Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Sex Pork, House Democrats, and My Poor Brother (Left Out of the Democrat Pork Bill While "Free Sex" Is IN in the Age of Obama)

"Democrats may have eliminated provisions on birth control and sod for the National Mall in the "job stimulus" -- but buried on page 147 of the bill is stimulation for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases!The House Democrats' bill includes $335 million for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned."


The above quote is from the story currently on Drudge, where you can read the entire story. Drudge, you will recall, broke the story earlier this week, with an enormous hedline under a picture of "Total Faiolure" Pelosi looking like a witch, of Nancy "Total Failure" Pelosi trying to put $155,000,000 for "family planning" into the economic stimulus (translation: democrat champion pork bill of all time) bill. The publicity and absurdity (along with the obvious promotion intended fro Planned Parenthood and te abortion industry of death), caused Obama to suggest to "Total Failure" Pelosi that she "bakc off". See previous two entries earlier this week in this blog.


However, Democrats have evidently not given up on sex pork. Make no mistake about it. This is all about the leftist idea that one of the main goals of public policy is to make sure that sex has no consequences--not to make sure people are healthy. You only have to look at the 1950's and early 1960's (when I went to high school and girls generally didn't--either have sex in high school or get pregnant in high school. As the statitistics conclusively show, this is the healthy live style. IN fact, as this blog has conclusively shown time after time, SEX (outside of marriage) IS HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH> The next pandemic will most likely be a sexually transmitted disease, as was the last arguable pandemic (AIDS). Yet, the leftist approach to this problem is not to bring back the healthy sex habits of the 1950's and early 1960's, but to encurage sex "experimentation", while selling the idea of condoms, etc. As I have said in this blog with regard to Dr. Dean Edell and other leftists, their attitude toward sex and sexually transmitted diseases means that they HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. With AIDS alone, the failure to treat the disease as a "real" disease, for fear of stigmatizing gay sex, killed hundreds of thousands, or millions, of people worldwide. Yep. I am saying I blame the leftist attitude toward sexually transmitted diseases for the death of a whole lot of people, and not just because of AIDS. That is in addtion to the ruined lives caused by both early sex and pregnancy, in addition to the millions of abortion deaths. It is actually an understatement to say that leftists "have blood on their hands".


Nope. The "Playboy Philosophy" has this backwards. Their argument is that "conservatives" want people to be "punished" for sex with a sexaul transmitted disease or a baby. Obama bought into this leftist/Planned Parenthood religious creed when he said that he saw no reason for his daughers to be "punished" with a baby if they "made a mistake", despite their upbringing.


It is really the opposit. IN the Playboy/leftist Philosophy, sex is almost the ultimate good, and anythign that discourages "sexual freedom" is bad. Conservatives do don want to see people "punished" for ssex. Conservatives simply see clearly what the healthy lifestyle is, and think that "education" should tell people what it is. A campaign about how promiscuous sex is hazardous to your health, on the order of the campaign against smoking, would save more lives than any of the proposed "sex education" of leftists. Conservatives are aslo not blinded by the leftist attitude that sexual satisfaction is the ultimate good, such that conservatives buy the slogans of the left. It is not that conservatives believe theat people should be punished for sex. We simply believe that abortion is the killing of a human being, and that people are responsible for their actions. This means that we should not excuse killing in the name of "free sex" and "women's lib". Nor should ew ignore the most effective measures against sexually transmitted diseases simply because leftist prefer the diseases to taking effective action against them.


Yes, conservatives know that the "education" envisioned by the House Democrats is going to be leftist indoctrinatioin in the leftist idea of sex and human relations, from kindergarten on up. This is "central planning" with a leftist vengeance, as leftists try to remake the entire country in their image on all social and economic issues.


However, believe it or not, the above is not even the real point of this entry. I have called this "sex pork", because that is what it is. The entire bill is a "pork" bill, and this is just another example. Does leftist "education" on sexually transmitted diseases have anything to do with the economy? Of course not!!!!! This is pork, pure and simple, and Americans should realize that is what is coming with this "stimulius" bill--much more pork than stimulus. It is one large collection of "earmarks", as Obama dishonestly suggests that he is "eliminating" earmarks. If you put your pork in large spending bills like this, where no one can know everything that is in the bill--much less effectively complain about most individual items--you don't need earmarks.


That brings me again to that brother of mine, who is co-owner of the struggling trucking company that needs about 2 million dollars in capital and/or loans to be reasonably sure of not going under. In my previous entry on Planned Parenthood, I noted that the Democrat central planners were putting my brother's company behind Planned Parenthood for bailout--Democrts obviously believeing that small business is much less important to the economy of this country than Planned Parenthood.


Now my brother has to face another, bitter pill. Democrats obviously believe it is more important to the economy to "educate" about sexually transmitted diseases (probably increasing such diseases the way leftists want to do it), than it is to save small businesses like that of my brother. Again, adding insult to injury, my brother has to see HIS taxes used by the central planners to address a problem (sexually transmitted diseases) that he needs "education" on (and, unless my brother is doing things I don't know about, a problem that my brother does not "fear".


I have told my brother that he is a "total loser" in the Age of Obama. By that, I do not mean to criticize him. I mean to criticize the AGe of Obama, where the huge Federal Government is going to deterine the winners and losers. Small businesses, like that of my brother, are generally the losers. Wall STreet, Big Business, Planned Parehtnhood, the various "industries" dealing with "sexual freedom" and its consequnces, etc. are the winnters. The biggest winners, of course, remain the central planners themselves, as Big Government ("Big Brother") takes over our lives and controls the employment of more and more people.

No comments: