Darryl Glenn Announces His Bid for U.S Senate

The race for the Senate has exploded in the state of Colorado. A Tea Party-backed conservative has taken the lead in the highly contested race. Darryl Glenn has Ted Cruz supporting his candidacy.

According to CNN:

Cruz described Glenn as a “constitutional conservative” who will “take on the D.C. establishment.”

“I am proud to stand with the grassroots in Colorado supporting Darryl Glenn in his campaign for the U.S. Senate,” Cruz said in a statement Friday. “He is a constitutional conservative with the experience to understand what it takes to bring back economic growth and preserve our individual liberties. I am confident he will go to Washington to fight for those values, and he won’t back down.”

His competition is the  Democratic incumbent, Michael Bennet. This is truly a David and Goliath situation where everyone is thinking that Glenn has little chance of winning because he is going against the “political giant” Michael Bennet. Of course, Michael is only a giant in terms of cash flow, not necessarily in terms of principles, especially if he is a strict adherent to the Democratic platform.

wcmu.org

Getting financial support has been a stumbling block for Glenn. According to the Denver Post on June 8th, Green only had 50,000 dollars in support but that was before Ken Cuccinelli  “jumped in on Glenn’s behalf with $500,000 in support.” And while that is quite a jump in support, it still doesn’t come close to the 5.7 million Bennet has for his campaign.  Of course, people who think all you need is money to win an election don’t know about John Moolenaar. If anyone is proof that you can win an election even when your opponent outspends you it is John Moolenaar.

In the 2014 Congressional race for Michigan’s 4th District, Moolenaar’s opponent, Paul Mitchell (no, not the hair guy) went into debt the tune of $3 million while John Moolenaar had a total of $567,108. [John Moolenaar] And that is not including the nearly 3/4 of a million dollars he received in free advertising from PACs that were just endorsing him. John, like Glenn, was also Tea Party and had a large group of supporters backing him. That is what won him the election, not the money.

Another thing the two had in common is that they both had prominent conservative figures backing their campaigns, with Ted Cruz backing Glenn despite the suspension of his campaign, there are still enough ardent Cruz supporters that they may actually be an asset to Glenn winning the race over Bennet. While people might think that Hillary’s lead over Donald in the Presidential race means that the Democrats have more clout.

The truth is a lot of people who are in the Hillary camp are only there because they hate Trump, not because they like Hillary. However, with Cruz it is a much different story, even with his suspension his supporters still want him to re-enter the race. There is a movement to get the delegates to vote their conscience and vote for Cruz at the Republican Convention and have Cruz be the official candidate despite the 1237 required delegate votes already won by Donald Trump. This sort of dedication could only benefit Glenn in the long run if he could get Cruz supporters to become Glenn supporters.

Another drawback is that the GOP doesn’t completely endorse Glenn nor does Glenn completely support the GOP. In fact, he is “a self-described unapologetic Christian constitutional conservative who has said he doesn’t see the value in compromising with Democrats — has vowed already to oppose McConnell if the Kentucky Republican tries to keep his leadership post. And McConnell has his own issues with Glenn’s allies.” The pundits are saying because of his staunch ideology he doesn’t have the capacity to reach out to the moderates in this country.

Of course, when it comes to moderates, King had it right when he said: First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate.” And while King may have highlighted the White moderate, the truth is it is applicable to all moderates of all colors. They are the greatest stumbling block towards our freedom.

In conclusion, while the Tea Party is far from dead like its leftist rival, Occupy Wall Street, it is not inundated with money either which makes it difficult to get people that are anti-establishment like Glenn elected. However, we have seen that with enough support that should not be a total hindrance to getting elected. Glenn might surprise everyone and become the next constitutional conservative Republican Senator for the great state of Colorado. Let’s hope so.

The Consequences of the SCOTUS Decision

Yesterday the SCOTUS case  WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH ET AL. v. HELLERSTEDT, COMMISSIONER, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES, ET AL  was finally decided. As typical of SCOTUS, they came down on the wrong side of history. Just like they did when they decided Plessy vs. Ferguson, Dred Scott vs. Sanford, Roe v. Wade, Doe vs. Bolton, Hodges vs. Obergefell and now this. SCOTUS has quite a history interpreting law in such a fashion that it devalues human life not upholds it. This decision is no different.

So let me tell about the inevitable consequences of the SCOTUS decision. It is going to kill women.  SCOTUS wrote in its decision: We have found nothing in Texas’ record evidence that shows that, compared to prior law (which required a “working arrangement” with a doctor with admitting privileges), the new law advanced Texas’ legitimate interest in protecting women’s health. 

I hate abortion absolutely despise it, but if you say you care about women’s health why would you not want women to have the best possible conditions to have an abortion in? Places that safe, sanitary and put the interest of the woman first. Let me tell you about some women who died because of shoddy abortionists who cared more about getting paid and not about the woman on the table.

Barbara Auerbach

Barbara was 38 years old. On December 11, 1982, she went to a New York hospital for the following procedures: an abortion and a tubal ligation. Two days later she was discharged from the hospital and four days later she started suffering from other complications. She was having back pain, vomiting and she was unable to hold her bladder. At this point, she was admitted to Princeton Medical Center. Doctors tried desperately to save her life but she died within a mere three hours of being admitted to the hospital. When the autopsy was performed it was found that she “had an obstruction in her small bowel, was caused a massive infection throughout her body.” [Real Choice]

Now as you can see all this transpired in a hospital setting. But there are many cases where woman/girl died because they arrived at the hospital too late if the hospital was called at all. The truth is a lot of the time the staff at abortion clinics are told not to call the hospital.

