Stanek Sunday funnies 3-27-11
Following are 2 political cartoons related to the pro-life issue this week, particularly intriguing because they were both both penned by liberals.
I mentioned March 18 that pro-aborts have displayed a surprisingly muted response to the tsunami of pro-life legislation introduced in various states after a superfluity of pro-lifers was elected in November. Now, Tom Toles at GoComics.com has taken notice. Of course, I love the concept…
This next one touches on a range of related topics to the pro-life issue, by Joel Pett at GoComics.com. There’s one I’m sure Pett broached unintentionally, the duplicity of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to launch US military intervention in another country supposedly for humanitarian concerns when they both push to murder 1.2 million innocent babies a year on our own soil (and have taxpayers fund it, no less)…
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Obama taking us into unnecessary war and then apologizing and talking about getting us out two days after he started it. Ex-RINO, what do you think Obama’s war?
I’m kinda surprised that Toles doesn’t have a KKK hood on the guy behind the desk. That would be his style. I can’t say I understand how someone with a grade school level of artistic talent who rarely draws anything worth looking at became a professional cartoonist.
Being a part of a multi-national, UN sanctioned, limited action, no boots on the ground, no fly zone enforcement is siginificantly different to being the lead player in a non-UN sanctioned invasion of Iraq based on lies and deception which has taken resources from what could have been a rapid and much less painful action in Afghanistan is hardly ‘taking us into an unnecessary war’ truthseeker.
“pro-aborts have displayed a surprisingly muted response to the tsunami of pro-life legislation introduced in various states” – because not much of it will get through, and if it does it will be overturned later.
Reality
“pro-aborts have displayed a surprisingly muted response to the tsunami of pro-life legislation introduced in various states”-because not much of it will get through, and if it does it will be overturned later.
I think that’s called wishful thinking.
Reality, you seem to be resorting to Bush bashing delusions again. Quit drinking the Kool-aid and look at this list of countries who were part of the coalition that invaded Iraq and then tell me how of these countries contributed to Obama’s war on Libya:
Australia: 2,000 invasion (withdrawn 7/09)
United Kingdom: 46,000 invasion (withdrawn 7/09)
Romania: 730 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 7/09)
El Salvador: 380 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 1/09)
Estonia: 40 troops (deployed 6/05-withdrawn 1/09)
Bulgaria: 485 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Moldova: 24 peak (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Albania: 240 troops (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Ukraine: 1,650 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Denmark: 545 peak (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Czech Republic: 300 peak (deployed 12/03-withdrawn 12/08)
South Korea: 3,600 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Japan: 600 troops (deployed 1/04-withdrawn 12/08)
Tonga: 55 troops (deployed 7/04-withdrawn 12/08)
Azerbaijan: 250 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Singapore: 175 offshore (deployed 12/03-withdrawn 12/08)
Bosnia and Herzegovina: 85 peak (deployed 6/05-withdrawn 11/08)
Macedonia: 77 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 11/08)
Latvia: 136 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 11/08)
Poland: 200 invasion—2,500 peak (withdrawn 10/08)
Kazakhstan: 29 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 10/08)
Armenia: 46 troops (deployed 1/05-withdrawn 10/08)
Mongolia: 180 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 09/08)
Georgia: 2,000 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 8/08)
Slovakia: 110 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/07)
Lithuania: 120 peak (deployed 6/03-withdrawn 08/07)
Italy: 3,200 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 11/06)
Norway: 150 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 8/06)
Hungary: 300 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 3/05)
Netherlands: 1,345 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 3/05)
Portugal: 128 troops (deployed 11/03-withdrawn 2/05)
New Zealand: 61 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 9/04)
Thailand: 423 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 8/04)
Philippines: 51 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 7/04)
Honduras: 368 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 5/04)
Dominican Republic: 302 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 5/04)
Spain: 1,300 troops (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 4/04)
Nicaragua: 230 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 2/04)
Iceland: 2 troops (deployed 5/03-withdrawal date unknown)
Oddly enough I do not see France listed there and now we are turning our war over to them??? Huh?? I heard France’s plan is to put a panel of bureaucrats from different countries in charge of running the war. Good grief!
