The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
How Only the Donald Defeats Demonic, Democrat Dames
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

It has to be said. Hillary Clinton did her side proud at the Benghazi hearing, held by the Select Committee on Benghazi in October. This predictable outcome came about because the Stupid Party, the Republicans, focused on posturing and self-aggrandizement.

A clever bunch of people would have arrived at the House Benghazi committee hearing with a surprisingly focused and unanimous mandate. First, they would have disavowed the secretary’s energetic intervention in Libya. Predicated on the first, the second move would be a terse proposition to Hillary. As follows:

“You were the one, Madam Secretary, who cracked the whip at Foggy Bottom. It is our informed opinion that you had resolved to run the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, as one would an open community center. In contravention of the safety of our people at the Benghazi post, you meant above all to telegraph to the world that the war you and war-lords Samantha Power and Susan Rice launched was a success, when in fact, Madam Secretary, your gunpoint democracy in Libya has been as fruitful as George Bush’s faith-based forays into Iraq and Afghanistan.”

“Having said that, Madam Secretary, let us trace the ‘stand down’ orders that issued from your office due to the mindset described. This will take an hour, maybe two. We Republicans don’t expect to squeeze much from you, but let us do those dead men our due diligence.”

And pigs will fly.

Instead, Republican puffery allowed Hillary to come off as a master bureaucrat. Slightly rehearsed, but speaking in a calm, surprisingly sonorous voice, Hillary demonstrated she is in command and able to memorize the ins-and-outs of her office, when the focus ought to have been on the steps that led to the death of those poor American men, who waited for something much simpler and much more humane: Hillary’s help.

GOP media spin notwithstanding, Mrs. Clinton gave a masterful performance. The Republicans failed Hillary’s victims: Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyron Woods.

Likewise, it takes a special kind of stupid to lose the moral high-ground to the taxpayer-funded abortion provider Planned Parenthood. This Republicans managed, too.

A special kind of ugly are Deborah Nucatola and Mary Gatter who’re in the sheltered employ of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, on the taxpayer’s payroll. Gob agape, Nucatola held forth on the harvesting of fetal body parts, while gorging on salad and gulping down wine.

Reams of footage taken by an anti-abortion organization, the Center for Medical Progress, show that, for base, crass and cruel nothing beats a left-liberal woman.

Except for another left-liberal woman.


California ghoul Mary Gatter promised the Center for Medical Progress a less-crunchy abortion technique, in order to better preserve tiny body parts. Gutter [sic], medical director at Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley, joked with “the buyers” with whom she was dining that she was working toward a Lamborghini [presumably one little limb at a time].

These women are ugly inside and out—from the affectatious tart tones emitted by Nucatola, down to Gatter’s nauseating habit of swooshing her gums with her tongue.

Yes, one has to be a special kind of moron to lose more moral high-ground to the two’s boss: 500,000 dollars-a-year babe Cecile Richards and her congressional harpies, who were out in full force, last month, to plump for ongoing public funding for Planned Parenthood.

Cecile Richards is the president of Planned Parenthood. Like Hillary, Cecile came out on top at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, in October.

Because they’re so obtuse, it’s hard to see what Republicans and their supporters mean, politically, when they declare in opposition to abortion. One can reasonably infer that, since abortion is legal, Republicans are indicating they would like to outlaw the procedure.

A feasible, ethical political position this is not.

Woman or man: As most Americans see it, an adult owns his body and all that’s in it. To outlaw the removal of a body part, however precious to you and me, is to invade and aggress against a woman and her provider for the dominion she has asserted over what is indisputably her private property: her body.

Republicans are hopeless. But as this ineffectual lot keeps repeating, Donald Trump is not one of them. Mr. Trump can and has to be able to say what his Republican rivals have proven incapable of articulating.

When questioned about abortion, Trump needs to tell his detractors the following:

Women have the right to screw and scrape out their insides to their heart’s content.

Trojans, Trivora or a termination: An Americans woman has the right to purchase contraception, abortifacients and abortions, provided … she pays for them.

