Civil Rights

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The thing is that I doubt very much if Walker especially cares about that woman, he's simply pushing his political agenda. That's what I find galling. Everything is about political persuasion, and nothing is about actual humanity or compassion.

Oh, it’s not at all about politics.

It's just that I have a natural aversion to idiocy.

Progressives provide so many examples.

*

Equating compassion and humaneness with Progressivism requires a double dose of doublethink.

Quotes from Progressive icon Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:
http://www.lifenews.com/2015/02/23/7-sh ... et-sanger/

- “We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”

- “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan.”

- “They are…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ’spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”

- “Birth control is nothing more or less than…weeding out the unfit.”

- “Human beings who never should have been born at all.”

- “I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world.”

- “But for my view, I believe that there should be no more babies.”

You are insane. And why the fuck would I care what 'Margaret Sanger' says about anything? Knowing you and your vile hypocritical ilk it's probably all lies anyway.

[commonsense]

Why would the Progressive and racist press fan the flames?

Two reasons:
1. If it bleeds it leads.

So true, so very true. That's how the news outlets are able to sell their news stories to their news consumers. Readership, viewership and visits--that's how the money is made.

2. Since Woodward and Berstein the purpose has shifted from reporting the news to:
reporting the news to:
- Gotcha
- Advocacy
- Bringing down the big dogs, but only if they're of the other political party.
“The people who report, edit, produce and publish news can’t help being affected—deeply affected—by the environment around them.”

This also rings so very true. And I can see how this applies both to liberals reporting on conservatives as well as to conservatives reporting on liberals. Of course the reporters are influenced by the stories assigned to them by their editors. And the editors are influenced by the owners, who intern are influenced by the stockholders, who are politically active in one party or another. It all makes sense now that you mention it.

The Media Bubble Is Worse Than You Think
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ast-215048

I, for one, was not surprised by the bubbles shown on the map. Reporters of every ilk are going to go where the jobs are. It is no surprise that more news organizations are based in metropolitan and cosmopolitan areas than anywhere else.

[commonsense]

Quoting Margaret Sanger was probably not the best way to go. She founded the American Birth Control League in 1921. It's focus has changed considerably since becoming the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

[Walker]

Quoting Margaret Sanger was probably not the best way to go. She founded the American Birth Control League in 1921. It's focus has changed considerably since becoming the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Sanger is a Progressive icon.

Hillary Clinton describes herself as a Progressive.

“Now, I have to tell you that it was a great privilege when I was told that I would receive this award. I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision ... And when I think about what she did all those years ago in Brooklyn, taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions, I am really in awe of her.”
- Hillary Clinton

[commonsense]

Now that you put it that way, it makes plenty of sense.

[Gary Childress]

The thing is that I doubt very much if Walker especially cares about that woman, he's simply pushing his political agenda. That's what I find galling. Everything is about political persuasion, and nothing is about actual humanity or compassion.

Oh, it’s not at all about politics.

It's just that I have a natural aversion to idiocy.

Progressives provide so many examples.

*

Equating compassion and humaneness with Progressivism requires a double dose of doublethink.

Quotes from Progressive icon Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:
http://www.lifenews.com/2015/02/23/7-sh ... et-sanger/

- “We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”

- “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan.”

- “They are…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ’spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”

- “Birth control is nothing more or less than…weeding out the unfit.”

- “Human beings who never should have been born at all.”

- “I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world.”

- “But for my view, I believe that there should be no more babies.”

I certainly disagree with some of Sanger's statements above, especially the one about "exterminating" blacks. But I do think "planned parenthood" as a concept in and of itself is a good idea and that birth control is a good way of preventing unwanted pregnancy and that unwanted pregnancies often put children in unfavorable circumstances when parents are forced into a life that they may not have wanted.

As far as "progressive idiocy", I've seen "conservatives" quoted on Global Climate Change issues and there seems to be a lot of idiocy there as well. I also think that population needs to be checked. We human beings can't propagate into infinity without creating extremely dire circumstances. Water is not an infinite resource. Cultivatable soil is not an infinite resource. Massive scale industrial farming for purposes of feeding a huge population causes many injustices to be inflicted upon animals we raise for food.

As far as Hillary Clinton's admiration of Sanger, has anyone mentioned to her some of Sanger's more scandalous remarks? Is she aware of them? It could be that Clinton is just ignorant of this darker side which Sanger appears to have had.

[commonsense]

Oh, it’s not at all about politics.

It's just that I have a natural aversion to idiocy.

Progressives provide so many examples.

Progressiveness and idiocy are opposites. According to the legal definition, Progressives make use of new ideas. Idiocy does not make such use. Progressives and Conservatives are opposites. Perhaps you meant to say that Conservatives provide examples of idiocy.

[Gary Childress]

Progressiveness and idiocy are opposites. According to the legal definition, Progressives make use of new ideas. Idiocy does not make such use. Progressives and Conservatives are opposites. Perhaps you meant to say that Conservatives provide examples of idiocy.

