Piers Morgan lets "journalist" Toure make a fool of himself and then eats him for lunch.

 Ripped from the headlines of Brietbart.com:

Former Black Panther Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL) made quite a fuss when he donned a "hoodie" during a speech in the U.S. House of Representatives until he was escorted out. At the time, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) "applauded his courage" for doing so. 

Meanwhile, back home in Rush's district, two men wearing hooded sweatshirts, or "hoodies," were the shooters in an incident that left one dead and five injured.

No doubt, in protest of the injustice of visited on Trayvon Martin.

Dr. Marc Siegel is no fan of Obamacare:

At the heart of the multi-headed abominable creature known as Affordable Care Act aka ObamaCare, there resides a singular deceit. It is too easy for lawyers and even U.S. Supreme Court Justices to miss this deceit in the process of arguing abstractions, but I and other doctors experience this reality every day our offices: 

Insurance does not equal care. One patient’s needs can get in the way of another’s needs. My waiting room is like so many others in America, and when it is clogged with several patients with low-paying highly-regulated insurance, the waiting time goes up and the access to quality medical care goes down. 

Keith Olbermann has been fired by Al Gore. American Glob has the story. Wittily told.

James Taranto interviews Cardinal Tim Dolan, head of the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops, about his conversations with President Obama about his administration's birth control mandate... and other things.

It's worth a read by Catholics and non Catholics alike.

Lest anyone think that Spencerblog only picks on liberal conclusion-jumpers in the Trayvon Martin case, check out this disgraceful comment from MSNBC's resident Republican Joe Scarborough:

"Well, what we don't understand -- I think I agree with -- I think some of us don't understand this... Like why is it that some on the right are actually taking this up as a cause when as the National Review said almost immediately after it happened, 'This has nothing to do with gun rights. This has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. This has nothing to do with Stand Your Ground laws. This has nothing to do with the NRA. This has everything to do with a guy that's trying to play security cop who was unhinged, who chased down and shot a 17-year-old kid, armed with Skittles and iced tea.'"

Now, I know this man used to be a U.S. congressman so expectations should be low whenever he opens his mouth, but this is beyond stupid and offensive. And if George Zimmerman is never convicted of anything, it's also slanderous and actionable in a court of law.

What evidence does Scarborough have that George Zimmerman is or was "unhinged"? What evidence does he have that he "chased down and shot a 17-year-old kid"? As opposed to being sucker-punched, knocked to the ground, jumped upon shot in self defense?

There is evidence that somebody punched George Zimmerman in the nose. There is evidence that he has a wound on the back of his head consistent with his claim that he was knocked to the ground. There are apparently, according to police, eyewitnesses who put Trayvon Martin on top of George Zimmerman while Zimmerman screamed out for help.

But Joe Scarborough knows better, he and his MSNBC colleagues, Al Sharpton, Lawrence O'Donnell, Martin Bashir, et al. They assert as facts, things they have NO real idea about. They've attached themselves to a narrative that is getting less and less plausible as each day passes.

It's gotten to the point where Bashir showed a new video today that is supposed to show how uninjured Zimmerman was that night and suddenly, it clearly shows a nasty gash on the back of Zimmerman's head. What does Bashir do? He simply ignores it! Pretends it isn't there!

Check it out here. The shot of Zimmerman's head wound is clearly visible at right around the 3 minute mark. And the Bashir and his reporter continue to talk as if Zimmerman doesn't have a mark on him. It's astonishing!

It is incredibly likely that that crime scene photos were taken that night. Ballistics will tell investigators the the angle of the shot that killed Trayvon Martin and whether it is consistent or inconsistent with Zimmerman's story.

But there simply isn't enough evidence in the public square to definitely say the sort of things people like Scarborough are bloviating about. Reasonable people can and should ask questions about what happened that night. But any conclusions such as those drawn by Scarborough are ridiculously, ludicrously premature.

Read Bob Somerby's accounts of the ridiculous Bashir and the rest of these babbling fools. (Just keep scrolling.)

Scarborough blames "far right" wingers for the controversy and ignores the shameful behavior and conclusion jumping of his colleagues.

He says the trashing of Trayvon Martin is "disgusting" and "beneath contempt" and "shameful" by people "on the right" and "far right."

It is quite wrong to assume that because Trayvon Martin because he was suspended from school and may have taken a toke or two or was otherwise an imperfect 17-year-old deserved to die that night.

But if Scarborough wants shameful and disgusting he ought to just listen to himself and cringe.

What is shameful and disgusting is declaring a man guilty of a crime on national TV before he's ever been charged with anything.

Scarborough confidently predicts that Zimmerman's defenders "will look foolish in the end."

Maybe. But Scarborough looks foolish RIGHT NOW.  Actually, he looks worse than foolish. He looks maliciously stupid. He better hope Zimmerman is found guilty of something. If not he should find himself in court and/or out of a job.

Disgusting, shameful and beneath contempt well sum up Scarborough's conduct in this matter. He is far from alone.

Heh!

UPDATE: No wonder Pravda, the official voice of the Russian government, is trashing Mitt Romney...

Electing Mitt Romney as the next President of the United States of America would be like appointing a serial paedophile as a kindergarten teacher, a rapist as a janitor at a girls' dormitory or a psychopath with a fixation on knives as a kitchen hand. His comments on Russia are a puerile attempt at making the grand stage and boy, did he blow it...

Somewhat like Condoleezza Rice did before the Bush regime was er..."elected" ..., Mitt Romney takes the chance to mouth off about Russia, calling her "our number one geopolitical foe" which fights "every cause for the world's worst actors". Unfortunately, such vapid stupidity has become commonplace among senior US politicians, providing the rest of the world with a telling insight as to the real nature of the political class in that country - out of touch, out of date and dangerously jingoistic. In short, overgrown self-opinionated schoolboys with super-egos but nothing whatsoever to back it up with.

Pedophile? Rapist? Psychopath? Mitt Romney? But this is what passes for considered opinion by the adolescent schoolboys who write for Pravda. You know, as long as the government approves.

Sure, sounds like an Obama endorsement to me.

Darby Borough and its council president officially join the chorus of ill-informed, conclusion jumpers on the Trayvon Martin case.

This was something the Darby community needed to do,” council President Janice Davis said. “There’s been a lot of false information going around about (Martin), and it’s got nothing to do with the issues we need to talk about. He was murdered. He was gunned down. We’re here to support his family and anyone else who finds themselves in a situation like this.”

He was murdered? Says who? No charges have been filed against Martin's killer, George Zimmerman, who is claiming self defense. What does Janice Davis know about the details of the case that allows her to make such a statement?

Does she know that, according to the victim, eyewitnesses and Sanford police, Martin was the "aggressor" that night.

From the Los Angeles Times:

The Orlando Sentinel is reporting that police sources say Martin was the aggressor on Feb. 26, knocking Zimmerman to the ground with a single punch and then climbing on top of the 28-year-old neighborhood watch captain and slamming the back of his head into the ground. Police say this account, given by Zimmerman, is supported by eyewitnesses, according to the Sentinel's report.

 One such witness reportedly told police that he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, striking the man, while Zimmerman cried out for help. The attack left Zimmerman bloodied, police sources told the Sentinel, and led him to fire at Martin in self-defense.

Police say Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a fat lip and confirm that the back of his head was cut. He received first aid at the scene but refused to go to the hospital and received medical treatment the following day, according to the Sentinel's sources.

The Sentinel's story also makes public new details about the circumstances leading up to the deadly confrontation between Zimmerman and Martin.

At the time, Martin was suspended from high school after he was found to be in possession of an empty marijuana baggie, according to the Sentinel. Martin's school has a "zero-tolerance" drug policy, the newspaper added.

Zimmerman was heading to the grocery store when he spotted Martin and called police to report a black youth acting suspiciously, possibly on drugs.

Zimmerman stepped out of his SUV to follow Martin, even though a police dispatcher told him he didn't need to do so.

Zimmerman told police he he'd lost sight of Martin and was heading back to his car when the youth suddenly stepped into his path. According to the Sentinel, Martin asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cellphone. Martin then said something like, "Well, you do now" and punched him, according to the Sentinel's sources.

Now, some - or all of that - may not be true. But the investigation goes on. Still, thousands of people have jumped to their own conclusions based on little more than wild and overtly racist conspiracy theories.

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter has called what happened that night an "assassination." That might win him a few more votes from members of Philadelphia's paranoid community, but he disgraces his office by saying such baldly inaccurate and inflammatory things.

Davis and others have joined him in this sort of clownish stupidity. Fair-minded and responsible people are calling them on it. And we should continue to do so.

Rosanne Barr: Against vigilantism before she was for it.

Meanwhile, Spike Lee also tweeted what he thought was George Zimmerman's home address to his followers so that one of them might... what? collect the $10,000 reward from the New Black Panthers for his "capture."

Turned out to be the wrong address. Lee called the elderly couple - who's actual address he tweeted to his minions - and apologized. They had to leave their home out of fear for their safety. The couple and Lee have reached a settlement. His apology was accepted along with a check to compensate them for their expenses in having to flee their home.

Sham contracts for minority firms in Philadelphia. My friend Bill Bender reports. Duh! This is what happens when you pass dumb laws.

Charles Krauthammer explains to a distracted electorate the significance of Obama's open mic fiasco.

You don’t often hear an American president secretly (he thinks) assuring foreign leaders that concessions are coming their way, but that they must wait because he’s seeking reelection and he dare not tell his own people.

No you don't. Read it all. 

Ann Coulter gets off a good one in a column about our new "Post-Racial Lynch Mob."

Since the cat leapt out of the bag on Zimmerman being Hispanic, the media have begun calling him a "white Hispanic."

Not being a race-obsessed liberal, I don't particularly care, but it's indisputable that Zimmerman is brown. I saw his face carved on the side of a Mayan temple in the Yucatan. Using his mother's maiden name, he would be admitted to the University of Michigan law school on a full scholarship.

Heh!

What do Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law and Swarthmore College's "Genderf**k" weekend have in common? They're both mentioned in today's print column.

Please enjoy.

It's amazing that this has to be explained to a cable mogul, but Heather MacDonald does a commendable job.

Cable mogul Evan Shapiro had a stunningly clueless Trayvon Martin entry on Huffington Post yesterday asking: Why doesn’t the media cover more black crime victims?

Shapiro, the president of indie cable broadcaster IFC, should pose the same question to Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and every member of the black protest establishment: Why don’t you protest more black crime victims? The answer would be the same in all cases: Because the only black victims who interest the race industry and its mainstream media handmaidens are blacks who have been killed by “white” civilians, including honorary whites like Martin’s killer George Zimmerman, or blacks who have been killed or offended by the police (black officers will do here in a pinch). 

Unfortunately, there are very few such victims. Ninety-three percent of all black homicide casualties from 1980 to 2008 were killed by other blacks, and are thus of no interest whatsoever to today’s race advocates, because they fail to support the crucial story line that blacks remain under siege by a racist white power structure.

How the courts and politicians protect the economic interests of the powerful at the expense of the public and American dreamers like Ali Bokhari.

George Will has the story.

Dan Henninger sees our Mandarins at work.

