Help! I'm nine months pregnant and can't fit in the tank

It apparently isn't just fodder for crazy Focker movies anymore. The U.S. military thinks their male soldiers need to wear fake boobies and pregnant bellies to have more empathy for pregnant female soldiers.  No, I'm not kidding!


Elaine Donnelly, president of the Military Readiness Committee exposed this latest Department of Defense move back in February.  It still hasn't made much noise.  Elaine Donnelly also served as a member of the Defense Committee on Women under two presidents and is an outspoken advocate against homosexuals in the military, so she knows what she's talking about.


This is just one more step toward requiring women to register for selective service when they turn eighteen, just like our boys must do. I have been speaking out against this and the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) since I was twelve years old.  I know that women have always played a supportive role in military affairs, but unless it is a last resort of defense (because mammas have a right to defend their children too) women do not belong in combat positions, not because they aren't brave or courageous (remember Boudica?) but rather because men are to guard the national boundaries so that women can guard the home front.


Sadly it isn't just a bunch of crazy women who promote this type of stuff, but there are way too many men who are more than happy to let women in harms way.  Sure there may be some guy out there who says that if that's the way they want it, then thats' what they get.  This is not a very manly way to think.  God intended men to protect women and children whether they know the danger they are in or not.  Many women have had to step forward due to male abdication of their role and due to Jewish propaganda that casts dishonor upon Christian women and their ability.  A Talmudic prayer says, "Thank God I am not born a Goy, a slave, or a woman."  Women want to be appreciated for their mental capacities, which unfortunately have been downplayed due to Jewish influence in society throughout the ages.  Many women feel they have to prove themselves.  This is a sad mindset for a woman to be in. 


The repercussions are enormous.  We have gone from a time in which it was improper ettiquette for a soldier to push a baby stroller (unfortunately it was considered unmanly) to men in uniform being required to wear fake pregnant bellies.  Too many of both sexes are on a self-serving mission.  Our population has moved toward an extreme of hedonistic worship of the individual.  The bedrock of the nation is not the individual.  It is the family.  What is good for the family?  That is the question we should be asking. 


Read the Article and watch the video at the end




On February 9 the Department of Defense announced incremental steps to implement a report advocating doctrinaire "diversity" in the military.  Central to this campaign, which briefers described as "just the beginning, not the end," are plans to order female soldiers into direct ground combat units such as Army and Marine infantry and Special Operations Forces.  These fighting battalions, which attack the enemy with deliberate offensive action, face conditions and physical demands that go far beyond the experience of being "in harm's way.


Days later, in an article titled Soldiers Don Fake Belly, Breasts to Better Understand Pregnant Troops' Exercise Concerns, Stars & Stripes posted a video of a male non-commissioned officer who was forced to wear fake breasts and a big belly simulating a female soldier's pregnancy. The hapless NCO, based at Camp Zuma in Japan, is one of several male PT instructor trainees who must take turns wearing the "empathy bellies" for at least an hour. The Army's Pregnancy Postpartum Physical Training (PPPT) Exercise is part of a worldwide effort to teach enlisted personnel how to be fitness instructors for pregnant soldiers and new mothers.

At first glance, the video appears to be an early April Fool's joke. It could also be an amateur show produced by someone seeking attention on Jon Stewart's Daily Show. Alas, the video is for real. The same Army leaders who think women can engage the enemy in hand-to-hand direct ground combat also think it is necessary to teach pregnant women to stay away from "snowboarding, bungee jumping, or horse riding."

Army doctors and nurses should counsel pregnant women about the value and risks of moderate exercise while on duty. But it is an abuse of authority, bordering on harassment, to force men to appear before their colleagues dressed like expectant mothers. There is no need to humiliate men just because some pregnant soldiers do not have enough common sense to follow doctors' orders for personal health and safety during pre-natal months.

Historically, trainees have been expected to conform to the demands of Army training, not the other way around. The larger question is, why is the Army preparing for so many pregnant women, and how does this improve our military? The Pentagon is doing the wrong things for the wrong reasons, elevating "diversity" above all other considerations.
The Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC), largely composed of civilian and military equal opportunity experts, has recommended policy changes that would treat the military like just another "equal opportunity" employer. To advance "diversity metrics'" for female personnel, the MLDC recommends policies that weaken or eliminate women's exemptions from assignments in "tip of the spear" Army and Marine infantry battalions and Special Operations Forces.

Americans are proud of women in the military, and there have been some changes in their roles since 9/11 that deserve recognition. For example, female engagement teams (FET)s and cultural support troops interact with civilian women and children in war zones in ways that are difficult for male personnel. It is dangerous duty "in harm's way," but still not the same as direct ground combat attacks against enemy forces under fire. These land combat missions, with physical demands beyond the capability of almost all women, have not changed.

