Democrats Ramp Up The Propaganda
Amidst the now-infamous SCOTUS draft leak, liberals are in full-tilt panic mode
Ever since the failed ploy to influence the impending mid-term elections by having one of their minions working within the U.S. Supreme Court leak the initial draft of the High Court’s 98-page decision to overturn the oft-controversial 1973 decision in Roe vs Wade, democrats country-wide are reeling.
No sooner did they begin to see how America was reacting to the treachery — the likes of which has never been done before within the Supreme Court of the United States — the liberal propaganda machine went into overdrive.
I have seen countless articles, even here on this very platform, issuing the most absurdly inflated statistics for how America is against overturning abortion laws and about the nationwide ‘outrage’ over the ruling in the now confirmed decision, though the findings haven’t yet been officially released.
In reality, this is complete bullshit
Of course, Dems want to convince as many people as possible that their view comes from the populous opinion and is shared by the overwhelming majority of Americans, particularly by women. In reality, this is not the case — unless, of course, you turn to the biased liberal media for your daily dose of completely made-up statistics.
Turn to CNN, CNBC, NPR, ABC, NBC, or the like, and you’re going to see story after story of staged outrage and mass-communal terror. These people make professionally trained crisis actors look like ranked amateurs. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so pathetic — and pathetically obvious.
Forbes recently published a piece about the actual statistics gathered by the folks at PEW research and Gallup regarding authentic poll results. In that article, they declare:
While support for whether abortion should be legal has remained relatively stable since 1995, the share of Americans identifying as “pro-choice” or “pro-life” has not. Gallup found 49% of Americans now identify as pro-choice and 47% as pro-life, as compared with 56% and 33% who said the same in 1995, respectively. Though at least a plurality of Americans have always supported abortion being legal in at least some circumstances, more respondents actually identified as pro-life than pro-choice in 2019, 2013, 2012, 2010 and 2009.
This is where Dems always cross the lines with their statistics and misrepresent (intentionally I believe) what the statistics really say. As is made clear if you look into any of the legitimate polls (a legitimate poll is one where the demographics being polled aren’t specifically hand-picked due to their likelihood of response and the results aren’t skewed with important criteria either added or omitted).
Yes, there is a vast majority of Americans who are in favor of keeping abortion legal — in some cases
Dems often leave these last few words out (again, intentionally I believe). This means cases such as the confirmed medical jeopardy of the mother’s life, or in the instances of rape or incest, many Americans who otherwise identify as ‘pro-life’ agree that exceptions should be made in the law to allow abortion.
Not that it matters per see, but just to clarify where I stand and where my personal bias comes into play, I too fall into this group. I do not however support abortion on the basis of the probability that the child will be born with what is commonly referred to as a ‘birth defect’, while many others do. I am of the opinion that that is God’s will and great things are often done through these magnificently different human beings.
Someday I intend to write a long piece on my experiences and the life lessons that can be learned through close relationships with the people who are born and raised to overcome such incredible odds, often quite literally from their first day of breathing air.
I recently interviewed a female Federal Judge, who was nominated to the federal bench as a democrat, at the Courthouse near my home in Georgia about the issue of abortion
I was doing a story for the media company I own, The Veracity Report, and the judge, who asked that I leave her name out of the article, said this on the subject:
Dillon then asked Her Honor:
As a Judge, as a woman, and as a democrat, not necessarily in any specific order, how do you personally feel about the High Court’s decision to basically nullify Roe v Wade?
I was an intelligent and independent woman before I was either a democrat or a judge. I understand why women want to have control over their bodies and over their lives, I really do. But as a devout woman of faith, my own personal belief is that the life of the unborn child, a completely defenseless life, needs to be protected once it exists at all costs.
And I believe that the right of that defenseless child to live, supercedes the right of that woman to have control over her body.
She went on to say:
Protecting the rights and safety of people who can’t defend themselves is a big part of the reason I became a judge in the first place, and doing it on a national scale is what convinced me that taking the appointment to the federal bench was the right thing to do.
You can read the complete article here: Federal Judge Opinion: Leaking The Supreme Court Draft Will Backfire on Dems During Midterms.
I believe she makes an excellent point, which brings me to what I feel are the key issues in the abortion debate saga:
- When does life actually begin?
- At what point, if any, does our responsibility to protect defenseless life supersede the personal rights of mothers and fatehrs?