Why are we so close to falling into the grip of an American mandarinate of the centralizing sort now smothering France? Our version of these controllers came to life in the 1960s. They are a byproduct of the passage in those years of a succession of federal rights and entitlement laws. The former were more admirable than the latter. But the singularly bad effect of that period on the American political psyche was the sense of moral triumphalism that spread among liberal policy intellectuals. From this certitude came the belief they could do anything they wanted to the booboisee in the untrustworthy states.

And they did, for example writing an Endangered Species Act whose coverage mandated federal government protection for such minutiae as the delta smelt. Only a mandarin would insist on this.

Obamacare may or may not be constitutional. But one thing is certain, writes Liz Peek, it certainly gummed up the works when it comes to America's economic recovery.

Here we go again. All eyes are on the Supreme Court as it wrestles with whether or not President Obama’s healthcare bill is constitutional. The country is divided on the merits of the law, but this we can say with certainty: Obamacare profoundly gummed up our recovery from the financial crisis.

Holman Jenkins is even more critical of the "Affordable Healthcare Act"

The Constitution may permit far-reaching schemes of insurance regulation; it may even permit an individual mandate. It may permit the government completely to take over health care. But it certainly does not permit insurance fraud. That's what the mandate is: It forces the young and healthy to pony up once again for another of Washington's actuarially unsound welfare promises.

Read them all.

Widener Law School makes it into elite company. Too bad it's for an ugly reason.

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter calls the Trayvon Martin killing an "assassination." Just another example of how this case is driving otherwise reasonable people to the brink of madness.

My print column is up.

UPDATE: Jim Treacher lists a few of the new details coming out about the case.

It's turning out that Trayvon may not have been the fresh-faced young innocent he was originally portrayed to be. That does not mean, by any stretch, that he deserved to die that night. What it means is that the media is playing catch up and doing its job of reporting everything it learns about the case and its participants in it.

For instance, another thing revealed is that George Zimmerman is a registered Democrat. Basically, that means nothing. But can you imagine what some Democrats would say if it turned out he was a registered Republican?

UPDATE II: Trayvon Martin protesters ransack a Walgreens. Any comment, Mayor Nutter?

UPDATE III: Jonah Goldberg weighs in: It's a white-hispanic thing...

White Hispanic.” That’s how the New York Times, Reuters, and other media outlets have opted to describe George Zimmerman, a man who would simply be Hispanic if he hadn’t shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. The term, rarely if ever used before this tragedy, is necessary in telling the Martin story in a more comfortable way.

What’s the comfortable way? It’s the way the blame for Martin’s death belongs squarely at the feet of “the system.” And “the system” is a white thing, don’t you know?

After all, our president is not referred to as a white African-American, right?  Maybe it would be more accurate to designate him white/African/American. But then, who really cares, except for the most race conscious among us.

... Juan Williams NAILS IT!

While civil rights leaders have raised their voices to speak out against this one tragedy, few if any will do the same about the larger tragedy of daily carnage that is black-on-black crime in America.

The most recent comprehensive study on black-on-black crime from the Justice Department should have been a clarion call for the black community to take action. There is no reason to believe that the trends it reported have decreased since 2005, the year for which the data were reported.

Almost one half of the nation's murder victims that year were black and a majority of them were between the ages of 17 and 29. Black people accounted for 13% of the total U.S. population in 2005. Yet they were the victims of 49% of all the nation's murders. And 93% of black murder victims were killed by other black people, according to the same report.

Read it all.

Liberals are in a panic over the questions asked by Supreme Court justices in the Obamacare hearings.

"Legal Analyst" Jeffrey "Chicken Little" Toobin tells CNN Obamacare is going down.

"This law looks like it's going to be struck down. I'm telling you, all of the predictions, including mine, that the justices would not have a problem with this law were wrong," Toobin said Tuesday on CNN. "I think this law is in grave, grave trouble."

This hysteria is premature. Justice Kennedy, the usual swing vote, could still go either way on this thing.  He might have just been pointing out that government has a pretty high bar to jump over to justify their action of forcing everyone in the country to purchase health insurance. And then he may decide Obamacare clears the bar.

Then again, maybe not. In any case, watching the liberals in a panic over this is certainly enjoyable.

Rick Santorum lets NYT reporter Jeff Zeleny have it for distorting his quote about Mitt Romney.


Based to the clip, Santorum has a pretty good point. At the event what Santorum actually said was... "He (Mitt Romney) is the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama."

Afterwards, Zeleny breaks off the quote in asking his question.

Here's a transcript of the exchange:

ZELENY: You said Mitt Romney is the worst Republican in the country. Is that true?
SANTORUM: What speech did you listen to?
ZELENY: Right here up. Said he’s the worst Republican –
SANTORUM: Stop lying. I said he was the worst Republican to run on the issue of ObamaCare. And that’s what I was talking about.
ZELENY: You said he’s the worst Republican –
SANTORUM: For every speech I give, I said he’s uniquely disqualified to run against Barack Obama on the issue of health care. Would you guys quit distorting what I’m saying in?
ZELENY: Do you think he’s the worst Republican –
SANTORUM: To run against Barack Obama on the issue of health care because he fashioned the blueprint. I’ve been saying it in every speech. Quit distorting our words. If I see it, it’s bullshit. Come on man. What are you doing?
ZELENY: Who’s distorting your words?
SANTORUM: You just did by asking me that question.
ZELENY: You sound upset about –
SANTORUM: I’m upset when the media distort what is I say. Yeah I do get upset. You know exactly what I was saying and you’re misrepresenting it. What are you guys in the business of doing, reporting the truth or are you here to try to spin and make news? Stop it.
ZELENY: You don’t care –
SANTORUM: You don’t care about the truth at all, do you? You really don’t. Asking that question shows me you don’t care at all about the truth.

