Fiddling While Rome Burns

Fiddling While Rome Burns
By Ken Connor
11/30/2011

Democrats blame the recent Super Committee's deficit reduction failure on Republican obstinacy and obstructionism. It was the GOP's refusal to raise taxes on the super rich, the Dems maintain, that resulted in the committee's inability to reach a compromise. Charles Krauthammer does an excellent job of debunking this fallacy in a recent Washington Post op-ed in which he illustrates the critical difference between Republican proposals that would have increased tax revenues and the Democrats' dogged obsession with raising tax rates:

In deficit reduction, all that matters is tax revenue. . . . The Republican proposals raise revenue, despite lowering rates, by opening a gusher of new income for the Treasury in the form of loophole elimination. . . . Raising revenue through tax reform is better than simply raising rates, which Democrats insist upon with near religious fervor. It is more economically efficient because it eliminates credits, carve-outs and deductions that grossly misallocate capital. And it is more fair because it is the rich who can afford not only the sharp lawyers and accountants who exploit loopholes but the lobbyists who create them in the first place. . . . Yet the Democrats, who flatter themselves as the party of fairness, are instead obsessed with raising tax rates on the rich as a sign of civic virtue.

Krauthammer's piece details several Republican or bipartisan proposals that would have increased tax revenues while simultaneously cutting tax rates, contrasting this approach with the ineffectiveness of simply raising rates on the super rich while leaving the vast network of loopholes and exemptions untouched. Such a tactic yields marginal results at best, with revenue increases nowhere near the levels they would be if the loopholes were eliminated. So why the preference for rhetorical fluff over substantive solutions? Quite simply, because Democrats have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. They cannot afford the political price associated with backing reforms that would alienate their core constituencies. Pinning the stalled deficit reduction efforts on the GOP serves as a convenient red herring, distracting from President Obama's woeful lack of leadership on this issue. Krauthammer explains:

Has the president ever publicly proposed a single significant structural change in any entitlement? After Simpson-Bowles reported? No. In his February budget? No. In his April 13 budget "framework"? No. During the debt-ceiling crisis? No. During or after the supercommittee deliberations? No.

[It] is the Republicans who passed – through the House, the only branch of government they control – a real budget that cut $5.8 trillion of spending over the next 10 years. Obama's February budget, which would have increased spending, was laughed out of the Senate, voted down 97 to 0. As for the Democratic Senate, it has submitted no budget at all for 2 1/2 years.

In trademark Washington fashion, demagoguery and cheap talk are winning out over substantive action. Both parties are equally guilty of playing this game when it suits their purposes, fiddling away while Rome burns. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, however, time is running out. The current crises plaguing the Eurozone could be our Cassandra; if we don't enact bold reforms, and now, ours may very likely be the next default on the horizon.

No amount of spin, or rhetoric, or blame-gaming can change the mathematical facts on the ground: Our debt has spiraled out of control and we are rapidly reaching a point of no return. This Congress and this President have had more than enough time to act, but they have failed to do so. If their dismal approval ratings are any indication, there will be a price to pay for this inexcusable indolence come November 2012.
_______________________________________

Planned Parenthood: Agent of Destruction
By Ken Connor
11/23/2011

According to its website, "for more than 90 years, Planned Parenthood has promoted a commonsense approach to women's health and well-being, based on respect for each individual's right to make informed, independent decisions about health, sex, and family planning."

There is in this glowing self-endorsement a subtle tribute to Planned Parenthood's founder Margaret Sanger. An unabashed eugenicist, Ms. Sanger's "commonsense" approach to unwanted pregnancies and undesirable demographic groups, such as minorities and the handicapped, was clear and unambiguous. She maintained that "the most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it," and that "birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."

Sanger would, no doubt, be proud of the legacy begotten by her monstrous ideology. Planned Parenthood is by far the largest abortion provider in the United States. In 2009, surgical abortions accounted for 97.6% of their services to pregnant women. In other words, "Planned Parenthood" has become a euphemism for "the abortion business yields big bucks." It might tout itself as a "commonsense" organization that provides a wide array of family planning services, but the truth is in the statistics.