If a soldier is wounded in battle−what we saw many times in Baghdad in 2003 or Fallujah in November 2004−a collocated support soldier may be the only person in a position to evacuate the wounded soldier on his own back. In this environment, women do not have an equal opportunity to survive, or to help fellow soldiers survive.


Lives should not be put at needless risk just to satisfy "diversity metrics" to advance the career ambitions of a few. Since we keep hearing about the need for a female Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey should pick a female officer and give her his seat. That would make more sense that feminizing Army training, especially since the Pentagon has admitted that military women are promoted at rates equal to or faster than men.

The male pregnancy training video brought to mind one of the most memorable moments in a March 1993 two-hour Firing Line debate with team captain William F. Buckley, Marine Vietnam hero Col. John Ripley, author David Horowitz, and me. Opposite us were feminist Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder, ACLU attorney Ira Glasser, Air Force veteran Heather Wilson, and retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Wilma Vaught.

Previously Gen. Vaught had stated that even pregnant women, depending on the month, should be allowed to serve in combat. In his joust with Gen. Vaught, Col. Ripley asked, “Would you please tell us, what month is it okay for pregnant women to fight, to be in combat?”

After some hesitation, Vaught stood by her statement, insisting that “There are women who are capable of doing many things up to a very late period in their pregnancy.” At that point, Ripley brought down the house with “Well, that’s wonderful. I’m sure the personnel people will be happy to know they are getting two for one.”

Col. Ripley's joke, unfortunately, is becoming all-too real. The pregnancy-padded NCO in the video, who was following orders, should not be blamed for looking ridiculous. The Army's top brass, who have no excuse, don't seem to know how foolish they look.

Say it isn't so!

I loved being in the Girl Scouts growing up. I still have a box full of achievement badges. I have two grown daughters and we skipped that phase and they knew why. The Girl Scouts have gone crazy. It really is sad, because Juliette Low, the groups founder, was a devout Christian. Yes, I know lots of sweet little girls in the scouts and I can't resist buying a box of cookies - or two - when they ask so nicely. I'm not saying every Scout leader is a man hating lesbian feminist, but the organization is moving in that direction and they are trying to take our girls with them. Watch this great little video below. It is an eye opener.

Ex-Komen VP Karen Handel Slams Planned Parenthood, It Fires Back

From Lifesitenews.com

Following her departure from the Komen for the Cure breast cancer charity in the wake of the massive attacks waged on it by Planned Parenthood following news that it would cut its funding, Karen Handel slammed the abortion business.

As LifeNews reported Tuesday, Handel, a top Komen official who was said to be instrumental in putting in place the changes in Komen policy that essentially resulted in cutting funding for Planned Parenthood, resigned her position.

Komen initially decided in December to revise its grant-making process to funds grants to agencies that provide direct health services for women — which would eliminate Planned Parenthood since it does not do mammograms. After Planned Parenthood, Democratic members of Congress and the media pounced on Komen for its decision, Komen clarified that Planned Parenthood would still be allowed to submit grant requests but they may or may not be funded.

“I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it,” Handel said in her letter. “I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen’s future and the women we serve.”

Handel followed up that letter with various interviews, including an appearance on Fox News, where she told the news station that Planned Parenthood viciously attacked the breast cancer group.

“What was unleashed over this past week was a vicious attack against a great organization,” Handel said, noting that Komen founder Susan Brinker came under personal attacks as well. “I would think all of us should be saddened that an outside organization should put this kind of pressure on another organization.”

“The last time I checked, private non-profit organizations have a right and a responsibility to be able to set the highest standards and criteria on their own without interference, let alone the level of vicious attacks and coercion that has occurred by Planned Parenthood. It’s simply outrageous,” Handel added.

She told Fox News that political pressure from her as a former Georgia Secretary of State and Senate candidate had “absolutely” nothing to do with Komen’s decision, saying, “For Komen, for myself the mission was always foremost on our mind.”

“The only group here that has made this issue political has been Planned Parenthood,” she explained. “I clearly acknowledge that I was involved in the process, but to say I had the sole authority is simply absurd.”

Handel also said the impending Congressional investigation of Planned Parenthood for fraud, misuse of taxpayer dollars and breaking abortion laws was part of the reason for Komen’s decision along with the desire to end pass-thru grants and provide direct grants to organizations that, unlike Planned Parenthood, provide women mammograms.

“I think the Congressional investigation, along with the various state investigations, were a factor in the decision,” she said. “But make no mistake about it, it was a bigger picture than that. There was the granting criteria, as well as the controversies that were surrounding Planned Parenthood.”

Some observers say the December Komen decision came about in part because Komen hired pro-life former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel as its new Vice-President for Policy. While media reports have differed about the level of influence she had on the Komen decision to change its grant policies, the liberal Huffington Post alleges in a weekend story that that was the case:

Handel told Fox News the focus on her made it so she should resign.