How does any of that contradict my statement truthseeker?
The statistics you supply reinforce my words “part of a multi-national, UN sanctioned…enforcement…”(of Libya) and “lead player in a non-UN sanctioned invasion of Iraq”.
Bush, Blair and Howard are war criminals. Poland was just stupid and misled.
“Obama’s war on Libya” simply doesn’t reflect the truth.
Myrtle, your whole cause is wishful thinking.
“non-UN sanctioned invasion of Iraq”.
Reality, Iraq was in violation of multiple UN resolutions at the time of the invasion.
But of even more interest is that Obama’s budget for this year had millions of dollars in increased US funding for Qaddafi to build his military and fight terrorism. The up until the invasion the UN was giving Qaddafi praise for his humanitarian work among his people. And now France wants Qaddafi’s oil so Obama gets suckered in to launching 100’s of missiles on Libya. The UN is a farce and the world under Obama is a sick world. We should have let France fight for their own oil and spent our resources helping Japan recover from the earthquake and nuclear disaster instead.
As are how many other countries, past and present? That doesn’t change the facts.
You still haven’t negated my initial statement or shown anything that supports your claim of “Obama’s war on Libya”.
So… not only is Reality a ridiculous pro-abort, it’s also a dishonest Democratic Party hack. Funny how the two so often go hand in hand.
United Nations Resolution 1441 was unanimously passed by the UN Security Council. 1441, the UN condemnation of Saddam Hussein which brought about Operation Iraqi Freedom, enjoyed even greater support in the UN than the UN Resolution which resulted in Operation Desert Storm.
As for us having no boots on the ground, that’s true, for now. But since Obama went to war without telling anybody about it or bothering to explain exactly what the heck we’re doing there, who knows what will happen in the next few weeks?
“a ridiculous pro-abort” – oh my, how cutting, how totally boringly predictable!
“a dishonest Democratic Party hack” – says he who is demonstrating mediocre athletic skill in his futile attempts to hop, skip and jump over the actual facts of the matter.
“Funny how the two so often go hand in hand” – yeah, just like anti-choicers, rethuglicans and god-botherers. Surprise.
United Nations Resolution 1441 did NOT sanction the US along with it’s small coterie of self-appointed lawmakers invading Iraq .
Receiving ‘wider support than even the 1990 Gulf War resolution’ also did NOT amount to a sanctioned invasion.
The no fly zone – not ‘war’ – over Libya IS sanctioned by the UN.
Again, the claim “Obama’s war on Libya” is untrue.
“without telling anybody about it or bothering to explain exactly what the heck we’re doing there” – you were obviously cut off from all sorts of media in the few days or a week prior to events commencing then were you?
Hey Out of touch with Reality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAyCdfOXvec
Obama’s War for Oil.
Sorry to go back on topic… I love the idea of a 9 month cooling off period! Or how about 21 years? When the National Health Service was pushing abortion for our unborn son, on the grounds that he had Down’s Syndrome, I put it to them that the logic here was that his life with DS would be so bad he would be better off dead: “indeed, you may be right about this, but shouldn’t that be HIS choice? So can he come back when he’s reached the age of discretion, and if he agrees with you, you can kill him then?” So far, however he seems to be enjoying his post-born life a lot!
Joshua, great post! Did the NHS have a response?
“yeah, just like anti-choicers, rethuglicans and god-botherers.”
Ha, and you call my words boring and predictable? Well, actually, I don’t believe I’ve heard “god-botherers” before. That one is so incoherent I would assume that you just made it up.
“United Nations Resolution 1441 did NOT sanction the US along with it’s small coterie of self-appointed lawmakers invading Iraq .”
