Uncommon Sense

politics and society are, unfortunately, much the same thing

Fiorina Destroys CNN’s Cuomo for Pushing Planned Parenthood Propaganda

original article: Fiorina Destroys CNN’s Cuomo for Pushing Planned Parenthood Propaganda
December 11, 2015 by Kyle Drennen

In a hostile interview with Carly Fiorina on CNN’s New Day on Friday, anchor Chris Cuomo accused the Republican presidential candidate of inciting violence with her criticism of abortion provider Planned Parenthood: “Do you feel any sense of regret about how you characterized what was going on at Planned Parenthood after the attack in Colorado? Because of what the man said, which seems as though he was influenced by some of the rhetoric that was coming out of you and others that painted a very ugly picture, an unfair one, about Planned Parenthood?”

Fiorina eviscerated Cuomo for his nasty slander: “Oh, please, really, Chris? Look, nine videotapes have come out about Planned Parenthood. It is very clear what they have been doing….this is a typical left-wing tactic, to try and shut down the truth by silencing people. This has happened over and over and over again.”

Cuomo contemptuously replied: “The question doesn’t go away. The videos were edited, you know that. The scenes that were depicted – ” Fiorina cut him off with some facts: “Actually, I don’t know that. There has been forensic evidence of those nine videotapes over and over again. There have been reports that say they are not edited.”

He insisted: “Of course they were edited. Of course the videos were edited.” Fiorina remarked: “It’s amazing to me that we’re still having this conversation.” Cuomo argued: “No, no, no. Let’s be careful about what we’re saying. Of course they were edited.”

Cuomo was clearly relying on Planned Parenthood claims that the videos were deceptively edited in some way. However, as The Federalist pointed out, an objective analysis found the tapes to be “authentic and show no evidence of manipulation.”

Cuomo continued to rant: “There were scenes and pictures depicting horrible things that nobody should want to see that weren’t authentic and weren’t germane to the conversation within the video. We had the guy on here, he couldn’t justify it. Now you had somebody who went out and killed in the name of that.”

Fiorina again blasted his assertion that conservative criticism of Planned Parenthood caused the Colorado shooting: “Really? Okay, I don’t recall, Chris – careful, you’re a journalist. I don’t recall anybody in the pro-life community celebrating this tragedy. I don’t recall any of that happening.”

Pointing to the abortion provider’s own change in policy in the wake of the controversy, Fiorina explained: “Planned Parenthood several weeks ago made a quiet little announcement that they would no longer accept compensation for the sale of what they call fetal tissue. That’s about as close to an admission as you can get. In fact, it is an admission….I don’t understand why Planned Parenthood would make an announcement that they’re no longer accepting compensation.”

Cuomo ran to their defense: “To clarify a policy that was used to villainize them when they felt that there was no need to do that. That’s what the head of the organization says.”

That parroting of Planned Parenthood talking points led Fiorina to observe: “It’s clear what your opinion is, Chris. It’s clear what your opinion is.” Cuome snidely asked: “What’s my opinion, Ms. Fiorina? What do you think it is?” Fiorina declared: “Well, I think you’ve bought the Planned Parenthood line, hook, line and sinker. So, good to know that.”

See the video and full transcript.

abortion, bias, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, news media, progressive, propaganda, relativism, scandal

Advertisements

Filed under: abortion, bias, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, news media, progressive, propaganda, relativism, scandal

Media CENSOR Poll Showing Majority Support Defunding Planned Parenthood

original article: Media CENSOR Poll Showing Majority Support Defunding Planned Parenthood
December 11, 2015 by Katie Yoder

The media rushed to cover a recent poll showing majority support for federal funding of Planned Parenthood. But when another poll surfaced with the opposite findings, journalists looked the other way.

Days before the U.S. Senate voted to defund Planned Parenthood, a nationwide poll conducted by Robert Morris University (RMU) showed a majority supported defunding the nation’s No. 1 abortion provider. In contrast to other polls, 53.3 percent of respondents agreed with the GOP position in regards to Planned Parenthood. The difference, according to researchers, was the question wording.

student

Earlier this week, for example, a USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll found that 58% were against eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood. National media hyped the story, from Cosmopolitan to TIME.

The questionnaire asked participants, “Do you think federal funding for Planned Parenthood should be eliminated – yes or no?”

But the new poll conducted by RMU showed different results – by providing a more detailed question.

“Congressional Republicans favor shifting Planned Parenthood federal funds to community clinics that perform the same services, but do not perform abortions,” the RMU question read. “Would you say you support or oppose this plan?”

The poll found that “A majority, 53.3 percent, strongly or somewhat supported the plan, while 31.5 percent were strongly or somewhat opposed.”

RMU Professor of Political Science Philip Harold commented on the different poll results.

“One of the cardinal rules in polling is to clearly indicate the alternative in the question and a poll question that doesn’t do this is flawed,” he said in a press release. “Because the wording of this poll reflects the actual proposal, it is more accurate.”

In an exclusive comment to the MRC, Professor Philip Harold, who conducted the poll, explained that while journalists had access to the poll results, they chose not to report on it.

“Press releases were sent to national reporters and was posted on PR Newswire,” the professor stressed. “In the past, results from the RMU Polling Institute have gotten traction on political topics but not this time.”

The press release outlined surprising results that should have been reporter bait:

“Democrats (47.3 percent) are more likely than Republicans (15.4 percent) and Independents (33 percent) to oppose the Congressional Republicans’ plan. However, 42.7 percent of Democrats in the RMU poll support the GOP plan.”

Professor Harold called the findings “astonishing” because the question noted that the plan belonged to “Congressional Republicans.” The RMU poll also discovered that that nearly one-third of participants who identified as pro-choice supported the Congressional Republicans’ plan, according to the press release.

abortion, bias, culture, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, news media, progressive, propaganda

Filed under: abortion, bias, culture, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, news media, progressive, propaganda

Reclaim Christmas

Many of us have fond childhood memories of Christmas. That, above all, seems to be the reason Western culture continues in the typical Christmas traditions such as gift giving and tree decoration.

But these traditions are becoming somewhat of an oddity. It is increasingly common to see the word Christmas replaced with any number of substitutes, such as festivus party, holiday tree, seasons greetings, and more. That’s in addition to the retail worship Westerners engage in and the obsession with Santa Claus – really, why is Santa garb EVERYWHERE? With the leftward march toward a more pluralistic society we curiously find “pluralism” to mean religiously neutral rather than tolerant. Believing in Santa is okay, but believing in God is just too much for our enlightened society. But that is an oddity in itself: a religiously neutral push in a society that is not religiously neutral.

I’m not talking about the growing theophobic animus (though that is an issue worth discussing – check out what religious plurality looks like in Hong Kong, for example). I’m talking about those who want to practice Christmas traditions in a way that is honoring to the real “reason for the season” rather than fall prey to consumerism. I’m talking to those who want to focus on the true meaning of Christmas – Jesus, the Christ.

And that brings us to the rub. While most people say Christmas is about something noble like spending time with family, they act like Christmas is really about gifts. And that’s not the only contradiction involved here. On the one hand we hear about greedy businesses staying open at odd hours (even intruding into Thanksgiving day); on the other hand many completely ignore the fact that PEOPLE WILL SPEND THEIR MONEY AT THOSE TIMES! Businesses are open for business because they know people will shop.

No one is forcing people to go out and spend their money. But many people pretend the “evil corporations” are making them do it (probably because blaming corporations is easier than being honest). In my family we refuse to shop on Thanksgiving day. It’s not difficult at all. Some of us don’t go shopping on Black Friday either. If you can’t stop yourself from shopping on Thanksgiving day it’s you who has a problem, not “capitalism”.

The mass hysteria that happens in the Christmas shopping season is a problem. The tragic stories of greedy shoppers should be eye opening. Greed is a part of the Christmas experience, especially in the United States. But so is giving. (What could be more Christian than giving?) If we want to redeem Christmas how do we get away from the greed but keep the giving? After all, every year I hear someone say it is better to give than to receive. And that’s true. And a mentality of giving is much better for society than a mentality of getting.

A friend of mine had a great idea about this, one which you could try next year. It’s a different tack on giving, but we still get to give. Imagine instead of being gift-based, the giving can be service-based. Here’s how it works.

Everyone in the household (or extended family, or other type of group) take a few strips of paper. On each strip, write one request you would like someone to help you with. A one-time gift of service can be of almost anything – within tasteful limitations of course. It could be helping to rake the yard, or learning how to cook a special dish, or learning how to change the oil in your car, cleaning out the garage/basement, setting up that annoying tech thing you can’t get to work, or anything you would like someone to help you with. You choose, it’s your request – a one-time gift of service written so anyone around the house during this time of year could serve you.

We all have varying skill sets. So keep than in mind when writing your requests. Chances are at least one of them can be met by someone in the household. Instead of putting gifts under the tree you can decorate the tree with acts of service that others could give to you. Imagine colorful service requests adorning the tree, where the “gifts” you receive have meaning specifically for you, and avoiding the stress of the commercial cattle run of shopping. On Christmas day you search the tree for acts of service you can give to others – and you don’t have guess about what they might want.

And you can modify this idea to your liking. One physical gift plus the gifts of service might work for you and your family, or what ever variation you want. Keep in mind, though, the purpose of this idea is to move away from the “getting” or shopping frenzy and move into a “serving” frame of mind.

Remember when I said many of us have fond memories of Christmas? If you’re capable of reading this chances are you’re aware the Christmas season can be a painful time of year for many people. If you can make the time, think of gifts of service you could offer to others outside your home. The neighbor who lives alone, or that person dealing with a stressful situation, or the retirement home you never visit, or the soup kitchen.

Imagine how Western culture could be different with adults who grew up with a mindset of service rather than a mindset of presents. You can start a new tradition, one which builds a stronger community. Think about it over the next 12 months. You might find next year’s Christmas has more “Christ” in it than you ever imagined.

culture, family, ideology, philosophy, religion

Filed under: culture, family, ideology, philosophy, religion

Yale couple flees classroom amid free speech chill

original article: Yale couple flees classroom amid free speech chill
December 08, 2015 by FoxNews

Anti-free speech demonstrators at one of America’s most vaunted universities have claimed a pair of scalps – a husband-wife duo who say teaching is too much trouble in a campus climate “not conducive to civil dialogue.”

Yale University professors Nicholas and Erika Christakis, who both have always gotten overwhelmingly positive reviews from students, said they have had enough, after an email she sent sparked a campus-wide controversy that soon pulled him in.

“I have great respect and affection for my students, but I worry that the current climate at Yale is not, in my view, conducive to the civil dialogue and open inquiry required to solve our urgent societal problems,” she said in an email to The Washington Post.

“I have great respect and affection for my students, but I worry that the current climate at Yale is not, in my view, conducive to the civil dialogue and open inquiry required to solve our urgent societal problems.”

– Erika Christakis, Yale professor

The affair began in October, when Erika Christakis, a psychology professor and associate master at the school’s Silliman College, one of a dozen residential communities, sent out an email defending the right of students to wear costumes which may be “culturally appropriating.” That spurred outrage and led to one student confronting Nicholas Christakis on the campus quad and berating him in a shocking episode that was caught on video that soon went viral.

The video showed Nicholas Christakis, a physician and professor of social and natural science, calmly trying to reason with a student who was screaming at him for not keeping students “safe,” as others snapped their fingers in a trendy sign of approval.

Erika Christakis said she will quit teaching indefinitely and cited a campus atmosphere not “conducive to the civil dialogue and open inquiry required to solve our urgent societal problems.” Her husband said he would not teach scheduled classes in the spring, and would take a sabbatical.

Neither Yale officials nor the Christakises responded to requests for comment.

“I don’t have much to add to her decision,” Yale Dean Jonathan Holloway told The Washington Post, adding that as a lecturer, Christakis is paid per course and can decide whether to teach each semester.

The school is ultimately responsible for the chill on free speech, according to Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

“While Yale did eventually get around to issuing a statement in favor of free expression, it’s hard to imagine that Erika or Nicholas Christakis would have decided to quit teaching at Yale and take a sabbatical, respectively, had Dean Holloway or President [Peter] Salovey consistently shown their support for free expression through their words and actions on campus,” said FIRE’s Robert Shibley.

The issue of free expression on campus has come into sharp relief on several campuses, with students calling for “safe zones” and speech codes where words and deeds deemed offensive are barred. Erika Christakis provoked outrage when she sent an email to Silliman residents questioning the desire to find offense in Halloween costumes.

“Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive?” Christakis wrote. “American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition.”

He husband later apologized for his role in the controversy in a heartfelt mea culpa delivered in his own home.

“I have disappointed you and I’m really sorry,” he told about 100 students gathered in his living room last month, as Holloway and other university administrators stood by.

“I’ve spent my life taking care of these issues of injustice, of poverty, of racism,” he said. “I have the same beliefs that you do … I’m genuinely sorry, and to have disappointed you. I’ve disappointed myself.”

In a related matter, Yale announced it could soon follow Harvard and Princeton and change the administrative title both Nicholas and Erika Christakis hold, as “master” evokes imagery associated with slavery.

“The word ‘master’ can evoke thoughts of slavery and other forms of subjugation, and it has made me at times quite uncomfortable to be referred to as ‘master,’” Nicholas Christakis said in a letter to students at the beginning of the year.

abuse, bullies, censorship, culture, education, extremism, free speech, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, oppression, progressive, protests, scandal, unintended consequences, victimization

Filed under: abuse, bullies, censorship, culture, education, extremism, free speech, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, oppression, progressive, protests, scandal, unintended consequences, victimization

Now there Are Three: Another Honest Liberal Pours Cold Water on Gun Control

Source: Now there Are Three: Another Honest Liberal Pours Cold Water on Gun Control

Filed under: Uncategorized

Pages

Categories

December 2015
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031