World News Korner

Wonkette provided part of a transcript, but I fleshed it out because apparently I am just that much of a glutton for punishment.

Here it is:

Hey friends! Y’know, back in the 1990s, Bill Clinton said that he wanted abortion to be safe, legal, and rare. Well, things really have changed since then, this is so unfortunate now — it appears as if Democrats, most Democrats, they want abortion to be safe, legal, and…celebrated? Mmmm.

Feminists, lately, who are in favor of abortion, they’re encouraging women to write or speak publicly and glowingly about how great having an abortion is, how great it was for them and their careers. My goodness, I find this really, really sad. It's dark. It's tragic in itself. Mmm, very sad.

In the past, even those in favor of abortion knew that it's a tragic event, not something to be celebrated like a rite of passage.

Look I know from personal experience how difficult it is when you find yourself in less than idill (sic) circumstances and you are pregnant. (Yep, it's called the Wite-Out solution.)

I know the strain it can have on you. On your family, On your career. So I can sympathize with women who find themselves in THAT situation. I know what she's going through.

But I also know that you will never regret choosing life. (You KNOW that? What, do you have crystal balls or something?)

In the sunset of your life, when you look back on all your choices that you made, and all of the things that you have accomplished you will never regret giving life to your children. I promise you they'll be your greatest joy. (And boy we all know how much a Sarah Palin promise is worth, don't we kids?)

I've never met anyone at their end of their life regrets having their kids. (What, is she hanging out in old folk's homes and critical care units these days?) But I have heard of many people who regret snuffing the life out of their child. (Okay for the record, abortion does not entail choking a baby to death.)

You know a final not for these would be feminists. They're not real feminists, They're not pro-women when they're celebrating women snuffing the life out of , say the youngest sisters in our society. (Wait, what?)


Little baby girl in the womb even.

No a real feminist is someone who fights for women to have real choices. (She does realize it's called the "pro-choice" movement right?) And that means having the choice to keep your child and pursue a career. Or give life to your child and allow another family to raise that child and then pursue your career. (Actually Planned Parenthood supports all of these choices as well. So her idea of having MORE choices is to do away with one of the choices offered by the pro-choice movement. Yeah okay.)

Having children is really a part of so many women's lives obviously. (But not ALL women's lives. Or does she simply not get that?) And in this day and age with the amazing technology we have that transcends the old office structure, right in the corporate world or in the big or small business world, women shouldn't have to sacrifice her career to raise a child.

You may take a break, if you will, to spend that valuable time with a child but you don't have to sacrifice your career and never go back in order to give life to a child.

Building a culture of life which America needs. A culture of life where we respect the sanctity of innocent life. It means encouraging a world where career women can raise their children. It's something that everyone, from both sides of the political aisle, should get behind.

Mmm, and I hope and pray that America will.

God hearing Palin condemning women for making choices concerning their own bodies is like hearing Mike Huckabee or Chris Christie telling somebody that they should not be taking that second helping of pie.

P.S. For those wondering just what in the hell Palin is blabbering about I think this might help to explain it.

P.P.S. For those who are wondering the post you are waiting for will publish at 6:15 AM Alaska time, or 10:15 EST time depending where you live.

Source

Courtesy of Politico:

Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor who is considering a run for president, said in an interview aired this weekend that he’s going to release about 250,000 emails from his time in office.

The move seems designed to get ahead of opposition researchers poring through his time in office — the Democratic research super PAC American Bridge already has started digging in on the candidates — but also to contrast Bush with people like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, both of whom have been accused of creating a fog of secrecy in their government offices.

Unlike the records of Christie and Clinton, Bush’s document trove is fairly dated — he was in office from 1999 to 2007. But the idea, he told WPLG-TV in Miami, is to create “transparency.” Bush was known as an active emailer while in office, often responding to queries himself.

Old Jebby is also writing an ebook. (Can't get an actual publisher?)

So yeah, I think we can all assume that Jeb is definitely throwing his hat into the ring.

Source

Courtesy of the Washingtonian:

In 2007, 15-year CIA veteran John Kiriakou told an ABC News reporter that his agency had waterboarded an Al Qaeda detainee, Abu Zubaydah, whom Kiriakou was involved in capturing in 2002. His revelation confirmed to the American public the CIA’s torture program and helped spur a years-long Senate investigation and a damning, 6,000-page report, the abstract of which was released this week.

Kiriakou pleaded guilty in 2012 to disclosing classified information, including the name of a fellow CIA operative, to a New York Times reporter. In early 2013, he reported to the a federal prison in Loretto, Pennsylvania, to begin serving a 30-month sentence. Kiriakou, along with supporters that include his congressman, Virginia Democrat Jim Moran, says the real point of his prosecution was to silence him and others from talking about torture.

To be clear, torturing detainees, many of who had no intelligence to share, is not an offense requiring imprisonment,

Ordering that practice, even though America is morally and legally against such practices, is not an offense requiring imprisonment.

However blowing the whistle on these illegal and immoral activities IS an offense requiring imprisonment.

Just so we are clear.

Just what exactly have we become?

Source

Sarah Palin in her "puffed up leather coat."

