Who Do You Think is the Biggest Murderer of All Time?

It's a rather short list. Maybe you're thinking Hitler, or Stalin. Maybe Mao. Or if you go back far enough in time, perhaps Attila the Hun or Vlad the Impaler.

Hitler certainly comes in with high numbers. Stalin and Mao are right up there also. Vlad or Attila, probably not.

Bzzz. Time's up. The biggest murderer of all time is, in my opinion (now I'm covered for libel) is a portly senior citizen named Sarah Weddington. She has silver-gray hair, a nice smile and looks like somebody Norman Rockwell might use as a grandmother serving pie after dinner. I'd even bet she's polite and kind to animals. Oh yes, she's very much still alive as I write this article.

Who, pray tell, is Sarah Weddington and why do I think she is the greatest murderer of all time, you might ask.

She's not an everyday household name, but she is famous in one circle. She is the attorney who argued successfully in Roe v Wade at the Supreme Court, which opened the door to legal abortion in America. Initially, only in the first trimester, but we all know how a door ajar quickly gets kicked wide open ... which, of course, it did. BTW, the vote was 7-2 and if you want to blame the court, feel free - but remember, they would not have been able to even hear the case had Sarah not filed the legal briefs first.

If you think abortion is not murder, that's your right. It's also an opinion just as mine is. If you're like me and think that abortion on demand of a viable human being is, in fact, a form of murder, then read on. If not, stop reading further; you won't like more of my thoughts about this subject. Viability is, of course established at some date in utero. We were all there once, and as Ronald Reagan notably said, I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.

Depending on your view of how we got here (creation, evolution or a mix of both), your views on abortion may vary. Biological systems are complex, and one of the important functions of biology is reproduction. The bible says Go forth and multiply and certainly mankind has accomplished that task. To ensure the continuity of the species, our creator added lust to the recipe and so far it seems to have worked marvelously.

When the topic comes up in conversation, sometimes I ask Why does a carrot grow?

Nobody gives me the real answer. I hear everything from that's what they do...  to   ...so we can eat them.

Answers like that miss the point. A carrot grows for one main purpose: To reproduce. Everything else is a support system to accomplish that end. And so it is for the human race: We are programmed to reproduce. It's not learned, it's innate. History proves that even without educated bulb-heads telling us how it works, somehow our primitive ancestors figured it out. If they hadn't, you wouldn't be reading this right now.

When medicine advances far enough to make it a routine procedure, and the law changes to remove legal consequences, is it acceptable? To some, yes. To others, no.  IMHO, elective abortion is homicide and as the numbers increase, then it becomes genocide. Not that it matters, but most Christian churches agree with me ... which is kind of ironic in that Sarah's father was a Christian minister. I suspect with that upbringing she was more than familiar with the 6th commandment.

I was puzzled when I saw the picture below. New Yorkers all know (or should) who the lawmakers are in it: Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul, Legislative leaders Carl Heastie and Andrea Stewart-Cousins. But who is the dowdy old lady sitting next to Cuomo, and further, what is she doing there? Why are they all smiling?

The politicians are smiling because they passed the late term abortion bill (aka legal infanticide) and Cuomo was signing it into law. FWIW, this bill failed repeatedly until NY Democrats took control of all 3 branches of NY government. Ironically, they called this the Reproductive Justice bill ... Well, not for some still in utero. Sucks to be you, sorry.

Even more ironic are the politicians whose own religion opposes it. The guy with the pen in the picture above, for example. Or our own (former NY Assemblyman who previously co-sponsored the bill) Congressman Brindisi. Both of these people are practicing Catholics, and until the church decides to enforce their own dogma, seeing these people in the communion line won't be an unusual sight.

The double-chinned smiling lady in the picture confused me. Who was she? Why did she make the cut?

It took me a while to find out that's Sarah. She was there as an invited VIP to celebrate the legality of late-term abortion. Like Adolf Hitler, she wasn't at the front lines doing the hands-on work (except for her own Mexican abortion in 1967, according to wiki). Her work merely started the ball rolling.

And that is why, in my humble opinion she rings the bell as instigating the biggest and longest genocide of all time. 46 years and counting ... and every day, every week, every year the number keeps growing.... Kind of like the debt clock, but with a different cost: Human life.

What Hitler did to his victims was evil and worthy of the term holocaust. What Sarah Weddington did in 1973, in my opinion  put Hitler in second place.