Santorum may have gone overboard in berating Zeleny and played to his conservative base by doing so on camera. But Zeleny did distort the quote in the question as he posed it. When asked about it later, Zeleny said he was just trying to get a clarification from Santorum without admitting his own mistake.

Richard Epstein explains the folly and unconstitutionality of Obamacare.

For openers, the ACA is subject to the law of unintended consequences. The law may proclaim that it protects patients when it in fact it restricts the health-care options of those it’s intended to protect. The ACA says that it will increase access to affordable care when in fact its endless mandates will drive up the cost of care. The false advertising of the ACA’s title conceals a wealth of difficulties with its internal design, which make its scheme unsustainable in the long run.

Read it all.

The Clippers prove once again that talent, hard work, enthusiasm and excellence are not foreign to the city of Chester. Sure, there are plenty of things more important than high school basketball, but the young men who brought the city its second straight PIAA State Championship epitomize the sort of passion, determination and teamwork that is so useful in all walks of life.

Their accomplishment is no small thing and should be a lesson to the adults of the city and to the rest of us as well.  

The Supreme Court hearings on Obamacare begin this morning. Robert Sammuelson explains why the effect of the law on people's health has and will be negligible. But the political effect is huge.

Why did the prez push such a complicated, regressive and divisive law? Ego!

Considering the ACA's glaring -- and predictable -- economic and political shortcomings, why did Obama make it his first-term centerpiece? The answer seems to be his obsession with securing his legacy as the president who achieved the liberal grail of universal coverage. In his book "The Escape Artists: How Obama's Team Fumbled the Recovery," Noam Scheiber recounts a telling incident. Obama's advisers tell him he can be known for preventing a second Great Depression. "That's not enough for me," Obama replies.

The ACA is Obama's ego trip, but as a path to presidential greatness, it may disappoint no matter how the court decides. Lyndon's Johnson's creation of Medicare and Medicaid was larger, and he isn't deemed great. And then, unlike now, government seemed capable of paying for bigger programs. 

Sammuelson rightly points out that unless the Supreme Court rules 7-2 or better one way or another (and it won't), partisans from either side will attack the verdict. He's quite right.

[Posted By Jake]

With soaring gas prices, continued high unemployment, out-of-control government spending, and an Administration hell-bent on curtailing all manner of personal freedom, the Democrats and their mainstream media enablers have been working overtime to sell the notion that at least Obama's foreign policy is an unequivocal success.

In particular, we have been told the stark contrast between President Bush's reckless cowboy diplomacy and the cool, calm, thoughtful approach of Barack the boy genius would set new standards of respect and prestige around the world. Even the Nobel Prize committee bought into the promise of hope and change; in hindsight, an embarrassing case of premature miscalculation.

Apparently, this Danish broadcaster didn't get the memo. If it wasn't bad enough several months ago to have the French question our courage, now we have the Danes laughing at our Commander-in-Chief's smug insincerity. It is about three and a half minutes of hilarity that should forever put to rest any delusions about Obama's intellectual superiority.

Rhode Island's state treasurer takes on public employee unions and her party (she's a Democrat) to tame an out of control state pension system.

So this is Gina Raimondo? The state treasurer who single-handedly overhauled Rhode Island's pension system and has unions screaming bloody murder? I had imagined her a bit, well, bigger. If not larger than life like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, then at least life-size. Ms. Raimondo couldn't be much taller than five feet, which may have caused some to underestimate her. That isn't the only thing that may have surprised people.

The former venture capitalist is a Democrat, which means that she believes in government as a force for good. But "a government that doesn't work is in no one's interest," she says. "Budgets that don't balance, public programs that aren't funded, pension funds that are running out of money, schools that aren't funded—How does that help anyone? I don't really care if you're a Republican or Democrat or you want to fight about the size of government. How about a government that just works? Put your tax dollar in and get a return out the other end."

Where is Pennsylvania's Gina Raimondo?

I have been out of the country working at an undisclosed location on the construction of a private, self-sustaining retreat for when the apocalypse comes. The Internet connection was spotty at best.

I am back in the country and will be home in time for the season premiere of Mad Men.

In the meantime, I sensed this from the states...



UPDATE: For more on the reason for that self-sustaining retreat... read this...

The president stands up to the oil demons.

Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address that he expected Congress to consider in the next few weeks halting $4 billion in tax subsidies, something he hasn't been able to get through Congress throughout his presidency. He said the vote would put lawmakers on record on whether they "stand up for oil companies" or "stand up for the American people."

"They can either place their bets on a fossil fuel from the last century or they can place their bets on America's future," Obama said.

Hmmm, as I recall our Investor-in-Chief "bet" a couple billion of OUR dollars on 21st century solar companies like Solyndra.

Turned our to be a pretty bad bet. But at least it rewarded a few of his rich campaign contributors.

In a recent speech Mark Steyn would like you to know who our president is sneering at.

So let's see. The president sneers at the ignorance of 15th century Spaniards when, in fact, he is the one entirely ignorant of them. A man who has enjoyed a million dollars of elite education yet has never created a dime of wealth in his life sneers at a crippled farm boy with an eighth-grade schooling who establishes a successful business and introduces electrical distribution across Michigan all the way up to Sault Ste Marie. A man sneers at one of the pioneering women in broadcasting, a lady who brought the voices of T.S. Eliot, G.K. Chesterton and others into the farthest-flung classrooms and would surely have rejected Obama's own dismal speech as being too obviously reliant on "Half-A-Dozen Surefire Cheap Cracks For Lazy Public Speakers." A man whose own budget officials predict the collapse of the entire U.S. economy by 2027 sneers at a solvent predecessor for being insufficiently "forward-looking."

