Former National Football league coach Dennis Green died in July 2016, but before his passing he had one of those spur of the moment, just precious and memorable profundities most applicable to todays environment. Coaching an average to mediocre Arizona Cardinals team, they won their opening game but were riding a 3-game losing streak in October 2006 which they seemed destined to break leading the Chicago Bears 23-3 with 8 seconds left in the third quarter. With the ball on their own 15-bang- an induced fumble was returned for a touchdown-making it 23-10. Things stayed on track over the next ten minutes, when an Arizona fumble with 5:11 left in the game was returned for a touchdown, now 23-17. Arizona needed to hold on for just 4:53 to win but stalled out after one first down. They punted the ball to Devon Hester-one of the most dangerous return men in the game-and a scant few seconds later Arizona was down and lost the game 24-23. Green was beside himself in the post-game interview, so frustrated at his team’s play that he uttered several times the famous words “They are who we thought they were,” explaining nothing and everything about how his team had blown the game.
With the leak of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s February 2022 pre-decisional information paper on Roe versus Wade reference the Mississippi case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, we reach that Dennis Green moment where we confirm what we knew all along: they are who we thought they were.
American society-or perhaps our culture-convention-the sense of order, goodness, an inherent obligation of doing the right thing just seem to be kind of passe today, overcome by dogma, partisanship, winning at any cost and doing what is necessary to prevail with no pretension to being concerned about lying, cheating or stealing or who has to be done dirty to prevail.
I’m probably off base with this theory about how the above came to be but I assume many of us parents raising children in the 1980s and 1990s were very concerned throughout about the tendency for what was emerging as a misplaced value system riddled with the downside consequences of good intentions best captured by the derisive term that “everyone gets a trophy.” Participation was its own reward. A number of communities we were part of as we moved around the world (military family) saved money by having co-ed teams at the younger ages (under 10) for things like soccer, baseball, softball, basketball and the like. We attended the vast majority of the games, and I was always struck by the predominant theme in many of the communities to discourage competition, not keeping score, not emphasizing winning or focusing on the results of the game.
The World War 2 and post generation parents would have been appalled at the very idea of some of these concepts, in fact many of those who viewed the games while visiting their grandchildren all had the same response-why aren’t they keeping score? Noting that players scoring too many goals were taken out, players were often setup with the ball in position to score for reasons that had nothing to do with the play-a team would often play without a goalie in soccer because-well-if not worried about nor keeping score, what would be the point of having a goalie? Besides, in California it was considered a “dangerous position in soccer.” A coach there explained the logic of it to me as the “children having a competition with themselves to get better each game, improving their skills and learning to play as a team.” It struck me that emphasizing the play of the team while totaling ignoring the metric of success for any team-was just weird-but we didn’t use the term woke back then. I asked what the metric was to track success and he went into tangent and philosophy mode about happy and well-adjusted kids who did not base their self-worth on game results. I told him I believed it was a disservice to these kids not to foster the positive aspects of competition-doing your best-accepting the outcomes, win or lose. Learning to be part of a team-somewhat depending on each other-having an outcome at risk or stake. That they were being setup for pain at some point down the road when the lessons not learned from competitive situations and games and accepting an outcome would be thrust upon them-and they would not be ready. Isn’t part of becoming mature and an adult dealing with outcomes, personal achievement and disappointment?
My first thought when I heard of the leak of Supreme Court Justice Alito’s position paper was the above. That somebody born in the 1980s-never had to deal with competition as many knew it up to that point-but was obviously smart and talented because they were part of one of the most exclusive inner circles in the world-was responsible for the leak, having no compunction whatsoever to let process interfere with their goals that must prevail at any cost. When nothing is a competition, everything is-grades, graduation placement, college, degrees, etc.
This Town Hall article by Matt Vespa asks “Is this the Supreme Court Leaker?” You might be curious about how speculative such a postulation might be, but Matt does a very nice job running through the evidence. What makes it logical and compelling is the assessment of the background of the person in the field in question, including a masters in gender and previous published articles, work and a paper written against a clerkship requirement focused on this topic. The paper was a somewhat militant view that argued for the Affordable Care Act-Obamacare-to compel Catholic medical facilities to conduct emergency and perhaps other forms of abortion against their religious beliefs. But most compellingly-and not coincidentally-someone who is married to a journalist who worked at Politico and often shared a byline with the author of the leaked document, Josh Gerstein.
That’s a spicy meataball-a lot of coincidences there if not true. A lot of what has followed this leak speaks to Dennis Green’s premise. The leak itself is at best now a secondary consideration to all the kerfuffle over the need to get the base out to exact revenge on the conservative members of the court.
Many LSMBTG* and pundits weighed-in with reckless abandon, as if to prove they could outstupid each other no matter how low the bar was placed. Our president-it almost pains one to acknowledge that fact-as he is want to do in these type matters on the national level, blundered into the middle of it and managed to put his foot in his mouth immediately by stating the quiet part out loud: again. In terms of his technique, this was in the doozy, somewhat of a cardinal sin category-saying that which cannot be uttered, acknowledged, admitted, stated or agreed upon-as viewed by leftist activists and their religion of Planned Parenthood (article citing a Gateway Pundit piece)
“The idea that we’re gonna make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make the judgment to choose to abort a child based on a decision by the Supreme Court I think goes way overboard,” said Biden as his handlers whisked him away.
