{"id":20727,"date":"2011-04-13T22:53:21","date_gmt":"2011-04-14T04:53:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/?p=20727"},"modified":"2011-04-13T22:54:25","modified_gmt":"2011-04-14T04:54:25","slug":"the-family-research-council-are-dolts-planned-genocidehood-edition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2011\/04\/13\/the-family-research-council-are-dolts-planned-genocidehood-edition.html","title":{"rendered":"The Family Research Council are Dolts (Planned Genocidehood Edition)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>The FRC have sent out a new emergency action alert email thingie<\/a> to all its faithful, with an incredible density of lies, misrepresentations, goofiness, black-is-white cognitive dissonance, and general doltitude.<\/p>\n

According to pundits, this was supposed to be the year that social issues took a backseat to the economy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Yes, well, given that the GOP ran full-time on “jobs, jobs, jobs!” it’s not surprising that’s what folks were expecting.<\/p>\n

Apparently, Democrats didn’t get the memo.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Really? Really?<\/em><\/p>\n

If the last six weeks proved anything, it’s that the culture war is alive and well–and lurking in the halls of Congress. When the dust finally settled from last week’s budget talks, Americans learned that it wasn’t conservatives with a one-track mind. It was the White House and Senate leadership, who thought it was worth putting more than 800,000 people out of work to satisfy the single-issue abortion supporters in their ranks. “Thanks to the way this deal was struck,” the\u00a0Wall Street Journal <\/em>says<\/a>, “we have a reminder that it was the Democratic President–and not the Republican Speaker–who stood on ideology.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That’s a … remarkable way of framing how the budget deal went down. \u00a0Which is was roughly, the Democrats caving to the GOP on on dollar cuts — giving them nearly everything they wanted. \u00a0The GOP leadership kept saying it was all about the budget cuts … but when the Dems matched the numbers the GOP was asking for, then the Republicans <\/em>made it clear that they didn’t just want budget cuts, but they wanted them to be tied particular “social issues” \/ “culture war” riders. \u00a0The budget deal had to explicitly defund grants to Planned Parenthood. \u00a0The budget deal had to explicitly defund grants that went to NPR. \u00a0The budget deal had to explicitly eliminate the EPA’s ability to interfere with polluters. \u00a0The budget deal had to do a variety of things that changed <\/em>the status quo,and that appealed to the social conservative base \/ cultural warriors of the Right.<\/p>\n

And that’s what the FRC (and the Wall Street Journal<\/em>, of course) frame as the Dems standing on ideology?<\/p>\n

By the way, that “Wall Street Journal” declaration is actually an op-ed piece by William McGurn, former Dubya speech-writer, former Newscorp executive, former WSJ chief editorialist. \u00a0Not quite the Voice of Dispassionate Reason there.<\/p>\n

To those inside the Oval Office, “…it was ‘chilling’ to see how inflexible Mr. Obama was.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Ooooh. Chilling!<\/em><\/p>\n

The original WSJ story is firewalled, but Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) has been gracious enough to copy the whole thing<\/a>. \u00a0And, remarkably enough, that whole “chilling” thing, which is carefully framed above as — well, of course, it must be from White House insiders, right? I mean, even Democratic functionaries were “chilled” by Obama and …<\/p>\n

Well, no, it’s a description from a “Republican aide” to Rep. John Boehner. \u00a0Again, not quite the voice of unbiased, objective authority here.<\/p>\n

But as far as liberals are concerned, an attack on abortion is an attack on the Democratic Party.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

No … liberals consider an attack on abortion to be an attack on women. \u00a0That such attacks are almost inevitably by Republicans does sort of lend a partisan glow to the matter, to be sure.<\/p>\n

D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray (D) obviously thought so. He was so angry about the ban on taxpayer-funded abortion in the District that he and 41 others plopped down in the middle of Constitution Avenue yesterday to protest. “The District restrictions that were part of the budget deal reached Friday were unacceptable,” Gray said, after he was hauled away by Capitol police. “It’s an outrageous position… All we want is to be able to spend our own money.” Like his party, the Mayor was willing to stand in the way of progress at a major crossroads to protect taxpayer-funded abortion.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Standing “in the way of progress”? \u00a0That’s an odd turn of phrase. \u00a0In reality, Mayor Gray was (as his own words demonstrate) incensed that the budget deal imposed the will of the Federal Government (or, in this case, the GOP-controlled House of Representatives) on the citizens of the District of Columbia, regardless of what their own elected representatives desired.<\/p>\n

You know how that works, right, FRC? \u00a0I mean, the Tea Partiers have been railing long and hard about how all those Federal Government types keep tromping over the local rights of the People. \u00a0But I guess when those People live in DC, and protest about the same thing, then they’re just Democratic apparatchiks<\/em>.<\/p>\n

And for what?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

For local control over local matters? \u00a0For protection of a woman’s right to choose?<\/p>\n

According to the latest D.C. census, the number of African-Americans in the city is alarmingly low. In one decade, “the black population dropped by more than 39,000<\/a>.” Experts say the percentages haven’t been this low since World War II. Do liberals think that’s a coincidence?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

No, “liberals,” like the Washington Post (whose story you link to) explain the change — a drop in black population and a rise in white population, thusly:<\/p>\n

The demographic change is the result of almost 15 years of gentrification that has transformed large swaths of Washington, especially downtown. As housing prices soared, white professionals priced out of neighborhoods such as Dupont Circle began migrating to predominantly black areas such as Petworth and Brookland.<\/em><\/p>\n

The city became a tougher place to live for working-class families, who had to contend with rising rents and soaring property taxes. Many of the new jobs created over the past decade have required higher education.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

On the bright side, maybe if the city stops being so African-American, the GOP will consent to letting its citizens govern themselves and be represented in Congress.<\/p>\n

Obviously, the local Planned Parenthood clinics are doing their job. So while Vincent Gray rages on about taxation without abortion representation, he should stop and consider where his city would be in another 10 years without the legislation. If you thought that black children were endangered before, imagine if the city could continue promoting\u00a0free <\/em>abortions to local women.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Right. Heaven forfend that this all be about changing demographics and the city of DC becoming more gentrified and attractive (and thus priced) to the more affluent. \u00a0It must be all about Planned Parenthood’s Fiendish Sales Job Promoting Genocide of Little Black Babies<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood, the group that most actively targets African-Americans, is awaiting its federal funding fate.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The whole meme about Planned Parenthood somehow genocidally “targeting” African-Americans is hot right now<\/a> in the anti-abortion movement. \u00a0It ignores some basic economics.<\/p>\n