Blue Collar Muse

If you’re a Nashville Blogger and the answer is ‘Nuttin’, why, what choo doin’?”, the answer is “I’m going to this!”

Katherine Coble at Nashville is Talking is hosting a Nashville Blogger get together at The Flying Saucer just South of Downtown off Broadway between The Frist Center and Union Station (map here). The party starts at 6PM and goes until ‘whenever’. We have the Pool Room reserved.

Part of the evening’s festivities will be to thank Brittney G for her two years of honchoing at Nashville is Talking and bringing the local blogosphere together. Beyond that, I have no idea what to expect.

Since I hope they don’t lynch me upon my arrival, I’ll be firmly entrenched immediately behind The Much Younger Trophy Wife until I’m sure the rest of the folks intend me no immediate harm.

Hoping to see you all there …

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 20% [?]

I am, at this moment anyway, undecided. I cannot decide who I feel more sorry for, the lady whose story started the ball rolling or some of the people who wrote about it and brought it to my attention.

Over at Nashville Is Talking, Katherine Coble posted ‘Miscarriage of Justice’ in response to a post from Aunt B at Tiny Cat Pants titled ‘Reading the Tea Leaves’ which was in response to Punkass Marc’s (that’s really his blogger name) post Ladies, Please Have Your Womb Reports to Me by 5PM. The story was originally reported here.

In late April, a 22 year old Pittsburgh, PA woman miscarried 15 to 20 weeks into her pregnancy. She did not seek medical attention or any other assistance. She put the remains of the fetus in her freezer, wrapped in two bags, with the bags then placed in a beer carton. It seems likely she confided in someone as police discovered the remains during a search conducted due to a tip they received.

The woman was originally charged with Abuse of a Corpse and Concealing the Death of a Child. The Abuse of a Corpse charge has been dropped and it is reported the DA may drop the remaining charge if the woman agrees to continue treatment for depression.

All in all a sad story. Sad for the woman, her family, the father and society in general. The young lady has some issues and needs some help. Hopefully she will take steps to get it.

Most disturbing is Aunt B’s response. Somehow, she twists this so that those who oppose abortion (anti-abortion or pro-life, choose your poison) are at fault here.

It’s a bit frustrating trying to determine the issues and facts since the original story at The Daily Times is pretty bare bones. Katherine Coble addresses the two valid issues present in talking about getting the poor woman some help and wondering about the validity of the state using the threat of trial to compel the woman to get help.

Aunt B, however, defines the issues by blaming the anti-abortion crowd (Aunt B’s term) for the actions taken by Pittsburgh authorities. Her logic, originally developed in a nicely written post long before this incident, is that since anti-abortionists want fetuses to be legally declared ‘people’ and want life to be determined to begin at conception they would view anything ending that life in utero as murder. Thus homicide investigations could be conducted and murder charges could be filed against women whose only crime is that they had a miscarriage.

A fanciful scenario, it is sure to garner support among the pro-abortion crowd. The problem is it is so far fetched as to be ridiculous to consider unless one is driving an agenda. It is similar to the oft used argument during the abortion debate, “What about rape and incest?” The most outrageous yet least likely scenario is used to justify the entire process. I have no problem with driving an agenda. I do it all the time. However, care should be taken to advance serious arguments on behalf of your position. Let’s look at Aunt B’s.

After noting that if a fetus is a person then abortion could be considered murder she states,

If the deliberate ending of a pregnancy through abortion becomes murder, all endings of pregnancies will be open for legal scrutiny. Not just “will be” but will have to be. If I’m driving a car and I deliberately run you over, I can be charged with murder; but if I’m just driving along and I drop my cell phone and I reach down to pick it up and I hit you and accidentally kill you; I can still be charged with a crime.

She is making two assumptions here that are incorrect.

The first is that it is only when abortion becomes murder that terminated pregnancies will be open to legal scrutiny. We unfortunately have abortion on demand in the US. Abortion is decidedly NOT murder according to current law. Yet this woman is still in some legal hot water. Why? Because she concealed the death of her child. In short, she did not do what was necessary to prevent her being investigated. And it had nothing to do with murder. The charge is Concealing the Death of a Child.

Had she had an abortion, there would have been no investigation since the circumstances surrounding the death of her child would be known. No legal problems there - just moral ones. Had she gone into labor early and had a premie that died or a still birth, there would have been no legal problems as the circumstances surrounding the death of her child would be known. She would have had family, friends and counselors to help with her state of mind. Had she seen her doctor or called an ambulance or sought some form of medical attention at the time of her miscarriage, the circumstances surrounding the death of her child would have been known and there would have been no legal problems. Again, there would have been support and assistance in dealing with a difficult, emotional event.

Since she did none of these things, she not only triggered some legal processes, she also avoided triggering some alerts that might have steered her towards some counseling or notified whatever counselor she was seeing that there was additional stress in her life that needed to be factored in.

But Aunt B’s scenario wherein big Brother invades the grief of a woman dealing with the trauma of a miscarriage does not fit the facts of this case. On the surface, it seems to do so. Refusing to engage in knee jerk reactions and actually looking at the facts shows it does not.

The second incorrect assumption Aunt B makes is that all pregnancies that end in anything but a live birth will be investigated with a view to possible criminal prosecution. Aunt B correctly points out many miscarriages go unnoticed by the woman who has them. There’s no investigation in that instance. Other miscarriages, farther along in the pregnancy, will leave either little or much in the way of evidence but the woman already knows that she is pregnant and thus knows she has miscarried. Having already started the process of doctors, hospitals and such, most women notify their OB/GYN that she has miscarried. The doctor then advises any examination or other medical procedures. Absent any reason to believe a crime has been committed there is no investigation.

This woman, as I mentioned before, did none of these things. When police had reason to believe there might be a problem, they did what police do - they investigated. And the charges she faced had nothing to do with murder despite the presence of a body. What they found prompted some charges that have either been dismissed or may be in the process of being dismissed. That they could have handled it better is definitely open for debate. But one thing is not in question. That is this - the young lady was totally in control of her choices and exercised them. Those choices, as choices always do, have consequences. That the consequences of her choices were not to her liking is unfortunate. But if you are unwilling to live with the consequences of your actions, perhaps you should choose different actions.

For Aunt B and others to twist this situation into a scenario wherein pro-life forces are somehow responsible for this woman’s misfortune is disingenuous. A moment’s analysis of the matter would show the fallacy of the argument she advances. It appears Aunt B is driven more by ideology than by truth. She seems to have replaced analysis and following the facts where they lead with forcing the facts into the shape she needs them to be in. Events must spin in the way they need to spin to support a predetermined outcome. If true, that is the hallmark of someone looking, not for truth, but for another rationale for an agenda. And as the saying goes, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Wanting to support the heart behind the argument but not finding any way to do so …

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 28% [?]

Cross posted from The Violence Worker. VW is another example of the great folks at the Coalition Against Illegal Immigration. Enjoy!

Last night, I got a phone call. It was a young woman from the Republican National Committee and she was seeking a contribution to the party. In years past, I donated somewhat regularly to the the RNC, but not this time.

I admit, I was a bit gruff with the poor girl at first. I told her in no uncertain terms that I was not going to give the RNC another damn dime until they quit agreeing with Ted Kennedy on immigration. I told her she needs to tell the folks up the chain that there are a lot of people upset about this immigration issue.

I then apologized to her. I told her I wasn’t angry at her, but at the party and people like McCain and others that thought this immigration bill was something they could ram down our throats. I told her that not only did I write the President concerning my opposition, I also called the White House to tell them I was opposed to their shamnesty bill. I also said it wasn’t worth contacting my senators. Patty Murray can’t understand polysyllabic words and Maria Cantwell was too much of a Democrat hack to care.

I asked her if she was getting a lot of flak over this and she admitted the immigration bill was “making things difficult”.