“Come on guys! Let’s go!” Biden’s handler shouted to reporters as Biden walked away. There goes the left’s “clump of cells” argument.
The reason the above is somewhat of a Lesko big flipping deal is the non-stop dogmatic mantra and propagandizing that democrats have spewed over the last several decades lying about how this magical act of birth “somehow” comes to fruition with a baby at the end, but is something altogether different right up to that point in a crass and macabre logic pattern that would have you believe in some convenient alternative reality that makes it somehow more palatable and socially acceptable to terminate-to kill-that baby prior to delivery. Before birth it is like a magician’s hat where there is no rabbit, and then all of a sudden-voila-c’est ici! That clump of cells, fetus, alien growth (not an illegal immigrant, but a foreign benign intrusion) or whatever disingenuous concept created to avoid culpability for what Lesko described above comes together like some complicated recipe or lightning strike.
Biden wasn’t alone at the picnic with the size 10 sandwich. This American Thinker article by Stu Tarlowe captures the logic-really lack thereof- of the View and one of the dimmer bulbs in the chandelier, Caryn Elaine Johnson, aka, Whoopi Goldberg. Now she has a habit of saying odd, different and hateful things but is rarely held accountable for them. So she thought defending child molester Roman Polanski made sense (wasn’t “rape-rape”-for him to drug and rape a 13 year old) and also defended Michael Vick in the dog fighting scandal because of “cultural influences,” but the most egregious up to this point may have been her apparent ambivalence over that “holocaust thing” because it wasn’t about race, it was just “whites doing bad things to whites.”
Her opinion on this matter is apropos to nothing, but worth reading under the habit of learning something knew about these people everyday (from the piece)-
Her latest, as she chimed in on the current kerfuffle over the prospect of the Supreme Court overturning the Roe v. Wade decision regarding abortion, was to declare that the decision to have an abortion was strictly between “my doctor, myself, and my child.”
(Leaving aside that her use of the terminology “my child” would seem to contradict the argument by abortion advocates that what is aborted is not a child, but an inconvenient, non-viable mass of tissue,) I find it quite remarkable that her comment seems to imply that the child has a vote in the decision-making process. I wonder how the child casts that vote or otherwise makes its wishes known.
I know it’s wrong to presume how someone will vote, but I think it’s a pretty safe bet that a child in its mother’s womb would vote to be born rather than to be aborted. And yet, even if the child has a vote, and a way to cast it, it can be easily outvoted by the woman and her doctor. And this provides a “teachable moment” about Democrats’ understanding of voting and of the nature of American self-government.
But much like Lesko Lunch Bucket Joe, she thought that the decision on whether an abortion is necessary or not is a matter and decision between the mother, doctor and the child…Is it crazy to believe that if the child is to be considered in this conversation that there needs to be a discussion about such representation?
How can that discussion take place in an environment where the over-the-top rhetoric of the left celebrates the macabre? This Federalist article by Ellie Reynolds describes the distasteful near glee and vitriol lacing this issue with a tinge of madness where the propaganda best reflected in the disinformation campaign of Planned Parenthood to cast this issue as an argument about a “clump of cells” has spawned generations of zombies who spout mantra that make you question their base humanity.
What has been achieved by all the decades of Roe Versus Wade is the institutionalizing and inuring of the act of killing babies with no more thought given to it than taking out the trash on the part of what can only be described as abortion zealots. Watching the unfolding of this inevitable action and the glee with which these activists have taken up the cause is to witness the underbelly of the type of movement that credibly threatens a democratic republic at its very core.
If not life, what is sacred to these zealots? If it is the cause, it is reminiscent of the scene from the Godfather where Michael Corleone witnesses a revolutionary act of defiance killing the commander of the guard by detonating a hand grenade: they can win.
12 May 2022
LSMBTG: Lamestream media echo chamber (LMEC-L) social media (SM) big tech tyrants (BT) and government (G)
Follow AFNN:
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
I’m ashamed to say that I watched a video clip last night, of a woman who stated, plain as day, that she would have been just as happy to have aborted her own child, as had brought her into this world. Judging by the appearance of the woman, I’d say her daughter is easily an adult, now, and that is something that I just never would have expected to hear a mother say, period. It makes me wonder how the daughter feels about that, too.
Thanks for reading! Don’t be-When they used to run the Ohio State accident videos for driver’s education classes-it felt the same-people who did dumb and stupid things bleeding out, gruesome injuries-just tragic accidents. I’ve never seen the figures on it, but they used to tout the success of such programs scaring kids straight.
The abortion as religion zombies should be treated the same way: they need to be seen, ridiculed and shamed for the idjiotic and stupid-mortifying-embarrassing-disgraceful-inhuman things they are saying. They are loathsome, disgusting human beings and if not stopped they are going to produce a generation of zealots worse than them-which we are already seeing with Ralph Northam and the crew who think you can change your mind up to-and after birth.