Although in the throes of civil war, Libya has never been much of a beacon of human rights. Now, having to deal with a threat to his leadership, Gadhafi’s only solution is to kill everyone. Although the estimates are at around 1,000 casualties, I’m going to bet it’s a lot higher. All of this begs the questions:
Should Libya still be on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights?
And,
Last year over 1,000 people were hijacked off the coasts of Somalia. Last week, two US citizens were hijacked on a yacht. The US Navy is now tailing the hijackers. This has got to cost some serious money. At what point do we tell people that they’re just SOL? I mean, I don’t sail the oceans. Sitting here in landlocked Kentucky, I know it’s dangerous off the coasts of Somalia. I’m not going there until they can convince me it’s not so dangerous. I just have a thing about pain and death. I don’t like. I don’t go where people do that stuff. For whatever reason, these people do go where people are known to get hurt. So, do we just keep throwing more money at the bad? Or, if these people knew they were totally on their own, would they still have gone? I think they would have most likely. But, that doesn’t mean they should expect me to pay for their assumed protection everywhere they go.
18
Feb
Dedicated to the Wisconsin Senate Democrats:
The real story is almost as comical:
What do you think?
17
Feb
A friend sent me this. It’s politically incorrect as heck, kinda offensive to some I would imagine as well. But I think it’s funny:
That’s the headline. It’s all over the place. According to whoever wrote this, it could “in theory”, legalize killing abortion doctors. Pretty harsh huh? The part they cite that provides that logic is:
The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Phil Jensen, a committed foe of abortion rights, alters the state’s legal definition of justifiable homicide by adding language stating that a homicide is permissible if committed by a person “while resisting an attempt to harm” that person’s unborn child or the unborn child of that person’s spouse, partner, parent, or child.
Absolute legal rubbish. Anyone knows state laws can not over-ride federal laws. Murder is still murder. This bill is obviously intended to allow a mother to protect herself. Duh. Apparently Kate Sheppard doesn’t know murder is a felony. Never one to miss a good opportunity, Vicki Saporta of National Abortion Federation jumped in as well:
“The bill in South Dakota is an invitation to murder abortion providers… This is not an abstract bill,” Saporta says. The measure could have major implications if a “misguided extremist invokes this ‘self-defense’ statute to justify the murder of a doctor, nurse or volunteer,”
Vicki missed the recent case where an abortion doctor was killed and the murderer used that very defense. It didn’t work.
The bill has been tabled, meaning it won’t even be debated or voted on. So, the headline, which was grossly wrong in the first place, is more wrong now. South Dakota is not “moving”. The bill is dead. And, they never moved to “legalize killing abortion providers”. Implicit or not. Fun headline, but wrong on every level. Anyone think there will be a headline somewhere about reporters writing misleading stories? Polls are still fun tho. I think most people are on to Kate.
One update, the bill has been re-written to clarify that this not open season on abortion doctors. It still is DOA and most likely never will be considered IMO. Not so much because of the controversy, but because it’s a very poorly written piece of legislation.