So… a unanimous resolution by the UN did not sanction an invasion of Iraq, but a 10-5 decision authorized Obama to randomly launch missiles? That makes about as much sense as the “pro-choice” slogan.
“Receiving ‘wider support than even the 1990 Gulf War resolution’ also did NOT amount to a sanctioned invasion.”
As long as you can show me that you called the 1990 Gulf War an illegal, immoral war and called for GHWB to impeached and thrown in jail.
“The no fly zone – not ‘war’ – over Libya IS sanctioned by the UN.”
Haven’t you been listening? It’s not a “no fly zone”, it’s a “kinetic military action”. Which, in case you didn’t pass high school Physics, means, “motion military motion”. More brilliance from the great Obama! He might as well have called it the “dynamic kinetic paradigm” because then all of you Obamazombies would have drooled over how great that sounds despite the fact that means nothing.
“Again, the claim “Obama’s war on Libya” is untrue.”
Obama is launching missiles at another country. He didn’t bother going to Congress first as GWB did. His explanations for the “kinetic military action” have been contradictory – first he said that Gaddafi had to go. Then his NSA says that regime change is NOT our goal. Say what? Now he’s saying that we had to launch missiles at Libya because Gaddafi was killing people. Well, if that’s the standard, we’re going to be launching a lot of missiles at a lot of countries very soon.
This is all so ridiculous. GWB went to Congress. GWB had the support of a unanimous UN Resolution. GWB had Saddam Hussein breaking the promises that he made to escape being captured in the Gulf War. Obama has none of that. If GWB did what Obama is doing now, you would be screaming for him to be impeached and arrested.
Eric – an awkward silence ensued! Honestly, I was being nice about it… after they offered abortion for the third or fourth time I got to thinking “the next person who offers to kill my son is getting a swift right to the jaw”, but those pesky Christian ideas about not hitting people denied me the satisfaction!
Glad to hear of the strength of you and your wife Joshua. When I was five months old in my mom’s womb , her doctor recommended abortion since I was at risk to die from the Rh factor before birth, or at best, I would be born disabled. Thankfully my mom found a new doctor. I was born 4 lbs 2 oz, which was an amazingly small survival weight in 1966. My mom never discussed with me the details of her conversation with the doctor, but I would love to know what she told him.
after they offered abortion for the third or fourth time I got to thinking “the next person who offers to kill my son is getting a swift right to the jaw”, but those pesky Christian ideas about not hitting people denied me the satisfaction!
Joshua–What you said was pretty effective WITHOUT having to use any physical assault. I applaud you! I really liked your post.
Eric says:
March 28, 2011 at 11:00 am
Glad to hear of the strength of you and your wife Joshua. When I was five months old in my mom’s womb , her doctor recommended abortion since I was at risk to die from the Rh factor before birth, or at best, I would be born disabled. Thankfully my mom found a new doctor. I was born 4 lbs 2 oz, which was an amazingly small survival weight in 1966. My mom never discussed with me the details of her conversation with the doctor, but I would love to know what she told him.
Well, let me see in 1966 she might’ve told him to take a hike or to get a haircut (if he had a Beattles hairdo–I’d have to ask my parents. That was the year they got married). Either way, you’re here today and that doc was wrong YAY :-)
Some doctors are right, that a kid would die before birth, but that doesn’t mean the mother has to abort them.
Thanks Mom in TX — I agree: killing someone because they’re going to die makes no sense. We don’t do that with terminally ill cancer patients.
That is old! I came up with the 9 month waiting period idea years ago.
“Ha, and you call my words boring and predictable?” – hence my use of the word ‘Surprise’, as in I can make predictable little niggles too.
“So… a unanimous resolution by the UN did not sanction an invasion of Iraq” – that is correct.
“but a 10-5 decision authorized Obama” – also correct.
