Something you might not know about Abortionist Kermit Gosnell

James Taranto dos some digging into the past of Gosnell

It was called the Mother’s Day Massacre. A young Philadelphia doctor “offered to perform abortions on 15 poor women who were bused to his clinic from Chicago on Mother’s Day 1972, in their second trimester of pregnancy.” The women didn’t know that the doctor “planned to use an experimental device called a ‘super coil’ developed by a California man named Harvey Karman.”

A colleague of Karman’s Philadelphia collaborator described the contraption as “basically plastic razors that were formed into a ball. . . . They were coated into a gel, so that they would remain closed. These would be inserted into the woman’s uterus. And after several hours of body temperature, . . . the gel would melt and these . . . things would spring open, supposedly cutting up the fetus.”

Nine of the 15 Chicago women suffered serious complications. One of them needed a hysterectomy. The following year, the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade. It would be 37 more years before the Philadelphia doctor who carried out the Mother’s Day Massacre would go out of business. His name is Kermit Gosnell.

H/T 1389 Blog

 

Of course not everyone hates Piers Morgan!

Stacy McCain opines today that everyone hates Piers Morgan

The petition to deport Piers Morgan is now nearing 90,000 signatures— which is what I’d call “a gpod start” — and this groundswell of antipathy to being lectured by a smarmy Brit on CNN has now reached America’s youth, including Michael Butler at The High School Conservative:

Piers Morgan “has a case of the sads” over the deportation petition, tweeting things such as “Ironic U.S. gun rights campaign to deport me for ‘attacking 2nd amendment rights’ – is my opinion not protected under 1st amendment rights?” One witty twitter user responded with “You ignore the Constitution, why shouldn’t they?” For those of you wondering if we really can deport Piers Morgan for being stupid, we can. James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal explains, “Your opinion is protected, your presence in the U.S. is not. See Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972).” . . .
There is also a response petition from British citizens which reads, “We got rid of him once and why should we have to suffer again. The Americans wanted him so they should put up with him. We washed our hands of him a long time ago.

McCain goes on to suggest we send Piers to France, or Canada. Hmmm, I can see Morgan in a beret, in fact, he sort of looks like he is wearing one when you watch him on CNN, if you are among the 77 people who do. He has that air of arrogance, that air of self-importance, and that accent, which is super hot on a woman (think Julia Ormond, Emma Samms, Kate Beckinsale or Kate Winslet), but on a man? But, to be fair here, not everyone hates Piers, just those that have heard him and his snooty drivel. Poor Piers, he just does not understand that when you start berating people who own guns, and criticizing the Bible, lots of folks will hold it against you. And guess what Piers, that First Amendment you are so worried about? It also grants us, the right to criticize you.

Santorum loves him some social engineering

Don Surber nails it!

 

Should Republicans follow Rick Santorum’s lead and offer a tax credit to low-wage young men to make them more “marriageable”?

NO.

This is a particularly bad idea that James Taranto identified as “Sexual Socialism,” but then did not really explain why this is such a terrible idea. His argument is that David Brooks of the New York Times thinks this is a good idea, so it must be a bad one. That’s a convincing argument, but let me take it one step further.

This is a lousy idea because it perverts the tax code once again to do some social engineering.  Instead of simply collecting taxes to support the government, Congress and the president would use if for behavior modification. We already do $1 trillion worth of socialistic behavior modification by offering tax deductions and tax credits for everything from having a child to what sort of dishwasher you buy. At election time, these are referred to both as “tax loopholes” and as help for the middle class. It depends on whose ox the federal government is subsidizing.

Again, Santorum and his “Social Conservatism” prove my theory that you cannot trust a man wearing a sweater vest. Good Grief!