Dakota Beacon

Amazing what happens in North Dakota when there is lots of water!

While the nation’s press and talk show hosts are having a field day devouring news of tabloid celebrities like Anthony Weiner and covering the bus tour of Sarah Palin, another – and far more important – story goes on which will wreak havoc on the American economy:  

”The new EPA pollution regulations will slam the coal industry so hard that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost and electric rates will skyrocket 11 percent to over 23 percent, according to a new study based on government data.” (Paul Bedard, US News, 06-08-2011)

Every dollar the EPA costs our utilities will be passed directly to consumers.  When you take this into consideration, with the leap in gasoline prices, which we can expect will begin to rise from $4/gallon to who knows where, and compute what this means to the cost of living – raising of food crops and livestock, processing and transportation, the cost of clothing which is subject to the same cost-of-production factors, it is easy to see how the EPA can bring our economy to its knees.  These government regulations are like the boulder that chased Indiana Jones through the cave.

Who will be able, given these inescapable increases, to spend “discretionary” income?  Who will have this?  Surely, the family that will be paying ever greater bills for simply maintaining its existence, heating its home, putting food on the table, using the automobile to get to work, will not be buying new furniture or dining out.  First to go will be the dispensable pleasures – entertainment, travel.  Now we see how profoundly destructive this federal over-regulation becomes as manufacturing and industry scale back accordingly, and satellite businesses – transportation, retail, services - lose ground and they, in turn, scale back – unemployment.

This is not a recipe for the recovery we must have if America is not to lose her sovereignty through insolvency.  Right now we have only ourselves to borrow from; we can only print worthless currency.  We cannot exist as a nation in this plight.  We have become “isolationist” not through military or diplomatic policy, but through default.  We can’t support a position in the world community.  America can no longer lead because we have lost our economic viability.  America can’t afford Barack Obama nor the programs he and his adherents support.

Against this somber backdrop, we survey the range of presidential hopefuls who expect to challenge him.  The impetus for the EPA regulations grows from the environmentalist panic instigated by cynical, self-serving politicians and their dupes.  Without the “green” movement the EPA might never have been born or if it had, would have been confined to cleanup of oil or chemical spills or monitoring our interstate lakes and streams.  Instead, thanks to champions like Al Gore, we have them investigating and regulating every enterprise that rears its head and all but shutting down our coal industry.  Thus every one of these dupes or villains bears responsibility for the situation in which we find ourselves today.  Who are these people?

We have plenty of them on the Left, but they don’t need our attention.  Their team is headed by Barack Obama.  What must concern us is who should be leading the opposition.  Here is where talk show conservatives need to stop mindless wallowing in tabloid stories about wayward congressmen and focus on the real threat: a leaderless Republican Party.  No conservative should be willing to entertain the candidacy of those who have ever been a part of the environmentalist movement or “global warming/climate change” lobby.   

Mitt Romney:  He has signed on to the “global warming” team.  Why?  The most damning, and most plausible, reason is blatant cynicism.  He might have chosen this method of winning primaries.  By enticing Democrats to vote in Republican primaries (always a factor when a Democrat is a one-term incumbent), he offers them a position not substantially different from their own.  Why would a Democrat not vote this way?  By doing so he accomplishes three things – he 1) helps to offset and neutralize the Tea Party influence in the Republican primary; 2) if by chance Obama is turned out of office, the person challenging him will not change policy and 3) such a candidate will not bring conservatives into Congress on his coattails.  Absent this theory, it is difficult to see why Romney would have come on board the “global warming” cruise.

Newt Gingrich:  No need to expatiate.  Gingrich has been a solid “global warming” team player all along, to the extent that he mugged with Nancy Pelosi for public service messages.  Clearly he is a true believer.  Nothing new.

Chris Christie:  It is difficult to imagine where this man’s support among conservatives derives.  Aside from burnishing a “tough on spending” image he has many, many liabilities which should be red flags to any conservative or libertarian, including the label of “gun grabber” second to none.  With regard to the EPA, however, he, too, is a member of the “global warming” team.  Which negates any meaningful “budget cutting”. 

Tim Pawlenty:  Here’s a fellow with an eye for the political expediency of the day.  A former cap and trade advocate, he has repudiated that position because the wind seems to be blowing in another direction.  This rootlessness begs the question, what will he do next?  What will happen if he is faced with an implacable bureaucracy, an errant congress or a determined, energetic lobby and the liberal press?  Will his adherence to a conservative stand survive after he no longer needs the conservative vote? 