This is probably the largest moral political issue of our time. If you absolutely don't want children but choose to engage in sex, I strongly advocate judicious use of contraceptives to avoid dealing with this issue. But ladies, if you somehow find yourself in an untenable situation, please seriously consider adoption as an alternative ... and, if after considering all the options, you are bound and determined to abort ... Please, please  do it right away. Physically tearing developed arms and legs off a late-term fetus or having a pair of scissors end the life of a human being during abortive-birth is grotesque, not to mention the pain a living being feels during surgical vivisection. That's cruel and inhumane torture; ironically, we treat our pets better. At that point, you're not an abortion patient anymore, you're the parent of a dead human. As I write this, the Michigan legislature has passed bills intended to outlaw fetal dismemberment during abortion, but the Governor (a Democrat) has said she will veto it ... which is not surprising. Georgia and Alabama recently went the other way restricting abortion to pre-heartbeat development (about 6 weeks). This issue is pretty much divided along party lines, and in these states legal battles will certainly begin shortly. I'm hoping the Supreme Court revisits this again; they have reversed themselves on occasion and it would be interesting to see a fresh ruling.

As you can plainly see, while I don't like abortion, I especially abhor late-term abortion of viable human beings because a developed nervous system does feel pain and dismemberment while alive ... is ... simply ... barbaric.

Make no mistake about it: A fetus is not a tumor or unknown growth. These are living beings renting space in a uterus just as you did in your mother. It's God's pay-it-forward system of ensuring we continue as a species.

Yes, I'm a man. No, I don't know everything female. This is how God has us reproduce. We don't get to redesign reproduction, only use (or abuse) it. Arguments about woman's rights in this matter leave out one important group: Those that can't defend themselves at the debate table. The other argument that men shouldn't be able to make laws about women also falls short. There are plenty of men and woman in the legislature, not to mention there are plenty of both sexes on the street that view things the other way.

Is everything legal also moral? Think about it. The answer is pretty obvious.

Oh. The number, you want the number: Over Sixty million since 1973 according to the majority of google hits.

So much for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ... those unalienable rights given to us by our creator, as written in the precursor to our Constitution (The Declaration of Independence) in 1776.

It's not really pro-life versus pro-choice. It's pro-life versus pro-death. Let's call it what it really is. The lines are drawn, folks. Like holocaust survivor and famous Nazi-hunter Elie Wiesel said:  We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.

Choose wisely. There is no middle-of-the-road on this issue. You either value all human life ... or you don't.

Are You a Nazi?

The word Nazi is bandied about frequently and is often (incorrectly) used to insult a person, an idea or a philosophy somebody strongly disagrees with. Both Democrats and Republicans have hurled the insult at each other at some point. After the 2016 Presidential election, it became commonplace to see Donald Trump compared to Hitler and most Americans now simply dismiss this as 21st-century political warfare. Neither side actually believes the other are real Nazis; more often than not it is used for pure shock value. Picture it as the new F-bomb of politics, if you will.

Rather than simply dismissing the word, I thought perhaps we ought to look at some characteristics of Nazism and see which side more closely resembles the Nazi Hallmarks of governing. Let's begin with some of Hitler's basic ideas about how a country should be run.

One of the tactics the Nazis used was to control the media. They knew controlling movie, newspaper and radio content (there was no television or internet at that time) was so important that their message should dominate. Upon Hitler's rise to power, German media almost immediately began regurgitating Nazi propaganda. How does this compare with today?

In America, it is no secret that the news media and Hollywood predominantly leans left. The liberal message clearly dominates the majority of what we see and hear every day. The few conservative media outlets pale in comparison to the number of left-leaning outlets. News reporters aren't Huntley and Brinkley anymore; they're editorial reporters with a slanted narrative of whole lies and half-truths they want to persuade people with. They don't want to just tell you what happened, they want to tell you what to think about what happened. CNN and MSNBC are clearly tainted beyond the point of no return. ABC, CBS and NBC are not too far behind. They have marginalized themselves with their words, their imagined-conspiracy news and their patently transparent and vapid reporters. I'd go as far as to say the media in America today is corrupt in their everyday slanting of the news, pretty much like Hitler's media was. Or maybe keeping spicy news quiet like Reuters did as they sat on a story for two years that would have hurt Democrat Senate-candidate Beto O'Rourke (he lost anyway) is an acceptable trade (to them) to make in their quest to sell unfair and unbalanced "news."

With very few exceptions, Hollywood is one big rats nest of liberalism. Late-night TV shows like the 2 Jimmy's, Rachael Madcow, SNL and The View regularly display their hatred of the America they loathe. Unhappy with the upset result of an election they abetted in rigging, they assail those they disagree with in the worst of terms. If the world were flat, they would have fallen off the left side long ago.