For like herself, America is packed with many other sovereign individuals. Some of these individuals do not approve of the products and procedures mentioned. Americans who oppose contraception, abortifacients and abortion must be similarly respected in their rights of self-ownership.

Taxpayers who oppose these products and procedures have an equal right to dispense what is theirs—their property—in accordance with the dictates of their conscience.

America’s adult women may terminate their pregnancies (to the exclusion of late-term infanticide). What America’s manifestly silly sex does not have the right to do is to rope other, presumably free Americans into supplying them with or paying for their reproductive choices.

The rights of self-ownership and freedom of conscience apply to all Americans.

No Republican has ever come close to articulating the ethical elegance of a libertarian argument.

It’s time for Mr. Trump, the anti-Republican, to so do.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Benghazi, Hillary Clinton 
Hide 62 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Biff says:

    What America’s manifestly silly sex does not have the right to do is to rope other, presumably free Americans into supplying them with or paying for their reproductive choices.

    Pay for the pill or pay for the unwanted child? And remember when deciding – there are millions and millions who do not, and NEVER WILL, take responsibility for their choices.

    • Replies: @boogerbently
    , @pyrrhus
  2. “Woman or man: As most Americans see it, an adult owns his body and all that’s in it. To outlaw the removal of a body part, however precious to you and me, is to invade and aggress against a woman and her provider for the dominion she has asserted over what is indisputably her private property: her body.”

    Do most Americans really think an unborn baby is part of the mother’s body? This seems totally insane to me.

    • Agree: Vendetta
    • Disagree: Kiza, Thirdeye
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  3. tbraton says:

    Do you really think Donald Trump should involve himself in the briar patch of abortion? After all, women comprise more than 50% of the electorate, and, no matter how he frames the issue, he is sure to offend some women by venturing into this controversial area. There is no guarantee that he will secure the nomination. There are still a lot of potential voters who are nervous about voting for Donald Trump. There is no need to add to the nervousness in order to appeal to the small band of libertarians, who may not vote for him anyway because they, like Sen. Rand Paul, do not believe in any restrictions on immigration, as I understand it. Judging from Paul’s very low polling numbers, there does not appear to be a large vein of libertarian voters in the Republican Party.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    , @rod1963
  4. annamaria says:

    Hillary is eager to give the Americans treasure and lives to Israel, see the recent paper by Glen Greenwald:
    One of the comments for this paper was so good that it deserves to be reprinted:


    Alana ↪ Adam
    “… This eternal-victim complex some supporters of Israel have is absolutely fucking tiresome. There are mountains and mountains of evidence – videos, documentation, etc. – that lay out Israel’s crime thoroughly. Anyone who’s studied this issue even a little knows what’s really going on & what HAS been going on. Zionism was always a racist, colonialist (Herzel in his writings literally called Zionism a “colonialist movement” that needed to get rid of all Palestinians whom he said were like the “red Indians”). Read the memoirs and diaries of Ben Gurion, Begem, Sharon and other criminals. These guys didn’t mince words in their writings – almost like they didn’t think anyone would ever read them. They flat-out admit to their crimes and to lying about threats from Palestinians and their neighbors to have an excuse to invade or destroy their armies/ take out their defenses. Here’s a very long but informative article that documents a lot of this:

    Sharon, Begin, Rabin, Mattityahu Peled (who was the army general at the time) have all admitted that the ’67 ‘war’ was an attack by Israel and that Israel wasn’t faced with any real threat. In their own words, they’ve said that Israel just wanted an excuse to take out the armies of their neighbors and weaken them – which would make it easier for Israel to continue its crimes.

    Here’s another article that outlines a lot of this…there are plenty of other books, articles, etc (including by Israeli Jewish historians and former army personnel) that attest to this:

    Your comment is a clear indication that you haven’t the slightest clue about the horrors that Palestinians have endured since even before 1948 at the hands of Zionists. Are you familiar with the countless massacres/rapes/thefts of Palestinians villages by Zionist groups? With the writings of every prominent Zionist who blatantly admits that Paleatinaisn posed no threat except a demographic one? That they “had to” commit their crimes against these people if they wanted a Jewish-majority state? Again, read the words of those responsible – they don’t hold back.