In part two of this video, Joy Davis who was an associate of Dr. Tommy Tucker and ran six of his clinics, talks about a time a patient of her clinic was bleeding badly and she couldn’t stop it.  Joy told Mr. Tucker (I refuse to call any person who kills children for a living-doctor) that he was needed, the patient was bleeding badly and she couldn’t stop it. She was told by him that he was busy and she just needed to fix it. She went back and tried to stop the bleeding once more. Still unable to and wanting to save the girl’s life, she called an ambulance to take her to the hospital. When Mr. Tucker found out he became upset with Joy, canceled the ambulance and told her, “We can’t send her to the hospital in that condition, they will hang us.” The ambulance was eventually called but the girl ended up dying. At that point, she went to the police.

 

pinterest.com

Joy continues her story. When she turned herself in for practicing without a license and gave the DA the file of Mr. Tucker’s negligence they told her they wanted more evidence and for her to keep working there, but nothing ever happened. When she finally confronted them, she was told, “Abortion is a hot button issue and we don’t want to touch it.”  So please don’t insult my intelligence, SCOTUS!

 

Of course, there is no record of deaths, they are covered up. “In the late 1980’s, Kevin Sherlock, an investigative reporter who specializes in public document searches, undertook an extensive review of death certificates for women of reproductive age in Los Angeles County. Looking for indications of “therapeutic misadventure,” he pulled autopsy reports and was able to find 29 abortion-related deaths in L.A. County alone between 1970 and 1987. Four of these deaths occurred during a one-year period for which the CDC reported zero abortion-related deaths for the entire state of California and only 12 deaths for the whole country.” The Cover Up of Abortion Deaths

This article was published in 2000 but let’s be honest, if Planned Parenthood is selling baby parts what is the likelihood that they are reporting deaths at their clinics?  Not very likely. To say that abortion clinics should not be held to same rigorous regulations that we hold all other surgical centers does not say you value women’s health. It says you value the Almighty Dollar more. It says that as a poor, Black woman (because let’s face it those are the women getting abortions) I do not deserve the same kind of care that a rich, White woman getting her breast enhanced does! This SCOTUS sends the wrong message to women. It is not about any “undue burden.” It is about patient safety.

If you are truly pro-choice then you should be fighting for women to receive better care not worse. The abortion industry has been getting away with injuring, maiming and killing women since 1973. Women like Angelica Duarte, a 21-year-old woman who  on November 1, 1991, was  undergoing an abortion per doctor’s orders due to health problems. She was given no care following her abortion but  was supposedly kept under “observation.” She was “rushed to the hospital  by paramedics at 7:30 that evening but she was dead on arrival.”  The spokesman for the hospital  said that she had lost 90 percent of her blood and that her uterus had perforated (something extremely common in the abortion industry.) And what did the medical board say after reviewing Angelica’s death?  “Thompson (the abortionist) did not have adequate equipment for post-operative care and revoked his license.” Angelica Duarte

So wait a minute, they didn’t have the equipment necessary to save her life?  The one that SCOTUS just said was an undue burden and unnecessary? But that is okay, SCOTUS says women don’t die because of that but what Angelica did. I am confused. Now I could go on forever and ever. I have a list of over two hundred names, so if you really need more drop me a line, I will be glad to go over my entire list with you. But as you can see SCOTUS has never been a human rights advocate and has always ruled on behalf the of the powerful, not the powerless. In fact, the current Supreme Court as it currently stands needs to go! I love the Founding Fathers but the Supreme Court is the one area of our governmental structure they got wrong! And SCOTUS continues to prove how wrong they were!

 

 

Birthing Zika: The Zika Virus and Birth Defects

Every season UCLA Health publishes a magazine called “Vital Signs.” In it, it talks about important health information for people to know, especially its patients who use UCLA on an ongoing basis for their health care needs. In the Spring Issue, it discusses the Zika Virus. This article will give you a brief look at what it is and how it can infect the lives of babies.

Most of what I will be talking about will be coming straight  out of UCLA’s Vital Signs magazine and given that UCLA is one of the premier research hospitals, I think we can safely assume the information is correct as we currently understand Zika.

Like its “cousin” Malaria, the Zika virus is found through the bite of mosquitoes. But it is not your average mosquito, it is the Aedes mosquito in particular. The Aedes is not just responsible for the Zika Virus but for dengue and chikungunya. (Okay that last one sounds like a form of chicken gonorrhea, but regardless stay away from mosquitoes.)   Experts are saying we should not worry about Zika Virus too much because it is not as likely to happen in the United States for the following reasons:

1. “The Zika Virus has spread throughout Latin America and the Caribbean.” That in itself means it is highly unlikely to occur in the United Sates.  The article goes on to say, “Only a few cases of Zika infection have been reported in the United States, mostly in people who traveled to impacted areas and some from sexual contact with an infected person who had returned from South America.”
2. The United States has vast experience dealing with mosquito born illnesses. Some of those illnesses are vastly more dangerous than the Zika virus. “Zika virus is a fairly mild illness compared to malaria, tuberculosis or dengue fever; those are infections that cause millions of deaths a year.”
3. While certainly irritating, to most of the adults that get it, it is not lethal. So if you are ever stricken with Zika, you are not going to immediately croak. There is plenty that can be done to help you overcome it. “In men and non-reproductive women, the Zika virus is fairly harmless.”

All that being said there is  one group that the virus particularly lethal for and that is unborn children.  Unborn children are always at risk of getting potentially fatal diseases, it is because depending on the stage of the pregnancy unborn children either have no immune system or a very limited one. Conversely, there are times when Mom is sick and the baby has made her healthier. I have heard stories of women with kidney problems who start to do better because the baby’s kidney’s help do what Mom can’t.