“to randomly launch missiles?” – they weren’t launched randomly. Stop trying to muddy the truth.
“As long as you can show me that you called the 1990 Gulf War an illegal, immoral war and called for GHWB to impeached and thrown in jail.” – I didn’t. Why not? Because ‘On November 29, 1990 the U.N. passed security council resolution 678 which gave Iraq until 15 January 1991 to withdraw from Kuwait and empowered states to use “all necessary means” to force Iraq out of Kuwait after the deadline.’
“Then his NSA says that regime change is NOT our goal.” – it’s not OUR goal. Our goal is to protect the overwhelming majority of Libyans fighting for that regime change.
“GWB had the support of a unanimous UN Resolution.” – not to invade Iraq with ground forces he didn’t!
The circumstances, UN mandated actions and the actual events taking place in Libya are fundamentally and vastly different to the illegal invasion of Iraq. If you can’t see that then it explains a lot about your approach to a number of topics. I think you need to recognize reality.
Yes, Reality. The situation is vastly different. The president during the Iraq War had a letter “R” after his name, and the president during the “kinetic military action” in Libya has a letter “D” after his name. That’s all.
Are you sure you wish to demonstrate such a complete and utter failure to grasp and address the facts John?
It’s got nothing to do with donkeys and elephants. You persist in ignoring the straight forward, black and white facts of the situation.
You have been either unwilling or unable to address them, all you do is try to throw a little more murk into the pool.
The UN resolutions and the actions which have taken place speak for themselves.
Reality said:
“Our goal is to protect the overwhelming majority of Libyans fighting for that regime change.”
Reality, many of the Libyan “rebels” are former Iraqi insurgents who were in Iraq killing Americans during the Iraq war. And now you want to arm them to rove through the country and kill Libyan ‘civilians’. What happens when these “rebels” that we arm swarm through towns they did not control? Answer- They kill people. You and Obama are freaking nuts if you think you can do this without a long term commitment to nation building. Freaking nuts!
Get a grip truthseeker, at no point did I discuss the intransigence of nations such as France on a range of issues nor did I make any comments about what would/could/should happen.
All I have commented on is the facts that Bush Jnr. and his accomplices did not have a UN sanctioned mandate to invade Iraq while Obama and other NATO nations as well as the Arab League did have a UN sanctioned mandate to do what has been done in Libya.
And that the statement “Obama’s war on Libya” was fatuous.
Anything else is wait and see.
Reality
Hoping your still posting here when roeVwade is overturned and not in some mom’s womb who shares your sentiments about life in the womb.
Myrtle, none of us will be here when RoeVWade is overturned. Our little speck of dust in the sky and all life on it will at some point be extinguished. But you know what, even if RoeVWade is overturned at some point, abortion will still go on. It will continue in the USA and it will certainly continue just about everywhere else in the world, including the supposedly ‘abortion-free Ireland’.
“not in some mom’s womb who shares your sentiments about life in the womb.” – and exactly what sentiments do you think I have about life in the womb?
Reality
Of course abortion will always exist but it will be the exception and not something people do because they don’t want to be inconvenienced. Your pro-choice in being pro-choice your opinion on the pre-born can’t be very high. You argue your points very well when you care about something but you can’t seem to argue for the pre-born the most vulnerable in our society. What would you say your sentiments or lack thereof were. I can understand the part about believing a woman has a right to choose if that’s why your pro-choice but that option already exists it’s called adoption. I believe that women often get way too many decisions made for them and that’s how I see hard core pro-choicers as elitist who have decided that of course they know what is best when they just don’t. I believe real empowerment will come when women decide that people who are zealous to kill their unborn might not have there best interest at heart after all.
Myrtle, people will continue to have abortions to avoid being ‘inconvenienced’ amonst other reasons.
The only things that will reduce abortion are good sex education, better contraceptives (and their use) and by improving one of the worst approaches to social welfare (all facets) in the ‘modern western’ world.
