Bob Herbert on Obama and Pastor Wright

Bob Herbert has an interesting op-ed in today's New York Times. Herbert also appeared on "Morning Joe" to discuss the op-ed.

I have to say that if you had asked me three months ago who was going to be the Democratic nominee I would have said-- without hesitation-- that it would be Barack Obama.

Now, I'm not so sure.

Pastor Wright seems to be Barack Obama's albatross and somehow the campaign needs to deal with it in a more realistic manner than they have so far.

Mr. Herbert is right-- this fiasco portrays Mr. Obama as weak which is not how a presidential candidate wants to appear.

Shvarts' Project Still Not Shown

The Yale art student who claimed to have attempted to impregnate herself then induced "miscarriages" by taking herbs, is still not talking and has not conceded to Yale's demand that she admit the project is faked.

Which begs the question: was her op-ed in Friday's Yale Daily News the truth? Did she really attempt to impregnate herself? It certainly is possible that she could have done so using the method she describes.

But taking herbs to cause a miscarriage is less predictable. And Shvarts' may not have been pregnant in the first place-- she never took a pregnancy test so she doesn't know.

But in the spirit of relativism, Shvarts' claims that because of this ambiguity, the blood in her art project carries the meaning we attach to it-- yada-yada-yada.

What crock.

This young women likely put herself through potentially damaging acts in an effort to create "art." Yale was right to pull this project-- but I surely hope someone is seeking real answers in an effort to help Shvarts.

Palin's Son Confirmed to Have Down Syndrome

Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, gave birth to her fifth child on Friday and today the Anchorage Daily News announced that her new son, Trig, has Down Syndrome. Governor Palin had some wonderful things to say to reporters about her son when she returned to work Monday, including:

"It just feels like he fits perfectly," Palin said. "He is supposed to be here with us."

Yale to Pull Art Project Unless Student Admits It's False

Yale University announced today that it will pull Aliza Shvarts' art project unless she admits that it is fiction.

According to FoxNews.com, Yale stands "by its claim Monday that Aliza Shvarts fabricated a shocking work of 'creative fiction' in detailing how she constructed her senior art project."

As I've noted in the two previous posts, Shvarts claimed that she impregnated herself with donated sperm and then caused "miscarriages" by taking herbs and drugs. She then collected the blood and material from the "miscarriages" for her "art project."

Then, Thursday, when university officials questioned her, she admitted that it was all made up-- a narrative that comprised part of her art project.

Then, on Friday, in an opinion piece for the Yale Daily News, Shvarts then claimed that she did do what she originally claimed except that she never took a pregnancy test and she took herbs on the 28th day of her cycle to bring on her menstrual cycle. She claims to have done this for nine months.

Now, if you can get past the ridiculous language of her opinion piece, (As an aside, why do so many students insist on wrapping the most basic claims and opinions in forty-cent words when a dime a dozen would work? Maybe it's because the most outlandish and assinine claims come across as more serious and learned when wrapped in silk versus cotton? Seriously, I thought her opinion piece was trite. Anyway,. . .) you'll discover that, as the Preacher said, "There is nothing new under the sun." Shvarts project is just a gross way of expressing the same modern feminist jargon everyone from Betty Friedan to Kim Gandy has espoused in some fashion.

On the plus side, Yale investigated and found that a step in the art project approval process was skipped. I know that as a speech communications major, I had to write an original piece of work 45-55 minutes long, memorize it and perform the speech before the faculty for approval before I could perform before the public. From the FoxNews account, it sounds like the faculty approval part was skipped.

Yale administrators are certain that Shvarts' claims of intentionally aborting herself over and over again are all part of Shvarts' "performance." They are insisting that she tell the truth and admit that no human blood was used for the project otherwise they will cancel the showing.

Let's all pray that her "narrative" is just that-- a piece of gross and crass fiction-- and that this young woman hasn't sacrificed her health and sanity for the sake of "art."

Yale Art Student Lied About Lying

The Yale University student who claimed to have impregnated herself with donor sperm just so she could induce "miscarriages" for her art project now claims the project was real-- despite whatever she told Yale authorities.

However, the facts as she now tells them are different from what was originally told to the press yesterday. According to FoxNews.com, the student, Aliza Shvarts, now claims that she did attempt to impregnate herself but took herbs on the 28th day of her cycle to begin menstruating. She apparently did not take a pregnancy test at any point during these repeated attempts and does not know if she ever became pregnant.