    Today, like the case has been for decades, Palestinians are murdered with impunity by Israeli Occupation Forces and extremist settlers. The IOF literally just stand and watche as illegal Jewish settlers attack Palestinians and set fire to their homes, farms, olive groves, punch holes in their water tanks and poison their limited water supply (as Israel steals Palestinian water), etc (there are plenty of videos of this on B’tselem and other human rights websites…in one of them, an old Palestinian farmer asks an IOF thug why he isn’t stopping the settlers and the IOF thug responds “why the fuck should I protect a Palestinian?” and proceeds to hit him. And this is the rule, not the exception). They attack and beat Palestinian women and children, who almost never see the assailants punished (97% of reported attacks on Palestinians by illegal settlers are completely ignored by Israeli police and the ones that are investigated very rarely bring the assailants to justice. Meanwhile, 99% of Palestinians who are brought to court on absurd and often falsified charges are convicted. IOF thugs constantly harras and detain Palestinian children as young as five years old. About half of Palestinian children arrested by the IOF are sexually abused while detained & almost all are tortured.

    The Israeli government absolves the criminal illegal settlers and IOF of all of it…they’ve made sure their murderous, fascist laws basically make it legal to abuse and murder Palestinians.

    And you don’t know the half of it. You have no fucking clue what Palestinians have been and are going through at the hands of the truly psychopathic Israeli government, IOF, and extremist illegal settlers. On top of the threats to their physical safety that Palestinians face every day, Israel continues to illegally expand nit just in Palestinian territory but in the territory of neighboring countries (Netanyahu just announced Israel will settle 200,000 illegals in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights – which would be a blatant violation of international law and even Ken Roth came out to say that it was “a move that dared the ICC to act”). Not to mention the daily illegal evictions, home demolitions, and land theft in Palestinian territory (East Jerusalem and the West Bank).

    So enough with the absurd and laughable “poor Israel” routine. A country like Israel – with the most technologically advanced army in the ME that is diplomatically shielded no matter what heinous crimes it commits, with billions of dollars in aid that goes to WMDs that they test on Palestinians and massacre them with in Gaza and the West Bank and then make billions selling those “tested” weapons to other countries, with its continued ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and theft of their land -does not get to play the victim card. And neither do its delusional, immoral supporters.”

    The Glenn’s paper should be sent to The Rachel Maddow Show for tonight’ (Friday) debate with a question on Hillary’s understanding of international law re Israel’ crimes against humanity in Palestine.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @Karl
  5. MarkinLA says:

    To really go after Hillary on Benghazi you have to focus in on what the hell were we doing there. There seems to be a gentlemen’s agreement not to discuss CIA bungles openly. Was this a weapons depot collecting weapons for our Syrian jihadis? If so, why was it so poorly guarded? Did they really think the Russians and then Syrians and Iranians wouldn’t find out?

    Some early conspiracy websites thought it was Syrian and Quds Force Special Ops troops who were tipped off by Russian intelligence. That makes more sense than some random jihaddis looking for a bargain on used AKs.

  6. Woman or man: As most Americans see it, an adult owns his body and all that’s in it. To outlaw the removal of a body part, however precious to you and me, is to invade and aggress against a woman and her provider for the dominion she has asserted over what is indisputably her private property: her body.

    Fetus=virus? It entered “through no fault of her own”? Like an illegal alien’s pre-anchor baby?

    South Africa’s schools were that bad?

    The “invasion” argument is about as silly as “silly sex” gets. It sinks an otherwise readable piece.

    If you want the “ethical elegance of a libertarian argument” on this issue, read Doris Gordon and Ron Paul.

    Re Trump: abortion is a tightrope issue for him. And his sister is a federal judge. I don’t see him coming down either side.

  7. Realist says:

    The beauty of our electoral system is that no matter who is elected, you can be sure they will be a corrupt, controlled, bought, asshole. And will have no concern for the American people.

