Patterico's Pontifications


Questions for Those Who Believe Abortion Is Murder

Filed under: Abortion,General — Patterico @ 8:24 pm

1) Do you believe killing an abortion doctor is morally justified?

2) If you had an al Qaeda terrorist in the sights of your gun, would you pull the trigger? If you were the President and you were told one of our snipers had Osama in his sights, would you give the order to kill him?

I do not happen to believe that abortion is murder, although I believe it is wrong — and becomes more morally objectionable as we get closer to the moment of birth.

But some do believe abortion is murder, no different from murder of a fully formed human. It is those people to whom I put the question.

No doubt I will be criticized for raising the question. I do not raise it to mock the views of those who believe abortion is murder; I have friends who believe it is, and I respect them deeply. I just find it perplexing when people say that they believe abortion is murder, but they don’t support the killing of abortion doctors.

I realize that I run the risk of having people say in the comments that they do support the killing of abortion doctors. All I can say is that I do not support such actions in any way, shape, or form — implicitly or explicitly. However, I am interested in a frank discussion of the issue by those who believe abortion is murder.

I want people to be extra polite in this thread. If you’re not, your comment may be removed. Let’s show the world that we can discuss difficult and emotional issues without insulting one another.

UPDATE: If you answer “no” to the first question, and “yes” to the second, the obvious answer is “why”? And if your answer is that we are at war with al Qaeda, then are you saying that if the Democrats declare that we are no longer “at war” with al Qaeda, then your answer to question #2 would change??

UPDATE x2: The majority of the answers I’m seeing please me. In essence, readers are saying that whatever they might think of abortion, they recognize that’s it’s legal — and that to murder an abortion doctor is illegal. I’m pleased by that reaction. It almost makes me feel like the laws of this country mean something.

Michelle Malkin has more on the evil nature of this murder, and the need to avoid scoring political points.

L.A. Times Lies About Cornyn’s Comments on Sotomayor

Filed under: Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 3:31 pm

My post is at Hot Air.

UPDATE: Guess what? They sent the false quote down the memory hole. Details here.

Dealergate and Clinton Donors

Filed under: Obama — DRJ @ 11:40 am

[Guest post by DRJ]

Via Michelle Malkin, Marla Singer at Zero Hedge found “… a significant and highly positive correlation between dealer survival and Clinton donors.”

She wonders:

“Did Maureen White pass a list of Clinton donors to her husband for preferential treatment in the Chrysler dealer beheddings game? We don’t know. “Maybe” is about the best answer we can give with this data. But “Maybe” should never have been an option anyone even had to wonder about.”

Singer cautions these are preliminary findings but also states she does not expect them to substantially change in the final version.

The story, I’m sure, will continuue.

EDIT: More on minority dealer closings here.


Abortion Doctor Killed (Updated)

Filed under: Abortion,Crime — DRJ @ 10:51 am

[Guest post by DRJ]

A Kansas abortion doctor has been shot and killed in church:

“George Tiller, a Wichita doctor who was one of the few doctors in the nation to perform late-term abortions, was shot to death on Sunday as he attended church, city officials in Wichita said.”

Whoever did this is a fool. Not only does this hurt the anti-abortion cause and go against Christian teachings, but it validates the recent report warning of conservative domestic terrorists.


UPDATE: A suspect is in custody:

“[T]he suspect in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller is in custody in the Kansas City area. Wichita police say the man was arrested near Gardner, KS at around 2:00 Sunday afternoon.”

The suspect is described as “a white male in his 50’s or 60’s with grey hair that is balding in the middle. He is about 6’1″ and about 220 pounds and was wearing a white shirt and dark pants. The suspect was last seen in a light blue Ford Taurus, possibly an early 1990’s model. It has a K-State vanity plate and a Kansas license plate number 225 BAB.”



Borking Sotomayor

Filed under: Judiciary,Obama — DRJ @ 8:51 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Republicans are concerned about Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, in part because of her statement that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” Nevertheless, Barack Obama has called on Congress to treat her fairly:

“What I hope is that we can avoid the political posturing and ideological brinksmanship that has bogged down this process, and Congress, in the past.”

This from the “first President in U.S. history to have voted to filibuster a Supreme Court nominee.” Perhaps Obama learned about “political posturing and ideological brinksmanship” from Joe Biden who, as recently as last October, proclaimed how proud he was to have “led the fight against Judge Bork” and effectively invent the political “Borking” of a Supreme Court nominee.


Patterico on the Northern Alliance Radio Network

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:08 pm

I received a sudden and very welcome invitation today to join Ed Morrissey and Mitch Berg on the Northern Alliance Radio Network. The conversation with me begins at 1:43:14; their during-the-commercial banter referencing me starts a bit earlier at 1:40:26. We mostly talked about Bill O’Reilly, with a touch of Michael Hiltzik thrown in for good measure.

Pharmacist Shoots Armed Robber, Is Charged with Murder

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 2:38 pm

It sounds like a bad case for the prosecution when you read about it:

Confronted by two holdup men, pharmacist Jerome Ersland pulled a gun, shot one of them in the head and chased the other away. Then, in a scene recorded by the drugstore’s security camera, he went behind the counter, got another gun, and pumped five more bullets into the wounded teenager as he lay on the floor.

Now Ersland has been charged with first-degree murder in a case that has stirred a furious debate over vigilante justice and self-defense and turned the pharmacist into something of a folk hero.

Ersland, 57, is free on $100,000 bail, courtesy of an anonymous donor. He has won praise from the pharmacy’s owner, received an outpouring of cards, letters and checks from supporters, and become the darling of conservative talk radio.