Even though it is not known if she became pregnant, Ms. Shvarts "art" project should be shelved. And I think this student needs serious psychological help. Putting herself through these attempts at self-impregnation and then inducing menstruation (or abortion-- we don't know) is cause for concern.

As a woman who has suffered a miscarriage, I find it extremely offensive that this student thinks my grief-- and the grief of millions of women like me who have lost a child from miscarriage or induced abortion-- is subject to her bizarre and sick sense of "art."

And regardless of what she asserts, this project was obviously contrived to shock and incite controversy.

It is possible that these new claims are part of a new "narrative" for her "performance art" and if it is, again, a lie, I think Ms. Shvarts needs to have her project pulled and both she and her "project" advisor need to understand that performing or acting for an audience willing to suspend disbelief is different from deliberately setting out to deceive the audience.

Lying is not art. It's lying.

Yale has a responsibility here and I hope they recognize it.

Yale Art??

I was quoted in a LifeNews.com article today about a Yale Art student who claimed to have artificially impregnated herself and then induced more than one abortion just for an "art project." She then filmed her "miscarriages" for her senior art project which is set to go on display.

Well, it turns out-- she lied.

She reportedly told three university officials that she did not do what she claimed to have done. According to a Yale press release, this is "performance art."

No, it's not.

It's sick.

Millions of women in this country have miscarried or have had abortions and grieve over their losses. I, for one, am incensed that this "art" student felt that those losses are subject to what amounts as a cruel joke purportedly done for the sake of "art."

Regardless of Yale's justification, this project is offensive to many and it's crude and crass.

It needs to be pulled.

Obama Thinks We're Too Obsessed

Over at Politico, Roger Simon points out that Barack Obama's worry about our "obsession" with the candidates and what they say is a two-edged sword.

On the one hand, today's elections are run every minute of every day. You can't get away from video cameras, cell phone cameras, microphones, recorders-- and that's just the public. The press is another matter entirely.

Any normal person would run in the other direction instead of seeking the White House.

But on the other hand obsess we must, candidates today have their soundbites and stump speeches so down pat that it's difficult to get any real answers. So we obsess and peruse and parse hoping to find out what they really think about issues.

So Mr. Obama is going to have to get used to living under glass-- at least until November.

Google Discriminates

I have to weigh in on the lawsuit against Google's AdWords. According the CNSNews article posted at Crosswalk:

A pro-life Christian organization [the Christian Institute] in Britain wanted to offer another option [to abortion clinic ads] -- but Google turned it down, saying that because its ad linked to a Web site containing "abortion and religious-related content," it was not permitted.

I had the identical experience.

Blogger, of course, is part of Google so it seemed natural to run a set of ads on AdWords featuring what my site was about. Repeatedly, if I used the words pro-life or abortion in the ad, I would get the little editorial policy guideline malarky telling me I couldn't run the ads because they contained abortion information. But since I am a fledgling (read: limited funds) columnist, writer and, first and foremost, a mom to special needs children, my response was not to fight it but to change my ads to read "conservative commentary" and then eventually pull them altogether in favor of press releases. The press releases cost me the same amount but generate more traffic to the site. And I figured fighting Google would be difficult and costly with U.S. law on their side.

In addition, Google's U.S. policy must be a little different from their U.K. policy or they stretched their policy in not accommodating me-- my website is not overtly religious. Not that I'm not but I tend to be very linear in my thinking and so I stick to the political aspects as much as possible. I will appeal to a person's religion or sense of fairness but it's not particular overt because of my writing style and background working for a non-sectarian organization. I also tend to write with less of the polemics than one might find on another commentator's site for the same reasons.

Google's notes on it's editorial policy never mentioned religious content only the fact that I couldn't run an ad that mentioned abortion. Of course, this didn't make sense considering all of the abortion ads I see but I chalked it up to a subjective editorial policy based in bleeding heart liberalism wrapped comfortably in capitalism.

As for the religiosity of being pro-life: contrary to popular liberal belief, opposition to abortion is not solely a Catholic view, it is however a catholic view. There are many non-religous individuals and atheists who believe in the right to life.

Google needs to leave the stereotyping to the fanatics and run the ads.

Clinton Asked About Oregon Assisted Suicide Law

Sunday, the Register-Guard (Eugene, Oregon) interviewed Hillary Clinton about a variety of issues. Two of the questions were about Oregon's assisted suicide law:

Q: What’s your attitude toward Oregon’s assisted suicide law?

A: I believe it’s within the province of the states to make that decision. I commend Oregon on this count, as well, because whether I agree with it or not or think it’s a good idea or not, the fact that Oregon is breaking new ground and providing valuable information as to what does and doesn’t work when it comes to end-of-life questions, I think, is very beneficial.

Q: Would you have voted for it if you were a resident of the state?

A: I don’t know the answer to that. I have a great deal of sympathy for people who are in difficult end-of-life situations. I’ve gone to friends who have been in great pain and suffering at the end of their lives. I’ve never been personally confronted with it but I know it’s a terribly difficult decision that should never be forced upon anyone. So with appropriate safeguards and informed decision-making, I think it’s an appropriate right to have.

And here we have folks the typical Clinton answer: the non-answer answer.

It is clear that Clinton is unwilling to condemn assisted suicide. And this is despite the fact that most assisted suicide victims are not only terminally or chronically ill but also clinically depressed. Because these individuals are not 20-years-old and healthy, there is no fight to save them. They're given the "compassionate" response of a bottle of pills and instruction on how to use them.

Angela Franks' Website

Someone very kindly wrote in to remind me that Angela Franks has a website with information about Margaret Sanger.

Her website also includes many quotes from Sanger's books. These books are often only available from special collections or university libraries.

Angela's site includes a link to the publisher of her book but as I mentioned on Friday, the book is available by special arrangement through National Right to Life for about 35 percent of the list price. The e-mail to find out more is education@nrlc.org.

Planned Parenthood's Billion

Although the number of abortions in this country is on the decline, Planned Parenthood made over a billion dollars for the first time in its history during its 2006-2007 fiscal year. And the number of abortions Planned Parenthood affiliates have performed has gone up. PPFA now does about one quarter of all abortions nationwide.

And your tax dollars are supporting them.

Tony Perkins, who heads up the Family Research Council, told LifeNews.com:

"A majority of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion -- however, still Planned Parenthood receives more than $300 million in taxpayer funding each year for 'family planning' projects that help bolster their abortion trade."

This week, I was a little lax on posting because I've been trying to read Angela Franks' book, "Margaret Sanger's Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility." Angela's book is heavy on research but, even so, the book is still very, very readable.

It's truly scary knowing that this billion dollar organization known by the innocuous sounding "Planned" Parenthood performs thousands and thousands of abortions every year and pushes abortion left and right-- that's bad enough. But when you read Angela's book, you discover just how deep the organization's eugenic roots go. Sanger was a big proponent of "negative" eugenics, the goal of which is curbing the birthrate among those Sanger called "the unfit"-- and by fair means or not so fair means. Sanger included the poor, the "feeble-minded," those with disabilities and those who would be considered of average to below-average intelligence among those she considered "unfit."

Planned Parenthood was founded by a woman determined to "weed out" the "unfit." Many of PPFA clinics are located in areas of cities where the poor and minorities are concentrated.

Is this Sanger's Legacy?

Why, oh why, are our state and federal governments pouring money into PPFA coffers?

**National Right to Life makes Franks' book available for a donation of fifteen dollars which is a steal considering that Amazon list's the paperback book for almost $36.

According to an article in NRLNews, you can purchase a copy of Margaret Sanger's Eugenic Legacy from the National Right to Life Trust Fund. You can reach the Trust Fund by e-mail at education@nrlc.org or by calling (202) 626-8829.

Obama's Gaffe

Well Barack Obama did it again-- said something blatantly offensive and the mainstream media ignored it.

Saturday, speaking in Pennsylvania, Mr. Obama said the following:

When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include -- which should include abstinence education and teaching the children -- teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual. But it should also include -- it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I've got two daughters-- 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at the age of 16. You know, so it doesn't make sense to not give them information. [italics mine]

Mmmmm, "punished with a baby"? Suddenly an innocent human baby is "punishment" like a spanking or being grounded? I realize that a parent would rather not have his or her child become a single mother. I have a nine-year-old daughter too and I would want to see her married with a college degree behind her before she has children but I would never consider the baby a punishment should such a thing happen. The child would be my grandchild.

Now, Mr. Obama does not specifically mention abortion but the attitude that the child is a punishment certainly fits with the pro-abortion rhetoric of both Democratic campaigns and their pro-abortion supporters.