    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
  8. They aren’t smart enough to use the Benghazi e-mail ruse to uncover illegal “Foundation” contributions and influence peddling (for $$$$) while SoS. We are entitled to all those e-mails.

  9. @Biff

    More little Dem voters.

    • Replies: @Biff
  10. pyrrhus says:

    A false dichotomy–the taxpayers should not be paying for the unwanted child either…

    • Replies: @Biff
  11. GW says:

    If you’re gonna cuck out, the federalist argument is better than the libertarian one anyway. Go after Roe and the nonsensical esteem we hold for the power of the judiciary. Signal that under my administration we will not enforce any court order against a state enforcing abortion laws, just as Obama has done nothing to prosecute the mayors and councils of sanctuary cities.

  12. Realist says:

    Carson is through….or should be.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    The Federal Government has bigger fish to fry rather than worry about abortion and gay marriage. When I was growing up, in Texas the age for marriage was 18. In Oklahoma, the age was 16. A few of my acquaintences came back from Oklahoma with a marriage license. Let each individual state worry about such things.

  14. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The GOP and Fox News obsession with Benghazi always seemed odd, since they support the jihadis/terrorists attempting to take down the Assad government. The two ex-Navy SEALs killed were hired guns. It was an operation to arm Islamic terrorists. Good riddance to anyone involved in facilitating this.

    Hillary fully backs arming and aiding the jihadists to overthrow the Assad government. In Damascus women can live like women in Western societies, in jeans and head uncovered. Meanwhile, in the areas ruled by the jihadists (ALL those opposing Assad), the group which Hillary supports, young Christian, Yazidi, and Alawite girls are raped and sold as sex slaves. Women are forced to cover themselves and STFU least they be raped and decapitated. The feminists of the West are silent. Hillary and other women (e.g., Victoria Nuland) are working for the Islamist Syria. And Hillary sounds like she’s ready to go to WWIII with the Russians to accomplish this. Out of all the candidates running for President, only Donald Trump has taken the sane position, i.e., work together with the Putin and the Assad and liquidate these jihadists and ISIS.

  15. tbraton says:

    “Carson is through….or should be.”

    I totally agree with the second part, but what do you base the first part on? He still appears to running strong in the polls, much to my amazement. And those polls appear to be supported by videos showing excited white people greeting Carson with enthusiasm at various book signings. I just don’t get the appeal.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    , @Realist
  16. I’m pro choice and pro planned parenthood. The case against the later is bogus. I’m sorry this writer was taken in. I understand objections to tax paid abortions. I object to tax paid war crimes. But technically at least the former does not exist.

    I’m also pro Trump. He should equivocate on abortion as there is no profit in standing with either side.

    It appears that the Republican establishment is poised to bring back Romney seeing the failure of Bush and the weakness of Rubio. Neither Trump nor Romney will prevail against Hillary. All the black people, all the brown people, all the anti endless war people and a ton of women who never voted before will back Hillary. As much as I would prefer Trump or even Sanders it will most likely be Hillary in the winners circle.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  17. @Simon in London

    You’re right. It’s scientifically ignorant and contrary to biological fact. A new, unique human life exists from conception. We can argue over when, why, and to what extent we should accord rights to that new human life, but we can’t deny that the new human being is not “part of” anyone else’s body.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  18. @tbraton

    Many of us who identify as libertarians, and many of us who now support Rand Paul, certainly do NOT believe in open borders. “Libertarianism in one country”, I believe John Derbyshire or some other smart guy called it.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  19. @WorkingClass

    Planned Parenthood commits, advertises, encourages, and profits from murder of innocent & helpless human beings, and I’d support pro-life / anti-abortion laws in my State. Having said that, though, I agree with you, WorkingClass, that Trump (or any candidate for FEDERAL office) would be wise to avoid abortion and not make it an issue, let alone a major issue, in his campaign.

    This viciously contested issue should be left to the people of each State to decide.

