Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

August 20, 2008

Glitter and naughty four-letter words

Filed under: politics — by lindyborer @ 7:05 am
Tags: , , , , , , ,

I see I have hit a nerve, judging from the dramatic spike in my blog stats after Monday’s post.  And I’m thinking it’s not due to my own post, but the Mary Eberstadt article on the Too Good page.  Either everyone thought it as deadly accurate as I did, or they disagreed so much that they just had to pass it along to others.  I suppose I’ll never know.

I made the mistake of buying glitter that was on sale for the kids yesterday.  The good thing is, Linus simply loves it.  The bad news is, Linus simply loves it.  What else can I say?  I always have the best of intentions when it comes to these sorts of things for the kids.  But the problem lies in the disparity between the scenario that plays in my head and the actual reality.  When I picked up the glitter from the dollar bin, I was envisioning the two of us carefully and delightedly shaking glitter onto our small reasonably-sized dots of glue, and then thriftily shaking the slight excess neatly back into the containers.   As you can imagine, (as you mothers know) the reality is a bit different.  As a sidenote:  Does anyone know the best way to clean up glitter?

And to switch gears now completely, Obama is denying that he voted down the BAIPA bill just for its own sake.  Of course, we know better, as there is evidence that the Illinois Senate Bill did have a neutrality clause, and there is evidence that Obama knew it and killed it anyway.  (See post,” I’m glad that got cleared up” for background.)  National right to life groups are lying about the reasons he voted against the BAIPA bill, says Obama.  He said in an interview last weekend with Rick Warren,
“I hate to say that people are lying, but here’s a situation where folks are lying,” Obama said in the interview. “I have said repeatedly that I would have been … fully in support of the federal bill … that you should provide assistance to any infant that was born — even if it was as a consequence of an induced abortion.”
But he said that was not the bill presented at the state level. Obama said that bill was trying to “undermine” Roe v. Wade and that the Illinois legislature already had a law in place to ensure life-saving treatment is administered to infants.
“So for people to suggest that I … (am) somehow in favor of withholding life saving support from an infant born alive is ridiculous. It defies common sense and it defies imagination, and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive and it’s an example of the kind of politics that we have to get beyond,” he told CBN
 What defies common sense, Senator, is the absolute lack of logic in your mental faculties.  No, you’re not in favor of withholding life saving support from an infant born alive, you’re only in favor of performing life destruction before the birth has taken place.  (I think my head is going to explode.  Let me walk through this slower.)

I’m sorry, but am I missing something?  Okay, so a doctor is performing an abortion.  The goal of an abortion is to stop the heart of a baby that is still in the womb.  Does it not seem ridiculous, then, that the abortionist, upon seeing that the baby did not, in fact, die as a result of the procedure, should then immediately begin giving life-sustaining care to this same infant simply because his head has emerged from his mother?  Not ridiculous that he should administer life-sustaining care, but that there should be such an instant switch of mindset?  And shouldn’t this switch of mindset mean that perhaps it was wrong to be trying to kill the baby in the first place?

In my opinion, if you’re going to be pro-abortion, don’t try to walk the line here.  Anyone with a shred of intelligence realizes the quandary of the above scenario.  Am I saying that Obama has no intelligence?  Perhaps.  But I really think the reality is much scarier than just a lack of intelligence.  To be so determined to make abortion available to anyone and at any stage and at any cost denotes a lack of morality.  It is plain evil.  And there, I have said the naughtiest four-letter word of our times.    

Of course, to liberals, this idea of good and evil is absurd.  Everything is relative, after all.  What’s bad for you is good for me, and how dare you be so judgmental? (But, I forget, I guess liberals do think one thing is evil, the US of A.)  I fervently hope that Americans will open their eyes to the reality of evil, and cast their votes accordingly. 

An excerpt from today’s Too Good article by Jonah Goldberg that I just had to add here:

When asked what America’s greatest moral failing was, theological Obama said it was our collective failure to “abide by that basic precept in (the Book of) Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me.”

In 2003, as chairman of the Illinois Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Obama received a statement from Jill Stanek, a registered nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. She testified that at her Chicago-area hospital, she’d seen a baby accidentally delivered alive during an abortion and then “taken to the soiled-utility room and left alone to die.”


I’m no expert on the Christian Gospel, but something tells me that Matthew might consider these wailing creatures the least of our brothers.








Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: