Jill Stanek

Barack Obama, liberal feminism: What women don’t want

Jill Stanek — Wed, 16 May 2012 17:25:03 +0000

The Obama campaign and feminists must be freaking out. It turns out they bet badly that what women want are free abortions and contraceptives. What a blunder. There’s nothing left in the pro-abortion arsenal if American women don’t believe Republicans are out to take away their birth control. The other side has already admitted abortion is no longer a winning issue for them. What else do they have?

A New York Times/CBS poll in March showed Obama’s approval sinking among women, this after they launched their “Republicans are waging a war on women” strategy that was supposed to bulk up their support.

Then yesterday the NYT/CBS poll showed now Romney leading Obama among women 46-44%.

We’re in the midst of the second tectonic shift against liberalism in America since Barack Obama was elected president.

The Tea Party movement generated the first shift in 2010. Women are doing it in 2012.

Today the Susan B. Anthony List released a new web ad entitled, “Womanhood.” The timing couldn’t be better…

Click here to view the embedded video.

[Poster via politicalloudmouth.com]

Lunch Break: Are you nanny enough?

Laura Loo — Wed, 16 May 2012 16:00:23 +0000

by LauraLoo

Great photoshopped parody!

President Obama’s most influential celebrity nanny, George Clooney, financially props him up big ”TIME“. George hosted a fundraising dinner last weekend which netted the Prez a reported $15M.

In turn, this so captures the heart and mindset of our Prez who wants all citizens to be breastfed/bottlefed/spoonfed by the U.S. Government – to ultimately turn us into a socialist nation.

[HT: 89 WLS Chicago]

Multiple mistakes about Obama and the Born Alive Act in new book, “The Amateur”

Jill Stanek — Wed, 16 May 2012 13:55:04 +0000

Edward Klein’s unauthorized biography of Barack Obama, The Amateur, was released yesterday.

While I appreciate that Klein devoted a chapter of his book, albeit only three pages, to Obama’s opposition as state senator to the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act, he got it pretty much all wrong. You can read the chapter at the link above, but here is the relevant section:

Obama did, however, have an interest in opposing a law that would have banned late-term partial birth abortions, a gruesome procedure that was once condemned by the late New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan as “too close to infanticide.” All across the state of Illinois, people were riveted by the controversial debate. The Chicago Sun-Times ran a cartoon showing God reaching down from heaven to a baby in front of Obama, who is holding a sign that reads “Live Birth Abortions” and yelling at God, “You keep out of this!”

An Illinois nurse named Jill Stanek testified before the Health and Human Services Committee that she had discovered that babies were being aborted alive and allowed to die in soiled utility rooms. One baby was accidentally thrown into the trash. Though Obama never showed up at the committee hearings, he voted against the bill – not once, but twice.

When, after a decade in the political wilderness, Illinois Democrats gained a majority in the legislature, Obama became chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee. As chairman, he prevented the “Live Baby Bill” from getting a committee hearing, guaranteeing that the legislation would die, much as the late-term babies were dying in the state’s hospitals.

People often get details about this chain of events wrong. For many years I, myself, thought Obama voted against the Born Alive Act three times, when it was actually four. It doesn’t help that the Obama campaign and liberals persistently try to muddy the waters.

But Klein’s portrayal of events was wrong on just about every point. I expected better from the former editor-in-chief of The New York Times Magazine, who has also had many books on the NYT bestseller’s list.

First and foremost, at issue was the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, not the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, which Obama also opposed as state senator but had to do with a different abortion procedure.

And, as previously stated, Obama voted against the Born Alive bill a total of four times, not two.

But my biggest issue is Klein’s conjecture that Obama did not attend the committee hearings on Born Alive. I’ve never heard that before. I have previously written about an exchange between Obama and me at one of those hearings, so to say Obama wasn’t even in the room inadvertently calls my portrayal of events into question.

The quickest refutation to that claim is Obama’s committee votes on Born Alive (here, here, and here). Substitutes are noted in Illinois, and Obama had no substitutes. He was there to vote.