Doctors are unsure of why Zika virus in unborn children causes birth defects. “Unfortunately, we don’t yet understand the frequency or the full scope of harm; to the unborn baby,”says Lydia Lee, MD a maternal-fetal medicine specialist.” However, the virus seems to be linked to cases of microcephaly. That is when the “baby’s head is smaller than expected and the brain may not develop normally.”  Because there have been so few cases in the United States and even less by pregnant women, it makes it difficult to determine what factors may be involved in causing the birth defects in the first place.

Pregnant women who have come in contract with people from impacted areas should see a doctor, just to make sure that everything is fine. While the Zika virus is harmless for the majority of the population, it is not for pregnant women and care needs to be paid when it can affect the health of  your unborn child.

 

 

 

The Third Amendment and Abortion

People know the first amendment and they know the second, but ask someone if they know the third and you will get a blank stare. No one knows the third amendment because they feel it is immaterial to our way of life now.However, what you may not know is that one little amendment changed the world. It was part of that “penumbra of privacy” that gave us Roe w. Wade.  So what is the Third amendment?

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time, of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time, of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

If you look at it plainly, it just says a soldier cannot take over your house, which was a problem during the Revolutionary days. However, that doesn’t happen today so why should we care? Because that “penumbra of privacy”  didn’t start with Roe v. Wade, it started with the one who got the whole ball rolling: “The Supreme Court has never had occasion to decide a case based solely on the Third Amendment, though the Court has cited its protections against the quartering of soldiers as a basis for the constitutional right to privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 85 S. Ct. 1678, 14 L. Ed. 2d 510 [1965]). Third Amendment

So what is Griswold vs. Connecticut? This is from the case brief of Griswold vs. Connecticut: Appellants, the Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut [always comes back to these monsters doesn’t it?], and its medical director, a licensed physician, were convicted as accessories for giving married persons information and medical advice on how to prevent conception and, following examination, prescribing a contraceptive device or material for the wife’s use.

Griswold was a “test case.” That means they deliberately broke the law in order to get the law changed. No one  had really suffered any damages on either side, which is usually a requirement to bring any case before any court. This was the case that ended  what was known as the Comstock Act. The Comstock Act  were laws that forbidden birth control and even the publication of it. Margaret Sanger actually went to jail because of the Comstock Act.

Several states, including New York, banned The Woman Rebel for its controversial advocacy of birth control. In 1914, Sanger was arrested for violating postal obscenity laws under the 1873 Comstock Act, which had made it illegal to send “obscene, lewd, or lascivious” printed material through the US mail.  Harvard  Of course, the Comstock Act just didn’t include printed material but “medical devices” as well.

“A devout Christian, he [Anthony Comstock] was appalled by what he saw in the city’s streets. It seemed to him that the town was teeming with prostitutes and pornography. In the late 1860s, Comstock began supplying the police with information for raids on sex trade merchants and came to prominence with his anti-obscenity crusade. Also offended by explicit advertisements for birth control devices, he soon identified the contraceptive industry as one of his targets. Comstock was certain that the availability of contraceptives alone promoted lust and lewdness.” Comstock

The article continues:  “In 1872 Comstock set off for Washington with an anti-obscenity bill, including a ban on contraceptives, that he had drafted himself. On March 3, 1873, Congress passed the new law, later known as the Comstock Act. The statute defined contraceptives as obscene and illicit, making it a federal offense to disseminate birth control through the mail or across state lines.” (ibid)

Without Griswold vs. Connecticut, there could be no Roe v. Wade or Doe v. Bolton. Here is an excerpt from the opinion of Roe v. Wade: ” Appellant would discover this right in the concept of personal “liberty” embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause; or in personal, marital, familial, and sexual privacy said to be protected by the Bill of Rights or its penumbras, see Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965); Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972); id. at 460 (WHITE, J., concurring in result); or among those rights reserved to the people by the Ninth Amendment, Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. at 486 (Goldberg, J., concurring). Before addressing this claim, we feel it desirable briefly to survey, in several aspects, the history of abortion, for such insight as that history may afford us, and then to examine the state purposes and interests behind the criminal abortion laws.”

What they  “discovered” is that because Greece had loose abortion laws that we should somehow emulate the Greeks. The Greeks and the Romans both threw Christians to the lions maybe we should start doing that as well.

The  “penumbra of privacy” that was supposed to protect our lives from the government literally coming  in through our front doors and taking the lives of others is being used for almost that exact person.  It is ironic that the third amendment, the amendment that time forgot, the one no one ever remembers is the that was used to do the most harm to the most vulnerable. The third ammendment was created to protect our families, it is now being used to destroy our families. The “penumbra of privacy” has bcome the “penumbra of death.” It is time that the constitution was not twisted in some grotesque variation of liberty where one man’s liberty is another man’s death. It is time to RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If Not for Me, Then Do It For Him

On December 18, 2015, my world came crashing down again. I have become accustomed to that. However, those times in the past it was something more manageable somehow. This time, it felt like the wind was knocked out of me. There was a call, I didn’t know the number exactly but I knew what was probably about. “Please don’t be the call, please don’t be the call.” I thought to myself.  Unfortunately, it was the call. A young man’s voice came on the line and he said the words I thought I would never hear, “Dena, Jeff is gone.” The voice was of Jeff’s stepson. We hadn’t spoken to each other much over the years, there was no animosity between us, just distance. And yet here he was speaking to me for the first time in years to tell me my brother was gone. For awhile there I was unable to even breathe, losing him was that hard.

