Spread the love
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Adobe Spark (1)

Two articles on the Obama Presidency
The failure of the Obama Presidency

Chait grouses that the 2009 stimulus was dismally small and admits that the Republican critique of it as funding “a wish list of long-standing Democratic policies” had “an element of truth.”
Yet he also celebrates it as saving us from depression. Really? The downturn actually ended in June 2009 as the first stimulus checks were being signed. Only an Obama fanboy would argue, just as a fire is going out, that the whole forest is about to burn down.
Moreover, deep recessions (such as the 1981-82 one) that cause people to cut way back are generally followed by booming rebounds. This one wasn’t. Far from turbo-charging the economy, the stimulus was such a dud that five years after the recovery began, 72 percent of Americans said in a poll that they thought we were still in a recession. “The stimulus ultimately failed to do what America expected it to do — bring about a strong, sustainable recovery,” wrote Michael Grabell of ProPublica.
That’s hard to dispute given the sluggishness of the recovery — economic growth has been by far the weakest of any post-recession period since World War II. But Chait has zilch to say about that. Nor does Chait mention that Obama is the first president since Herbert Hoover to fail to preside over a single year of 3 percent growth. But hey, Obama fans, stay in your bubble. It’s cozy there.
Sealing himself off certainly didn’t work for the Bubble President, though. President Obama entered office thinking: “They love me! So they’ll love everything I do!” No. He had no backup plan for what to do if Congress became less than generous with the rubber stamp. Virtually every president has to negotiate with Capitol Hill — Ronald Reagan faced hostile Democrats in the House for his entire presidency — but Obama thought horse-trading was beneath him.
So he contented himself giving speeches and signing executive orders that Donald Trump is about to feed into the shredder. It looks like Obama’s chapter in the history books is going to be much like his résumé when he was elected president: thin.

On the Worst Presidency

Much will be written of the Obama legacy. He will no doubt quickly sign a lucrative contract to produce a book explaining the glory of these past eight years, awful as they were. While most folks have understood that things were falling apart at the most basic levels, Mr. Obama, in his own mind, saw them progressing from one success to another. He flew over it but he never really saw America. His basic character was pretty accurately described by Plato and Aristotle. Like Mr. Clinton, he probably would have been elected for a third and fourth term were it not for the reaction to, yes, Franklin Roosevelt and the two-term limitation.
I will pass over his religious views. His is a popular leftism that identifies religion as politics. Catholics were slow to recognize the efforts Mr. Obama made to identify religion and positive law. No leeway was left. Religion could not stand in the way of social “progress.” Who could have imagined even a decade ago that the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion traditions would be under fire for holding back the social engineering that Mr. Obama and his friends foisted on the country’s embassies, laws, military, healthcare, medicine, schools, environment, and even in the food we can’t eat.
But is there nothing good that this still relatively young man accomplished? The comedian Jack Benny was once famously confronted by a robber who insistently demanded, “Your money, or your life!” To which Benny replied, “I’m thinking! I’m thinking!” Mr. Obama has made it necessary for us to recall a whole order of being that was relentlessly overturned step by logical step. Do I think that this countrywide recollection is taking place? “I’m thinking! I’m thinking!”

How Planned Parenthood plays with their statistics:

Matt Walsh – stop asking me to fund your sex life!!
Nobody on Earth accepts and tolerates everything, nor should they. Things should only be accepted and tolerated if they are acceptable and tolerable. Liberals deny that any standard of acceptability and tolerability can be imposed, yet they have no problem ruthlessly imposing such standards themselves. So it isn’t that conservatives are less tolerant than liberals, it’s that we have different ideas about what is tolerable. Liberals clearly believe that my ideas and my very existence are intolerable, proving that they do not actually consider tolerance a universal principle. They’re right. It’s not.

How Roe from Roe V. Wade became pro-life

As a young mother, in a troubled marriage facing an unplanned pregnancy, she was advised by friends to assert falsely that she had been raped in order to obtain an abortion. When this scheme failed she was referred to a young, pro-abortion feminist attorney Sarah Weddington who used McCorvey and her case as a means of attempting to overturn Texas’ abortion laws. Eventually, Weddington took the case all the way to the Supreme Court, resulting in “Roe V. Wade.” 
By the time the case was her in the Supreme Court, McCorvey had already given birth to a daughter.
“I was a very confused twenty-one year old with one child and facing an unplanned pregnancy,” McCorvey has said. “At the time I fought to obtain a legal abortion, but truth be told, I have three daughters and never had an abortion.” 
McCorvey said that from 1969 to 1984, “I lived with a lie that I had told.” She could not accept all of the pro-abortion rhetoric, discovering that there was nothing to connect the promised benefits of abortion with the truth and the reality she saw on a daily basis.

New options for moms with breech babies. 

Next, Anke presented results from her MRI study Does pregnancy and/or shifting positions create more room in a woman’s pelvis? (J Ob Gyn, Jun 17 2014). The study examined how pregnancy or changing positions changed the pelvic dimensions. They scanned 50 pregnant women and 50 non-pregnant women (mostly midwives from their unit). Each woman was scanned in both a “modified squat” and in a dorsal spine position.
Anke’s research team measured the pelvic inlet, the midpelvis, and pelvic outlet (a total of 6 measurements). The results were really exciting: modified squatting makes the pelvic inlet slightly smaller, while the midpelvis and outlet are larger. As midwife Anne Frye says, when the baby isn’t engaged yet, don’t get the woman squatting. Anke commented, “You midwives already knew that, but as a doctor I didn’t know that!”

@import url(//www.google.com/cse/api/branding.css);

Custom Search
(Visited 18 times, 1 visits today)