Win the Abortion BattleI’ve often argued that the Democrat position on Abortion is the Same as their historical position on Slavery and Jim Crow. At best they considered unborn children as subhuman just as they once considered blacks subhuman and at worst they consider unborn children property to be disposed as they see fit, just as they once considered black slaves.

So when I heard that Kevin Williamson was fired by the Atlantic for daring to consider the murder of the unborn just as heinous as the murder of the born it hit me that if he had been a columnist for a Democrat Paper or magazine in the days of slavery or Jim Crow and had dared suggest that the murder of a black person was Just as heinous as the murder of a white person he would have been shown the door as well.

Some might be upset at the reminder of this historical reality but it’s not just a historical allusion as abortion so disproportionately slaughters black children and nothing is more sacred to the Democrat elite that their ability to continue that slaughter thus Williamson’s’s objections become beyond the pale.

It seems that some things just never change.

If you’d like to continue to support independent journalism, help defray the $140 a month extra I’ll need for my new hosting site please consider hitting DaTipJar here.



Consider subscribing. 7 more subscribers at $20 a month will pay the monthly price for the new host/server.


Choose a Subscription level


Finally might I suggest my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

My final interview from the 2018 Catholic Men’s Conference at Assumption College Was Christine of Visitation House in Worcester.

Visitation House does wonderful work. I’ve written about them before. their website is here. My interview with the speaker for their annual dinner held on April 28th this year is here.

Now that these interviews are complete we’ll go back to two CPAC interviews a day till they’re done.

Previously

March 24th
Voices of the Catholic Men’s Conference 2018 Christine of Visitation House

March 23rd
Voices of the Catholic Men’s Conference 2018 Seth and Matt of the Coming Home Network

March 22nd

Voices of the Catholic Men’s Conference 2018 Brother Jorchem of St Benedict Abbey

March 21st

Voices of the Catholic Men’s Conference 2018 Robert LeBlanc Author of Where will you Plant Your Seed?

March 20th
Voices of the Catholic Men’s Conference 2018 Holy Family Passionist Retreat Center

March 19th

Voices of the 2018 Catholic Men’s Conference: Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

I speak to Chris an activist from NYC at CPAC 2018

I conducted a 2nd interview with Chris which I played on my radio specifically concerning his Pro-life work

These two interviews were two of the most interesting I did during CPAC

DaTechGuy at CPAC 2018 The story (blogged) so far:

Thursday March 8th

Voices at CPAC 2018 Chris from NY Longtime Prolife activist

Wednesday March 7th

Voices at CPAC 2018 Michael from Liberty University

Tuesday March 6th

Voices at CPAC 2018 Sarah Rumpf

Monday March 5th

Voices from CPAC 2018 Doreen from Michigan
Voices of CPAC 2018 Susan from New Mexico

Sunday March 4th
Voices of CPAC 2018 Myra Adams

Friday March 2nd

Voices of CPAC 2018 John Hawkins and Sierra Marlee

CPAC 2018: Two Men who made a Difference For Me

Wednesday Feb 20

Voices at CPAC 2018 Dylan and Watson

Voices at CPAC 2018 Kira Innis (Two Angles)

Monday Feb 26th

Voices of CPAC 2018 Greg Penglis of WEBY 1330 Radio

Sunday Feb 25th

CPAC 2018 Dutch Kitchen Cannoli Sicilian from Brooklyn Approved

Saturday Feb 24th

CPAC 2018 / Don’t give a VUK Meet the Voter the Media Narrative says Does Exist

Friday Feb 23rd

Voices at CPAC 2018 Senator Ted Cruz Answers Two Question for DaTechGuy

Thurs Feb 22nd

We Interrupt CPAC 2018 for CNN and their Gun Control Galaxy Quest Moment
Voices of CPAC 2018: Ron from PA

Wed Feb. 21st

Voices at CPAC 2018 Vicki from Minnesota

Voices at (or near) #cpac2018 Lea from National Association of Developmental Educators We talk Students and Math

DaTechGuy at CPAC 2018 The Calm Before the Storm and What I’ll be Asking

If you don’t want to wait or my blog posts to see my interviews my youtube channel is here.

Full CPAC 2017 list (for those who feel nostalgic) is here

A reminder I have copies of my Book Hail Mary the perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer available at CPAC with me, price $7 and I will happily sign them for you.

Or you can just order it on Amazon


If you’d like to continue to support independent journalism, help defray the $140 a month extra I’ll need for my new hosting site) and think my CPAC 2018 reporting is worthwhile please consider hitting DaTipJar here.



Consider subscribing. 7 more subscribers at $20 a month will pay the monthly price for the new host/server.


Choose a Subscription level


Finally might I suggest my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

By John Ruberry

Donald Trump received during the 2016 general election campaign, only two of them came from publications that have more than 100,000 subscribers. Those papers were the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Florida Times-Union. There were nine anti-endorsements–eight of those urged “Not Donald Trump–” and 64 “No Endorsements.” Most of the rest, 243 of them, were for Hillary Clinton.

In Illinois, all four of the newspaper nods so far for next month’s Republican gubernatorial primary have gone to incumbent Bruce Rauner. But as I wrote late last year at Da Tech Guy, Rauner has failed miserably as governor of America’s fifth-most populous state. Oops, make that sixth-most populous, as Illinois’ people exodus has allowed Pennsylvania to surpass it. National Review calls Rauner the nation’s worst Republican governor. During Rauner’s 2014 campaign he touted a 44-item turnaround agenda. None of them have been enacted into law. And after overriding the governor’s veto, the man who has destroyed Illinois, House Speaker for Life (in all but name) Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) last summer rammed through a 32 percent income tax hike.

Running against Rauner in the GOP primary is Jeanne Ives, who I support. A West Point graduate, Ives entered the race after Rauner signed into law bills that angered Land of Lincoln conservatives, including sanctuary state legislation, a bill that allows Illinoisans to change the gender listed on their birth certificates, and legislation that expands taxpayer funding for abortions. On that last one Rauner broke his promise to Illinoisans--including Cardinal Blase Cupich–that he would veto it.

Jeanne Ives

Rauner’s endorsements are milquetoast testimonials.

“You say you wish more had been accomplished during Rauner’s first term to fix finances, to grow jobs? So do we,” the Chicago Tribune shrugs.

A “flawed incumbent” laments the Daily Herald.

“As we approach this primary election, we have fundamental concerns about the governor’s ability to lead in this incredibly difficult time,” the Bloomington Pantagraph unloads.

“With a handful of exceptions, we believe he has been a failure as governor, and he has only himself to blame. He promised what he could not deliver,” says the Chicago Sun-Times.

In not choosing Ives, each paper mentions her conservative stance on social issues and the Pantagraph specifically cites a controversial TV ad where actors, including a man wearing a dress, “thank” Rauner for signing social issue legislation.

There has been only one poll so far in the GOP race and it’s a month old. At that time nearly 70 percent of likely voters hadn’t heard of Ives. But a few days later Ives’ TV commercials, including the one that has so angered the media and Democrats who have no intention of voting for a Republican candidate for governor, began airing.

The “experts” said Trump couldn’t even win the Republican nomination for president, let alone defeat Hillary Clinton. Sure, Illinois is a blue state, but the Land of Lincoln has been destroyed by the Democratic hegemony led by Madigan. And as I told the Prairie State Wire last week, Illinois hasn’t had a real conservative governor in the modern era.

Are enough Illinoisans fed up with failure?

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

-Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride
by William Goldman

I live in a relatively small town in Massachusetts and, like most towns, we have our political differences. They usually play out in local issues, but something happened about a year ago that seems to have the leftists in our little town riled up, much like leftists across the country. I won’t go into details, but there have been a number of contentious issues brought up and discussed at recent town meetings and through letters to the editor in our local paper that make this division clear. It is interesting to me that all of these new problems have been brought up by leftists in our town who apparently didn’t know that these problems existed until President Trump was elected.

