginning and then reach a conclusion all of their own. Then on top of that they are only concerned with physical bodily harm because this is all that they have in their existence, their bodies which they idolize. What is violent talk? Who participates in it and why is it the only form of speech that the liberals are interested in curbing. What about Hip-Hop music there is plenty of violent talk involved in those arenas and yes their is plenty of violence that takes place but does talk of any kind produce actions? The homosexuals say that the teaching of the Church are what lead Tyler Clemente to jump off the bridge even though suicide is forbidden in Catholicism and they have no answer to those that are not homosexual who jump off the bridge. It is saying that people are somehow completely mechanistic, that because something is said that the person has no intrinsic bearing of their own like a religion that organizes how they behave. Yet the liberals spend most of their time trying to eliminate the intrinsic values of society and then blame the violence that they can encapsulate on the conservative talk show host. They do not blame Howard Stern who would actually send people out to aggravate others they blame and at the same time dismiss Jared Lee Lounghren as a "nut'. Violent talk produces violent actions perhaps in sick egotistical people but that is true of all things. It is shocking and terrible that of all the crimes committed in society to which few have anything to do with talk that we would now try to limit the freedom of speech not with television shows with lots of violent talk and depictions , not with the music industry that has lots of violent talk but with the Rush Limgaugh show, with the Bill O'Rielly show, how interesting how perfectly that suites these liberal democrats, how this Jared who was considered by his peers to be 'liberal pot-head' is now seen as the product of conservative talk radio. These liberals are quite disgusting.