She said she understood, but she was a dedicated Republican. She then said that I should consider giving to the party to help elect Republicans and I told her no. It’s not that I want the other side to win, but from now on, my money was going to go to individual candidates. I then thanked her, wished her well and hung up.

The RNC has to know by now that this immigration bill has simply made their Conservative base (including me) quite angry. If they are so arrogant as to think that we will support them in some sort of sycophantic allegiance, I’m thinking their calls to us might be their wakeup call.

We need to keep up the pressure and not let them slip this one by us.

Thanks VW for the post and for the action …

Blue Collar Muse

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, Email the Coalition and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

Popularity: 30% [?]

Remember when being “tolerant” meant the BEHAVIOR being tolerated was annoying, improper, ill conceived, anti-social, immature, selfish, rude, unacceptable, inconsiderate, boorish, conceited, narcissistic, self aggrandizing, narrow minded, hateful, spiteful, bigoted, mean spirited, small, petty, asinine, inane, out of the mainstream, family unfriendly, godless, lacking in social skills, insulting, unkind, mean, cruel, unthinking, uncaring, adolescent, thoughtless, intemperate, fly off the handle, childish, whiny, petulant, complaining, irresponsible, foolish, shortsighted and generally all around bad?

Ever wonder how “tolerant” came to mean that if you refuse to approve of all that bad behavior then YOU are annoying, improper, ill conceived, anti-social, immature, selfish, rude, unacceptable, inconsiderate, boorish, conceited, narcissistic, self aggrandizing, narrow minded, hateful, spiteful, bigoted, mean spirited, small, petty, asinine, inane, out of the mainstream, family unfriendly, godless, lacking in social skills, insulting, unkind, mean, cruel, unthinking, uncaring, adolescent, thoughtless, intemperate, fly off the handle, childish, whiny, petulant, complaining, irresponsible, foolish, shortsighted and generally all around bad?

Yep - me too.

By the way, if you think of any I missed in the above list - comments are open. Feel free to let me know.

Thinking I might need to add a bit of bandwidth if this thing takes off …

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 22% [?]

Is it just me or has anyone else wanted to reach for an airsickness bag while listening to or reading a transcript of Harry Reid’s whining speech in the Senate well after his immigration sponsored smack down last night?

I almost went over the edge into the angry land of the Left, however, when this gem fell out of his mouth. I can’t find the exact quote. Reid lamented that it was unfortunate and wrong that a small group of Senators could block an issue from being brought to the entire Senate for a vote! By now my family, God bless ‘em, is used to me yelling at the TV (I do it during football season, too).

I hollered, “For heaven’s sake! Can you say ‘judicial nominees’?!?!”

When the Left started with their filibuster shenanigans, EVERYONE told them, “What goes around comes around!” Harry’s whining about being stopped by the filibuster is pathetic and he’s just crying crocodile tears. You’d think the Senate Majority Leader would behave with a bit more decorum. You’d be wrong.

At least with the judicial nominees, the GOP was asking for the Senate to fulfill one of its Constitutional responsibilities. In voting down the Immigration Bill, those that voted “No” also fulfilled a Constitutional responsibility. They swore to defend the US and the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Last night, a few domestic enemies got their comeuppance.

Thinking the new filibuster works equally well for both sides although it probably should not be employed by either …

Blue Collar Muse

Others offering intelligent insight on the Immigration debate:

Harry Reid’s Undocumented Americans at The Conservative Common Man;

Somewhere in Hell, Demons are Shivering at Common Sense America;

How Much Do Anchor Babies Cost the US? at Right Truth;

Ted Kennedy’s Protege, John McCain, Displays Liberal Issue Deflection Techniques at the Debate at Conservative Common Man;

Why YOU Need to Say NO to the Senate Immigration Bill at Georgia Crime Watch;

Pro Amnesty Dems and Repubs Vote to Welcome Additional Illegal Immigrant Felons….to Do the Crimes Americans Won’t Do… at stikNstein … Has No Mercy;

One Way to Fight a Sanctuary City - Final Update at The People’s Patriot;

CT State Senator Harris’ Feeble Attempt to Justify In-State Tuition for Illegal Aliens at The People’s Patriot;

Recap of Cloture Vote of S1348 Last Night at Bear Creek Ledger;

Immigration Bill Dying, No Life Support Available at Right Truth;

TEDDY AT THE BAT The Outlook Wasn’t Brilliant for the Cloture Nine That Day… at stikNstein … Has No Mercy;

We Did It!!!! at Georgia Crime Watch;

American Patriots… We Have Held the Line at The People’s Patriot;

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, Email the Coalition and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

Popularity: 28% [?]