A few days again I started a campaign to get to Ohio so I could attend the Republican National Convention. I really wanted to go. Then I started thinking, maybe it is not I who should go. Maybe it is Jeff. Maybe I should not go for me, maybe I should go for him. So let me tell you about my brother and why he deserves to stand before the Republican National Convention. Jeff was an amazing man and I am just beginning to find out how amazing. People who are just finding out about his death are sending it in condolences, telling me stories what kind of man he was. So let me tell what kind of man that is:

First and foremost, he was a true follower of Christ. His world revolved around being the best possible Christian he could be. When I needed help building up my faith, he was there. He allowed me and everyone around him to see themselves the way Christ saw them. Secondly, he was a husband and a father. His family meant the world to him and he loved them without end. He was married to his wife for over 2o years, up to the very day he died. You have never seen love until you have stood in the presence of Jeff and Veronica. I was lucky enough to witness that love in my lifetime. Third, he was our brother. There was four of us, Jeff was number three and I was number four. Jeff and I had always been best friends. Lastly, and probably the most importantly to you, he was a Republican

 

The last time I would ever see my brother

Jeff was a lifelong Republican. In his first election, he voted for Reagan. He loved Reagan and thought he was the best President. He and I disagreed on that, even today. (I prefer Eisenhower, myself.) But he was a Reagan conservative through and through. Even when I was a liberal the one thing we agreed on was abortion That made sense, of course, we were both adopted. Why would either of us promote something that would kill us? He supported all my pro-life efforts. Before he died he asked me, “Dena if you could do anything with your life, what would you do?” I told him, “I don’t know, but it would have something to do with the pro-life movement. I want to end abortion.” I told him. To which he responded, “Then that is what you should do.”

 

Such a goal seemed out of my reach. But not for Jeff, he thought his little sister could do anything. “The way you write, Dena it touches people. You are going to do great things with your writing, that is your ministry,” he told me once. He was always telling me things like that. He was always telling people things like that, he could see the best in everyone. Jeff was a conservative, not because he thrived in taking people down but because he got his greatest joy in lifting them up. Jeff used his voice to stand for Christ. Jeff used his voice to stand for those who could not speak for themselves. Jeff may not have been a pro-life zealot, like his sister, but his life stood in testament to what happens when you choose adoption for your child, you get a life full of greatness. Jeff was my hero and I always used him as an example of a life well-spent in my pro-life work. Everything I did in that area was so I could save a Jeff.

So maybe if I get to the RNC, I shouldn’t introduce myself as Dena Leichnitz. Maybe what I should say is, “Hello, I am here standing for Jeff Leichnitz. He was a lifelong Republican and conservative. He loved this country and wanted the best for it. He believed in the Constitution and in our religious liberty. He was a man of God. My brother died way too soon but he left this world a better place and I am here to carry on his work. I am here to make sure his beloved party, the party of Reagan, whom he loved so dearly,  does not fall to the “winds of progress.” It is not progress that we need but a reclaiming of our values. Jeff helped me see that I had always been a conservative, now I am here to help this nation remember so have they!”

To help get Jeff’s message to the RNC, go to this website: SendmetoRNC

Gays Are Getting Armed

After the Orlando shooting on June 12th that killed fifty people, there has been an increase in gun sales among gays and lesbians. While this surprises some, it shouldn’t. People should be able to protect themselves from others who would threaten them. It simply common sense that such a horrific tragedy would cause people to think twice about the second amendment.

© 2014 Peretz Partensky, Flickr | CC-BY-SA

“Gun shops typically see a spike in customers after mass shootings. But this time, many are seeing shoppers they’ve never really seen before: More gays and lesbians. George Horne, the owner of The Gun Room, Denver’s oldest firearms dealer, said Tuesday business is booming at his store.””For this time of year I’d say its three to four times what we normally have,” he said. KDVR

Gun sales are not the only thing that is rising, but so are memberships to gun clubs.  There is a gun club that is geared towards gays and lesbians and it has seen its membership rise dramatically in the last few days: “The Pink Pistols is a national gun club for gays and lesbians. It saw its membership soar from about 1,500 members on Saturday to 3,500 on Monday. Dozens of new chapters are springing up, including one [Mike] Smith is creating in Colorado Springs. He said it’s something he feels compelled to do, even though he’s heterosexual.” (ibid)  Mike Smith is a gun dealer who lives in Denver.

© 2011 Neil Kremer, Flickr | CC-BY-ND

Now for every sane, rational person who happens to think their life is worthy of self-protection, you have the gun control people telling them it is not. While West Hollywood, the Capital of Gaydom, has now started posting signs that say shoot back with using the Don’t Tread on Me insignia as its background, others have said we require more gun control. However isn’t gun control what brought us here? Isn’t the fact that the psycho had control of a gun and no one else did exactly why fifty people are dead? Gun control was never about disarming criminals, like terrorists but disarming the masses. Now they want to disarm the gay population?

However, while this fight continues more gay people are realizing that the second amendment is for them too and not just right-wing militia types who hunt their own food. Of course, the sudden increase is not surprising, there always is after these type of mass shootings. What will be surprising is if we start to see an exodus from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party because of the Democrats determination to defend not only Muslims but to disarm them from protecting themselves. Log Cabin Republicans are a group of gay Republicans, it would be interesting to see if their numbers increase following this tragedy. After all the 2nd amendment is not a heterosexual right, it is an American right!

 

 

Liberals: It is Gays or Muslims-Pick One!

Okay liberals, I am done being nice. I am done playing your little games! I am done with your constantly defending Islam no matter what Muslims do! It is now time you took sides and  you better pick well! We are in a fight for our lives and it no longer can be ignored. Fifty people were murdered and another fifty-three were injured in Orlando on June 12th at a gay nightclub, Pulse. Ten days earlier, there was a shooting at my Alma mater, UCLA. A professor was shot and killed. What do both of these shooting have in common? Islam!

Both of the shooters were Muslim but we are supposed to pretend their religion has nothing to do with it. But how much longer can longer can we lie to ourselves? How many more gays are you going to let die because it is easier than saying the words Islamic Terror? Look at these people, these were young men who were shot down like dogs and all you can say is “Well not every Muslim is a terrorist.” Are you kidding me with this!? Does it matter? Does it matter if only 1,000 are terrorists if those 1,000 are on our shores gunning for us? Tell these fifty people that “Not every Muslim is a terrorist.” and see if that brings them back to life.