This is not a comprehensive list, of course, but some of the major players.  The ravages of the EPA pogrom against the American economy could not survive without the “global warming” team.  Remember that.  Knowing this, it is incumbent upon conservatives, especially those with a microphone or ink, that they denounce “global warming” candidates.  It should not be hard to do.  Science does not support them.  They’ve been exposed as fraud.  Conservatives need to reject them.  Instead, we have Mark Levin, who, criticizing Romney and asking listeners to support someone else, ends his segment with a white flag - the defeatist determination that if Romney is the candidate he will have to (reluctantly) support him!  What?  Did Levin not excoriate Republicans in the House for not playing the government shutdown card and calling the bluff of spendaholic Democrats?  Should they show more grit than he?  The correct view is to say to Republicans and  rest of the world:  If you do this we will not support you, we will support your defeat.  In the case of Romney, look at the chessboard.  He has pandered to the environmentalist movement.  Should this help him win the primaries through support of liberals/Democrats, he risked nothing. He will always have the “crawl back” Republicans. 

Others, too, are guilty.  Ann Coulter supports Chris Christie.  Rush Limbaugh has not condemned these “green movement” Republicans.  He has not said that they are “unacceptable”.  They are unacceptable.  We cannot accept them because they will accelerate our nation’s demise.  They are part of the problem.  Anyone who supports them, however reluctantly, is also a part of the problem.  The Republican elites need to hear it from conservatives:  if the nominee supports the “green” agenda, it will tear the party apart.  That conservatives will not come back.  Only in this way can the Republican Party - and America – be saved.
 
 - Sally Morris is a member of Americans for Constitutional Government and the Executive Committee of the Valley Tea Party Conservative Coalition.

As my old friends at The Spectator in London pointed out on Monday morning, I scooped the entire planet in breaking the news of Osama bin Laden’s death: “Osama bin Laden is dead, says Mark Steyn.” This was in The Spectator’s edition of June 29^th 2002, which turned out to be a wee bit premature. I jumped the gun, much like Osama’s missus in Abbottabad, but by nine years.  

Nor, to be honest, was a teensy-weensy near-decade discrepancy in the date the only problem with my scoop. Much of that Spectator piece was preoccupied with the usual assumptions about Public Enemy Number One – caves, dialysis, remote wild Pakistani tribal lands where western intelligence hasn’t a hope of penetrating unless you turn a cousin of the village headman, etc. All these assumptions prevailed until a few days ago, when it emerged that Osama, three wives and 13 children had been living in town in a purpose-built pad round the corner from the Pakistani Military Academy for over half a decade. Brunch every Sunday with a couple of generals at his usual corner table at the Abbottabad Hilton? Eggs Benedict, hold the ham?

The belated dispatch of Osama testifies to what the United States does well – elite warriors, superbly trained, equipped to a level of technological sophistication no other nation can match. Everything else surrounding the event (including White House news management so club-footed one starts to wonder darkly whether its incompetence is somehow intentional) embodies what the United States does badly. Pakistan, our “ally”, hides and protects not only Osama but also Mullah Omar and Zawahiri, and does so secure in the knowledge that it will pay no price for its treachery – indeed, confident that its duplicitous military will continue to be funded by US taxpayers.

If this were a movie, the crowds cheering “USA! USA!” outside the White House would be right: The bad guy is dead! We win! The End. But the big picture is bigger than Hollywood convention. In the great sweeping narrative, the death of Osama bin Laden is barely a ripple, while the courtesies afforded to him by the Pakistani establishment tell us something profound about the superpower’s weakness and inability to shift the storyline. Bin Laden famously said that when people see a strong horse and a weak horse they naturally prefer the strong horse. Putting a bullet through his eye is a good way of letting him know which role he’s consigned to. But the strong horse/weak horse routine is a matter of perception as much as anything else. On September 12th 2001, General Musharraf was in a meeting “when my military secretary told me that the U.S. secretary of state, Gen. Colin Powell, was on the phone. I said I would call back later.” The milquetoasts of the State Department were in no mood for Musharraf’s  I’m-washing-my-hair routine, and, when he’d been dragged to the phone, he was informed that the Bush Administration would bomb Pakistan “back to the Stone Age” if they didn’t get everything they wanted. Musharraf concluded that America meant it.