Control of internet content is still debatable. It's kind of like the wild west right now, but make no mistake about it: Liberals largely own social media sites (Facebook and Twitter, ie) and they simply delete content they don't like and/or put the authors in limbo (Facebook jail or Twitter account deletion). This is the modern version of Nazi book-burning - simply eradicate what somebody sitting in front of a computer screen deems inappropriate. There are things that should not be on the internet (child porn, for example) and we deal with those using law enforcement. That excepted, political social media isn't in Nazi territory - yet. But the censorship of thought emulates one of the major signatures of Nazism that most likely will only get worse.

Conclusion: Similar to the Nazi control of the media, the left dominates what gets disseminated as news in 21st-century America. They do parrot the liberal slant in reporting. Need more convincing? Just look at their take on the Mueller report. Even though it exonerated Trump, they refuse to get the message or apologize for wasting 2 years of our time on a nothing-burger. They still scrape the bottom of the barrel trying to prove their point. Just look how many times CNN and MSNBC put sleaze-lawyer Michael Avenatti on TV as some sort of go-to person. (~250 appearances before he was arrested and relegated to the junk heap).

Another of the tactics the Nazis employed was controlling education. They knew that early and repeated doses of propaganda were more likely to engender lifetime support to keep their regime functioning. How does this compare to education in America now?

You'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to not realize schools in America lean left. Liberal education starts in the local school system and by the time a young person enters a college or university, it progresses into wholesale brain-washing. Professors are overwhelmingly liberal and students have to adapt to get past them. By graduation time, the job is complete. Liberal Arts degrees are aptly named because if you earn one, you will likely be liberal. Benjamin Franklin, using the alias Silence Dogood warned us of the dangers of higher education in his fourth essay printed in 1722. Of course we need doctors, architects, lawyers, engineers and other specialty-skilled people. But we don't need more people with debt-laden generic liberal arts degrees. These people come out of college with a different perspective and are soon shocked into the cold-hard realities of the world, which often disillusions them when they have to find employment and pay off (often, 6 figure) student debt. Many of these people would have done far better with trade jobs.

Conclusion: Much like the Nazi regime did, the left dominates the educational system and has for many decades now.

Hitler also knew that an armed citizenry was dangerous to absolute control. He implemented gun control and sold it to the German population as a good thing in that they would be safer without guns. He wasted no time in disarming those he deemed dangerous to him. Soon after, he ramped up his pogrom, started WW2 and we all know how the story ended. In America, we are governed by the US Constitution, and our forefathers wasted no time in adapting the first 10 Amendments which we recognize as the Bill of Rights. Does anybody wonder why they put the right to own guns right after the right to free speech, religion and press? Because it was that important to them. They had just finished fighting a war against tyranny and weren't real fond of the idea of doing it right away again. They weren't worried about deer uprisings, they were worried about bad government and the ability of the citizenry to be able to fight it ... with guns, if it came down to that again.

So how do liberals and conservatives view gun control now? Almost along party lines, with some exceptions. Liberals are always calling for more gun laws (thinly veiled confiscation schemes, as per Senator Feinstein who said if she could grab them all, she would). Conservatives are the ones defending the constitutional right of keeping arms.

There is some real irony in this one. It is absolutely moronic for liberal protesters to say Donald Trump is Hitler while demanding he disarm the American populace. And, of course, this is why the Supreme Court is so important in defending our rights. It falls upon the conservative members of the court to defend the 2nd Amendment, because it is patently obvious the liberal members won't. It is no coincidence the liberal media signs on to the idea of more gun laws, and further, use their resources to advance the idea of disarming the citizenry. Big media is, of course, mostly owned by liberals.

Conclusion: Like Hitler, liberals want to remove guns from private ownership in America. Conservatives don't.

The worst plank of Hitler's Nazi government was, of course antisemitic murder. For reasons we may never fully understand, Hitler hated Jews to an extreme. The Third Reich governed for 12 years, but Hitler began well before his 1933 rise to power. His struggle as outlined in Mein Kampf began in the 1920s and he never went out of his way to hide his anti-Semitic feelings. When he seized control, he implemented his plan of Jewish genocide piece by piece. But where did it begin? With anti-Semitic words, of course.

How does this compare in 21st-century America? Are anti-Semitic words being spoken by anybody of prominence or power today?

The answer is, of course, yes. When Jesse Jackson uses terms like Hymietown, when Al Sharpton inflames a tense racial situation over the killing (by blacks) of a young Rabbinical student by saying If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house ... These are outrageously anti-Semitic remarks. When Ilhan Omar made anti-Semitic comments about Israel, the house Democrats couldn't even muster up the votes to condemn her remarks and instead came out with a watered-down generic resolution that meant nothing. When AOC opened her mouth and stuck her foot in it about Israel, it's another indication she's not Jewish-friendly.  When Rashida Tlaib says the holocaust gives her a calming effect, it's pretty clear what she means: She hates Jews. These people are, by the way, all prominent Democrats. Conservative Republicans are aghast at the tone and intent of these words and say so at every practical chance. In Obama's last term, he was not known for his good relations with Israel (maybe because he meddled in Israeli elections?), and Hillary Clinton wasn't very Israel-friendly either. When Trump won, Israeli PM Netenyahu was elated when he said Donald Trump is a friend of Israel.