Courtesy of Sarah "Whip it, whip it good" Palin's Facebook page:

America Asks: "Whose Side Are You On"; Necessarily Directing This At Our President

In debauched minds it is fine for our young, once potentially unifying President to boast, "I'm pretty good at killing" while speaking of his own secret kill list, but all hell breaks loose if America's expert and experienced CIA (Even CIA Director Brennan recognizes that the CIA was not adequately trained to conduct these "enhanced terrogations.") keeps known terrorists up at night for questioning, plays annoying music to get the evil ones' attention, and considers whatever else necessary to keep us safe. (Yuck it up much, Nobel Peacenik President?) From the cozy confines of the White House he blusters a willingness to assassinate whomever he chooses, no need for judicial balance or seasoned military brass strategy – in fact the Community Organizer canned nearly 200 of our top military officials. And leftist response to their leader's suspiciously opaque drone game plan? Crickets.

(Wrong Brenda Bitchface, liberals have talked about our frustration with the drone programs quite frequently. Drone programs that, by the way, were started by George W. Bush and only exist due to the illegal wars that he started in the first place.)

Mr. President: newsflash ignored by your yapping lapdogs – many of our finest whom you unprecedentedly refer to as "YOUR" own troops confide that the only thing legitimizing your being Commander in Chief is that puffed up leather coat you sport with an embroidered title on your left breast. They want to respect you; they know to obey you; they deserve better.

(Like who? John McCain who never saw an adversary that he did not want to bomb back to the stone age. Or Mitt Romney who may actually have known less about foreign relations than even the woman whose credentials were all based on her state's proximity to Putin's backyard?)

Want to talk "torture"? Evidence #1: Innocent Americans tortured and murdered by guilty terrorists on 9/11. Note the accurate terms "innocent" and "guilty". (The 9-11 attacks can be called all kinds of terrible things, but they certainly cannot be defined as "torture.") Innocent 9/11 families are still tortured. Torture is slicing off the heads of investigative journalists and American charity workers serving in the Middle East who are used as political pawns. (No, actually that's just murder.) Torture is what radical Islamists routinely do to women and minorities.

True Americans say "never again." These perpetrators are evil monsters sharing dark demonic (Demonic?) intentions with radical Muslims who are beheading Christian children today overseas. True Americans serving as watchmen on the wall say, "Not on our soil. Not on my watch." And any American-loving leader should promise, "Whatever it takes to stop evil, to protect this nation, we shall do."

(No! That is where you are wrong crazy lady. An "American-loving leader" recognizes that America should do NOTHING that damages the country's integrity in the eyes of the world, or undermines the moral high ground it needs to compel other nations to treat their prisoners, women, and everyday citizens with respect for their human rights. George Bush stole that from us, NOT President Obama.)

You're on one side or the other. What is it, liberals: sympathy for inconvenienced terrorists who would murder our children or saving America?

- Sarah Palin

And that in a nutshell is what is wrong with Sarah Palin and her ilk. They see the world through the eyes of children, where everything is good or evil, right or wrong, black or white. Without recognizing that most things are rendered in varying shades of gray.

However America using torture, well that really is a case of good and evil. And evil would be those who use the fear that most Americans felt after the 9-11 attacks to justify engaging in tactics that would forever damage us long after we had overcome the panic that gripped us in its aftermath.

Speaking of torture can you imagine what is going through John McCain's mind right now as he listens to this garbage?

It's your damn fault old man. It's your damn fault.

Source

(Source.)

Source

Courtesy of CNN:

More than 300 former Obama campaign staffers signed an open letter Friday morning urging Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run for president in 2016.

The letter draws parallels between Obama's come-from-behind insurgent candidacy and Warren, who would enter the race an underdog against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton if the latter runs, as expected.

Clinton is seen as the likely Democratic nominee if she jumps in the race, and leads every survey of the potential Democratic field by double digits. But the same was true during her first run for president, in 2008, when a then little-known senator from Illinois jumped in and upended what many expected to be a coronation for the former first lady.

"We believed in an unlikely candidate who no one thought had a chance," the letter opens.

"We know that the improbable is far from impossible," it goes on.

Once again I am conflicted.

Like many others I have some reservations concerning Hillary. Though I still see her as the Democratic party's best hope in 2016.

That being said the speech that Warren delivered on the Senate floor Friday spoke to me in a way that I have not felt since Obama's amazing speeches during his campaign and in the early days of his presidency.

If there were no Hillary, I have no doubt that I would be pushing with all my might to encourage Warren to run.

However I also believe that Warren will be a powerful voice in the Senate and that in those chambers she can electrify the Democrats like few others can these days.

Of course if Hillary taps Warren as her running mate then for me that would be the best of all possible options.

Anybody care to disagree?

Source

Courtesy of My Fox Chicago:

Officials for the state of South Dakota have removed a “Don't Jerk and Drive” safety campaign after complaints about the sexual overtones of the message.

The campaign, created by the state's Department of Public Safety, was meant to ask drivers not to overcorrect, or jerk, steering wheels while driving on icy and snowy roads.

But officials opted to kill the campaign after multiple complaints that the phrase wasn't appropriate.

So to be clear, it IS okay to masturbate while driving in South Dakota?

I'm asking for a friend.

Source