    Neither Trump nor any other candidate for federal office needs to say WHICH view on abortion law he will impose on the entire country.

    He should say, rather, that he stands for the Tenth Amendment. The U.S. Constitution nowhere specifically authorizes the federal government to interfere in this area of life, so the Tenth Amendment leaves the matter “to the States, or the People, respectively,” NOT the federal government.

    Pro-lifers can work for anti-abortion laws in their State and stop trying to force their view on the whole country.

    Pro-choicers can work for pro-abortion-choice laws in their States and stop trying to enforce THEIR view on the whole country.

  20. @tbraton

    With Carson’s intelligence, solid personal values, patriotism, impressive hard work and achievements in medicine, opposition to collectivism, and ability to inspire, I’d be honored to meet him. My wife and I read two of his books and were moved as well as informed.

    But that doesn’t mean I want the guy in the White House. Heck no.

    Carson seems to have no well-thought-out, well-informed views on major foreign-policy issues, nor any willingness to keep an open mind, show restraint in the use or threat of military force, consider seriously the large financial and economic burdens which wars place on American taxpayers, etc. And he seems to be merely parroting whatever the usual suspects tell him to say to appeal to the supposedly warmongering GOP base.

    Of all the GOP presidential candidates so far, there are only two who show some promise in reducing the wealth and American lives squandered on constant unnecessary non-defensive wars: Rand Paul, and to a lesser extent Donald Trump.

    Rand is trying too hard to attract militarists and straying too far from the consistently “pro-defense but pro-peace” his father espoused with such conviction and courage. But he’s the only one speaking out against the presumption in favor of war, shared by most or all of the other candidates, and he’s the only one going after this creepy surveillance we’re subjected to (hi NSA). RAND PAUL is still my guy, with Trump my fallback in the unhappy (and I think unlikely) event that Rand drops out before my State’s primary.

    And I don’t need either one of them talking about the federal government imposing any view of abortion law on the country, not pro-life and certainly not “pro-choice.” My guess is Trump is kinda pro-choice if he’s honest about it, while Rand is really pro-life.

  21. @RadicalCenter

    We are in agreement regarding the tenth amendment.

  22. nickels says:

    American women’s obsessive attachment to abortion is a tragic attachment to the paradigm Isaiah warned of. Cultural Marxism, white genocide, feminism and the destruction of monogamy.
    When the walls of the temple come crashing down they will see it was not something worth holding onto, but the exile will be long and arduous.

  23. As a young, single man, I gradually discovered that politically left-leaning lovers tended to argue for their right to rope me into fatherhood if contraception failed.

    These conversations did come up, and they were serious.

    On the other hand, the young women who professed to be republicans, or politically to the right, consistently said they would gladly share the cost of abortion or would not expect me to support the child if they chose to have it.

    Yes, the “conservative” women honored my choice, and more often seemed to approve of abortion as an option too.

    They were better in bed, by the way.

    That’s just my experience. I don’t know how generalizable it is, but I swore off liberal women a long time ago and eventually married a wonderful, pro-choice conservative.

    A pro-choice conservative. That’s a real thing. I think there are many of them.

  24. @Buzz Mohawk

    I should add that fortunately this issue never manifested itself. The choice never had to be made, thanks to latex, the pill, and whatever other methods we were using at the time. They all worked. I didn’t leave a bunch of fatherless children behind. After all, I’m white and careful.

    I’d re-think my lifestyle if I had it to do over though.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  25. @Buzz Mohawk

    There are many “pro-choice” conservatives and libertarians, but that’s a sad fact, not to be celebrated.

    And if you preferred women who expressed a willingness to KILL any baby they conceived with you, that was heartless, selfish, and cruel. Doesn’t exactly counter the view of some pro-lifers that abortion is often used because the parties didn’t have the decency & maturity to use contraception.

  26. @RadicalCenter

    P.S. I am pro-life and I wholeheartedly support people using contraception, especially if they are going to have sex outside marriage and with someone they have no plan to marry. Better contraception than conceiving a baby and then murdering it. (Anyway, it is other adults’ right to use contraception without needing permission from me, or from the government, because contraception does NOT kill a human being.)