A muy grande toca del sombrero (that’s ‘a big hat tip’ for you narrow minded English only speakers) to Steve, the BadIdeaGuy, over at Target Rich Environment for pointing me to this story.

The Chicago Tribune put up a story on B. Hussein Obama’s recent comments on the possibility that blacks in the US will simply spontaneously ignite in rioting as they did when the officers who beat Rodney King were not convicted.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama declared the nation has failed to address a “quiet riot” of despair simmering in impoverished black neighborhoods across the country as he spoke Tuesday before one of the oldest and largest annual gatherings of African-American ministers.

Obama offered an ominous portrait of hopelessness pervading many inner-city neighborhoods and its potential to erupt into uncontrolled violence, along with a call to the rest of society for a more determined effort to reduce pockets of endemic poverty.

The Illinois senator described the street corners of ghettos around the country as gathering places for “young men and women without hope, without miracles and without a sense of destiny other than life on the edge — the edge of the law, the edge of the economy, the edge of family structures and communities.” …

Obama called the Bush administration’s slow response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans a metaphor for neglect of poverty-stricken communities. And he repeatedly referred to the Los Angeles riots that broke out 15 years ago after a jury acquitted white police officers of assault charges in the videotaped beating of African-American motorist Rodney King. More than 50 people died and thousands were injured during several days of violence.

“Those riots didn’t erupt overnight;” Obama said in his speech at the university’s Convocation Center in Hampton, Va. “There had been a ‘quiet riot’ building up in Los Angeles and across the country.”

He said that violence is “inexcusable and self-defeating.” But, he added, many of the same frustrations continue to build in black America, stoked by poor schools, bad housing, and inadequate job opportunities.

“Those ‘quiet riots’ that take place every day are born from the same place as the fires and the destruction and the police decked out in riot gear and the deaths,” Obama said. “They happen when a sense of disconnect settles in and hope dissipates. Despair takes hold and young people … believe that things are never going to get any better.”

My first thought after reading Obama’s statements was, “How could this be happening? We’ve spent trillions of dollars in the last 50 years or so fighting all these problems. How is it that there is still poverty, still unemployment, still people living in despair and hopelessness, still people willing to destroy the work and lives of others when they do not get what they want? How could this be?

Perhaps Senator Obama could look at the failed social policies of the Democrats over the last 50 years and point a couple of fingers in that direction. No dreams or miracles? On the edge of the economy? Perhaps he could fault Democrats giving people no hope by providing Welfare to successive generations of Americans and teaching them they should have no dreams beyond what the government limits them to. Inadequate job opportunities? Perhaps he could address why Democrats consistently support paying people just enough to keep them home doing nothing as opposed to getting out and working in entry level positions at less than welfare payments. First and second jobs provide the 5th and 10th jobs and open up all manner of opportunity. On the edge of family and community? Perhaps he could fault failed Democratic programs that destroy families - abortion on demand and paying women to have babies. On the edge of the law? Perhaps he could speak to the issue of black on black violence and the glamorization of thugs and gangstas. Perhaps seriously enforcing the laws against drug sales and usage would give people the idea that the way to prosperity in America isn’t through the end of a needle or the barrel of a gun. Perhaps …

I suspect, however, that he’ll continue to point fingers at Bush and Republicans and Conservatives and offer up select, individual incidents which can be spun in the direction he needs them to spin as opposed to looking at decades of evidence that the policies the Left has proposed and funded have made worse the very problems they were trying to fix. Rather than admit they were wrong and try something different, the Left will continue their ‘Anyone but us’ declarations of responsibility.

