My job interview was postponed 24 hours so I was able to jump into the car and get a few pictures from the protest today. The snow was steady and regular but it didn’t prevent an enthusiastic crowd of 70 people from turning up to protest against Planned Parenthood and their plans to open up in Fitchburg.

The protesters were on both sides of Main street which is one way.

No snowstorm was going to deter them:

Of course some took shelter under a convenient awning:

Franciscans don’t need awnings against a mere snowstorm:

And the City counsel was represented by Rosemary Reynolds

For Fitchburg it was an impressive showing. Only Unitil could have drawn a bigger crowd around here.

As time permits, I’ll get a more detailed story up.

…at least not with time ticking away on me. My Noontime job interview means I will certainly not be able to report firsthand on the Main Street Protest today, but I’ll see what I can do.

Of course there is always the chance that the interview will crash and burn, if that happens I’ll hurry down and see what I can see.

You’ll forgive me if I don’t hope for that eventuality.

Update: It’s snowing in Fitchburg, no idea how this will affect turnout.

…that demographics is destiny.

Be afraid oh ye of the left, be very afraid.

Update: Didn’t see it before but this post by Zombie concerning the numbers at the SAN FRANCISCO march for life. 40,000 pro life marchers met by 80 on the other side. One interesting bit:

There was a racial undertone to the day’s proceedings as well. The vast majority of the pro-choice side was white, while a substantial percentage of the pro-life side were racial minorities — in particular, Hispanic, Asian, and Pacific Islander.

and the big finish…

You might be tempted to justify the small turnout at the counter-protest because it may have been poorly advertised, or that the Left was caught by surprise, learning of the rally only the day before, preventing any possibility of generating a substantial pro-choice presence. But no. First of all, the Walk for Life is an annual event, and everyone knew full well months in advance when it was scheduled to happen. The local leftists protest the Walk for Life every year, so it was most definitely on their calendar. Furthermore, the counter-protest was widely and extensively advertised on local liberal sites (which is how I found out about this event myself, since I scan such sites for local happenings). Examples of online notices exhorting people to come stand with the pro-choice counter-protest can be found at IndyBay, BACORR, SFist, Bay Area Progressive Directory, among many others. In short: It was no secret. Everyone who was possibly interested in the issue knew that January 23 was the big day.

The question then becomes: Why did basically no one on the pro-choice side show up, aside from a few demented radicals?

Simple logic: Two generations have passed since Roe v Wade. One side of that debate, a decidedly religious side, has not only had more children but, as a rule rarely aborts them. Thus 40 years later when the time comes for a march their people are available to attend.

Newly re-elected city counselor-at-large Rosemary Reynolds (who won the seat held by Annie DiMartino) attended a meeting of Mass Right to Life in Fitchburg and informed them that Planned Parenthood will NOT be attending the Tuesday city counsel meeting on the 2nd.

Supposedly this is due to a key official of PP not being able to make it.

I wouldn’t put it past them to try to “deke” people in order to keep the turnout down so I think I’ll show up anyway.

The group will also hold a protest on main street tomorrow. I’m sure that will re-assure the remaining merchants on main street that PP won’t hurt business.

One side thought. The one Mosque in Fitchburg is located on main street. As Islam generally opposes abortion I wonder if the local Muslim community will be joining this protest?

Oh fyi the “re-elected” refers to her previous time on the city counsel.

…then NOW has some trouble:

Women’s Rights groups, like NOW, commendably call out advertisers and networks for airing sexist and demeaning portrayals of women that lead to young women’s diminished self-esteem and acceptance of roles as mere sexed-up objects.

What a ridiculous situation they’re getting themselves into now with their protest of CBS airing a pro-life ad during the upcoming Super Bowl game. The ad will feature Heisman trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mom, and they’ll speak to the sanctity of life and the beautiful potential within every innocent child as Mrs. Tebow acknowledges her choice to give Tim life, despite less than ideal circumstances. Messages like this empower women! This speaks to the strength and commitment and nurturing spirit within women. The message says everything positive and nothing negative about the power of women – and life. Evidently, some women’s rights groups like NOW do not like that message.

On Morning Joe today, Barnicle, Scarborough and Mika all talked about the standard superbowl ad whose message is: “Drink our beer/use our product and you will get laid!” and asked why they don’t just buy their own.

Gateway is on it, but then again he always is.