Conclusion: Anti-Semitic words and deeds are on the rise in America, not unlike Hitler with his anti-Semitic words as he began his entrance onto the world scene. This is dangerous to our Republic. Sadly, the rhetoric seems to be coming from the liberal left. Small fringe groups on the radical right may also be anti-Semitic, but they have not elected anybody or elevated any of their members to everyday national prominence as the anti-Semites residing on the left have. Overall, the anti-Semitic voices we are hearing in America today are on the liberal side of the scale. The American Jewish community would do well to take note of this and vote accordingly.

I'm sure this essay is going to upset many liberals. Knowing that it will offend some people I value, I debated whether or not to write it. Nobody likes to be called a Nazi, and for the record I am not saying liberals are real Nazis. Nobody is putting political dissidents in concentration camps or exterminating them, even Hillary Clinton who has a remarkable record of associates getting murdered or suddenly and inexplicably committing suicide. I'm pointing out that that a good portion of 21st-century American liberalism shamefully copies much of what the Nazis thought important. Control of the media and education, gun confiscation and antisemitism were all part of the Nazi grand scheme. Considering everything, America is not in a good place right now. Things need to change; a balance has to be restored or repeating many of the evils of the last century is almost certain to occur. Whether it is in my lifetime or not, I don't know. I'd guess not, but then again, looking at the almost even division that exists in America right now, of that I'm not even certain.

History does have a funny way of repeating itself. Many civilizations have come and gone before us. America is not in any way immune, and if we don't get our house in order, we will eventually join them when our future becomes our past.

Coming Attractions (next blog): Who do you think is the biggest murderer in history?

Hint: You're not thinking out of the box enough.

Professing Themselves to be Wise, They Became Fools

These are crazy times we live in. Almost every day, another pearl of wisdom rolls out of the mouth of one of the announced Presidential candidates seeking the Democrat nomination. It appears that each one is trying to outdo the others with loony ideas, and further, isn't embarrassed to share these gems with the American public. I'm probably writing this too early because I'm sure more dimbulb ideas will emerge between now and convention time.

Some of these escapees from the lunatic asylum have proposed:

• Allowing jailed prisoners, including felons to vote
• Free health care for illegals (as if they don't already show up at ERs with no money)
• Sanctuary cities and even worse, sanctuary states (Except Florida. They just said 'No thanks')
• Abolishing the electoral college (Yay! Then only 4 states will elect Presidents!)
• Lowering the voting age to 16
• Reparations for slavery that occurred over 150 years ago (or, how to sew up the black vote)
• A slew of new guns laws, including putting gun owners in jail (Hitler, Mao and Stalin ring a bell?)
• Universal basic income (Is this a new name for Welfare?)
• Medicare for everybody ... or age 50, depending on the temperature that day
• $600 given to every voter so they can "donate" to election campaigns (Suddenly, everybody is running and giving themselves $600, Senator Gillibrand)
• The NEW green deal that only costs $93 trillion (A bargain! Only $600,000 per household)
• Abolishing ICE, the Federal Immigration Police (Oh sure, that will help stem the flow of illegals)

The leftward march of Democrats is alarming, because if history is any teacher some of these ideas are eventually going to be law. As I look at the list of candidates, I'm tempted to start a betting square on who is going to drop first ... and then second through five. There are about 20 or so in the race at the moment, but that number will slim down fast next year as we get to the serious contenders. Biden is in the lead as I write this, but that can change in a heartbeat (if it happens, figuratively, not literally I hope). Keep in mind most of these people are in the race for 2 reasons: 1, national name exposure and 2, Vice-Presidential wanna-bes.

The candidates from the solid blue states can probably forget about being tapped for VP. Their electoral votes are already pretty safe, so you can figure that the VP selection is most likely going to come from a toss-up state to try to secure their electoral votes. Thankfully, that takes Kamala and Fauxcahontas out of the VP race, and I wouldn't bet on them locking up the #1 slot any time soon either. It also takes De Blasio and Cuomo out of consideration also, which, as a New York resident allows me the privilege of applauding for.

But I digress, something I'm famous for. I'm going to close by posting a map of the 2016 results with this comment: This looks more like a cat-scan of a cancer patient than it does America. And no, for the doubters, the healthy area is red and the cancer is blue.

As a final thought, I'm going to tell you where the title of this blog came from: Romans 1:22.

It seems they had their share of idiots back then too.