“that option already exists it’s called adoption” – that is one option, that’s why its called ‘choice’.
“I believe that women often get way too many decisions made for them” – I’m glad to hear that you’re against misogyny and patriarchy.
“I see hard core pro-choicers as elitist who have decided that of course they know what is best when they just don’t” – what, beause we tell people it’s THEIR CHOICE? Not ours, not mine, not yours, but THEIRS?
“people who are zealous to kill their unborn” – contrary to what many of you like to believe, this is not the case. Pro-choicers are zealous about women having the right to choose.
“Anything else is wait and see.”
Reality,
Waiting to see the consequences of freaking nuts people who call it their humanitarian duty to launch missiles gainst a sovereign nation and leave it in chaos and disorder. Exactly what does it mean when they say NATO has assumed complete control of the operation? Does that mean when the UN decides to put boots on the ground they can overrule Obama who said last Monday that there would be no American boots on the dround in Libya? And your plan is to just wait and see. Freaking nuts.
Again:
Get a grip truthseeker, at no point did I discuss the intransigence of nations such as France on a range of issues nor did I make any comments about what would/could/should happen.
All I have commented on is the facts that Bush Jnr. and his accomplices did not have a UN sanctioned mandate to invade Iraq while Obama and other NATO nations as well as the Arab League did have a UN sanctioned mandate to do what has been done in Libya.
And that the statement “Obama’s war on Libya” was fatuous.
Anything else is wait and see.
Reality
Maybe pro-choicers and pro-lifers just have a different definition of help I don’t think your helping someone by assisting them to kill their baby. I’m not sure why. My definition of true help often involves explaining a situation and looking for the best solution. I find people who usually have an agenda or often in a hurry going nowhere and that pretty well sums up for me what abortion is a permanent solution to very very bad advice. I am for choice though I just don’t think killing a baby is a choice though it’s a crime.
“abortion is a permanent solution” – and either having a child or adopting one out isn’t?
“it’s a crime.” – well it isn’t.
Reality
Sure it is. Just as it is to put minors on birth control without telling them that there capable of abstinence. It’s called contributing to the delinquency of a minor. And when they tell them that there not capable of self-control and they get pregnant and they kill there babies two crimes have been committed. But of course there believing science will protect them I’m hoping science protects them like it protected the minors and the unborn babies. What are your thoughts. When your at your most vulnerable state care to be surrounded by such care(?)?
‘And that the statement “Obama’s war on Libya” was fatuous.’
Lets see…. It was Obama who called for the US miitary to take this “kinetic military action” of launching 200 humanitarian tomohawk missles on the Libyan people without consulting congress. Just who’s war is it then if not Obama’s? This is where the liberal gets silent and goes away without answering or posts a diatribe that neglects addressing the question at all. That is Reality.
Gees truthseeker, you really are desperate to malign Obama aren’t you. You really are rabidly republican.
One of the first people to call for a no fly zone was the Australian foreign minister. Eventually the UN, at the behest of the Arab League amongst others, sanctioned a no fly zone with military action to protect the Libyan rebels.
The US was part of a coalition of forces which acted under that UN sanction. Control is in the hands of NATO.
Far from going silent and going away, I have repeatedly described the situation to you yet you continue to ignore the facts and persist with your variety of dances round the campfire. It is you who keeps posting diatribes in an attempt to deny the facts.
It is not ‘Obama’s war on Libya’ – that remains a fatuous statement as evidenced by the facts. You need to face the reality of the situation.
No Myrtle, abortion is not a crime, neither legally or morally.
Reality
Yes Reality it’s a crime. It’s a crime that the woman was coached to lie. It’s a crime that when she admitted she lied and took it all the way to the supreme court they still refused to overturn the case. It’s a crime everytime an infant is resting in it’s mother’s womb and is torn to pieces or is burned inside it’s natural habitat.You can stand on your roof and holler it’s not a crime until your teeth fall out it’s a crime and if you don’t believe that then that’s your problem not mine. Just because somethings legal doesn’t mean it’s not a crime. The next time your life is in imminent danger and it’s legal to snuff out your life than you will have a better understanding of what I’m saying. And of course it’s not my job to persuade you the way I figure it anyone that’s capable of making any valid argument and still cannot see that the unborn have a right to life is in denial and as for as I’m concerned can stay there. And if it’s not illegal to kill the unborn why when a driver kills a mom and an unborn baby is he or she charged for both deaths? And what’s more of a crime is when people have been blessed with so much opportunity and just can’t seem fit to extend that same right to the most vulnerable of our society.
You can stand on your roof and holler it’s a crime until your teeth fall out it’s not a crime and if you don’t believe that then that’s your problem not mine.
“And if it’s not illegal to kill the unborn why when a driver kills a mom and an unborn baby is he or she charged for both deaths?” – because only the woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy.
Reality
Well at least your half correct. And if pregnancy involved something that was not alive like just something extra her body had and she chose to rid herself of it I can see that. But she doesn’t have the right to terminate another life. Anyway I can’t make you see. That’s something that your own spirit will have to see. I could see it clearly since I was little the beauty of life and of people.
Joshua
That is so cool. Have you ever read the book by Brother Oggs. I think it’s called You Gotta Have A Want Too. He’s a preacher and was born with Cerebral Palsy. The doctors weren’t optimistic at all and once when he had an appointent they weren’t expecting to see him in the shape he was in they were looking for him and he was the young man right in front of them. Anyway it’s an awesome book. His mom and if I remember right the entire family had a lot of faith and now he has his own family is a preacher and wrote at least one book. Your son will teach you and your wife lessons that you might never have had the opportunity to learn without having him as part of your family.
“It is not ‘Obama’s war on Libya’ – that remains a fatuous statement as evidenced by the facts.”
Fascinating the way you dance around Obama taking any responsiblity for the war by claiming it is somehow disingenuous. Tell me a simple yes or no answer to this question or flee the blog like a Democrat flees Wisconsin. In your ‘reality’ was it Obama’s decision to launch the 200 humanitarian tomohawk missiles upon Libya?
FACT: It is Obama and not NATO who is responsible for the US military strikes against Libya. Grow a spine.
Your persistence really is driven by your innate hatred of Obama and democrats to such an extent that you continue to ignore the facts and keep throwing mud in the hope that some will stick truthseeker.
Obama did not instigate or declare ‘action’ – not war – against the Libyan leader. The UN did. As part of a coalition acting under the UN sanction the US fired missiles. So did the British and French. I don’t see you calling it ‘Cameron’s war on Libya’ or ‘Sarkozy’s war on Libya’.
FACT: It is NATO and not Obama who is responsible for the coalition strikes against Libya. Unlike Bush Jnr’s non-sanctioned, unilateral invasion of Iraq.
“As part of a coalition acting under the UN sanction the US fired missiles. So did the British and French.”
Talk about ignoring the facts: Out of the first 180 missles launched 178 were American and two were British. That is not just a support role we played. We were the primary (and virtually sole) aggressor in the strike that launched this war.
I see you didn’t answer my question though. Lets try again. And I think you can be more intelligible then your previous attempt at an answer when you said:
“Obama did not instigate or declare ‘action’ – not war – against the Libyan leader. ”
Not quite sure what that meant.
In your ‘reality’ was it Obama’s decision to launch the 200 humanitarian tomohawk missiles as a first strike upon Libya?
What my sentence meant was:
1. Obama did not ‘instigate’ or ‘declare’ anything.
2. it is not a ‘war’
“In your ‘reality’ was it Obama’s decision to launch the 200 humanitarian tomohawk missiles as a first strike upon Libya?” – my answer to your heavily loaded question must be NO!