Presidents Day: Remembering FDR’s victims

**Posted by Phineas

Presidents Day is one of those weird holidays, a conflation of the birthday’s of two of our greatest presidents, Washington and Lincoln, into a nondescript Monday-off that not only honors those two, but the likes of… Millard Fillmore, Rutherford B. Hayes, and Jimmy Carter? Someone owes George and Abe an apology.

Regardless, today is an apt time to think about the men we’ve entrusted with the highest office in the land and about the good and bad they’ve done. At the Washington Examiner, Tim Carney takes a look at Franklin Roosevelt, nearly a saint in the liberal pantheon and the subject of books that are as much hagiography as they are history, and reminds us that FDR also had a quite a record of demolishing freedom in order to expand state power. Carney presents three examples of the victims of FDR’s statism, but one especially stands out:

Innocent Japanese Americans: Government, ultimately, is force and the threat of force. This is most in view when it comes to imprisonment.

Certainly one of the very worst sins of the U.S. Government was FDR’s creation of internment camps. More than 100,000 Japanese-Americans, none of whom had ever been accused of a crime, along with Italian- and German-Americans, were packed off to prison camps. Think about it this way: FDR’s internment of a hundred thousand Americans was closer in time to today than it was to the Emanicipation Proclamation.

The Japanese-American internment was really one of the worst atrocities against civil rights after slavery ended, up there with Jim Crow, and a president who could approve this order should be harshly criticized for his abuse of power and the cavalier trampling of citizens’ rights at least as much as he should be praised for any good he did.

We entrust our Chief Executives with great power, especially in time of war, and the example of FDR and the Japanese internment is a reminder to us to consider the character of the person we place in office, not just his or her record.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

It’s official: Mel Watt to seek #NC12 re-election

Despite rumors that suggested he was considering not running,  Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC12) filed today to seek an 11th term in the US House:

“The congressional districts are being contested in the courts and could very well be changed,” Watt said in a statement. “This has already led some experienced members of our congressional delegation to announce that they will not seek reelection.

“We need experience and seniority to maintain the influence of our delegation and we need representatives who will continue to work for progress, not return to the same old rhetoric and policies that led to the mess we’re trying to dig our country out of.”

Ironically, the reason he gives for wanting to stay in Congress is exactly why he needs to retire – because Watt and his liberal ilk are part of the problem, NOT the solution.  Of course, even if he did retire, his replacement wouldn’t be any better on that front because that district, even being redrawn as it has been, is still a solidly Democratic district.

On the other hand, local Tea Party leader Matthew Ridenhour has decided to run for Meck. County commissioner – the district 5 seat – which is being vacated by GOP commish Neil Cooksey. Unlike Watt, I support Ridenhour wholeheartedly.  Great guy, solid conservative,  honorable Marine and Iraq war veteran …

How is the VA abortion law “like rape” when abortion is VOLUNTARY?

Back story, via Jimmie Bise:

Just when you thought the abortion debate couldn’t get any more silly and shrill, here comes the pro-abortion crew, screaming into the breach created by a new law in Virginia. First, let me hip you to the law itself. What the state did was to modify an already existing law regarding what abortion providers must do prior to providing an abortion. Here is the meat of the modification.

Except in the case of a medical emergency, at least 2 hours before the performance of an abortion a qualified medical professional trained in sonography and working under the direct supervision of a physician licensed in the Commonwealth shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age. The ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable.

Pretty simple, right? Before an abortion, barring any emergency, the clinic has to have an actual physician oversee a routine sonogram — note here that the law does not demand any particular type of sonogram — and give the patent the opportunity to see the results of that sonogram and hear the fetal heartbeat. That’s it.

And yet, the abortion lobby — the people who derive their living from providing, promoting, or extracting money from taxpayers for abortions — have decided to make it a big deal.

Seriously. I’m seeing headline after headline on the left about ultrasounds being “vaginal probes” that are conducted “against women’s wills” for “no medical reason.” (As if bioethics don’t constitute a medical reason.)

They are making it sound, in their phrasing, like an ultrasound is somehow comparable to rape, and Dahlia Lithwick makes the comparison explicit. Jezebel pretends that the rationale is not a bioethical one—a way for society to slow things down, see if we can think abortions through—but rather that the girl or woman has already been penetrated by the male sexual organ, which of course has nothing to do with it.

So there you go. Now a routine medical test that doesn’t have to involve a “vaginal probe” is comparable to rape because…

The obvious question to all this is the one I used for the headline of this post: How is this law “like rape” when abortion is voluntary whereas rape obviously is not?  How is a “vaginal probe” ultrasound “like rape” when you have the option not to have the “vaginal probe” done?!

I’d like to be able to use the excuse that liberal “womyn” who make such arguments by suggesting they are stuck on stupid but in reality every “feminist” who has asserted this nonsense knows the truth.  It’s just a manufactured PR scare tactic used by The Usual Suspects to paint people who actually want to save the lives of the unborn as “extremists”, all the while trying to maintain their absurd facade as “the voice of mainstream women of America” – in spite of the fact that abortion itself is a grossly (literally) extreme act condoned and encouraged by these so-called “mainstream voices of American women.”   They know that if their cheap, orchestrated, deliberate attempts at misinforming Virginia voters about this bill work, they might be able to get a few of  VA GOP legislators booted out of office come election time and maybe, just maybe they can have the law repealed or modified shortly thereafter.

Or something like that.

But the truth is, as always, important here – especially on an issue as morally imperative as the safety and well-being of the unborn.

Here are a few more truths, while we’re at it:

-Unless a woman IS raped, having unprotected sex with a man is a  VOLUNTARY CHOICE.

-If she allows the man to have sex with her without him being protected and without protecting herself, she has made the CHOICE to risk pregnancy.

-Having voluntary unprotected sex is more likely to result in an “unwanted pregnancy” than having voluntary protected sex (which is also a CHOICE).

-Under modified Virginia law, before a woman has an abortion she has a CHOICE as to which type of ultrasound to have .

-She is not FORCED to have a “vaginal probe ultrasound.”

-More importantly, she is not FORCED to have an abortion at all! It is her “CHOICE”!

-Because of the very real possibility that a woman in Virginia who wants to have an abortion might change her mind after having the ultrasound done, *extremist* feminists  have deliberately played the “GOP wants to rape my v*gina!” card because in reality they’re not really about “choice” when the “choice” made by the pregnant woman is to have the baby.  This is also why the oppose sensible laws mandating a 24 hour waiting period for women who want to have an abortion.  Trust me, if this law in any way made having an abortion easier – even if it DID “mandate vaginal probes” – they would have no issue with it whatsoever.

-Lastly, need I remind any of you feminist geniuses out there that most abortion procedures involve some type of “vaginal probe” anyway??? Hello!?

Need I say more?