A decade later, we’re back to September 10^th. Were Washington to call Islamabad as it did a decade ago, the Pakistanis would thank them politely and say they’d think it over and get back in six weeks, give or take. They think they’ve got the superpower all figured out – that America is happy to spend bazillions of dollars on technologically advanced systems that can reach across the planet but it doesn’t really have the stomach for changing the facts of the ground. That means that once in a while your bigtime jihadist will be having a quiet night in watching “Dancing With The Stars” when all of a sudden Robocop descends from the heavens, kicks the door open, and it’s time to get ready for your virgins. But other than that, in the bigger picture, day by day, all but unnoticed, things will go their way.

In the fall of 2001, discussing the collapse of the Taliban, Thomas Friedman, the in-house thinker at The New York Times, offered this bit of cartoon analysis:

“For all the talk about the vaunted Afghan fighters, this was a war between the Jetsons and the Flintstones - and the Jetsons won and the Flintstones know it.”

But they didn’t, did they? The Flintstones retreated to their caves, bided their time, and a decade later the Jetsons are desperate to negotiate their way out.

When it comes to instructive analogies, I prefer Khartoum to cartoons. If it took America a decade to avenge the dead of 9/11, it took Britain 13 years to avenge their defeat in Sudan in 1884. But, after Kitchener slaughtered the jihadists of the day at the Battle of Omdurman in 1897, he made a point of digging up their leader the Mahdi, chopping off his head and keeping it as a souvenir. The Sudanese got the message. The British had nary a peep out of the joint until they gave it independence six decades later - and, indeed, the locals fought for King and (distant imperial) country as brave British troops during World War Two. Even more amazingly, generations of English schoolchildren were taught about the Mahdi’s skull winding up as Lord Kitchener’s novelty paperweight as an inspiring tale of national greatness.

Not a lot of that today. It’s hard to imagine Osama’s noggin as an attractive centerpiece at next year’s White House Community Organizer of the Year banquet, and entirely impossible to imagine America’s “educators” teaching the tale approvingly. So instead, even as we explain that our difficulties with this bin Laden fellow are nothing to do with Islam, no sir, perish the thought, we simultaneously rush to assure the Muslim world that, not to worry, we accorded him a 45-minute Islamic funeral as befits an observant Muslim.

That’s why Pakistani bigshots harbored America’s mortal enemy and knew they could do so with impunity. Bin Laden was a Saudi with money, and there are a lot of those about funding this and that from South Asia to the Balkans to Dearborn, Michigan. They’ve walked their petrodollars round the western world buying up everything they need to, from minor mosques to major university “Middle Eastern Studies” departments. By comparison with his compatriots, Osama squandered his dough. In that long-ago Spectator piece, I wrote, “Junior’s just a peculiarly advanced model of the useless idiot son - a criticism routinely made of Bush but actually far more applicable to Osama, who took his dad’s fortune and literally threw it down a hole in the ground.”

A lot of American policy followed it. A decade on, our troops are running around Afghanistan “winning hearts and minds” and getting gunned down by the very policemen and soldiers they’ve spent years training. Back on the home front, every small-town airport has at least a dozen crack TSA operatives sniffing round the panties of grade-schoolers. Meanwhile, at the UN, the EU, at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, in the “Facebook revolutions” of “the Arab spring”, the Islamization of the world proceeds: Millions of Muslims support bin Laden’s goal – the submission of the western world to Islam – but, unlike him, understand that flying planes into buildings is entirely unnecessary to achieving it. Will being high-flying Jetsons with state-of-the-art gizmos prove sufficient in a Flintstonizing world? The Pakistanis are pretty sure they know the answer to that.