In addition, State Net, a branch of LexisNexis that has reporters memorialize state legislative committee hearings, published notes about our March 5, 2002, debate, which was quite an odd one. Click to enlarge…

I should note this conversation was about a companion bill to Born Alive, which would have mandated that a second doctor be present in the event any baby was anticipated to be born alive in the State of Illinois.

As I testified, current Illinois law allowed (and still allows) the abortionist to determine before a baby is born whether s/he thinks the baby will be viable. It is easy to see why the person being paid to deliver a dead baby would do all s/he could to ensure that outcome, even if slightly delayed. Obama didn’t believe an abortionist would stoop that low. Pro-lifers do. It makes total sense. Kermit Gosnell proved our point.

But what made the conversation odd was Obama’s statement, “I agreed with you last year and we suggested that there be a Comfort Room or something of that nature be done.”

In fact, Obama hadn’t said anything the year before (see StateNet’s notes here and here), and now he wanted to take partial credit for devising the Comfort Room?

The concept of such a room was so twisted. Rather than take abortion survivors to the Soiled Utility Room, nurses now took them to a room where they could have photos and footprints taken as keepsakes. And Obama was all in. (See more photos of the Christ Hospital’s Comfort Room here.)

At any rate, Klein got the story all wrong. I’ve been reading his book and find it interesting but wonder how much of it is accurate, if this was any indication.

[HT: Fran Eaton at Illinois Review]

Gay marriage, abortion, and President Obama

carder — Wed, 16 May 2012 10:00:54 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

Obama is like President Herod… as in King Herod. He trades blood for votes. He allows children to be killed so he can climb atop their broken bodies and glorify himself.

He does the same here with marriage. He climbs atop the institution of marriage so he can advance an agenda of evil with regard to militant homosexuality.

Don’t believe for one minute this surrogate tale of – well, he did this really for the money. HE DID THIS because he believes it and wants everyone to come to heel.

~ Michael Voris, Real Catholic TV, May 14

Planned Parenthood targets college students: 79% within 5 miles of a university

Jill Stanek — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:44:18 +0000

by Ashleigh Weaver, Pregnancy on Campus Coordinator
Students for Life of America

Last semester I spent a lot of time working on the study, “Abortion Facilities Target College Students,” in essence to prove what we know: Planned Parenthood and independent abortion facilities target college students.

The Daily Caller just published a story on the study, which is located on our website.

Main findings

This study first looked at Life Dynamics’ study showing that most abortion facilities are located in racially disproportionate areas. We then examined all the zip codes (499) of the approximately 3,000 that were not located in disproportionately high racial areas to determine two things: if they had a university located within the zip code, and if there was a university located within five miles of the abortion facility. Out of these 499 zip codes: 72% of the facilities were located within 5 miles of a university….

The study then looked at all the Planned Parenthoods in the U.S. to make the same determination: how many universities were within the zip code of a PP and within 5 miles of a PP. Of the estimated 780 Planned Parenthood facilities in the United States, 615 of them, or 79%, are within 5 miles of a university. 46% of PPs are within the same zip code of a university….

By comparison, of a sample of 100 randomly selected zip codes, only 25% are located within 5 miles of a university.

According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, approximately 46% of abortions in America are performed on college-aged women. Women aged 18-29 are overrepresented among abortion patients. Those in their early 20s had the highest abortion index, and the highest relative abortion rate, of any age-group (“Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients, 2008″).

In the 1995 CDC study on College Health Risk Behavior, 35.1% of college students reported they had been pregnant or gotten someone pregnant. According to that same study, approximately 79.5% of college students (aged 18-24) have reported to have had sexual intercourse. Out of that 79.5 %, approximately 2.2% have gotten pregnant.

If there are 8,100 students on any given campus, with almost 80% engaging in sexual intercourse and 2.2% getting pregnant, then according to those statistics, around 142 students become pregnant each year. We also know that these college aged women (20-24) are at the most fertile time in their life.

(Prolifer)ations 5-15-12

Kel — Tue, 15 May 2012 19:30:28 +0000

by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.