According to the Web I am the Queen of the Homophobes, so you all need to bow down to me. But if the Queen of the Homophobes is ten shades of pissed at the slaughter of gay men and women, what does that tell  you? It tells that is so inherently and utterly wrong that even a “homophobe” like me cannot abide by it. It tells you that I am so pro-life that the loss of these people turns my stomach in knots. As the Bible commands me to do, I do not rejoice in evil and this my friends is pure evil.

Here is the thing, whether I agree with their lifestyle choice is immaterial when it comes to things like this, they are first and foremost Americans. That makes them family and family can fight with each other all they want to but no one better mess with your family and you have messed with my family for far long, Muslims! I don’t care if all Muslims are not terrorists, you are a threat! Just like I don’t take kindly to the KKK or the Aryan Nation, just like I don’t take kindly to the Black Panthers or the BLM movement, just like I despise  Hamas and ISIS, I am equally done with you!

Chase Strangio-Twitter

Of course, even though it was a Muslim that pulled the trigger and pledged his allegiance to ISIS, somehow once again it is the fault of Christians. Tell me when is the last time a Christian killed 103 people, let alone 103 gay people. Yet if you listen to the ACLU, the spawn of Satan, they will tell you it is our fault! “Chase Strangio, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s LGBT and AIDS Project, claimed the social and political environment cultivated by Christian conservatives in recent months was to blame for the shooting at Pulse, a nightclub popular with Orlando’s LGBT community.”Daily Caller

Strangio’s irrational logic is because there have been 200 laws “against the LGBT” (and I can pretty much guess 199 have to do with bathroom policy and not allowing men to go into the bathroom with little girls and somehow that is wrong and against LGBT) that somehow that caused an otherwise rational Muslim with no misgivings about homosexuality to lose his mind and kill everyone in sight. Are you kidding me with this? After all, Muslims are oppressed too, they would never do anything like this. This man is defending Muslims against his own people, how deranged do you have to be? It is easy to blame Christians because we won’t behead you, he knows that. But to actually blame Muslims that would take too much courage for the likes of Chase Strangio!

Los Angeles LDS Visitors’ Center

While lying about the threat of Islam in this country, Strangio, did happen to tell the truth about Christians while not meaning to. If Christians do not like something we  make laws. We don’t gun them down, we don’t behead them, we don’t throw them off rooftops. We are civil and you may disagree with the laws and you may not want to see them passed and but they are no way the same as killing 103 people! You also have a voice and you have the right to fight them and we will never take that away from you because we don’t want it taken away from us! Besides it is what makes America great! So Strangio don’t you dare compare us civilly passing laws as the same as cold-blooded murder! You are a disgrace to gay people everywhere!

West Hollywood-Allen B. West.com

Of course, not all gay people are taking this lying down. In California, the land of destroying our friends and embracing our enemies, people have started to wake up. The don’t tread on me symbol that was and is party of the Tea Party movement has made its way to the gay community after all this time. The picture to your right was taken in West Hollywood, which is a hop, skip and a jump away from me.  So it makes me proud that my gays are not cowering to the Muslim community and defending their lives as they have every right to. There are gay people and there are West Hollywood gays, you don’t mess with the WeHo gays!

Liberals have had their chance and they have proven they will let everyone in America die before they stand up to Muslims!  I am tired of the U.S.S Coles, the 9/11s, the Fort Hoods, the UCLAs and the Pulses! I am tired of pretending Islam is not a threat and we should all sing Kumbaya and befriend all the jihadists in the world. Gays should not have to sacrifice their lives to make the liberals happier and less fearful. Gays should not be told not to shoot back because they are killing an “oppressed person.” Gays are not the sacrificial lamb on the altar of liberalism! Liberals, if you won’t protect your royalty, I will protect my “enemy.” Because they are not really my enemy anyway, they are my brethren, they are my people, they are Americans!

 

 

 

 

Why I Should Go to the RNC!

I have been invited to go to the RNC and I would love to go but it would mean paying my own way. So I am trying to raise some funds so I can head to Ohio and cause some mischief. These are the following reasons I should go:

1. Because I am Black and we all know Blacks should get everything they want. If they don’t it means you are racist and your kin were slavemasters. And let’s face it how many Black Republicans are there, like five? I and my other four Black Republicans will be the toast of the town, well as long there are no other minorities in attendance, otherwise, we will just have to hang out with each other singing Smokey Robinson songs and talking about the good ol’ days when our men pulled up their pants.

2. It will give me a chance to talk to the people in power and tell them your concerns… and mine. Okay, let’s be honestly probably mostly mine but I won’t completely forget you. You give me some good questions and I will try to make sure they get asked. However if your question is, “Why you are such a scumbag, Senator Ryan?” Probably not going to ask that. Also, if it takes me ten minutes to ask your question, probably not going to get asked. But this is your chance to have someone speak for you!

© 2006 Phil Scoville, Flickr | CC-BY

3. Because I live in California and living here is like living in the La Brea Tar Pits, the more you try to remove yourself from the muck, the more it pulls you back in. Even if it is just for a day I would like to see how the normal folk live. It would be nice to eat a hamburger without being given the stink eye by some tofu-loving vegan.  I mean I am not asking for much, just a day away from Jerry Brown, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, etc, is that really asking for all that much? Help save a constitutional conservative’s sanity, send her to Ohio.

4. Because we are constitutionalists/conservatives and we support each other. Oh, liberals think they are so generous, but they have nothing on us! When we give, we give from our hearts. We give because we believe in a person’s cause! We give because we know it is the right thing to do! And the Right always does the RIGHT thing, that is why we are called the Right!