When I read about someone like that, I really want to be on his side. How do we know he wasn’t worried about the guy pulling a gun on him and killing him?

But then you see the video, and you realize that the guy didn’t seem very concerned at all:

Now, granted: we can’t see what the guy on the floor is doing. And even if he’s not moving, I feel some sympathy for the pharmacist. He didn’t ask to be robbed at gunpoint. If he had killed one of these guys with the first shot, the other robber could have been prosecuted for murder.

But the pharmacist just doesn’t look concerned to me. And he apparently lied to the police about what he did. It looks to me like he just decided to execute this kid. Based on this tape, he looks guilty — if not of first-degree murder (and it may well be that), then at least of voluntary manslaughter. (He could likely raise a defense of heat of passion under California law and have a decent shot at selling that to a jury.)

What do you think?

UPDATE: Corrected “store owner” to “pharmacist” in one sentence.

Patterico Banned from

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:24 pm

I wish I could share today’s “ blog posting” . . . but my membership has been terminated:

Due to violations of the Terms and Conditions of attributed to your account, your Premium Membership is hereby terminated effective as of the date of this notice. The termination is final and any attempt to use the site or to renew membership either directly or indirectly will similarly result in termination and/or blocking use of the site.

I’m not sure what terms and conditions I supposedly violated. I never posted any comments (or “blog postings”) on O’Reilly’s site. All I did was quote (and screencap) two embarrassing comments from the message boards.

Oh, wait. I just reviewed the Terms and Conditions again, and I believe I have found the relevant language: “4. Do not expose Bill O’Reilly as a rank hypocrite.”

OK, then.

UPDATE: Thanks to Hot Air and Instapundit for the links.


Hiltzik Column Corrected with Incorrect Correction; Original Column Still Inane

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General,Morons — Patterico @ 10:00 pm

Well, that was quick. Quick . . . and wrong.

Michael Hiltzik’s Thursday column, concerning which I wrote the Readers’ Rep just this morning, now bears the following “correction”:

FOR THE RECORD: Michael Hiltzik’s Tuesday column on the California budget cited an incorrect estimate of 30% for state population growth from 1998 through 2009. The correct figure, based on population estimates from the state Department of Finance, is about 15%. But the finding by the legislative analyst’s office that the state budget remained in line with population growth and inflation during that period, on which the column was based, relied on the correct multiplier of population growth.

Uh, it was his Thursday column, not his “Tuesday column.” Time to correct the correction!

In any event, the little defensive-sounding statement that ends the “correction” is still misleading, as is Hiltzik’s entire column. Matt Welch notes the problem: in attacking as incorrect the “infectious” and “deeply cherished talking point” that we are overspending, Hiltzik doesn’t count bond spending as part of California’s spending. This very fact renders Hiltzik’s entire column utterly stupid and pointless — and it’s not saved by the fact that Hiltzik whispers this fact as one of several “caveats” he mentions only in passing. This is hardly a peripheral point, as Hiltzik pretends it is. Instead, it devastates Hiltzik’s central point. As Welch says:

In what universe does “bond spending” not count as “spending”? Does this mean I am not technically spending when I buy stuff with my credit card? If a “deeply cherished talking point” turns out to be true, can it still be “infectious”?

In other words, Hiltzik is saying, California’s spending isn’t that bad if you don’t count the billions and billions we are borrowing against our children’s futures.

What a very wise and perspicacious point that is! Ignore the borrowing and we’re doing great! Aren’t you thrilled that you have this guy as a business columnist?! Let me make an equally inane and pointless observation: the current state budget isn’t really in bad shape . . . if you don’t count the deficit!

Welch notes that an honest accounting of California’s spending — i.e. an accounting that doesn’t emply Hiltzik’s “caveats” that render his whole column a mass of horseshit — reveals quite plainly that the problem is not lack of revenue. The problem is spending — pure and simple.

Regarding the population and inflation multiplier, the Reason study cited by Welch shows that California’s rate of spending increases significantly exceeds the rate of population growth plus inflation.

The combined total of 4.3811 percent a year is easily outpaced by the 5.37 percent average annual increase in General Fund spending. . . . Over the entire 18-year period, state spending grew at an average annual rate of 5.91 percent, while population plus inflation grew only 4.38 percent a year, on average (see Figure 3).

But of course, this analysis doesn’t have the phony-baloney “let’s pretend bond spending doesn’t cost us anything” type of “caveats” featured in Hiltzik’s crappy column.

Marc Danziger is fed up. He says Hiltzik should be fired. Me, I think that he should be kept on the payroll. Hear me out! I need to add a couple of “caveats.” First, Hiltzik’s paycheck should be paid in Monopoly money. And his columns should be printed in invisible ink.

No need to fire him. This ship is sinking anyway. Let him go down with the rest of them.

It’s Friday. Time for “The Obama Show”

Filed under: Media Bias,Obama — DRJ @ 3:43 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

This week’s episode is “Obama takes NBC News’ crew out for burgers.” Previous episodes include the girls’ first day of school, Michelle’s White House garden, the new swing set, Michelle & Barack’s date night, Obama takes co-worker Biden on a burger run, and this year’s most popular episode, a multi-part event featuring puppy Bo Obama. ***UPDATE: There’s more! $24,000 date night in New York. ***

Before the Sonia Sotomayor nomination, Obama’s approval rating index was at +1, its lowest point ever. After Sotomayor his approval bounced to +10, so this a good time to make nice with the media and get those weekend poll ratings up with a human interest story that helps Americans forget things like GM, Chrysler, trillion dollar debt, unemployment, North Korea nukes, and Iran.


Next Page »

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0845 secs.