    I know MANY pro-lifers who think this way. But it’s convenient for the “pro-choice” movement to paint us all as crazy catholics who oppose contraception (legally or just morally) and then oppose abortion and leave people’s lives heavily unnecessarily burdened by babies who never should have been created.

    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
  27. @Buzz Mohawk

    Good for you saying that. I’d re-think my lifestyle and priorities somewhat, too, if I could do it over again. Who wouldn’t, if they’ll admit it?

  28. Realist says:

    You should keep up with the news.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    , @Chris Mallory
  29. @RadicalCenter

    Doesn’t exactly counter the view of some pro-lifers that abortion is often used because the parties didn’t have the decency & maturity to use contraception.

    I’ve observed that parties having children they can’t support lacked the decency to have an abortion.

  30. @RadicalCenter

    What do you think of all the busybody laws dealing with “cruelty to animals”? Is it right that one person try to use state power to tell another how to deal with its chattel, when it affects no one else?

    If you like laws against “cruelty to animals,” if they don’t offend your libertarianism, then I’m not sure how you can be convinced. But if you see that this laws are intrusions on freedom, you should see that prohibiting abortion is the same.

    For it could be asked, why don’t lesser beings too have “rights.” Who is to say?

    My conclusion is that people shouldn’t stick their nose in matters for purely moralistic reasons when they have no conceivable objective interest in the matter. Whether it’s animals or fetuses.

  31. tbraton says:

    “You should keep up with the news.”

    Well, if what you said is true, then the news should keep up with me.

  32. annamaria says:

    “A new, unique human life exists from conception.”
    Only as a potentiality. On the other hand, the fact of killing thousands and thousands of healthy babies and children in the Middle East in order to provide for war profiteers should be the most important theme for the presidential debate. Those Americans that like talking about the sanctity of life, are mute, en masse about the obscenity of the US-run wars that have resulted in the hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties, including the multitude of babies and pre-born. Bush the lesser was quite successful in mobilizing the evangelicals (anti-abortionists) for the illegal wars of aggression. The same huge segment of American Christians sees nothing wrong in supporting Israel, which policies are the engine behind the killing spree in the Middle East, where children and pregnant women were killed in the huge numbers.
    There should be no daylight between the question of abortion and the question of morality of the current wars. Too many men like showing their supposed ethical superiority for the expense of the weak. Women must have choice. Before castigating the poor and powerless women for their choice not to have babies (for whom the women are not able to provide), try to take on the rich and powerful men that legislate allocation of trillions of dollars on the lethal weaponry, mercenaries, and other well-connected war profiteers.

    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
  33. @Realist

    American political hacks are a despicable lot. To a man (and woman), they’re bought-and-paid-for.

    • Replies: @Realist
  34. FLgeezer says:

    “There should be no daylight between abortion and the question of morality of the current wars”.

    Excellent point annamarina. I’m a practicing Catholic and find that my fellow believers seem to think only American pre-born lives matter. And, of course evangelicals are loopy on the subject. On matters middle-eastern, they are of the “kill ‘me all” school. In addition to which evangelicals are all Israel-Firsters. But I guess being an Israel-Firster is concomitant with “kill ‘me all”. How they can reconcile Christ’s promise of “peace I give you” with their murderous advocacy is beyond my ken. Mass murder is NOT Christian dogma.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @FLgeezer
  35. I know a lot of wealthy Republicans. They are more stupid than you realize.

  36. FLgeezer says:

    “Kill them all”, not “kill me all”. Begone spellchecker!

  37. Why is a womans reproductive choice 0% my business, but
    100% my financial responsibility ?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  38. It’s ok to dispose of aborted baby parts and tissue but not sell or reuse them? That seems absurd. If you morally accept abortion, selling and reusing the resulting parts seems far less morally questionable.

    The woman swooshing her gums with her tongue is a completely irrelevant personal tick. Similarly with eating a salad and drinking wine. So what?