5. You always wanted to sponsor one of those African kids but thought it was too expensive. Well think of me as your “African kid” except this is a one time deal. You don’t have to pay monthly fees. I won’t send pictures of my village and won’t make you feel guilty about that iPhone you have and grass hut I have. Nope, no sad depressing pictures of and my bloated body as I die from starvation. Instead, you get to send me to Ohio, to talk about our first world problems with our first world leaders. Isn’t that much better? Not only that but I am not asking for 30 bucks a month, I am asking for a one-time donation of five dollars….or more (no one will stop you from sending 10, 20  or if you want to that 30 dollars!) that will help send your mouthpiece to Ohio!

So for all these reasons you should send me to Ohio, why wouldn’t you? Here is how to do it, go to this site and donate: https://www.gofundme.com/SendmetoRNC

 

Victoria Woodhull: The First Hillary

 

“I come before you to declare that my sex are entitled to the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

—Victoria Woodhull

Everyone has been going around saying that Hillary is the first female to run for the presidency. That we should all vote for her because electing her would be “historic.”  While Hillary could possibly be our first female President, her campaign is not the first one launched by a woman. She is not also the first one to have criminal investigations plague her campaign. All of this belongs to Victoria Woodhull. Victoria was Hillary before there was a Hillary.

So who was Victoria Woodhull and what was her campaign about? Well, like Hillary she was about “women’s rights.” Of course, back then women’s rights weren’t about men pretending to females or killing your unborn children. Back then it was about getting to vote. What makes Victoria’s campaign truly significant is that women did not get the right to vote until 1920 and she ran her campaign in 1872. Think about that for a minute she was running at a time where she was being denied the simple privilege of voting for herself. That is truly gutsy.

However, that is the extent of my admiration for Ms. Woodhull. Ms. Woodhull was both Hillary and Bernie Sanders in one back in her era. “A free thinker, Victoria Woodhull created Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly, a radical publication, in 1870 with her sister, Tennessee. The publication gave the sisters a place to express their ideas on social reforms, including women’s suffrage, birth control and free love. The journal also published the first English translation of Karl Marx‘s The Communist Manifesto.” Victoria Woodhull

So before there was Bernie Sanders, before there was Eugene Debs, a socialist who ran in 5 Presidential elections between 1900 and 1920 and earning 6 percent of the vote in the 1912 election between Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt and William H. Taft [Eugene Debs], there was Victoria Woodhull.Victoria was big on social reforms and she used her publication  Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly to drive her points home. This caused significant controversy for her.

This controversy didn’t stop her from creating her own party and running on its ticket. Victoria is the one who created the Equal Rights Party. Though they wanted to win elections like any party their purpose was larger than that, “Although few seriously thought Victoria Woodhull would win, they knew her campaign would send a message to Washington. It’s time for a woman in the White House.” [Who is VW?] Today that seems to be the message as well. Not just that a woman should occupy the Oval Office but that Washington needs changing and reforms need to be made. Her campaign platform was the following: “Woodhull advocated for equal education for women, woman’s right to vote, and women’s right to control their own health decisions.  She criticized the Victorian ideal of women’s place being first and foremost in the home as full-time wives and mothers.” [Victoria Claflin Woodhull]

© 2007 Dave, Flickr | CC-BY-ND

Feminism was just becoming a movement back when Victoria was running for Presidency but even for a feminist of her era, she was different. Women like Susan B. Anthony, for example, were very much “traditional” women but just wanted the chance to vote. Susan B. Anthony sure didn’t go around preaching about free love and by all accounts she was pro-life. Woodhull was very much more like modern day feminists than she was like those of her time. Woodhull wasn’t just different from the feminists of her time, but women in general. Woodhull was also a fortune teller/spiritualist.

She and her sister, Tennessee Celeste Claflin, became involved in the spiritualist movement of the 1800s. Woodhull became a popular medium, traveling around with her sister to entertain audiences. Spiritualist

It was this “spiritualist” side that added to the rumor mill and created the controversy that was touched upon earlier in her campaign. It also didn’t help matters that she and her sister started their own brokerage house.  “[Cornelius] Vanderbilt, in turn, helped the sisters become the first women stockbrokers in history when they opened their own brokerage house in 1870 called Woodhull, Claflin & Company in 1870.” [ National Women’s History Museum] Cornelius Vanderbilt was a railroad tycoon and Woodhull was his spiritual advisor, which is why he was willing to help her create her own brokerage firm. (ibid).

Woodhull lived a turbulent time in American history. She was born in 1838, in Homer, Ohio. That was 22 years before we would have our Civil War and lose 2 percent of our population. The roles of men and women were changing thanks to the suffrage and race relations were volatile. Yet instead of backing away from all of this, she met it head on. She even invited Frederick Douglass to be her Vice President. “There is some evidence that abolitionist Frederick Douglass ran as her running mate, but it is unclear how involved he really was in the campaign. No matter the case, the election turned sour, with Woodhull publicly fighting with her critics in her publication.“ Biography.com

In closing, Woodhull was very much like all the candidates we have running today. She was a woman and a “women’s rights” advocate like Hillary. She was a socialist like Bernie Sanders and she had the independent wealth, along with a sour reputation like Donald Trump. “Eventually, though, her funds ran out. She remarked of her own campaign, “The press suddenly divided between the other two great parties, refused all notice of the new reformatory movement; a series of pecuniary disasters stripped us, for the time being, of the means of continuing our weekly publication, and forced us into a desperate struggle for mere existence. . . . The inauguration of the new party and my nomination seemed to fall dead upon the country; and . . . a new batch of slanders and injurious innuendoes permeated the community in respect to my condition and character.” [Who is VW?]  Does that not sound like where we are today. A divide between the two great parties, a total rejection of a third party and the “need” for a woman president. The more things change, the more they stay the same. “Hillary” didn’t get elected in 1872, maybe she won’t be elected today.