Shortly after the election, one of the more progressive churches in town distributed lawn signs which many of my neighbors – including one right across the street – display even today:

It is a safe bet that anyone with such a sign in front of his or her house did not vote for President Trump. It is also clear that the sign is an attempt at signifying some kind of moral superiority on behalf of the residents of that house, implying that no reasonable person could possibly disagree with them on these points.  The problem is that these points are so completely disingenuous that it’s obvious that anyone putting up such a sign has no desire to engage in a reasonable debate on any of them.

Black lives matter: Of course they do. So do all other lives, including the lives of police officers who risk their lives to keep us safe and have been put in greater danger by the behavior and rhetoric of “Black Lives Matter” and their political sycophants. Unfortunately, the people in this house are unwilling to admit the “Black Lives Matter” movement is based on a lie. Michael Brown was a criminal who was assaulting a police officer when the officer shot him in self defense. He was not a “gentle giant” who was surrendering with his hands up.

Women’s rights are human rights: Of course they are. Everyone’s rights, by definition, are human rights, and those rights are spelled out in the Constitution. But the fact that I am against abortion-on-demand and taxpayer-funded birth control does not mean that I am a “misogynist.” I believe in the right to life, from conception to natural death. This is the most basic human right.

No human is illegal: Of course not. But when humans break the law, like entering our country illegally, they should be punished. That’s what “the rule of law” means.

Science is real: Of course it is. Science is based on the idea that you form a hypothesis, experiment, and adjust the hypothesis according to the data. Science is never “settled.” The closest the proponents of “global warming” have come to the scientific method is when they changed the name to “climate change” when they were unable to massage the data enough to show that the earth is actually warming. Biology is also a science, and it tells us that men are men and women are women and wishing to be the opposite sex doesn’t make it so.

Love is love: Of course it is. But that is not a justification for changing the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. Especially when that change brings with it the force of the state to compel others to endorse and participate in same-sex ceremonies that violate their sincerely held religious principles. The reason that the traditional definition of marriage was in place throughout all of human history until only a few years ago is that it is the ideal environment for bringing up children. My wife and I are complementary in many ways, each bringing a unique perspective to our family in ways that same-sex couples simply cannot.

Kindness is everything: I agree, which is why I don’t have a sign on my lawn that implies that my neighbors are a bunch of neanderthals for disagreeing with me. If these people truly believed that kindness is everything, they would respectfully engage in conversations instead of accusing those who disagree with them of being science denying racists, bigots and homophobes.

[If] you do not speak up to warn the wicked about their ways, they shall die in their sins, but I will hold you responsible for their blood.    –Ezekiel 33:8

Massachusetts General Law defines abortion as “the knowing destruction of the life of an unborn child.” Further, it defines an “unborn child” as “the individual human life in existence and developing from implantation of the embryo in the uterus until birth.” Now, we can argue about whether that individual human life began at implantation or at conception, but Massachusetts law is clear that the unborn child is a life and not just a “blob of tissue.” Unfortunately, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in Moe vs Secretary of Administration and Finance (1981) decided that taxpayer funds must be used to kill that life if its mother so wishes.

Prior to Moe, the state operated under the Doyle-Flynn Amendment – the state-level equivalent of the federal Hyde Amendment, which has been upheld repeatedly by the US Supreme Court – which prohibited taxpayer funds from being used to pay for abortions. But in 1981, the SJC took it upon itself to go beyond the federal Roe v. Wade decision and decreed that taxpayer funds must indeed be used to pay for abortions for poor women under the guise of “equal protection.” Why the legally-recognized life in the womb is not also due equal protection of the laws is not clear, but the SJC ruled that since state Medicaid funds were used to pay for legitimate maternity care and other health care for indigent women, Medicaid must also pay for abortions.