A great nation needs successful self-made businessmen like George Peck, and purveyors of scholarly excellence like Mary Somerville. It's not clear why it needs a smug over-credentialed President Solyndra to recycle "Crowd-Pleasing For Dummies" as a keynote address.

Read it all.

Daily News Columnist Ronnie Polaneczky talks about her transvaginal sonogram with Pa. Attorney General candidate Kathleen Kane, who has had one too. Both are outraged about a proposed new state law that would require women seeking an abortion to have a sonogram first.

Kane found her ultrasounds "invasive, uncomfortable and often humiliating." My experience was similar, despite the sensitivity, kindness and professionalism of the technician administering the diagnostic test. 

It's hard to hang onto your dignity when you're naked from the waist down, your feet are in stirrups and your vagina is being probed with a 10-inch wan

Yes, well, we all are put in undignified positions when it comes to protecting our health. But what do the sort of invasive examinations so vividly described by Polaneczky have to do with House Bill 1077? There is nothing in the bill that requires ANY woman to have a "transvaginal" sonogram. I just read it. All it requires is a standard pregnancy sonogram, which is completely non-invasive.

In fact the New York Times lists the types of sonograms on its Health Page. A pregnancy sonogram provides images of the fetus. A transvaginal is, and I quote "used to look at a woman's reproductive organs, including the uterus, ovaries, cervix, and vagina."


Both Polanecsky and Kane had these procedures done for their own reproductive health concerns. But they had nothing to do with determining anything about a fetus, abortion or anyone's right to informed consent.


I am personally against such a legal requirement when it comes to a woman procuring an abortion. 


Though I am all for informed consent, clearly this law is designed to discourage abortion by creating another hoop for women to jump through. 


But I am even more against people in the media misrepresenting the truth about what the law would require.


You have to read down a ways in Polanecsky's piece, past all the "transvaginal" talk, to get to this: 

The ultrasound wouldn't always be the version in which a transponder is run over a woman's belly, since that test may not yield the information called for by the bill. So the woman could be forced to undergo the more invasive transvaginal version.

"Could be?" Really? Sez who? And by whom? Who is going to force this theoretical woman to undergo the more invasive procedure? The caring folks at Planned Parenthood who perform the vast majority of abortions in this state? 


This is pure hooey. And it continues...

The forced test has been likened to rape (why not add candlelight and Barry White, and call it date rape?). But since it's being pushed in a bill sponsored by a gaggle of anti-choicers, the bill has been cynically dubbed "The Woman's Right-to-Know Act."

The bill IS being pushed by a gaggle of anti-choicers. But it is being fought by a gaggle of pro-choicers who are twisting and flat-out lying about what the bill requires.


It's possible that some who have come out against the bill are just confused. 


For instance, in an editorial in the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal says... 

But the wording of HB 1077 is specific in that it requires the attending physician to measure the gestational sac if an embryo is too small to be seen. An external ultrasound cannot effectively measure the gestational sac in women who are less than 12 weeks pregnant — which is when most abortions are performed.

         That usually requires a transvaginal ultrasound.

Here's what the actual wording of the bill says: 

"When only the gestational sac is visible during an ultrasound test, gestational age may be based upon measurement of the gestational sac."

Get it? The doctor gets to estimate the age of the fetus based on on what is visible on the ultrasound. The law does't require him/her to do another, more invasive test. What part of "may be" don't these people understand?


Polanecsky credits our own state Rep. Tom Killion for bailing on the bill, which she again inaccurately claims contains a "mandate" for "an invasive medical test."


Candidate Kane incredibly and dumbly compares the requiring of a sonogram before an abortion to an "illegal search." This is certainly ironic, given that most prenatal testing is done to find out if there is anything wrong with the fetus - like Down syndrome, for instance - so that it can be quickly destroyed and disposed of. Such legal "search and destroy" missions are now common place in America.


Polanecsky wraps up her column congratulating Kane - and by extension, herself - for being willing to discuss such uncomfortably, personal things.

I applaud Kane for going public about something many women would be too squeamish to discuss. And I hope more women follow her example.

If we don't tell it like it is, those Harrisburg yahoos will never get it.

This isn't telling it like it is. It's telling it like it isn't. There's a word for that.

UPDATE: When similar complaints about Virginia's sonogram law were raised it's sponsors simply included language saying no transvaginal sonograms would be required. That bill was signed into a few weeks ago. Again, I'm personally against such a requirement. But I'm also against such phony claims being asserted in and by the media.

A new Yale study says cell phone use during pregnancy may be bad for babies.

NEW HAVEN - Yale University researchers say they may have found a link between cell phone use during pregnancy and behavioral problems in children such as hyperactivity.

“We can’t extrapolate from this what level of exposure is bad, but it lays the groundwork for saying cell phone exposure can cause harm,” says Hugh S. Taylor, a professor at the Yale School of Medicine and chief of the division of reproductive endocrinology and infertility in the school’s department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences.

“If you’re pregnant, it makes sense to move your cell phone away from your abdomen when you’re not on an active call. Putting it on a desk or a table might be better,” Taylor says.

I'm confused. How do you talk on your cell phone close to your abdomen when you ARE on an active call? You'd have to be a contortionist.

Ruminations on Snyder vs. Lombardi, Chester Upland's Fight Club, and Voter ID. My print column is up.

UPDATE: First rule of C-U Fight Club: Claim self defense.

I have just returned from the Delaware County courthouse where the matter of Snyder vs. Lombardi has finally been put to rest.