Images:

Victoria Woodhull-Biography.com

Bernie Sanders-Bernie Sanders

Pro-Life Gays: Do They Exist?

The simple answer to the question is yes. Gay men and women are just like anyone else, some are pro-life, some are pro-choice but it seems the overwhelming majority of them fall on the pro-choice side. For too many of them there seems to be a sort of hatred for “breeders.” And while it would easy to be tear into them, I am going to highlight a group that gets little to no attention. While I will be the first to argue Blacks and gays have little in common when it comes to “civil rights” I will say this if you are gay and pro-life you are virtually a leper in that community. So if they are the lepers, I will be Mother Theresa and share my love for these truly courageous people.

Let’s start with an organization that serves this particular community. It is called PLAGAL. It stands for Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians. It was started in 1990 in Washington DC and Minneapolis. It started out as Gays Against Abortion but later the name was changed to more accurately display the lesbian population within the group. In 2009, they issued a media release with the following statement:

The Pro-life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians (PLAGAL) is outraged that the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) would join forces with pro-abortion organizations. Abortion advocates have been losing support for abortion on demand and have targeted the LGBT community with the position that our rights are dependent on the right to abortion in order to boost support for their cause. It is a mistake to link abortion rights as being one and the same right as those of the LGBT community. 

This is what pro-choicers do. They try to make you believe your rights are somehow dependent on the slaughter of an innocent. Of course, there is no such thing as “abortion rights.” To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, you don’t have the right to do what is wrong. It  would be just as ridiculous to purport you have “carjacking rights” or “kidnapping rights.” Therefore, this illusory concept is dangerous in two ways. 1) You are killing an unborn child 2) It makes you believe you somehow have the right to kill this unborn child. Gays, on the other hand, do have rights that include all basic and civil rights afforded to everyone else. Therefore, trying to compare a non-existent right to a legitimate right is a lesson in futility.

There are some people in the pro-life community that think people like PLAGAL don’t belong in the pro-life community, but they most certainly do. We may not agree on same- sex marriage or having homosexuality taught in schools. But that doesn’t mean I can’t join arms with them and work with them side by side to get abortion overturned. Abortion is too big and too important an issue to let things like pride stand in the way. I don’t think we should exclude anyone from joining our side. Our whole premise is that the unborn should be counted among the human race. That just because they are “inconvenient” doesn’t mean that they are not entitled to our love. The same goes for gay pro-lifers. As well atheistic pro-lifers, etc.

Gay pro-lifers are already are stepping out on a limb for us. They are a part of a community who devalue the pro-life movement and the people in it. Yet instead of turning tail and hiding what they believe, they stand their ground and fight for the most vulnerable. These are amazing people and they should be made to feel welcome in our community. People might argue that by allowing them we are saying we agree with homosexuality. No, that is not true, we are just accepting like all people they have their own sins, but the greater sin is abortion and for the sake of the murdered we cannot turn people away because they don’t live up to our ideals.

If we get rid of gay pro-lifers, we have to get rid of men, Black women (after all they have the most abortions, so how can we allow them in the pro-life movement) and a myriad of other people who do not live up to beliefs to what a pro-lifer is supposed to be. The great thing about the pro-life movement is its inclusivism. We are people from all walks of life, all socioeconomic statuses, we are the rich, the poor and everything in between. There is room for everyone to help save children. In fact, if you truly want to “save” these people the best way to do it is to show you genuinely care for them as fellow human beings and then share your personal testimony of Jesus Christ with them. However, the time to do that is not in the midst of a pro-life rally or event, that has to be first and foremost on your mind. But afterwards, over  a cup of coffee, you can talk to them, connect with them and if the Holy Spirit so moves you bring the Gospel into the conversation.

No one is saying reject the gospel or change your beliefs about homosexuality being a sin. However, rejecting gay pro-lifers doesn’t save babies lives and the impact you can have cannot be done if they are not there. The pro-life community believes all lives are worthy of love and compassion and that goes for gay pro-lifers as well. There is plenty of time to worry about our other disagreements later but there  is no time for disagreements among the pro-life community because each day 3,000 babies die. So the time for disagreement is over, it is time for us to fight, all of us, even the gay pro-lifers!

Blacknright Market: Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community

 

 

 

California: Playing with Lives

I was recently talking to a good friend of me about my heart. Due to radiation poisoning, my heart is all but shot to….you know the place. So he asked me, what about a heart transplant? And I told him, “I don’t want one. Not anymore.” I went on to explain why. Now I will tell you. California is so protective over people’s feelings, they will let people die in the process.

On May 27, 2016 ,a piece of legislation was rushed through the Senate in California that would make it possible for HIV patients to donate their organs to other HIV patients. That sounds all fine until Murphy’s law takes effect. There is a reason that HIV patients are not part of the donation pool, even to each other. But the people who purposely say they are for science start throwing it out rather quickly if science will “hurt someone’s feelings.”

The following are the reasons this law is dangerous:

1. It lowers the standards for transplants. If you are now willing to let in HIV patients, one of the most deadly diseases there are, what other diseases will now become acceptable into the transplant pool? While they are initially only letting people with HIV transplant to one another, how long will be until we hear about someone who didn’t have HIV being transplanted with someone who did? People are not perfect, we all make mistakes and one mistake in this area can do insurmountable damage.
2. But let’s say the system they devise works out. People with HIV are only getting transplants with people with HIV. Those who need transplants are being saved because now they are more organs for them. HIV people are getting organs. Everything is great. However, transplants in an of themselves open the body to infection. But here is the thing, there is such a thing called HIV superinfection:

Unprotected sex between two HIV-positive people is also risky even if both partners are otherwise STD-free and the relationship is mutually monogamous. This is because of the potential for an HIV superinfection.