It’s disingenuous, it’s dishonest and worst of all it perpetuates the very problems they say they are trying to eliminate - in short, it’s Democrat politics as usual. Frankly, someone needs to get in Obama’s face (and move on to Jackson, Sharpton, et al) with facts on the tragedies his Party have forced on the nation. Funny thing is, BHO is a smart man. He knows he’s lying and dissembling and keeps on doing it. How dare I say that about one of our pols? One sentence answer … “I did not have sexual relations with that woman …” Out of office for 6 years and he’s still the shining example the Democrats look to and emulate.

Thinking it’s deeds that matter, not words - said another way, “Democrat is as Democrat Does” …

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 21% [?]

Thanks to Indian Chris for each week’s Wednesday Hero at Right Wing & Right Minded.

This Weeks Soldier Was Suggested By Mary Ann

Popularity: 20% [?]

A post I wrote recently got some interesting circulation around the ‘Net. As a result, I’ve found a number of great sites to visit and read. Two of the best are from the same guy. John Hawkins runs both Right Wing News and The Conservative Grapevine. Check them both out and bookmark ‘em. You’ll want to go back.

While at The Conservative Grapevine this afternoon, I ran across a link to a TownHall columnist, Amanda Carpenter. She wrote on Hillary Clinton’s appearance at a nationally televised forum on faith and values last night. Near the end of a 15 minute segment where the panelists were free to speak their mind at length, Clinton opined:

An uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person,” Clinton said. “I mean, that is a fact. So what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people to give up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground. …

The same with energy. You know, we can’t keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil and the need to deal with global warming and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God’s creation and just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.

Who she’ll be taking from and how much of what she’ll be taking weren’t outlined. Evidently this is just notice that it’s coming so we can’t say she didn’t warn us. Ms. Carpenter did, however, give us some insight by referring us to a 2004 statement by Hillary.

The New York senator said something similar to “taking things away from some people” at a June 2004 private fundraising event in San Francisco. There, Associated Press reporter Beth Fouhy wrote that Clinton told attendees Democrats should take money back from taxpayers who benefited from President Bush’s tax cuts.

Clinton told her donors, “We’re not coming to you, many of whom are well enough off that actually the tax cuts may have helped you, and say ‘we’re going to give you more.’ We’re saying, ‘you know what, for America to get back on track and be fiscally responsible, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.”

She added, “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

I’ve decided that I’m willing to do my part.

I’d like to give up Amnesty for illegals, increased taxes and I’ll surrender my right to surrender in Iraq. I’d like for Hillary to give up her mentoring of Sandy Berger on how to take documents home with you, the application of Socialism to Heath Care and the construction of her Village to Nowhere. Seems like a fair trade and a good deal for all concerned.

Thinking that maybe if I ask really nice, I’ll have a slightly better chance of not being laughed at to my face …

Blue Collar Muse

UPDATE:  Sam’s comment got me to thinking.  Why should I do all the work?  Post a comment on what YOU are willing to give up.  Once we get a list up, I’ll send it to Hillary.

Popularity: 37% [?]

I remember an incident from almost 15 years ago. I had just left to run an errand with my young son when a predator called my house. When my wife answered the phone, a man told her that he had both me and our son and unless my wife would engage in phone sex with him, he would hurt us.

Thankfully, M’Lady K had the presence of mind and common sense to push back her fear and see through the scam. It was by no means easy, especially since she struggled with fear a great deal at that time, but she did it. She ran next door and the man of that house pretended to be me coming back home. It turned out the caller was an inmate in an out of state prison with a few minutes of phone privileges left who randomly dialed our number. While we were randomly selected, the intent to savage another human being for selfish gain using their love for their family was both intentional and despicable.

You expect that sort of exploitation from scum in prison. You’d think that those on the outside would be more caring, thoughtful and law abiding. You’d be wrong. The scum are at it again. And once again, it’s intentional. This time, the target isn’t housewives - it’s military wives and they are phishing as identity thieves. Thanks to Mike at Lamplighter for pointing me to this story.