Coming Home outlines some technological and scientific advances of the 20th century – intended to make us happier, freer and more powerful – which have brought “catastrophic” consequences to society, and in particular, to women.
Abstinence Clearinghouse spotlights Nigeria’s celebration of International Women’s Day by teaching that abstinence is vital to the health of the nation. We could learn something from them:

In the United States, “International Women’s Day” may be celebrated by the distribution of free contraceptives, an old-fashioned bra-burning, and a rally chorus singing Aretha Franklin’s “Respect”. We mean no disrespect to the Queen of Soul, but the women in Nigeria really know how to throw an “International Women’s Day” party.

Accepting Abundance points out the root cause behind the controversial breastfeeding mom on the cover of Time:

Shockingly, Time Magazine’s May 2012 again takes issue with this idea featuring a young mother letting her three year old son stand on a stool and nurse himself from her fully exposed breast. The title challenges, “Are You Mom Enough?” The caption asks why attachment parenting drives mothers to extremes. Here’s a better question: Why is this twenty year old book [Dr. William Sears' The Baby Book] getting so much attention now?

I think I know why. Children have actually become viewed as entitlements instead of gifts. Parenthood is now focused on adult desires, and on their image, rather than children. Parents want to appear successful, but when mothers view their children as accessories, it’s no wonder they feel imprisoned by the idea of constant attachment. It’s no wonder they go to extremes to look successful.
ProWomanProLife discusses a sickening article “celebrating” Mother’s Day by promoting abortion access. A woman named Linda – “married for less than a year, got pregnant and decided to have an abortion in favour of quiet mornings spent in bed, jogging or gardening” – is profiled, and mention is made of her use of contraception:

We admire people when they do brave things. And here’s the thing. You can’t have it both ways. Many abortion-rights activists want to claim making the abortion choice is ever so brave. But that’s not what Linda is saying. She’s saying it’s routine. That many women choose abortion for many different reasons. She asks me not to bat an eye. Fine. But don’t tell me next thing that your decision to abort was courageous in its own right.

Commenters (understandably) seem offended by the inappropriate timing of such an article.
Bryan Kemper posts a now-viral video about a mother’s love for her child, who was born with special needs. Tissue alert!

Click here to view the embedded video.

[Book image via sfgate.com]

Susan B. Anthony List unveils website for pro-life policy institute to rival Guttmacher

Jill Stanek — Tue, 15 May 2012 16:42:13 +0000

For far too long the Guttmacher Institute has been the sole go-to group for studies, policy, polls, and statistics on the life issue.

The mainstream media relies on Guttmacher as an unbiased source (NYT: “nonpartisan research organization on issues of sexual health”), when it certainly is not.

Founded in 1968 by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the organization is named after Alan Guttmacher, an ob/gyn who served as Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s first president from 1962 until his death in 1974 and also vice president of the American Eugenics Society in the 1950s (a position conveniently omitted from Guttmacher Institute’s bio of Guttmacher.) Guttmacher and Planned Parenthood maintain they parted company in 1977. But as recently as 2009 PP was still subsidizing Guttmacher.

So, now surprise, Guttmacher’s research findings always end up propping the culture of death.

But today brings good news. The Susan B. Anthony List has unveiled its new website for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, its education and research arm, which was formed in late 2011.

From SBA’s press release:

“We envision lozierinstitute.org as a crossroads for both new information and fresh analysis of policy questions that vex the modern world, centered on the value of human life and care for mothers, the children they carry, and the family,” commented Charlotte Lozier Institute president Chuck Donovan. “We will address topics from abortion, to population policy, advances in fetal medicine, health policy, and even end-of-life care. We will supplement and encourage existing organizations, as well as provide a balance to existing research organizations embedded in the abortion industry, by focusing on mid- and long-term topics where reflection and deeper examination can make lasting contributions.”

The institute is named for Charlotte Denman Lozier (1844-1870), a pro-life feminist physician who was a contemporary of Susan B. Anthony’s.