HIV superinfection occurs when a person who is already infected with HIV is exposed to, and becomes infected with, a different strain of the virus.

Some studies have estimated that the risk of superinfection is similar to the rate of initial infection with HIV. Superinfection is problematic because it is associated with increased health problems, and because it is harder to treat, even using combined antiretroviral therapy, as there is a possibility that someone could be infected with two differently drug-resistant strains.

HIV Superinfection

So if this is a very real possibility just by exchanging semen during sexual encounters, how much bigger is the risk of HIV superinfection when implanting new organs into a person? Now let’s look at what the World Heatlth Organization (WHO) has to say: “There are two main strains of HIV: HIV-1 that has caused the majority of infections and AIDS cases and HIV-2, which is concentrated in selected countries…HIV itself has numerous varieties and has been shown to mutate even within an individual during the progress of the infection. AIDS develops in an HIV-positive person after years of infection, as HIV steadily weakens the body’s immune system and increases its vulnerability to pneumonia, tuberculosis, diarrhoea, tumours and other opportunistic illnesses.” WHO-HIV

So you may have two main strains but you still have numerous varieties. So you could have HIV 1 and your partner may have HIV 1 as well but that may not be what both of you really have. Your partner could have HIV 1.1 and you could have HIV 1.2. And it is the slight change that really isn’t discernible under a microscope could have a real impact. If they don’t want you exchanging semen due to super-infection why is now okay to exchange organs? Don’t the same risks apply? People will say, don’t people with HIV deserve a chance to save their lives via organ transplantation? Of course, they do but the best possible organ they can get and not one that can potentially open up more risks to them.

Transplantation is a very real possibility for me in the future. This is not a what if situation for me, it is a when situation. To me, this is the equivalent of saying, “Well Dena we found a heart for you but the person was a hemophiliac, but don’t worry you get a heart of out the deal.” I would be “Are you kidding me? I am already  a borderline hemophiliac because of my blood thinners, you want to make me a full-fledged hemophiliac, are you kidding me?” Now maybe I wouldn’t become a hemophiliac, maybe the likelihood that happening is totally minuscule, I don’t know. All I do know is you are giving me the organ of someone whose disease was worse than mine and there is no way I could do that. It is not because I hate hemophiliacs or don’t want them around me. It is because there are very real consequences of having their organ inside of me and the damage it could potentially cause. This is not hating, this is not bigotry, this is life and death and attention must be paid.

This feels like the medical community has given up. It is almost like, “Why should we waste good organs on those with HIV, let’s just give them other HIV organs and if they die, oh well they were on the transplant list it isn’t like they were going to live that long anyway!” This doesn’t seem like science this seems like surrender. If at every other point, you are telling people to be careful of engaging in behavior that could change their HIV status but all a sudden when you really need to be careful you are told it is okay, well that seems fishy and illogical to me. To need a transplant is a very scary thing, to take in someone’s body part that could already be rejected is a bit overwhelming. To then add something that can lead to greater problems seems downright cruel. As long as this law is in effect, I will not be getting a transplant. Even if I get my weight down, even if they say I they can put me on the list, I will refuse. Because even the medical field believes in surrender, I do not.

 

 

I Wish I Had a Red Dress

Author: Pearl Cleage (click on link to purchase book)

Publisher: Morrow Publishing

****

 Star scores

One star-poor      Two stars-fair     Three stars-Good      Four stars-excellent

Originally published by Rapport Magazine

This was not a book that one could put down and walk away from. From page one, Cleage immediately gets the reader hooked. She also weaves an entertaining story with social commentary, shedding light on the Black experience from all different views. The setting for this narrative is the beautiful Idlewild, Michigan. A former thriving oasis, in its heyday, for Black American entertainers like Lena Horne and Sammy Davis, Jr., treated like royalty instead of second-class citizens.

This is the place Joyce Mitchell now calls home- still quite beautiful, but definitely no longer a Black paradise.  Joyce Mitchell is a middle-aged widow who lost her husband five years ago in a tragic car accident.  Not feeling she was affecting enough change in her pupil’s lives, she leaves the teaching profession and becomes a “social worker,” where she opens up a program for troubled young women. Most of them are teenage mothers, and society, the government, and their parents all have washed their hands of them.

This program is everything to her, and the only thing missing in her life is the love of a good man and a red dress. For a woman whose life is surrounded by blackness, including her clothes, she feels a little color couldn’t hurt. Little did she know she would wind up with both.

When Joyce tries to get federal funding, it proves to be a disaster and it becomes up to her to keep her program afloat on her own. In the meantime, she still has to take care of her girls and herself.  It is during this chaotic time that love chooses to come knocking.

Her best friend, Sister, is a reverend. Yet not the kind of stoic person one pictures when they think of ministers, even women ministers.  One night at a dinner party, she introduces Joyce to a tall, dark, and handsome man, Nate Anderson. He is new in town and is quite available. He is a former cop from Detroit, and now is the Vice-Principal at the high school. There is an instant connection, and pretty soon they are keeping each other company.  Mitch was the only man Joyce had ever been with, so this is new terrain for her.

She must learn how to love again and open her heart to a new man. Will she let that “free floating rage” block her from something that could be special and meaningful? Will she allow the lousy examples of manhood that her girls have fallen for cloud her judgment? Can she bury Mitch once and for all, and allow someone new in her life? Is Nate her “Denzel clone” (as one girl refers as the perfect man) she has been waiting for?

Cleage is a terrific writer. Her characters are vibrant, passionate and authentic. While the plight of the Black man is often portrayed, the Black woman’s story is seldom heard. This is a story for the sisters, about the sisters, and by a sister – one of integrity and love that every brother would be well-advised to read. Heck, a book every man should read! Undoubtedly, this is a book that should not be missed.