Komen For The Cure: Like A Dog To Its Vomit

"But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own avomit again; and the sow that was bwashed to her wallowing in the mire." 2 Peter 2:22

Last week, the Komen for the Cure Foundation announced it would no longer award grants to Planned Parenthood, in part because of investigations into Planned Parenthood's practices and policies. It stated the move was not made because Planned Parenthood's role as - let's be honest - an abortion clinic. However, Komen founder and Chief Executive Nancy G. Brinker did say "[y]ou have to be sure you are granting to the right people."

The Komen Foundation experienced a tremendous backlash of threats and vitriol from pro-abortionists and abortion-supporting groups. At the same time, Komen also saw a huge boost in its donations from those supporting the decision.

This morning the Komen Foundation reneged on its decision to cut off grants to Planned Parenthood by stating that it "will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair."

Right and fair to whom? The women that Planned Parenthood deceives? Fair to the unborn children that have their skulls crushed for the purpose of "saving women"? They know their original decision was "right and fair". They know they were on the right side of the issue, but for political purposes and to avoid the fury of the relentless left, they - like a dog returns to its vomit - returned to their folly. Like a sow that is washed - washed clean of the blood of innocents - returns to its wallowing in the mire, so has Komen returned to its life-consuming position of supporting and funding a morally defunct organization.

They stated previously, "[y]ou have to be sure you are granting to the right people." The same goes for people who gave money to them. Those people thought this organization was changing. They thought it was carving out a better future, which actually focused on helping women. They were wrong. They granted their money to the wrong people.

The Komen Foundation should refund ALL donations received since making the announcement to cut off grants to Planned Parenthood. They should fess up that they are selling out women and fetuses for convenience and politics. They should choke on the vomit and re-join Planned Parenthood in the mire of evil.

Jon Stewart Adeptly Compares the "Safety Net" to Morphine...

On the February 1, 2012 episode of the Daily Show, Jon Stewart replayed the clip of Mitt Romney saying, "I'm not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there. If it needs repair I'll fix it. I'm not concerned about the very rich; they're doing just fine."

Stewart, in his classic manner stopped the tape, and stuttered like a madman as he teed up his witty homerun response. He said:

"Did you just suggest that you don't have to care about the very rich because they're fine but also, equivalently, the very poor because they're okay too. Because the reason the net is there is they're not okay."

So, it's all teed up; all Stewart has to do is relax, take a nice swing and this one's leaving the park. There are a lot of directions he could take this, but Stewart pulls the classic metaphor out of his toolbox. He proceeds:

"It's like a Doctor saying "you know, I'm not really concerned about the very healthy, because they're doing fine; or the very sick because...you know...morphine."

For those who are unaware, morphine is a drug used to mask severe and/or acute pain by impairing sensory, motor or attentional abilities. It also is known to have a high potential for addition; tolerance and psychological dependence. Morphine also causes constipation and slows recovery.

So, Jon is saying that the safety net (Welfare) for the poor is like morphine for a sick patient. You know, Jon, that actually sounds right. It is very much like that. Let's look at this...

Welfare is touted as a very compassionate and loving system, but it too has a high potential for addiction; tolerance and psychological dependence. Welfare, also, can constipate the soul and relieve pain and discomfort so much that it slows or eliminates recovery. Many welfare recipients become so addicted to government assistance that they develop a tolerance and are never able to break free from it.

Well done, Jon. You have made a very important point, which Conservatives have been making for years. It's good to see that you have realized the potentially destructive consequences of a welfare state. Just as we don't want the patient to "live" his days in a morphine-induced haze, we certainly don't want welfare recipients to go through life propped up by the impairment of perpetual handouts.

The Star-Spangled Banner ...Last Verse!