After haranguing a very patient Judge George Pagano who had found her in contempt of court and threatened to put her in jail last December, Paula Lombardi finally signed the papers that she had been ordered to sign, thus bringing to an end a 13-year court case involving two houses, a mortgage a lien and a romantic relationship gone bad.

At one point, Ms. Lombardi told Judge Pagano that the plaintiff's lawyer was misleading the court about a conversation she had with him Tuesday morning when I happened to be present in her home. She told the judge that I was in courtroom could verify everything she said. Lucky for her I was not asked to take the witness stand.

Sitting silently through the proceeding in a gray suit was Fred Snyder, who was represented by attorney James Kelly of Upper Darby.

Having spent an hour and a half listening to Lombardi go on and on about the case, in which she ended up representing herself, I asked Snyder if he wished to comment.

"No" he said, "You wouldn't want to hear what I have to say."

When I assured him that I would, his lawyer intervened.

"I would advise you not to say a word," he told his client, "because he (meaning me) would properly quote you and no good can come from that..."

For her part, Lombardi said what I wrote in my column Wednesday about "Hell has no fury, or whatever it was" was wrong.

"I told you this case was not about Fred Snyder. This is about an injustice in the courts." Adding... "I don't ever want to see Fred's ugly face again."

A Chester Upland teacher and the President of the School Board go at it.  Where's Damon Feldman when you need him.

p.s. Wanda, love the earrings!

Thomas Sowell explains Professor Derrick Bell and what white guilt and double standards can do to black pride.

More from Peter Wood at the Chronicle of Higher Education on Bell's Critical Race Theory and the recent dust up between Breitbart activist Jason Pollack and CNN's Soledad O'Brien.

Liberal pundit Froma Harrop, who is also President of the National Conference of Editorial Writers, explains why she is not "worried about gas prices."

After all, she has more important things to worry about.

Run the video, it's priceless.

I just talked to attorney James Kelly who is representing Fred Snyder in Snyder vs. Lombardi, the subject of today's print column. (Scroll down for Snyder vs. Lombardi vs. The World)

I asked Kelly if Paula Lombardi signed the documents she said she would to end her being in contempt of court.

He told me she hadn't. When she arrived at the scheduled meeting, he said, she asked where Fred was.

Kelly reminded her that she told him not to bring him. And that's true because I heard Paula's end of the conversation with my own ears. I was in her Springfield home when it occurred.

So the documents didn't get signed as per ordered by Pagano and Paula remains in contempt of court.

There is a hearing scheduled for 9 a.m. tomorrow in Judge Pagano's courtroom.

That's Paula, over there, in happier times.

UPDATE II:  Kelly also told me that Lombardi told him she was going over to see Judge Pagano herself. I called the judge's chambers and I was told that she did attempt to see the judge but was told she needed to leave. And she did.

"The judge does not see people ex parte," his secretary explained. The contempt hearing is on for tomorrow morning.

So far my efforts to reach Lombardi have been unsuccessful. I will keep trying.

She did call my editor this morning and complained that I misquoted her in saying that she would comply with the judge's order "under duress." She is incorrect about that. That's exactly what she said According to Kelly she told him at their meeting that I also misquoted him and that he too should complain to my editor. He told me he had no complaints about how he was quoted.

I plan to see everybody tomorrow.

Pillow fight promoter Feldman is under state investigation. Jack McCaffery has the story.

Money Quote:  

“I just want to move on with my life,” Feldman said. “But no matter what I do, they are out to get me. What if I had a marbles competition? Or I wanted to find out who the best bowler was? They would get me for that. It’s the biggest joke I have ever seen.”

Aside from the pillow fights themselves, it's hard to disagree with him.

Jonah Goldberg watches Obama's poll numbers sink and piles on.

Obama often says, “Under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years.” That’s true: It’s also true that under Obama’s administration, Snooki from Jersey Shore got pregnant and Charlie Sheen lost his job. And he can take about as much credit for those developments.

Read it all.

WaPo Opinion Columnist Richard Cohen watches Game Change and declares it "absolutely smashing."

The headline:

Sarah Palin's foolishness ruined U.S. politics

That's a bit of an exaggeration isn't it? It's like saying Richard Cohen's foolishness with Peter Jennings' wife ruined marriage.

Michele Malkin nails CNN's Soledad O'Brien on Critical Race Theory, not to mention her undisclosed relationship with the professor in question.

That's going to leave a mark.

Springfield's Paula Lombardi believes the legal system is corrupt and that she is the victim of a great miscarriage of justice. If she doesn't obey a judge's order today, she might very well go to jail tomorrow.

My print column is up.

Maureen Dowd goes all in on the Democrats "War on Women" hoax.

Women have watched a chilling cascade of efforts in Congress and a succession of states to turn women into chattel, to shame them about sex and curb their reproductive rights. They’ve seen the craven response of G.O.P. candidates after Limbaugh branded a law student wanting insurance coverage for birth control pills, commonplace for almost five decades, as a “prostitute” and “slut.”

Oh my. But no mention of Bill Maher, Louis C.K. and other progressive stalwarts who have said much, MUCH worse thing about certain females.

The law student in question is 30 and believes the government owes her free birth control. That doesn't make her a slut or prostitute. It makes her a big-government moocher who believes her fellow citizens should be forced to subsidize 100 percent of her sex life.

Dowd and her fellow progressives think they have cleverly framed this issue to fool female voters into voting for Democrats.

Looking at recent polling data, Micky Kaus thinks they're wrong.

While these nincompoops crow over their own supposed cleverness, the president's poll numbers continue to drop thanks to his "progressive" energy policies and rising gasoline prices.