As did Roe v. Wade, this decision clearly overstepped the judicial role of interpreting the Massachusetts Constitution and enshrined a policy decision with the weight of a constitutional amendment, thus prohibiting the legislature from even debating the issue. Legally, the only proper response is an actual constitutional amendment that the SJC cannot misinterpret to its own ends. The Alliance to Stop Taxpayer Funded Abortion has taken up the challenge and is currently gathering signatures with the hope of bringing this question to Bay State voters in November 2020.

The amendment as proposed reads “Nothing in this Constitution shall require taxpayer funding for abortions.” Note that it does not make abortion illegal in MA. It only permits the legislature to debate whether taxpayer funds should be used to pay for them.

The amendment process in Massachusetts is extraordinarily difficult. The first step is to gather 64,750 signatures by November, 2017. In actuality, this means we need to gather close to 100,000 signatures because it seems like the Secretary of State’s office looks for any excuse to reject valid signatures. If there is a stray pen mark on a sheet with 25 valid signatures, the entire sheet may be thrown out. So, volunteers – including my wife and I – are being very careful with the signed sheets.

Assuming we get the required signatures, the motion must be approved by 50 members of the state legislature in two consecutive sessions in order to be put on the ballot in 2020 to allow citizens to vote on the amendment. Assuming it passes, Massachusetts will be in line with the federal government  and the legislative history of the state in letting the legislature decide whether taxpayer funds will be used to pay to knowingly destroy the life of an unborn child.

There are many ways you can help. Of course, you can volunteer, or donate to the Alliance, and if you’re a registered Massachusetts voter, please sign a petition. And please keep our efforts in your prayers.

Update: Stacy McCain talks about this (and a few other things) here.

I speak to Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life at the Catholic Marketing Network

His latest book is here

Priest’s for life web site is here.

The Rest of my Catholic Marketing Network posts are here.

Although I didn’t get a chance to interview Edward Sri I did record the majority of his speech at the Thursday Breakfast at the Catholic Marketing network event.

The Rest of my Catholic Marketing Network posts are here.

it came to be that if I agreed with my church I’m a catholic and I’m very catholic and I’ve been all my life ,that people were calling me a racist and a bigot for believing my beliefs and that, that was the final straw for me cause I’d been a democrat all my life and my mother the same way and I felt I wasn’t welcome.

DaTechGuy Feb 2010 on Why I was (at the time) A Republican

At the Hill they’ve discovered what I figured out last century. If you are a Roman Catholic who actually believes the doctrines of the church concerning the sanctity of life, the Democrat Part is simply not for you.

The raging debate among Democrats about whether to support candidates whose views on abortion differ from the national platform obscures a crucial fact: There simply aren’t that many “pro-life” Democrats left.

Only six members of the House Democratic Caucus voted for a 2013 proposal to ban abortions after 20 weeks in the District of Columbia. Of those six, only three – Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) and Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) – are still in Congress. Lipinski and Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) are the only Democratic members of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus.

and it’s not just a question of being pro-life,

In 2016, just one Democratic senator, Indiana’s Joe Donnelly, scored less than a 100 percent rating with NARAL Pro-Choice America. Donnelly and Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Bob Casey (D-Pa.) are the only three Democratic senators with lifetime scores under 100 percent with Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

Bottom line if you aren’t on board with the whole, baby killing, selling human parts agenda of Planned Parenthood, you can forget about any kind of future on the national level state or even local level.

And no matter how popular you are in the party,  if you dare come out in favor of a Pro-life democrat, there will be hell to pay.

NARAL Pro-Choice America had condemned Sanders and Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez for endorsing Mello and intending to campaign with him. NARAL’s president, Ilyse Hogue, called the campaign stop “politically stupid”; Daily Kos, the progressive site that had been crowdsourcing donations for a series of campaigns in red states, pulled its endorsement of Mello after admitting it was unaware of his views about abortion.

Now the Democrats have a perfect right to decide that Abortion should be a litmus test for them if they wish, and such a decision is very consistent with their party becoming pretty much a secular party.

The only problem is that this comes with consequences:

In fact, Blume’s research also shows quite vividly that secular, nonreligious people are being dramatically out-reproduced by religious people of any faith. Across a broad swath of demographic data relating to religiosity, the godly are gaining traction in offspring produced. For example, there’s a global-level positive correlation between frequency of parental worship attendance and number of offspring. Those who “never” attend religious services bear, on a worldwide average, 1.67 children per lifetime; “once per month,” and the average goes up to 2.01 children; “more than once a week,” 2.5 children. Those numbers add up—and quickly. 

Or put simply,  if you kill your children they can’t grow up to vote, not even in chicago.  This is known as the Roe effect and  while disputed at the time by some, 12 years later the results for Democrats are clear both in Nebraska:

They lost the mayoralty in 2013, one in a string of defeats that had seen the party wiped out in Nebraska’s major elected offices; in 2016, they lost the Omaha-based 2nd Congressional District

and in the congress

“Back in the early ’90s, when we had 290 members of the House, we had 100-something pro-life Democrats. Today, we’ve got three or four pro-life Democrats,” said James Zogby, a long-time Democratic National Committee member and a national advisory board member of Democrats for Life of America.

Subtract those 100 members from the Democrat Caucus and what are you left with, a permanent minority.

Now if the Democrats want to remain the Party of Lena Dunham, Amanda Marcotte, Channel Dubofsky, Shulamith Firestone, Andrea Dworkin, Sidney Abbott, Ti-Grace Atkinson, Gloria Steinem, Jaclyn Friedman, Meghan Murphy and Jean Houston instead of the party of DaTechGuy and his Wife, they are welcome to do so, but let me point out one thing. As of Today my wife and I have produced more voting age children then all of those NARAL supporters combined.

A quick Layoff bleg update.  Aug 10th was the scheduled end to my layoff bleg and I’m sorry to say we didn’t manage half of the goal I had set (UPDATE: Now we have) although we did manage to raise enough to get me a paycheck this week and next week. This will make August a very lean month.

So if you are inclined and at all able I would ask you to hit DaTipJar at this time even if we don’t make the goal another $315 will mean a full paycheck for August 25th. (made that goal!)

UPDATE: replacing the layoff bleg with a weekly paycheck goal details to follow.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basic but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



by baldilocks

:::until they get into office:::

The Democrat Party’s latest strategy sits poorly with some of its loyal backers.

The Democratic party is facing a revolt from the left after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman said the party would back pro-life candidates in 2018.

The DCCC chairman, Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, told The Hill that there will not be “a litmus test” for candidates on the subject of abortion. Lujan’s comments come as Democrats attempt to rebuild a broken party that has hemorrhaged elected offices on both the state and national level.

(…)

“I’m afraid I’ll be withholding support for the DCCC if this is true,” said former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, whose name was briefly floated this year as a candidate for DNC chair.

“What better strategy than to betray their base and reaffirm that women’s basic rights are negotiable and disposable,” said prominent liberal columnist Jill Filipovic.

“Reducing the rights of those with child-bearing capacity to a mere matter of opinion is utterly unconscionable,” declared New Republic writer Rachel Cote. She added: “The Democratic Party is in fact saying that there’s ‘no litmus test’ regarding their colleagues’ support of basic bodily autonomy. Terrible.”

Saying that the Democrat Party had taken the lead on abortion advocacy is a Captain Obvious assertion, but individual Democrats are far less homogenous in their opinions and beliefs about abortion. And now, after a long record of losing elections, with the 2016 election being the straw, the Party wants to win again.

And such is the nature of politicians and political parties regardless of affiliation: say what you need to say — even repudiate your most revered sacrament – then, when you win, drop the mask.

One more thing: I’ll bet that the usual suspects hollering about the DCCC’s pragmatism are merely playing their assigned roles; they won’t withhold any support, at least not where it counts: funding. They’re supposed to cry out in public protest about this. After enough pro-life Democrats and some Republicans are lured back into the fold, the professional Democrats will tighten their rhetoric right back up.

No, I don’t trust any of them. Why do you ask?

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

%d bloggers like this: