search
top

Rule by the Ignorant

Polls show that 38% of pro-lifers think highly of Planned Parenthood. Says Jim Geraghty:

I suppose we should be thankful that the public can still differentiate between Kermit Gosnell and Kermit the Frog.

That’s not all the news in the ignorance department, either. These people help choose our leaders. Unfortunately, this is what democracy looks like.

18 Responses to “Rule by the Ignorant”

  1. HappyWarrior6 says:

    You think that’s bad? That number looks more like 50% when you talk to my fellow Catholics. There is no other president that has epitomized the culture of death like this one, and he still won the lion’s share of the Catholic vote in 2008 and 2012. This is the sort of cognitive dissonance that we’re up against in the gun culture from low information voters, too. “But they only want to reduce the killings! Everyone wants that!”

  2. AZRon says:

    I’m still aghast that these geniuses can’t figure out what causes conception. Ounce of prevention / pound of cure = if you don’t create a child, you don’t have to murder a child.

    It’s actually pretty easy to prevent impregnation; Gosnell, PP, and Fluke notwithstanding.

    I guess we, as a society, deserve this for allowing a spate of professional victims to rule our lives in the name of diversity.

  3. Andy B. says:

    I would caution everyone who is in a state of self-righteousness, that no one to my knowledge has performed an unbiased study to show that people in the broader population who agree with positions “we” support, are any better informed than the rest of the population.

    It would be very interesting to take a random sample of a large number of people, and ask them questions of broad fact, along with questions regarding their positions on public policies; and then compute the correlation of their scores on knowledge of fact, to their positions issues.

    I know I quote it too often, but I am again reminded of that quote, “The problem isn’t that Americans know too little, but that almost everything they do know is wrong.”

    • Sebastian says:

      It’s a problem pretty much all around. No issue or “side” is immune. I highlight stuff like this to show the problem with unrestrained democracy.

  4. Braden Lynch says:

    Since ignorance is rampant, may I suggest that the government do less, a lot less. How can our daft public officials concoct laws that will be free of unintended consequences and bad impacts when the voting public is misinformed to start with?

    I’m not a libertarian, but I am starting to think that there are very few things that the government does right, so why let them have any more power than a dog-catcher?

    Regarding the pro-life and abortion theme above, if you vote for a Democrat, any Democrat, you are culpable for abortion since it is a central plank for them. Please stop deceiving yourselves and thinking you are pure. You are the problem if you vote any Democrat, ever. God will be judging how you vote and the blood of innocents cry out to Him for vengeance.

    • Andy B. says:

      I’m certainly not defending Democrats, but what you say is equally true of Republicans, if you just want to choose a different issue than abortion. I.e., choose anything that they support as a party, that you find distasteful, and supporting any of their candidates is to support that which you hate. That is why I pull so few levers in voting booths anymore. I frequently say we are in the position of early-’30s Germans, with only the communists or fascists to choose between, in terms of viable political movements. And indeed, the Germans chose. as we do.

  5. Matthew Carberry says:

    Planned Parenthood does a lot more than abortion cheerleading.

    Isn’t it possible that folks can back their other efforts, including provision of free/low-cost contraception (not that they should be getting gov’t dollars to do even that) while being upset by that one facet of their charter?

    Think of the Sierra Club, as much as they stick to actual conservation efforts, I think well of them. When they go beyond that to being anti-hunting and anti-gun I don’t.

    Hell, I support the Fed DOT, in as much as it sticks to maintaining the “Constitutional under both National Defense and Post Roads rationale” portions of the interstate highway system.

    • HappyWarrior6 says:

      I cannot, and I do not agree with my tax dollars subsidizing contraception either, which PP gets in droves. It’s not a matter of “getting behind” something as I find their practices revolting. It’s a question of government what government out to be in the business of paying for. I don’t believe government out to be in the business of population control OR gun control.

      • HappyWarrior6 says:

        Out… Ought. I’ll blame that on the pesky autocorrect.

        • Matthew Carberry says:

          Heck, it works as subconscious commentary too. Getting the gov’t -out- of controls.

          I totally agree, it’s the tax dollars that bother me most.

      • Other Steve says:

        “I do not agree with my tax dollars subsidizing contraception either,” If you think your side is right and the other side is wrong – YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

        I LOVE how the very people that complain about wellfare/handouts, abortion, and minority crime are THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE who argue against contraceptives, sex education, and abortion. It’s almost poetic.

        Hey, guess what, being an adult isn’t about seeing things in black and white, it’s about living inside shades of gray. You don’t think PP should offer contraceptives? Fine, then shut the fuck up the next time you see some 16yo trailer trash using an EBT card with an ear pierced baby at walmart. Oh, or do you not think there is a direct correlation? As was appropriately written above, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

        Oh Golly, 38% pro-lifers MIGHT be able to see that PP isn’t just an abortion service. Shocking. Stick to guns here please.

        • Matthew Carberry says:

          Tax dollars going to a non-governmental agency for a non-Constitutionally enumerated purpose is wrong, full stop.

          If you or me or millions of other people want to contribute to PP of their own money of their own free will, more power to us. For the Feds to take tax money, ultimately at the point of a gun, for such a purpose is wrong.

          • Since money is apparently not fungible (at least when it comes to taxpayer funding of abortions/PP), what if we just say that all the PP subsidy money comes from the Fed’s printing press or Chinese loans?

            Bam, no taxpayers on the hook. It is magic money from Somewhere Else!

  6. WR2A says:

    Yeah, it’s tough to be critical of anything related to PP when they distribute brochures like this:

    http://unitedfamiliesinternational.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/day-11-happy-healthy-and-hot-planned-parenthood-and-sexual-freedom/

    And if you think for one second that no federal/taxpayer money is going to their abortion-on-demand efforts, you are woefully naive.

  7. NUGUN Blog says:

    The issue is that many support the contraceptive and STD programs of Planned Parenthood. While opposing the abortion end of things.

    In fact, Planned Parenthood IMHO would be wise to allow a separation of donations. So that those who oppose abortion and feel it is morally wrong, could donate with a clear conscience to their other activities.

  8. Asdf says:

    On one hand we have quite a few of these Tea Party imbeciles who can’t be bothered to spell-check the signs they bring to protests. On the other, hordes of semi-literate baby mommas who literally believe that Obama will put gas in their cars, pay their rent, and give them all free sail foams.

    Luckily they seem to cancel each other out almost 1:1 come election time!

  9. Madelaine says:

    Hi! I could have sworn I’ve been to this web site before but after browsing through a few of the posts I realized it’s
    new to me. Anyways, I’m definitely delighted I discovered it and I’ll be book-marking it and checking back
    often!

top