 ©MARK STEYN 2011

Finally! It can be said that it is a beautiful spring day in North Dakota…..but, a chance of snow in the northwest corner of the state. Well at least from where I sit there is a little green grass, geese flying over, robins hopping around in the trees, patches of snow, and mud. Odd isn’t how for one or two fleeting weeks each year, mud is very beautiful? Say it out loud, “beautiful mud”, kind of has a nice sound does it not? But, don’s say it aloud around people from out of state, they would not understand. Your mental state would be questioned.
Sending the magazine to the subscribers is getting to be embarrassing. I just heard from my father in Michigan that he got his most recent magazine……THREE WEEKS AFTER IT WAS MAILED! In fact, I have had several magazines returned as undeliverable that were sent to an address less than ONE HUNDRED miles from were the magazine was sent from that returned SIX WEEKS after being mailed! It is absolutely unbelievable. On the odd occasion that someone has called to comment about this tardiness or wondering where their latest copy is, I tell them it was mailed weeks ago. There is invariably initial silence, then the, “Well OK, thanks”, and I know that they do not believe it possible. The caller likely thinks I am lying to them.
The U.S. Postal Service is the only means to mail individual magazines. I have no other options. My only recourse is to bring this to the attention of the Postal Service. The beauty of a monopoly bureaucracy is that they can (and do) pass you around and give you an unending number of people to contact with your complaint. No one can give you any answer other than we will look into it. There is no possible resolution. Eventually, because you realize the futility of your quest for sanity, and you feel yours slipping away, you throw in the towel. So, in summary, it takes as much as three weeks to mail a magazine as little as 100 miles and nothing can or will be done about it. And if you think that is cool wait until the same type of governmental bureaucracy monopoly is in charge of your health care!
The U.S. Postal Service by all indications is on an unsustainable financial trajectory. They have an incredibly strong union, and very high wages and benefits. As with the afore discussed intractable, unfixable mailing problem, nothing can be done. What is absolutely insane is that you can buy almost anything short of a new car from a vending machine. These machines are quite sophisticated these days. The can dispense after payment by credit card, coin, or bill. All stamp dispensing machines have been removed from all Bismarck Postal facilities. This fact raises the question of “Why do I have to stand in line to buy stamps from a Postal Service employee who if making the average wage of a Postal Service employee costs the Postal Service somewhere around $ 70,000 per year, when the act of selling a stamp is no more difficult than making change at the Cenex?” There was a little brouhaha in Bismarck about the possibility of shutting down the main post office. It seems that the annual rent in that Federal building was too much overhead. Idea: put in three stamp dispensers and put two front counter folks (who by the way are wonderful folks) to work sorting magazines so that they can go 100 miles in say two weeks. Two birds, one stone.
If you call the U.S. Postal Service to make such a crazy suggestion, I will guarantee you that you will have an opportunity first hand to experience the governmental bureaucracy monopoly hand-off, “we will look into it”, Kabuki dance. When you are done call Senator Conrad and thank him for voting ObamaCare into law.

It is always startling to me when I talk to people that advocate pre-birth infanticide. I like to ask them the question, “When is an unborn child a human being?” The answer is always void of science and common sense as the engrained refrain is regurgitated, “When they are born!” Then when you remind them that in Fargo, at the Red River Women’s Clinic that tiny beings with fingers, toes, eyes, ears, noses, eyebrows, even little girls with all of the eggs in her ovaries that she will ever have are ripped apart as they are sucked out of the womb……the infanticider’s retort is “It’s only a fetus”, as if the term “fetus” which is a medical description of the period of time during the life cycle is instead a designation of sub-humanity.

Just prior to a recent discussion the mother of a Down’s Syndrome son voiced her concerns of how medical technology was so readily able to discern the sex of, the possible imperfection of, or if “God forbid, the gay gene”, and how these test drove the killing of many “fetuses”. As we talked afterwards it was apparent how precious her “imperfect” son was to her.

Perhaps you may think that I have gone a little overboard in the recent issues of this publication when it comes to the unborn. Well, all I can say to that is that sometimes your life experiences compel you to do all that you can to protect the innocent unborn, maybe because they are human beings, maybe because the are defenseless, and maybe because we can never judge the significance, regardless of perceived “defect”, of any human, born or unborn.

I will never forget the first time I met Gary. He had called me for an estimate on some remodeling. When I got to his house there he sat, covered in grime, surrounded by old insulation and heating duct parts. “You look like duct soup”, I joked. “Quack, Quack” he exclaimed. We burst out laughing and instantly we were buddies.

Gary had big, kind, gentle brown eyes. He was probably nicest person I have ever known. For about 7 years I did carpentry work on the rental properties that he and his mother owned. I can only begin to tell you of the kindness that man showed me and how we laughed constantly for years. Once, on the way back form the lumber yard we saw a frightened dog on a very busy street. Gary and I took that dog door to door until it got home. Gary then insisted that he pay me for the 4 hours we spent looking for the owners because the search was his idea. Another time when I was so desperate for cash that I was going to sell my table-saw to a mutual friend, Gary called me. “Don’t sell that saw to Mark, I’m on my way over”. Without any discussion Gary handed me a wad of cash and said, “Pay me when your family doesn’t need it”. Everywhere Gary went he spread kindness.