I disagree here. There are some who call themselves "progressives" who at least sometimes do idiotic things, too. It's not entirely for unfounded reasons, I think, that there is a backlash against some "progressive" policies and leaders.

[commonsense]

Progressiveness and idiocy are opposites. According to the legal definition, Progressives make use of new ideas. Idiocy does not make such use. Progressives and Conservatives are opposites. Perhaps you meant to say that Conservatives provide examples of idiocy.

I disagree here. There are some who call themselves "progressives" who at least sometimes do idiotic things, too. It's not entirely for unfounded reasons, I think, that there is a backlash against some "progressive" policies and leaders.

I meant to add at the end of the post. I agree that idiotic things are sometimes done by progressives, and by conservatives, also. Your comment about political backlash is spot on, too.

[Gustav Bjornstrand]

Walker, this video on Sanger may interest you. I had heard those 'Sanger was a racist' arguments for a long time and it was interesting to see them rebutted.

[Walker]

Walker, this video on Sanger may interest you. I had heard those 'Sanger was a racist' arguments for a long time and it was interesting to see them rebutted.

Sanger’s thrust was to have fewer to none of certain kinds of people.

In her words:
https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/web ... 238946.xml

“Birth Control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the Eugenic educator. In answering the needs of these thousands upon thousands of submerged mothers, it is possible to use this interest as the foundation for education in prophylaxis, sexual hygiene, and infant welfare. The potential mother is to be shown that maternity need not be slavery but the most effective avenue toward self-development and self-realization. Upon this basis only may we improve the quality of the race.

“As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Walker, this video on Sanger may interest you. I had heard those 'Sanger was a racist' arguments for a long time and it was interesting to see them rebutted.

Sanger’s thrust was to have fewer to none of certain kinds of people.

In her words:
https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/web ... 238946.xml

“Birth Control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the Eugenic educator. In answering the needs of these thousands upon thousands of submerged mothers, it is possible to use this interest as the foundation for education in prophylaxis, sexual hygiene, and infant welfare. The potential mother is to be shown that maternity need not be slavery but the most effective avenue toward self-development and self-realization. Upon this basis only may we improve the quality of the race.

“As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

Eugenics was a popular idea in her time, and quite mainstream in the US. You can't judge past widely accepted ideas by present standards. Only a moron does that. Social evolution is a gradual learning process.
What she thought was irrelevant anyway, so nice try with your bullshit anti-choice propaganda. And what does she have to do with the topic?

[Walker]

Walker, this video on Sanger may interest you. I had heard those 'Sanger was a racist' arguments for a long time and it was interesting to see them rebutted.

Sanger’s thrust was to have fewer to none of certain kinds of people.

In her words:
https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/web ... 238946.xml

“Birth Control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the Eugenic educator. In answering the needs of these thousands upon thousands of submerged mothers, it is possible to use this interest as the foundation for education in prophylaxis, sexual hygiene, and infant welfare. The potential mother is to be shown that maternity need not be slavery but the most effective avenue toward self-development and self-realization. Upon this basis only may we improve the quality of the race.

“As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

Eugenics was a popular idea in her time, and quite mainstream in the US. You can't judge past widely accepted ideas by present standards. Only a moron does that. Social evolution is a gradual learning process.
What she thought was irrelevant anyway, so nice try with your bullshit anti-choice propaganda. And what does she have to do with the topic?

So, Clinton admires Sanger because of Sanger’s ignorance, and you support that.
Rather moronic, wot?

“What Sanger’s liberal admirers are eager to downplay is that she was a thoroughgoing racist who subscribed completely to the views of E. A. Ross and other “raceologists.” Indeed, she made many of them seem tame.”

Contraception, abortion, and the eugenics movement.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/224136

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Sanger’s thrust was to have fewer to none of certain kinds of people.

In her words:
https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/web ... 238946.xml

“Birth Control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the Eugenic educator. In answering the needs of these thousands upon thousands of submerged mothers, it is possible to use this interest as the foundation for education in prophylaxis, sexual hygiene, and infant welfare. The potential mother is to be shown that maternity need not be slavery but the most effective avenue toward self-development and self-realization. Upon this basis only may we improve the quality of the race.

“As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

Eugenics was a popular idea in her time, and quite mainstream in the US. You can't judge past widely accepted ideas by present standards. Only a moron does that. Social evolution is a gradual learning process.
What she thought was irrelevant anyway, so nice try with your bullshit anti-choice propaganda. And what does she have to do with the topic?

So, Clinton admires Sanger because of Sanger’s ignorance, and you support that.
Rather moronic, wot?

“What Sanger’s liberal admirers are eager to downplay is that she was a thoroughgoing racist who subscribed completely to the views of E. A. Ross and other “raceologists.” Indeed, she made many of them seem tame.”

Contraception, abortion, and the eugenics movement.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/224136

Support what? I don't give a fuck about Sanger or your 'Planned Parenthood', or anything else in your country.

[Walker]

Support what? I don't give a fuck about Sanger or your 'Planned Parenthood', or anything else in your country.

Sanger identified the “deplorables" of her time, and actively sought to minimize their population.