Planned Parenthood wants to talk:

Dianne Luby, chief executive officer of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said she would be “more than happy to come to a City Council meeting” to discuss the concerns that drove six city councilors to vote to draft a resolution urging Planned Parenthood to abandon plans to open a Fitchburg chapter.

Planned Parenthood officials will attend a Feb. 2 City Council meeting.

Steve DiNatale is has a few things he’d like to talk about too:

State Rep. Stephen DiNatale, D-Fitchburg, said Thursday that he wants to meet with Planned Parenthood officials to explain to them that Fitchburg is not the right place for them to open a new office.

“We will gladly, gladly, meet with the state representative’s office, in the district or at the Statehouse; whatever works for him,” Mermell said.

DiNatale said he was trying to connect with officials from Planned Parenthood on Friday afternoon.

“I want to know what their plans are, how they arrived at the city of Fitchburg, some of the fine details you might say,” DiNatale said.

I’m sure PP will be wearing it’s most friendly face, but no matter how friendly and polite the face may be, the reality doesn’t change.

When I posted about Planned Parenthood coming to Fitchburg yesterday I wrote this:

The fight is now going to come here and the question is going to quickly become; what side are you on?

Well it didn’t take long for some on the City Counsel to decide:

“The City of Fitchburg is always complaining that we’re the social mecca of northern Worcester County. Do we really need another social service agency?” Councilor-at-large Thomas Conry asked.

State Rep. Stephen DiNatale signed on to the late-filed petition calling for a resolution, and said he planned to sit down with Planned Parenthood officials and explain to them why Fitchburg is not the right community for them to come to.

“It’s a blatant duplication of services. We have local agencies, with local people doing an outstanding job,” DiNatale said, following the City Council meeting.

“We do not need them on Main Street,” DiNatale said.

The most amazing statement on the subject was uttered by ward 5 Counselor Solomito in opposing the resolution:

“We shouldn’t prohibit anybody from coming here when we don’t know anything about them,”

We don’t? It’s not like they’ve been around for nearly a century, but if Joe wants to know perhaps he can ask Abby Johnson.

Johnson said she became involved with the clinic “to help women and … [do] the right thing.” The idea of increasing abortion numbers to increase revenue was repugnant to her. She said that ideally the facility’s director would provide “so much family planning and so much education that there is not a demand for abortion.”

But this ideal was not shared by the rest of Planned Parenthood, she said, because “abortion is the most lucrative part of Planned Parenthood’s operations.”

“With the family planning corporation really suffering,” Johnson said, “they depend on the abortion corporation to balance their budget, help get them out of the hole and help make income for the company.”

She continued, “They really wanted to increase the number of abortions so that they could increase their income.”

And a little history for the rest of them.

There is going to be a fight and it’s going to be big, as I’ve already said that this will give Catholics in town a place to re-direct their anger from church closings, but it is also going to animate the large evangelical community that has been growing in the area.

Meanwhile on the left I expect to see angry Coakley people using this fight as a place to vent.

…the paper this morning had the story but it has finally appeared online:

Assurances that abortions will not be performed left the Rev. H. Edward Chalmers unconvinced, and Chalmers was wary about the prospect of an office opening in Fitchburg.

“They may not be doing abortion services there, but they could be recommended,” Chalmers, of St. Bernard’s Parish in Fitchburg, said. “(Planned Parenthood) is the largest abortion provider in the United States.”

Or in English: We won’t be tossing the bodies here but we can direct you to the tin.

Mayor Lisa Wong, who was unaware of Planned Parenthood’s plans to come to Fitchburg, said its presence in the city will likely be “polarizing.”

“There might be a lot of people who are happy to see it there, are there will probably be a lot of people who aren’t going to happy to see something like this going downtown,” Wong said.

Saying planned parenthood is “likely to be polarizing” is like saying “water is likely to be wet”

Planned parenthood says it will not perform abortions here because it is:

…opening the Fitchburg office using federal grant money it received in December, which carries the stipulation that abortions will not be provided.

So if the law changes or if they can come up with dough to open elsewhere with different money then: bring on the bodies!

Let’s not play games, Planned Parenthood makes money off abortions, that is their primary business. It is the business of death and deception. To pretend otherwise is an insult to both science and intelligence. The fight is now going to come here and the question is going to quickly become; what side are you on?

I’ve had a full nights sleep that hasn’t been preceded by a drive out of Boston for the first time in days. When I came downstairs Robert Stacy (I’ll sleep when I’m dead) McCain was still typing at the dining room table, has there ever been a person who works so hard for such a small amount of cash?