Most Americans, male and female, would rather have $2.50-a-gallon gas than contraceptives they can buy themselves for $9 a month.

Go figure.

A guy in black combat boots and a bullet proof vest is found walking around the Granite Run Mall with a handgun on his hip.

Sounds like a disaster in the making.

But when questioned by state police Lawrence Henry Benson of Chester peacefully handed over his weapon. He told them he was looking for a guy who threatened him a few days earlier and would have shot him if he'd found him.

Lucky for everyone that he didn't.

Nice job by mall security and state cops to resolve the situation with no one getting hurt.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu wanted higher gasoline prices before he wanted lower gasoline prices.

The Obama team is in a tizzy over rising gasoline prices. It should be. If prices continue to rise as expected into the summer, voters will blame the president. They already are.

Is this fair? Yes and no. Gasoline prices go up and down and there is little at those times that a sitting president can do about it. But, at the moment we have a president whose announced policy has been that rising gas prices are, overall, a good thing for America. Rising oil prices mean America will have to turn to other sources of energy. They will make these other sources of energy more competitive in the market place. But in the short term nothing - not natural gas or electric cars, which GM just stopped making for a while, will ease the pain to consumers of high gasoline prices.

Obama's Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said he would like to see the price of gasoline go up to European prices ($9 a gallon). He has since disavowed that desire.

To avert blame, the president is claiming oil production is up since he became president. But it is quite clear that the recent drilling boom has nothing to do with anything this president has done. Drilling is only up on private and state land. It is down significantly on federal land, off coast, and in Alaska. It's  environmental base of the Democratic party that the president is appeasing with these policies.

He continues to delay the building of the Keystone pipeline. Whoever his Republican challenger is this fall won't let him get away with such bald-faced misrepresentation of his energy policy. He will throw back in the president's face his own statements, such as that under his energy plan electricity rates would necessarily "skyrocket."

While that sort of talk was catnip to green voters, regular voters understand what this president's green dreams will cost them.

The talk now is of the president tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to temporarily flood the market with cheaper oil. The SPR was created to be used during national emergencies, not to bolster the re-election prospects of an incumbent president. This should and will be seen for the calculated and cynical gesture it is.

If gasoline goes up and stays there for much of the summer, it won't matter if it comes down in the fall. Within the electorate, the feeling will harden that the president's energy policies were a failure. He will be clobbered with campaign reminding voters of the Solyndra debacle and how he wasted billions of taxpayer dollars on other green companies, whose executives showed his campaign with donations.

No wonder they're scrambling. They'll be scrambling right up until Election Day.

Thomas Sowell's take on the punishment of black students in America's public schools: It's a hoax.

If black males get punished more often than Asian American females, does that mean that it is somebody else's fault? That it is impossible that black males are behaving differently from Asian American females? Nobody in his right mind believes that. But that is the unspoken premise, without which the punishment statistics prove nothing about "equity."

What is the purpose or effect of this whole exercise by the Department of Education and the Department of Justice? To help black students or to secure the black vote in an election year by seeming to be coming to the rescue of blacks from white oppression?

Among the many serious problems of ghetto schools is the legal difficulty of getting rid of disruptive hoodlums, a mere handful of whom can be enough to destroy the education of a far larger number of other black students -- and with it destroy their chances for a better life.

Frank J. sez:

Democrats have their new talking point: The GOP is doing a “War on Women”. And the sad thing is some people are dumb enough to think that’s a real thing. I for one just find it supremely dishonest with the left pretends to care about anything other than their own politics. Democrats care about women the same way they care about blacks — they’re groups they can get votes from. If you ever want to see great examples of misogyny or racism, see how the left reacts to women and minorities who disagree with them.

I think Frank J. makes an excellent point.

(Posted by Dannytheman)

Roger Kimball hits hard with the truth in every way in his story about this Presidents reign.

Read all about it here.

Some of the gems as written, With Romeny being 5 points ahead? "A syphilitic camel should be ahead." " The political class wants to govern like it's 1775, a time when kings were kings and consent of the governed didn't matter."

W.R. Mead notes the downside of government-run health care:

Fans of government health care keep telling us that government can do the job, and they point to countries like the UK as examples where single payer, government run health care systems deliver high quality, compassionate care.

They are either grossly ignorant or they are lying through their teeth.

A recent study by a British healthcare regulator finds that half of all elderly people in Britain’s nursing homes are being denied basic health services.

Half.

 NYT columnist Paul Krugman wrote sometime ago:

"In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We've all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false."

What a relief... Unless... unless he is grossly ignorant or lying through his teeth. What are the odds?

Just saw this ad while watching CBS' Sunday Morning... pretty darn spectacular. Mrs. Spencerblog was in tears... and wants Cartier for her anniversary. Damn you Cartier!

That's one interpretation of new government data from the U.S. Department of Education on  punishment rates for minorities.

There's another. My print column is up.

UPDATE: Winner of the Best Comment So Far goes to tom19061:

When I was a child in Catholic school, the boys were disciplined much more harshly than the girls. I got beat with brass rulers, wooden pointers etc.. There wasn't a bias, the boys acted up! When I got home and told my parents, they didn't march to the school and berate the teacher, they beat me again! There were over 50 kids in my class and I got an excellent education. As far as the state of education today, we lost the church/school/family dynamic that existed in parishes throughout cities in America. My parents took me to church on Sunday, met with my teachers after Mass and discussed my development. If we didn't attend church and contribute to the church and school, we weren't welcome to attend school. If I didn't perform or act appropriately, I was told that my option was public school. When the Catholic education system left the cities, the churches were bought up by minority denominations but they neglected to buy the school house next door. That left the children without guidance and the only option is/was public school. The minority community needs to educate their own, just as the Polish, the Italians, the Irish, the Ukranians, the Greeks and all the rest did before them. This is a Black problem that needs to be addressed by Blacks. "

I say whites can help by supporting charter schools and school choice but it's hard to disagree with anything else.