  39. @RadicalCenter

    And, of course, don’t forget that Roe vs. Wade–the ruling that legalized abortion–was the product of the U.S. Supreme Shysters, those judicial megalomaniacs.

  40. @Realist

    Carson should never be allowed near the Oval Office,but that Politico piece is filled with lies and half truths. Politico has also walked back several of the claims through after publication editing.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @tbraton
  41. @RadicalCenter

    Many of us who identify as libertarians, and many of us who now support Rand Paul, certainly do NOT believe in open borders.

    State-subsidized immigration is the opposite of libertarian.

  42. @boogerbently

    Why is a womans reproductive choice 0% my business, but
    100% my financial responsibility ?

    And why are men more likely to believe that than women are? The pro-life movement is a girls’ club. Indeed, the political wing was founded by a Long Island housewife, the late Ellen McCormack.

    As Libertarian Toni Nathan was the first woman to receive a vote in the Electoral College, Mrs McCormack was the first to receive federal funds (which, yes, I oppose too, but there are few more deserving recipients thereof) for a presidential bid. Too bad they went to her Democratic campaign, rather than her own NYS Right to Life Party.

  43. Realist says:
    @Chris Mallory

    “Carson should never be allowed near the Oval Office,but that Politico piece is filled with lies and half truths.”

    I think you are over stating it, but the fact remains Carson lied.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
  44. rod1963 says:

    Yep, it’s best if Trump avoids this polarizing wedge issue. There is no upside for him, only lots of bad press. Besides Carson owns this issue at the moment.

    Keep focusing on the economic and immigration issues. Because if those aren’t solved, women won’t be worrying about abortions anymore, they’ll be worrying about being raped by 3rd immigrants who view women as nothing more than cattle or watching their job go overseas and joining the ranks of the permanently unemployed.

    • Agree: tbraton
  45. Karl says:

    >> Hillary is eager to give the Americans treasure and lives to Israel

    it’s amazingly easy to cherry-pick quotations and/or citations in a way which allows you to paint Person XX as being in love with Israel, or in love with Martians, or anything you want. Sort of like Bible quoting, as it were.

    But down where the rubber meets the road….. Hillary did not attempt to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, or do any one of any number of other actions which would have NOT cost a red cent; nor one drop of GI blood.

    I do not accept Ilana Mercer’s identification as an “ex-Israeli”. Ilana Mercer has never seen the inside of a Lishkat Giyoos. Christ on a Crutch, she can’t even write three paragraphs in Hebrew.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  46. map says:

    Abortion is an intractable issue. It is important to understand why.

    Abortion is, like guns, very primal.

    Guns are very primal because, for men, surrender is not an option. Women always have the option of submitting to a conquering male by offering to bear his children. Conquered men face death or slavery. Gun control is, therefore, rightly seen as an attempt to impose unacceptable conditions on conquered men.

    Abortion is very primal because, for women, they only have so many opportunities to find a quality man. If they fail, then they want abortion to reset their mating strategies. Because of hypergamy, there exists a large pool of women that are competing for the attention of a smaller pool of men. The competition is fierce, often including the availability of free and easy, unprotected sex, which a quality man can demand of any woman in his orbit. The women comply if they want to compete.

    Telling a man he cannot have a gun leaves him at the mercy of more powerful men. Telling a woman she cannot have an abortion means she has to abandon her plans to pursue the kind of man she really wants. The primal nature of these wants is why the anti-abortion and gun-control movements have weak success records.

    I am sympathetic to the higher morality of the anti-abortion movement. I do agree that life begins at conception and that abortion is murder. But this higher morality is going against the primal urge of a women trying to get the best possible sperm for her eggs. Moreover, abortion will need to be attacked only after the soft polygamy of the modern prenuptial dating market is destroyed.

    It’s better to focus on economics and immigration.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  47. tbraton says:
    @Chris Mallory

    “Carson should never be allowed near the Oval Office”

    What I especially like is his insistence that he told the truth when he said (or wrote) that he had hit his mother on the head with a hammer. Now stop and think about that. How many people have ever hit their mother on the head with a hammer? I guess we have to give him credit for being honest, just as we did George Washington, but. . . .