[Top graphic via TooManyAborted.com]

Lunch Break: Charlize Theron is enthralled with motherhood

Laura Loo — Tue, 15 May 2012 16:00:14 +0000

by LauraLoo

Actress Charlize Theron is enthralled with the new love of her life, adopted baby boy Jackson. As quoted by US Magazine:

“It’s an overwhelming sensation of love,” Theron gushed. “There’s almost a moment where I feel like I can’t remember anything prior to him. I feel like it was always just meant to be what it is. Everyday I’m just like, ‘It’s not possible to love you more,’ and then 20 minutes later you’re like, ‘Oh my God! How is this possible?’”

Click here to view the embedded video.

As an aside, Charlize’s newest movie Snow White and the Huntsman will be released in theaters June 1st - and also stars actress Kristen Stewart. Woo-hoo!

Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.

Kline wants two KS Supreme Court justices off his ethics case – due to unethical behavior

Jill Stanek — Tue, 15 May 2012 13:27:28 +0000

Former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline, pictured right, will file a blistering motion today requesting that two Kansas Supreme Court justices recuse themselves from deciding his ethics case - due to their unethical behavior.

The justices are set to determine whether to indefinitely suspend Kline’s law license, the culmination of a long, sordid saga that reads more like a John Grisham legal thriller, involving sustained cover-ups for the abortion industry at the highest levels of Kansas state government.

Kline wants Justice Carol Beier, pictured left, off the case for “her deep-seated antagonism” against him, demonstrated in court decisions and spiteful written opinions.

Kline also accuses Beier of engaging in pro-abortion activism from the bench. Beier calls herself a “third wave feminist,” of which “[a]bortion access and ‘reproductive rights’ are a central theme,” according to Kline’s motion.

Beier has advocated manipulating the media to advance her ideology as “a necessary pre-condition to an evolution in the law.” Aside from her legal degrees, Beier has a B.S. in journalism. As a fledgling attorney Beier worked at the National Women’s Law Center.

Kline is also asking Chief Justice Lawton Nuss, pictured right, to recuse himself. As attorney general Kline filed a complaint against Nuss in 2006 for secretly meeting with the President of the Kansas Senate regarding pending education finance litigation.

Nuss was later formally admonished by the Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications for improper behavior.

Kline believes it would be easy to suspect retribution as a factor should Nuss rule against him now.

Kline’s 66-page motion lays it all on the line, reviewing multiple instances in which a state government ruled by friends of the abortion industry attempted to thwart his legitimately founded investigation into illegal child rape cover-ups and record tampering by Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood in Overland Park and late-term abortionist George Tiller in Wichita.

Former Governor Kathleen Sebelius, pictured left, was the Kansas abortion industry’s puppet master, appointing Beier eight months after Kline took office. Sebelius now serves as Secretary of the U.S. Department Health and Human Services under President Obama.

As an aside, when reading the motion I was surprised to see myself quoted on page 43, and am honored to play a small part in Kline’s attempt to seek justice, a David vs. Goliath case if there ever was one.

The abortion industry and its tools are not content to have run Kline out of the state. They now seek to ruin his career and make an example of him as the first U.S. prosecutor ever to bring charges against them.

Former child actress: Attachment parenting consistent with feminism, if not liberal feminists

Kel — Tue, 15 May 2012 07:00:05 +0000

We care about what hormonal contraception does to your body and your brain. We research why doctors prescribe birth control to teenagers and adults who don’t have a “regular” menstrual cycle.

We object to routine inductions with pitocin and interventions during labor because of the risks to the mother and the baby. We believe that breast milk is biologically and nutritionally superior to anything formula manufacturers tell you is equal to it, and that sleeping next to your baby releases positive hormones that facilitate bonding.

We have empowered ourselves and refuse to endure a male-centered obstetric history that has taken women’s bodies and molded them to their preferences for their convenience, their comfort and for their world view.

Now tell me how attachment parenting is inconsistent with feminism?

~ Former Blossom child actress Mayim Bialik, as quoted by Opinion L.A., May 11

[Photo of Bialik's book cover via motherloveblog.com]