UPDATE II: I wonder how long it took him to learn NOT to tell his parents.

Spring ahead!

The parallels between1980 and 2012 are quite interesting. William McGurn recalls.

Mark Steyn wants to know why we have to fund a middle-aged schoolgirl's sex life.

Oh, and the “young coed” turns out to be 30, which is what less evolved cultures refer to as early middle age. She’s a couple of years younger than Mozart was at the time he croaked, but, if the Dems are to be believed, the plucky little Grade 24 schoolgirl has already made an even greater contribution to humanity. She’s had the courage to stand up in public and demand that someone else (and this is where one is obliged to tiptoe cautiously, lest offense is given to gallant defenders of the good name of American maidenhood such as the many prestigious soon-to-be-former sponsors of this column who’ve booked Bill Maher for their corporate retreat with his amusing “Sarah Palin is a c***” routine . .. 

Go ahead counselor, sue me.

Texting While Driving is now illegal in the state of Pennsylvania. Don't expect accidents rates to go down. My print column is up.

Good stuff from Congressman Jim Cooper: 

Would you be surprised to hear that our government is just like a middle-aged American who, having eaten fast food for decades, now faces heart trouble in his golden years? Aging nations have arteries clogged with obsolete laws, slowing blood flow and preventing oxygen from reaching all parts of the body politic. Physicians call this arteriosclerosis; historians see decline of empire.

It happens so slowly and naturally that no one notices. Legislators want to prove that they care about children, seniors, veterans, etc. by creating programs to benefit them. Elected officials are so busy campaigning that they (and their staffs) don't review the statute books to see which programs already exist. They certainly don't check to see which ones are working, and which are not. As a result, each new generation of politicians simply adds another layer of spending and bureaucracy.

"Actually, I was just changing the radio station. There outta' be a law."

So Democrats are outraged that Rush Limbaugh would call a female activist who thinks the government should pay for her birth control "a slut." But they are mum, when progressive commentators and entertainers call conservative women demeaning names. Like Bill Maher, to name just one, who has called Sarah Palin one of the ugly names for female genitalia.

Maher recently donated $1 million to a re-elect Obama super PAC. No calls yet from outraged Democrats that the president demand the money be returned.

James Taranto does a nice job explaining the hypocrisy of cultural feminism and it's media cheerleaders. And he praises Democratic consultant Kirsten Powers for calling out these liberal men for their grossly misogynistic remarks.

In that spirit, let me say that I think Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot for his stupid remarks. At least he's apologized for them. How sincere that apology is, who knows.

UPDATE: More on this from Nick Gillespie over at Reason magazine. The catalog of name-calling is quite graphic. Mr. Gillespie's contempt for such stuff, be it done by liberals or conservatives, sounds quite genuine.

Comes from Jim Savage, President of the United Steelworkers Union Local 10-1, which you will find below along with my response.

Mr. Spencer, 

In your Sunday column, you make the statement that "it seems" that the union leadership has not pursued the option of purchasing and running the refineries ourselves. If you question whether or not that is an option that was pursued, I'm really not all that hard to get in touch with. In fact, I was sitting right next to you while you were observing our offending signs that prompted your column. Partisanship can be understood, especially for a columnist who writes often about politics. Laziness, on the other hand, is far less excusable. Have a nice day.

Jim Savage

President

USW Local 10-1

Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Mr. Savage, 

Your reading of my Sunday column does not do it - or you - justice. The portion of it with which you take issue actually read: 

"The workers (of the refineries) have been well represented by their union in so far as their leaders seem to have pursued every avenue possible to keep the plants open. (Every avenue, it seems, short of purchasing and running the refineries themselves.) They have been to Harrisburg and Washington to plead their case and demand action from our elected officials."

That was, more or less, meant as a compliment. Sorry, if I offended you. 

But you are wrong to believe that your "Obama-Biden" campaign signs offended me or "prompted my column." They didn't. I simply found them ironic given of the President's antipathy for the industry in which you work. I thought I was pretty clear about that.

What actually prompted the column was the news that the refineries might actually be purchased and  what I considered to be the intemperate remarks, and unsubstantiated accusations made by union leaders toward Sunoco management. All that, plus the stark contrast between the attitude exhibited by you and your fellow union members and that of a lone business owner who recently saw her own business forced to close down.

I would understand if you were offended by those observations. But my failing to call you to ask about something that was a practical and financial impossibility, not so much.

In any case, I sincerely hope that the refineries will be purchased and will resume operation.

Have a nice day and Nemo Me Impune Lacessit to you too.


UPDATE: Here's another email on the same subject:

To: Gil Spencer

Subject: You know where your bread is buttered

That is about all I can say about your column on the refinery workers.
Except to say you should have had a comma after the word, weeks.
So a small-time capitalist who actually does run a risk loses her dough.
The huge capitalists who run a refinery, how much risk did they run?
I thought as a newspaperman, you would be on the side of the ordinary worker.

Brian Steer
Pottstown

Brian, sounds like you have something against capitalism, small or large. But your so-called "huge capitalists" who run the refinery, are actually not capitalists, in so far as they started a business with their own money. They are nothing more than managers, hired by the owners of the company, the shareholders. You need to learn a little more about how capitalism works. 


As for newspapermen being on the side of the "ordinary worker," I like to think I am on the side of anyone who does a job and does it well. But I don't believe any company owes anyone a job for life. Not even me. 

---

(Posted by Dannytheman)