  48. @Realist

    Please provide a direct quotation, in context, of his lie(s).

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Realist
  49. Realist says:
    @Chris Mallory

    In his book Carson said he was offered a scholarship to West Point.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
  50. Giuseppe says:

    Between the Scylla of the Stupid Party and the Charybdis of the Dissembling Party, what’s a Thinking Voter to do?

    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
  51. Even worse than his cloudy memory about West Point 40 years ago, Carson shows himself a traitor with his call to make Puerto Rico the 51st state.

  52. @Realist

    Like I asked, produce the quote in context.

  53. @Giuseppe

    “Between the Scylla of the Stupid Party and the Charybdis of the Dissembling Party, what’s a Thinking Voter to do?”

    Don’t vote. Given our corrupt, bought-and-paid-for political system, voting is an exercise in futility.

  54. Biff says:

    United States is a socialist county(it fits every criteria) and you will be MADE to pay.

  55. This Is Our Home [AKA "Robert Rediger"] says:

    Your life must be a very boring one. You have no other interests than the Middle East.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  56. joe webb says:

    find out what women really want!

    Read F. Roger Devlin’s ” Sexual Utopia in Power.” About $20 at Amazon.

    Of course Devlin recognizes the evolutionary nature of women, that they are loopy by design , that that design works pretty well when the gals have children and a real male to keep them under control.

    However, left to their own devices, their cunning, their resentments, their sex obsessions (i have been ending the debate for years by simply directing folks to the women’s magazines…that is what women want), they become like spoiled children, but much worse, since sex is a much more dangerous drive than simply wanting more toys which can be sharply curtailed by just a glance from a real man, or for that matter, a real woman.

    Of course Devlin’s pieces in this book are anti-feminist and , well, it’s great stuff.

    Joe Webb

  57. annamaria says:
    @This Is Our Home

    “Your life must be a very boring one. You have no other interests than the Middle East.”

    What a surprising interests in the quality of my life. As a sentient being and mother, I am indeed interested in the info on the conflagration of the Middle East, courtesy the US/UK/Israeli neocons. The conflict could lead to the WWIII. You might want to read on nuclear radiation in order to understand other peoples’ worries about this conflict; knowledge of the basic physics would suffice.
    Here is a repost of my two Qs re the downing of the Russian civilian airplane over Sinai:
    1. Why the Islamists have never targeted Western airplanes, for four years? – not to disturb the flow of financial and material support from the “coalition of the willing” including the US/UK/Israelis? Has not been then the “war on terror” in the Middle East just a pretense on a part of the US/UK/Israel to remake the Middle Eastern maps for the benefit of Israel?
    2. How was Mr. Carter so sure that the Russian Federation will be targeted, whereas the US/UK/Israel (which have been “fighting” the Islamic terrorists for four long years) will not?

  58. Jefferson says:

    “I do not accept Ilana Mercer’s identification as an “ex-Israeli”. Ilana Mercer has never seen the inside of a Lishkat Giyoos. Christ on a Crutch, she can’t even write three paragraphs in Hebrew.”

    Didn’t Ilana Mercer spend the majority of her life in Canada and The U.S? So I would not expect her to able to be 90%-100% literate in Hebrew.

    What percentage of North American Jews are fluent in Hebrew as in can read, write, and hold an entire conversation in Hebrew? I doubt it is a majority percentage, especially among secular non religious North American Jews.

    I know a Jewish American who is way more fluent in Russian than she is in Hebrew. She said her Hebrew speaking skills are so pathetic that she would be embarrassed to speak it in front of someone who was born and raised in Israel.

    I imagine her Hebrew speaking skills are about as good as Columba Bush’s English speaking skills.

  59. Thirdeye says:

    “Life begins at conception” is superstitious twaddle. The capacity for human sentience is one of the last things that develops in the fetus.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
From the Leo Frank Case to the Present Day
How America was neoconned into World War IV