Of course, these issues go far beyond the scope of this article, so I will not address them in too much detail here, except to say that my research has shown that, to most people, these issues are the paramount ones in determining if abortion should be considered as a viable option.
Sure, there are people with ‘extreme’ views:
Like those women who love to scream that since men don’t have a uterus, we have no say in the matter. This is obviously the most asinine and logically absurd argument anyone could ever make. But in today’s world, where people feel that their opinions don’t need to be validated by facts or logic yet should be given equal weight to facts and logic, it doesn’t surprise me that there are those (thankfully an extreme minority) who believe that arguments like these should carry legitimate weight.
The fact remains that save for one, (and there are those that dispute that one also) every child conceived in the world has a human biological mother and a human biological father.
Under the law in all 50 states, and under any common-sense law imaginable, neither of those parents has any intrinsically superior ‘right’ over that child and its life than the other. As such, men are very much not just a part of the debate, but legally, and by necessity an equal part of the debate.
Democrats make no effort to conceal where they stand on this issue. Neither does anyone else. Yet, ironically, even ‘Roe’ herself was not a proponent of abortion except in certain instances.
First, a brief history lesson on the landmark 1973 SCOTUS decision that declared individual states did not have the right to make abortion illegal.
Due to the high profile publicity of the case, the plaintiff, Norma Leah Nelson McCorvey, was publicly given the pseudonym “Jane Roe” when, in 1969, after getting pregnant with her third child, and wanting to abort that pregnancy, sued her local District attorney Henry Wade because Texas, the state she lived in, had a law on the books that made abortion illegal except in cases where the mother’s life was in jeopardy.
McCorvey won her case in Texas and the state appealed the decision to the US Supreme court, which ultimately heard the case and issued its now-infamous decision in 1973.
As an interesting aside that not many people are aware of, due to the lengthy process of fighting her case, Mrs. McCorvey never had the abortion and after birthing the healthy baby girl, known thereafter as ‘Baby Roe’, gave the female child, who would eventually be named Shelley Lynn Thornton, up for adoption. She also later reunited with the child and the two formed a close relationship throughout the rest of her (McCorvey’s) life.
But perhaps the most shocking fact of this case is that from that point, until her death in 2017, at the age of 69, ‘Roe’ herself had been one of the biggest and most outspoken detractors of the SCOTUS decision in ‘Roe vs. Wade’ and one of the nation’s leading anti-abortion activists.
The landmark decision was extremely controversial even at the time and has since been modified by the High Court several times over the years, most notably in the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey.
In that case, the constitutional protection of a woman’s right to obtain an abortion was upheld (though barely) however the federally protected timeline allotted for legal abortion was shortened dramatically to align with what was at that time considered the viability of a fetus to live independently from its mother. At that time, this was accepted to be the 23rd week of pregnancy.
In other words, the court took the position that no fetus could be reasonably expected to survive outside of its mother before the 23rd week of gestation. As such, the 23rd week would become the legal bar for abortion in America.
Now, with tremendous advances in medical science since the 1992 decision, this is no longer the case. Since the decision in Casey, many children have been successfully separated from their mothers much sooner than the 23-week parameter set by the court in ’92 and have gone on to live fully healthy and natural lives.
Because of this fact, it is a foregone conclusion that the federal law established in Roe and modified in Casey would need to be amended again. This is what the current SCOTUS is in the process of doing as the case has again been brought to them for consideration.
That’s because more and more people have been challenging various state laws limiting abortions and unilaterally reducing the maximum gestational period for legal abortions in many states.
Democrats are doing their best to politicize this and weaponize this process prior to this November’s key mid-term elections. As a result of these impending elections, control of the Senate and The US House of Representatives is going to be decided for at least the next two years, and the democratic party is clearly flustered since virtually all political pundits agree, that the Blue team is likely to suffer sweeping losses nationwide.
This is due in no small part to soaring inflation, suffocating gas prices, poor handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, supply-chain bottlenecks, and the general unpopularity and mismanaged government the country has suffered through under the epically failed Biden/Harris administration policies.
An administration whose only response or defense to each and every one of these crises is to blame someone else.
Sorry, Joe, the supply chain was throttled, gas prices soared and inflation skyrocketed long before Putin invaded Ukraine. No matter how your fans try to spin it, you just can’t alter that fact.