According to the Red Cross, whose name and reputation are used for credibility in the scam, it works like this:

The caller (young-sounding, American accent) calls a military spouse and identifies herself as a representative from the Red Cross. The caller states that the spouse’s husband (not identified by name) was hurt while on duty in Iraq and was med-evacuated to a hospital in Germany. The caller stated they couldn’t start treatment until paperwork was accomplished, and that in order to start the paperwork they needed the spouse to verify her husband’s social security number and date of birth. In this case, the spouse was quick to catch on and she did not provide any information to the caller.

The American Red Cross representatives typically do not contact military members/dependents directly and almost always go through a commander or first sergeant channels. Military family members are urged not to give out any personal information over the phone if contacted by unknown/unverified individuals, to include confirmation that your spouse is deployed.

It is a federal crime, punishable by up to 5 years in prison, for a person to falsely or fraudulently pretend to be a member of, or an agent for, the American National Red Cross for the purpose of soliciting, collecting, or receiving money or material.

In addition, American Red Cross representatives will contact military members/dependents directly only in response to an emergency message initiated by your family. The Red Cross does not report any type of casualty information to family members. The Department of Defense will contact families directly if their military member has been injured. Should any military family member receive such a call, they are urged to report it to their local Family Readiness Group or Military Personnel Flight.

These con men play on the deepest fear and worst nightmare a military spouse has. Pass this on to any military families you know and let’s get the word out on this one. Snopes.com posted this at their site just yesterday.

Thinking while our guys are fighting for what is precious to us over there, the least we can do is keep an eye out for what is precious to them back here …

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 21% [?]

I find it incredibly interesting how the meanings of words change in the several ongoing political debates in this country.

For instance, in my post ‘Assimilation or Annihilation’, I point out there is no such thing as an ‘illegal immigrant’ since an immigrant, by definition, is someone here legally. The correct term is ‘illegal alien’.

The term ‘illegal immigrant’ is used to appeal to our sense of history and belonging. When prompted to fondly remember, “America is a nation of immigrants!” by those supporting Amnesty for illegals, we are being pushed to call up a warm, romantic notion of people enduring danger and deprivation to get to America and then make further sacrifices to work with us to build America. Immigrants really did endure many a hardship to get to the land of opportunity that is America. They really did contribute mightily to the growth and glory of our country. We should rightly remember them and honor and extol their sacrifice.

Illegal aliens are a different group altogether. While all immigrants are aliens, not all aliens are immigrants.

Illegal aliens also endure many hardships to arrive here in the US. But their purpose in coming here is different from the immigrant’s. While an immigrant comes to receive from the bounty that is America, he also brings the resource that is himself TO America. He both contributes and receives. For the most part, illegal aliens are more interested in what America can provide for them as opposed to what they can bring to America.

Next time you hear the term illegal immigrant, pay attention. The person speaking may be telling you more about themselves than about the debate.

Thinking a better emotional comparison would be between our Founding Fathers and today’s Dead Beat Dads …

Blue Collar Muse

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email stiknstein at gmail dot com and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

Others blogging on Immigration:

S1348 Immigration Bill - 20 Loopholes at Bear Creek Ledger - MUST READ

State GOP Who Oppose RNC on Amnesty See Pickup in Fundraising at Bear Creek Ledger

Chambliss and Isakson Claim They are on the Fence…Literally at Georgia Crime Watch

One Way to Fight a Sanctuary City - UPDATE at The People’s Patriot

Lamar Alexander interview with Bill Hobbs (more on amnesty) at Bear Creek Ledger

Terrorists Coming From the Southern Border at Time to Change the Nation

Accessory to the Crime at Right Truth

Public Aid, Illegal Aliens vs Veterans at Right Truth

From ‘Permanent Republican Majority’ to ‘End of the Party as We Know It’ Within 5 Years at stikNstein … Has No Mercy

Popularity: 25% [?]