I loved Gary. I cried when his mother told me that he was sick again in the fall of 1988. I cried because I realized then that my suspicions were true, that Gary was dying of AIDS. Holding the hand of your best friend, so young, so kind, who had been so full of fun and energy while he is dying changes you forever. I thank God for Gary, though I still cannot understand why he is gone. But what if he had never been?

Jake was my next door neighbor when I was in second, third and fourth grades. Jake was big, strong, impossible to anger, and happy at all times. Jake was in his late teens and a Downs-syndrome child. I called him “Jake-o” or “Big, bad Jake”, he called me “Tee”. We spent our days playing hide and seek, wrestling (he would always let me win which inspired great mirth), and just generally running around in the woods. Jake was an incredible baseball batter. He would pound a hit that looked like a homerun and wait until the ball cleared the fence to begin skipping and dancing around the bases as the rest of us broke into the chant, “Jake, Jake, Jake, Jake.…”. The pure joy and exultation on his face was infectious. I can’t remember having more fun playing baseball than with Jake. I thank God for Jake. But what if he had never been?

At the time of her birth my niece McKenzie was the most premature (16 ounces) child to be born and survive in St. Louis County, Missouri. She was considered a miracle. Today, at 24 years she is by all accounts “a live wire”. My fondest memory of her was from the family reunion when she was 6 years old. She just wanted to crawl all over me, to be held and cuddled. Such an affectionate kid, a beautiful spirit, so easy to love, a miraculous gift from God. But what if she had never been?

Holding McKenzie I realized that she had a beautiful spirit. The realization of the beauty of her spirit, that spark of human kind got me to wondering about the moment that she changed from a genetically unique collection of cells into a human having a spirit. Did her spirit develop after her premature birth during the time that she would have spent in the womb? Did her spirit come into being exactly 9 months after her conception? When is that exact moment when a collection of cells becomes a human?

After he was gone, Gary’s mother told me that he had been flawed and if she had known of the pain he would have in his life should would not have allowed him to be born. What if Jake’s parents had known that he would be born mentally retarded and decided that it was just better that he were not allowed to be born? What if it had been decided that McKenzie would be too much trouble and expense to keep alive?

Are there people not yet born who will do great and kind things? Are there people not yet born who will be an inspiration to those who know them? Are there people not yet born who will do wonderful things because they have beautiful spirits? But what if they never are? How can we predict the human potential of the unborn?

Studies of identical twins and the human GNOME projects seem to substantiate the fact that much of who we are is hard wired. The code is all there at the first division of the fertilized egg. As our technology allows more and more knowledge of the process that is human life what if we find that it is a continuum and that the humanness, the spirit, that spark is there at that first division of the fertilized egg?

Imagine a young woman with a big and growing problem. Imagine that she listens to Planned Parenthood and the National Organization of Women and decides that it is her reproductive right to make a “choice” to end her problem. Imagine that someday after she has chosen a surgical form of birth control that she realizes that science proves that life is a continuum and that she had initiated infanticide? Is it possible that the belief that you killed your child would leave deep and permanent scars on the psyche of these women?

You all know people conceived under inconvenient or difficult circumstances. Go ask their mothers if they think, in retrospect, that they would have been better off to have decided to have her child destroyed before birth. Find, if you can, the birth mother of an unexpected child, ask her if bearing that child and then offering a childless couple the chance to fill a void in their lives was worth giving birth. Ask the mother of a Down’s Syndrome child if they wish they would have terminated that child’s life to make their own life less difficult. Ask the mother of a homosexual if they would have destroyed that child if they had known what was going to transpire. Ask an adopted person if they are glad that their mother did not have them destroyed as a method of birth control.

You all know how the vast majority of those questions would be answered, yet the insanity of pre-birth infanticide remains largely unexamined. “Abortion” is a clinical abstraction, done in a neat and clean clinic, under the care of people who are so “compassionate”.  Now ask yourself the question, “Is this really about license for promiscuity and an industry of death with billions of dollars of blood money at stake?” But, you already know the answer, don’t you?

How many beautiful people like Jake will not bless another child because a fetal test indicates he will be “mentally impaired”? What if Gary’s mother had made a “choice”? How can we know the effect of the life of an unborn?

The title of this article posed a question. Who can know the value of the unborn? No one.

Barack Hussein Obama Sr.