I'll admit; I have a fantasy about singing the National Anthem at a major event.  It's not because I can actually sing - because I can't - but because I dream of stepping up to the microphone with confidence and pride and belting out...the final verse:

O, thus be it ever when freemen shall stand,
Between their lov'd homes and the war's desolation;
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserv'd us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust"
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

No one would be able to say or do anything about it until it was over.  I would give particular emphasis to the lines, "Praise the Pow'r that had made and preserv'd us a nation!" and "In God is our trust".  What a message and reminder it would send to the millions of people watching!

Alas, I cannot sing, so I have to rely on the dream that maybe someone with actual talent will someday be so bold.  Kelly Clarkson this Sunday at the Super Bowl?  I won't hold my breath.

Liberal In Nature: Book Synopsis

When Democrats suffer a crushing political defeat, Andrew, a self-proclaimed liberal, flees society to live in the wilderness and soon discovers that his liberal ideology is perfectly suited to fixing the inequalities and injustices he perceives in nature.  He settles in a beautiful, isolated valley that is rich with mountains, streams, animals and lush vegetation.

After several months of observing the patterns and cycles of the valley, Andrew notices that nature is not as perfect as he originally thought.  He sees squirrels that gather more nuts than others, a bear who dominates and bullies the other animals, a misunderstood wolf who is the victim of prejudice, trees that don’t get as much sunlight as others, salmon who can’t spawn because of oppressive waterfalls, deer who have to work too hard for their food and much more.

Andrew takes it upon himself to bring fairness and equality to nature.  Applying his liberal ideology, he intercedes on behalf of oppressed and underprivileged organisms as he tries to fundamentally transform the valley.  He sees himself as a savior to the valley and he tries to earn the animals’ trust by easing their burdens.  His meddling, however, disrupts the balance of nature eventually producing unexpected and undesirable consequences.

Liberal In Nature addresses – directly or indirectly - important social and political issues such as: abortion, affirmative action, the death penalty, the economy, education, energy, global warming, gun control, health care, homeland security, immigration, private property, the relationship between religion and government, social security, taxes, the Tea Party, terrorism, and welfare.

Liberal In Nature is a witty, satirical political novel aimed at anyone who has an interest in politics, but it most often resonates with a more conservative audience.  It is layered with parables, metaphors, irony and humor.  Some readers enjoy it for its simplicity while others enjoy it for its depth of thought and research.  Buy a copy of Liberal In Nature !

5 Favorite Lines from the State of the Union 2012

#5 "I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury poisoning..."

What an obstructionist!  He talks about bipartisanship all the time, but then he says things like this.  You know, Mr. Obama, if you would back down just a little bit on poisoning our kids with mercury, Washington D.C. would be a lot more efficient.  Okay, if you're not willing to compromise on this issue, how about helping Republicans achieve their goals of dirty water and unhealthy food?  Any wiggle room here?  Your refusal to compromise on matters where  legitimate arguments exist on both sides is a sign of your rigid ideology.  You should go back and read your inauguration speech. 

#4 "We also know that when students don’t walk away from their education, more of them walk the stage to get their diploma. When students are not allowed to drop out, they do better."

I'd like to see some hard numbers on this.  Can we get a fact-checker on this right away?  Is it possible to walk away from one's education and still walk the stage to get a diploma?  You might suggest that a GED is an option, but they actually just send those in the mail...you don't get to walk the stage.  I happen to know that from experience.  That's right...I am Garrett Hall, J.D., B.A., GED.

#3 "It’s time to apply the same rules from top to bottom. No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts"

You heard him, right?  From top to bottom.  No handouts!  President Obama is in favor of entitlement reform!  It's about time, because we cannot keep up with this entitlement society.  And no copouts?  I'm sure he is including himself in this.  No more blaming Bush, ATMs, Republicans, earthquakes, bloggers, etc.  And since we are including you in this picture, I certainly hope the American people don't bail you out this November!

#2 "We got rid of one rule from 40 years ago that could have forced some dairy farmers to spend $10,000 a year proving that they could contain a spill — because milk was somehow classified as an oil. With a rule like that, I guess it was worth crying over spilled milk. (Laughter and applause.)"

My main issue here is the "Laughter and applause" caption.  I didn't hear laughter or applause.  I heard some uncomfortable moaning, restless stirring and uneasy laughter by the President.  "Laughter and applause" is incredibly generous and just downright untrue.  The President should stick with Nancy Reagan and Special Olympics jokes...he pulls them off much better.

#1 "When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it’s not because they envy the rich. It’s because they understand that when I get a tax break I don’t need and the country can’t afford, it either adds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference — like a senior on a fixed income, or a student trying to get through school, or a family trying to make ends meet."

A tax break the country can't afford?  Is the Country writing checks for tax breaks?  I wasn't aware that all income went through the US Gov't and then they graciously gave us our percentage back.  I didn't know it was their property that they are kindly gifting to us.

This is an example of the backward way Obama and his minions think about income.  They think they are entitled to it and it belongs to them.  They also think they should decide how the majority of it is used.  Besides, students trying to get through school or families trying to make ends meet don't lose anything when someone gets a tax break.  That money never belonged to them and the Gov't never saw it.  Now, overspending and waste in the Gov't may burden Americans, because the Gov't isn't really producing.  It doesn't retain capital to invest...it simply spends it on something else.  So, let's view untaxed income for what it is...personal property.

So, yeah, great speech.  I like what you've done with it...it was much better the third time.

Blog Revival!

It's been two years since I posted on this blog. What is it that induced me to revive it?  Politics...more specifically, the illogical politics of our day.  There are so many good arguments to be made for candidates on both sides of the aisle.  There are legitimate differences that could create great intellectual debates.  But, instead we have to witness illogical and dishonest attacks on candidates and specific groups of people, comments taken out of context, illogical conclusions, false contrapositives, etc.

I guess that's just how it is.  But, as long as it is that way, I will do what I can to expose it.  I hope you enjoy the posts.  Here we go!

(By the way, I wrote a book during my blog absence...you can learn about it here: Liberal In Nature

Al Gore Reads "Apocalypse" Poem

You've got to love Al Gore, right?  He's got a grammy, an Oscar, and a Nobel Peace Prize.  Well, watch out poets, cause now he's going for Poet Laureate.  I have uploaded a video of him reading his latest "apocalypse" poem.  As brilliant as the poem is and as brilliantly as this grammy award-winner reads it, I still felt like it was missing something.  After much deliberation, I concluded that it needed some background music just to set the right mood.  Here it is.  I hope you enjoy it!


APOCALYPSE

One thin September soon
A floating continent disappears
In midnight sun

Vapors rise as
Fever settles on an acid sea
Neptune's bones dissolve

Snow glides from the mountain
Ice fathers floods for a season
A hard rain comes quickly

Then dirt is parched
Kindling is placed in the forest
For the lightning's celebration

Unknown creatures
Take their leave, unmourned
Horsemen ready their stirrups

Passion seeks heroes and friends
The bell of the city
On the hill is rung 

The shepherd cries
The hour of choosing has arrived
Here are your tools 

Top Ten Contest

Through the years I have found David Letterman's Top Ten Contest to be a suitable creative outlet during times of stress. I have the Bar exam to thank for this one:

Top Ten Things Overheard During President Obama's Trip to Russia

"I just flew in from Washington and boy are my ears tired" Dave M, Fargo, ND

"What happened to the guy who can't say 'nuclear'?" Ernie D, Mississauga, ON

"Did you see the new episode of 'Miami Vice'?" Michael R, Dubai, UAE

"The last guy from the US used to drink all our vodka" Bill B, Springfield, MO

"I loved you in 'Hancock,' Mr. President" Marc M, Brooklyn, NY

"Do they sell Marlboros here?" Cameron H, Deltona, FL

"Mr. Obama, tear down this teleprompter!" Garrett H, Spokane, WA

"Hey Michelle, do we have any more iPods?" Randall W, Anniston, AL

"We'll cut back our nukes but you have to take Rush Limbaugh" Linda F, Shady Side, MD

"Let's get a coffee from Tsarbucks" Mike J, Brampton

Here's the link: http://lateshow.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/top_ten/contest/index/php/20090711.phtml

This is my fourth time making the list...looks like I've got another "Late Show" mousepad coming my way. I enjoyed the prizes much more when the Late Show was actually funny, but one can always use a new mousepad, right?

Walking Out on Graduation...

Graduating from anything is quite an accomplishment, so why is it that the "official" way to celebrate is to wear some ridiculously silly robes, stand/sit for hours and hours, listen to some idiot spout off anecdotes and lessons that you don't care about, and then grab your diploma and throw your cap?

As crazy as all of that is by itself, when you graduate from Case Western Reserve University School of Law you have to pay $200+ to do it.  That's right, you pay over $100,000 to "learn how to think like a lawyer" and then they jab you with a $200+ bill for renting your robes on the way out.  Not to mention that all of the commencement activities take up about 8 hours of one's life - 8 hours spent with annoying law students who you have been forced to put up with for 3 years.  Here's how I tally it:

Robes = $200

Commencement Day = $400 (8 hours x $50/hr - the cost of my time)

Dealing with Annoying law students for 8 hours more = $40

Total = $640

I got to thinking, what could I do with that money instead?  I found that the possibilities are seemingly  endless.  Since I can't do some of the following activities and work at the same time, I will limit the budget to $240 on those activities.  Here are a few items I came up with:

1. Play 18 holes of golf at one of the best courses in the country

2. Play 180 holes of golf at a few municipal courses

3. Buy some new piece of electronic equipment (ipod, phone, TV, etc.)

4. Buy all new camping equipment

5. Buy all new fly-fishing equipment

6. Take a helicopter trip over the grand canyon

7. Buy great seats to a Cavs playoff game

8. Order anything I want from the best steakhouse in the US

9. Take the whole family on a little vacation

10. Pay back a tiny portion of my ridiculously large student loans

I'm just getting started.  There are plenty more and I will add them to the comments as I think of them.  I would welcome any suggestions you have.  

The only downside to taking my approach is that you don't have any pictures for posterity.  However, thanks to photoshop you can have the pictures and you never have to wear the horrendously archaic and non-flattering robes of the unholy priesthood.  Check this out:

Response to Michael Moore

I hesitate to even mention Michael Moore on my blog, but I saw an editorial he wrote and I just had to respond.  In the editorial, Moore praised President Obama for his firing of GM's CEO and for his use of his "superhero" powers.  Here's the link. (I know it's very un-Michael Moore-like to actually provide a link to the original source so you can view it without relying on my biases, but I'm a better person than he is)

I sent him the following email:

"Mr. Moore,

"He has the massive will of the American people behind him -- and he has been granted permission by us to do what he sees fit."

Who gave him this permission?  The 66 million people who voted for him?  What about the 62 million people who voted for Bush in 2004?  To do what he sees fit?  So, now we are supposed to accept the President's judgement?  Does it have to do with approval ratings?  Did you say similar things when Bush had an approval rating between 80 and 90 percent?

See, my problem is not necessarily what you say, because I can accept your premises, and appreciate them, and then shave off all of the excess BS.  You are who you are and you serve an important purpose in our society, even though I disagree with many of your contentions and the ridiculous and intellectually dishonest way you shout those contentions without making obvious concessions.  

My problem is that you are clearly not a man of principle.  You want it one way for the things and people you like, and a different way for the things and people you don't like.  You whined for years about the way that Bush did what he saw fit.  I guess the real problem is that he didn't do as you saw fit.  So, is that how it is?  When a President agrees with you, he can have almost unlimited - even superhero - powers, but when he disagrees he should be impeached?

As always, you are a giant contradiction.

Regards,

Garrett Hall

PS. It is not a valid response to bash Bush.  We've heard it.  Notice that I am not defending Bush or bashing Obama.  I'm simply talking about your hypocrisy and lack of principle."