I took him for a quick cig run to Tedeschi’s market (that took over the store 24 in Fitchburg) and ran into the mother of a friend of mine who does Janitorial work at the Post Office and the Hospital. She said people were very happy in both locations, but for liberals the anger was extreme, but apparently not all of them.

The worst is that I can’t help but feel like the main emotion people in the caucus are feeling is relief at this turn of events. Now they have a ready excuse for not getting anything done.

Four days ago I told a certain Mr. McCain who happened to be sleeping on my couch that democrats in congress were hoping for an upset to give them an excuse to get out of yet another vote that could push them off the cliff. I thank Mr. Marshall for proving me right in print (well in pixels anyway).

Stacy is picking a bad time to leave Fitchburg. The front page of our local paper is that Planned Parenthood is about to open an office here. The must think the timing is good with 4 Catholic Parishes due to close by June.

It is in fact exactly the opposite, it’s not only bad it’s really bad. The natural anger that the closing would have generated at the church, combined with the anger over the economic and employment situation now has a place where it can be re-directed. The large Hispanic (I hate that word, what does it mean?) population here is very Catholic as well.

The only good news about this? With such a new opening perhaps the Charming Roxeanne will be in town to blog about it a bit and I can introduce the young lady to the wife and kids. My oldest is active in right to life, they should get along like a house afire.

Well the train beckons so I must go. It’s been a great week, but like Cincinnatus I now prepare to return to being just another guy looking for a job (that elusive $800 a week) in Massachusetts who runs a small blog where I talk about things that interest me.

Thanks for joining me for the ride, and if you like what you have read you are welcome to stop by to read anytime.

Back in November my favorite atheistic liberal feminist blogger Violet Socks at the Reclusive leftist wrote this:

On your blog, in your comments, everywhere. That’s how memes start. Coakley’s got the courage and the convictions. She’s raising her head above the parapet, right now, when it matters. Just as she did last year when she endorsed Hillary Clinton. Just as she did when she refused to surrender that vote at the convention.

Martha Coakley for President.

As you might guess by my description of her Violet and I have a serious disagreement on Abortion. Yesterday she quoted a post at a blog called Confluence:

There were a multitude of permutations that would have succeeded in covering poor and sick people but the Democrats picked the one that is most likely to piss off their own constituents in the highest numbers. Congratulations, guys.

But this abortion thing? I gotta wonder why it wasn’t sufficient to stick the knife into health care reform without adding the agonizing poison. You should have never even entertained Stupak and Nelson no matter how much they howled and screamed. That’s going to come back to bite you. And no matter how much theater comes up on the floor of the Senate during debate in the next couple of days to try to remove the amendments and compromises, taking them out is not going to make this bill smell any sweeter. The jig is up. We see through the distraction.

The actual post is interesting philosophically but bottom line is the abortion language makes the bill unacceptable.

Today the Boston Globe has this story about Martha the righteous:

“Let’s be clear on what’s principled here,’’ she said at the time of her opponent, US Representative Michael Capuano. “If it comes down to this in the Senate, and it’s the health care bill or violating women’s rights, where does he stand?’’

Obviously feeling the pressure, Capuano pivoted a few days later and said that while he voted yes in the House, he would vote no on final passage if the abortion restrictions did not change.

Coakley used her stark position on abortion rights to appeal to supporters for donations; in an e-mail, she declared her decision to make her position “a defining moment’’ in her campaign.

Asked last week whether she would vote against a bill that went beyond current law in restricting abortion coverage, Coakley said, “Yes, that’s right.’’

In a statement to the Globe yesterday, Coakley said that although she was disappointed that the Senate bill “gives states additional options regarding the funding mechanisms for women’s reproductive health services,’’ she would reluctantly support it because it would provide coverage for millions of uninsured people and reduce costs.

As Newsbusters put it:

Coakley is such a self-serving hypocritical flip-flopper than not even the Boston Globe could spin this story to make her look good. In almost any other state, Coakley would have very little chance in the general election but, hey, this is Massachusetts we are talking about here. Democrat candidates for senator aren’t so much elected as automatically coronated.

I have thoughts concerning Ms. Coakley, they are similar to my thoughts about Scott Harshbarger. Neither are printable so I didn’t say a thing at the time of the first post. As I want to keep my sense of decorum I’ll continue to restrain myself.

But I can’t wait to read Violet’s follow up post on this subject once she reads the Globe’s story. I’ll wager it is going to be an interesting but not work safe read.