(Obama's father) Born: 4/4/36 Died: 11/24/82 at the age of 46.

He was 5 years old when WW II started, and less than 9-1/2 yrs old when it ended.

Lolo Soetoro (Obama's step father) Born: 1935 Died: 3/2/87 at the age of 52.

He was 6 years old when WW II started, and 10 years old when it ended. He must have been the youngest Veteran in the war.

On February 23, 2011 the Fargo Forum published reporter Patrick Springer’s article entitled “Family Planning Faces Funding Cuts”. I would contend that this article was either poor reporting or propaganda. The article begins with the subheading “Advocates: GOP playing politics”. In so doing the author has set the predicate that Republicans are not serious or perhaps are manipulative and want to make family planning unpaid for by the Federal Government. The first paragraph continues what I believe is the deception:

“Funding cuts looming in the U.S. House that target federal support for family planning threaten services for more than 14,000 North Dakota patients who receive family planning, cancer screening and treatments for sexually transmitted diseases, providers said Tuesday.

The cuts are favored by House Republicans in a program called Title X that supports family planning programs, which include birth control but not federal funding for abortions.”

You will note that for some odd reason Mr. Springer neither provides any information about the official designation of the proposed legislation. What he neglects to tell is that HR217 is specifically named the “Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act”. The proposed bill is specific in the aims and conditions of it’s application stating:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act'.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ABORTION.

Title X of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`SEC. 1009. ADDITIONAL PROHIBITION REGARDING ABORTION.

`(a) Prohibition- The Secretary shall not provide any assistance under this title to an entity unless the entity certifies that, during the period of such assistance, the entity will not perform, and will not provide any funds to any other entity that performs, an abortion.

`(b) Exception- Subsection (a) does not apply with respect to an abortion where--

`(1) the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape, or an act of incest against a minor; or

`(2) a physician certifies that the woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-threatening physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

`(c) Hospitals- Subsection (a) does not apply with respect to a hospital, so long as such hospital does not, during the period of assistance described in subsection (a), provide funds to any non-hospital entity that performs an abortion (other than an abortion described in subsection (b)).

So, Mr. Springer is writing about defunding any entity that provides or pays for abortions! Somehow he forgets to mention the very crux of the story! Oversight? Accident? Sloppiness? The rest of the story pretty well explains what happened because the first quote of the story is:

‘“It would make a huge impact on our clients, which is unfortunate,’ said Larry Anenson Jr., health protection and promotion director at Fargo Cass Public Health, where the family planning clinic had more than 7,000 patient visits last year.”

Which leads to the question, is Fargo Cass Public Health doing abortions or paying for them?

Then when Rep. Rick Berg’s communication director Alee Lockman tells Springer that:

“It’s not killing all Title X funding,” she said. “Assuming that none of the organizations in North Dakota perform abortions, they would be exempt from this legislation.”

Springer still does not cite the bill nor the title of the bill which would have immediately clarified the factual basis of Ms. Lockmans’ statement.

Instead Mr. Springer writes that, “Robin Iszler, a registered nurse and administrator of Central Valley Health District, based in Jamestown, N.D., said there is a false perception that family planning services support abortions.” I believe that this quote was added to add authenticity to the premise that Republicans were cutting contraception when funding is tied not to Family Planning but specifically to ABORTION!

Then while still not giving the name, designation, nor basis of HR417, Springer finishes with quotes from Planned Parenthood Communications Director Amy Jacobson who continues to spread disinformation saying:

“This isn’t about abortion,” said Amy Jacobson, Planned Parenthood’s North Dakota public affairs manager. “This is about preventive services.”

…….

“All those sorts of things are important to protect our public health,” Jacobson said, a benefit to the general population, and not just the uninsured patients served by the family planning clinics.

“This is really a historic attack on women’s health,” Jacobson said.

Amy Jacobson for some reason does not know that this is in fact, ALL ABOUT ABORTION, and IS NOT about denying family planning funds to organizations who have nothing to do with pre-birth infanticide.

Mr. Springer finishes with a short paragraph:

“More than half of the patients served at Planned Parenthood’s clinic in Moorhead are from North Dakota, she said. The Moorhead clinic does not perform abortions, but some other Planned Parenthood clinics do.”

Does Patrick Springer not know that this is all about abortion and just has not done his homework before contacting and interviewing? Or, is he a propagandist who purports to be a journalist? My experience is that it is the later case.