There is one major difference between the Planned Parenthood of today and that of Margaret Sanger's time: Margaret Sanger was brutally honest about her disregard for the unborn, while contemporary abortion advocates hide behind the language of "choice" in order to disguise the ugly reality of what they advocate. Unfortunately, this campaign of misdirection has been wildly successful. Many women instinctively rally behind a woman's "right to choose," without giving much thought to the reality behind the choice at issue. In the abortion debate, we aren't talking about choosing between chocolate or vanilla, fried or scrambled, with fries or without. We are talking about choosing whether a baby will live or die, whether we will kill it or give it life, whether we will destroy or protect an innocent child.

So powerful has our delusion about the reality of abortion become – and so powerful the pro-abortion lobby behind Planned Parenthood – that our elected representatives allocate hundreds of millions of dollars each year to Planned Parenthood. This funding has withstood year after year of budget debates and political controversy. Make no mistake about it, however, that money is blood money. Planned Parenthood preys on the fear and ignorance of women faced with unplanned pregnancies as a means of advancing their twisted worldview. Instead of celebrating life as a blessing, even when unplanned, Planned Parenthood's operatives peddle the myth that pregnancy and parenthood is some kind misogynistic social construct used to keep women dependent and servile. They tell women that the right to choose abortion is a right intricately tied to their female identity, rather than a betrayal of a sacred duty bestowed by the author of the universe. They tell women that choosing abortion is an empowering decision, not one that can impact future fertility and inflict emotional and psychological scars that last a lifetime.

Advocates of life must not give up in their quest to shed light on the true nature of Planned Parenthood's work and the repugnant ideology that inspired its founding. They must continue working to support organizations that offer women true choice: the choice to view their unborn child as a blessing, and the vocation of parenthood as the greatest calling a human being can answer. The time is long overdue for Planned Parenthood to be denounced as an agent of death and despair and its abortion activities declared illegal.
___________________________________________

To read another article by Ken Conner, click here.
____________________________________________
Planned Parenthood now hiring someone who wasn’t aborted
By Michael Norton
11/30/2011

Planned Parenthood Federation of America recently posted a job opening for Vice President of Communications. According to the announcement, it is looking for someone who is “strategic, innovative and experienced,” with the capability of providing “vision, leadership and direction for PPFA’s communications.” (I suppose it’s a given that possible applicants are those who were fortunate enough to be born instead of aborted as children.)

The job announcement informs potential applicants that PPFA “has 83 independent local affiliates that operate more than 800 health centers throughout the United States, providing high-quality services to women, men and teens.” What the announcement doesn’t say is that a big part of these “high quality services to women” are the more than 300,000 abortions performed by PPFA annually.

That’s 300,000 babies killed, and not infrequently dismembered.

I wonder what kind of person would take this job?

Who would aspire to be the “innovative” voice of an abortion-industry leader like PPFA? I don’t remember the position of providing “strategic…vision” for abortion mills being on the option list during career day in high school.

And what does it say about the state of our nation when such a position is openly advertised, as if they were looking for a car salesman or a talent promoter?

Regardless of how much they cloak it with phrases like, “PPFA is the nation's leading sexual and reproductive health care provider and advocate,” the bottom line is that they provide no advocate for the 300,000 children they abort each year. As a matter of fact, their scalpels literally separate preborn children from the one certain advocate every child should have at that moment—a mother.

The job announcement also says that the potential Vice President of Communications needs to be someone who “actively engages with elite media to drive PPFA’s mission.” What is that mission?

Is it to offer a direct, unflinching defense of Roe v. Wade or a just a carefully crafted P.R. campaign for taxpayer-funded abortions at any time, in any place, to enrich PPFA’s coffers?

Regardless, it’s certainly a mission of death. And PPFA is now hiring someone to represent them in that endeavor…in case you’re interested.