“I was too much of a focal point,” she said. “I really felt I had a responsibility to just step aside so they could refocus on their mission. I wanted to do the right thing on my own terms, and that’s what I tried to do.”

Later on Tuesday, Planned Parenthood vice president told pro-abortion activists at a fundraiser that the debate was good for the abortion business as it built up its grassroots support.

“We heard from tens of thousands of people,” Cecile Richards said. “It was a fabulous opportunity to frankly educate a lot of people in America about the preventive care we do.”

“What we saw last week,” Richards said, “was Americans are just tired of people playing politics with women’s health care. … By reversing this decision, I think (Komen) has gone a long way to reassuring folks that they don’t want to get between women and their health care.”

“The good news is it means we’ll be able to provide a lot more health care to women,” she said, saying Planned Parenthood raised about $3 million off of the public battle

Open letter to Sen. Mitch McConnell

From a Concerned Wife and Mother Regarding
the No Gun Registration Amendment and Gun Registration


Dear Senator McConnell,

I am a mother and grandmother. I home educated my children and am active in the Tea Party, my local Republican Party, and the Home Schooling Alliance of Arkansas. My husband is a small business owner. Within my family are law enforcement officers, teachers, attorneys, and ministers. We are a conservative and traditional value based family with members in throughout the United States as well as your home state of Kentucky. This weekend I spoke before a traditionalist organization in D.C. in regard to the incremental legal decline of the Christian family in this nation and the rise of socialism.

We are all deeply saddened that it now appears you will not back the NO-GUN REGISTRATION Amendment sponsored by Rand Paul. You have spoken out in defense of a tougher stance toward illegal immigration. You have spoken out in defense of limited government. And you have spoken out against many of the insane entitlement programs that are draining our economy. But how will you vote in this most important issue that our civilization pivots on?

Surely, Mr. McConnell, you are aware that allowing any federal agency the authority to track and demand the 4473 form of legal gun owning citizens is a slippery slope toward the eventual abandonment of our Constitutionally protected God given right to keep and bear arms.

Taking away our right to privacy from the intrusive eyes of political engineers who desire to dismantle traditional America – in the name of “security” will be disastrous in the years ahead for all freedom loving men and women everywhere.

I urge you to support this important amendment to the extension of the Patriot Act.

I trust you will side with the Constitution and the legal opinions of our founding fathers.

Sincerely,
Rachel Pendergraft

Another White Guilt Trip

Below is an article by Margaret Krome who writes a bi-monthly opinion piece for the Capitol Times in Wisconsin. My comments are mixed in with hers.

Last week I attended a workshop entitled “Dismantling Racism” put on by the nonprofit group Growing Power in Milwaukee.

We did an exercise where white people in the room read statements about white privilege. I related to several of them. “I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well-assured that I will not be followed or harassed.” “If a traffic cop pulls me over, or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven’t been singled out because of my race.” I even could relate to, “Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.”

It is nice that she thinks so highly of herself. In my experience, and by my conversations with people all over the U.S. as well as keeping updated on trends, statistics, etc. I feel it is safe to say that Ms. Krome doesn't know what she is talking about. First off, everyone, and I mean everyone judges other people by appearances. However, I don't necessarily mean skin color or race. Value judgments are made about people's socioeconomic class all the time. It is often easy to spot the difference in someone who is from a working class background, middle white collar background, upper middle class, etc. It is in the clothes that are worn, the cars that are driven, the hair, the style, the health of the skin. Etc. It doesn't always hold true. Sam Walton, founder of Wal-mart used to tool around the Ozark Hills here in overalls and an old pick up truck. But for the most part, those who have money or at least don't worry about money are easily identified just by appearance. I would wager that Ms. Klone feels privileged not because she is white, but because she is financially secure. Working class whites aren't guaranteed success just because they are white. They have to work like everybody else. And middle class whites aren't guaranteed success either. In fact, a big part of their income is spent paying the taxes to keep entitlement programs in this country afloat. I believe that a white person and a black person dressed equally as well will get the same treatment by financial institutions etc. And those who don't appear to have much in the bank or in financial distress, whatever the color will also get the same treatment.

But I was amazed by how few of the statements I, as a person of white privilege, had previously considered. I hadn’t noticed that “I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.” Nor had I previously recognized as a privilege never being asked to speak for all the people of my racial group. Or that I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race. These and many other statements were written by Peggy McIntosh in a 1990 article that described such unearned assets as “like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions ... tools, and blank checks.”

So being called a "credit to your race" is now considered racist? These so called "unearned assets" aren't racist. These "assets" mentioned such as not being late and its reflection is in fact a reflection on civilized society. Rooted deep within Western Christian civilization is a certain code that the U.S. was built upon. These are common courtesies, a certain refined etiquette, an appreciation for timeliness, and attention to detail. And most of all is the high value we place on law and order. A community run in such fashion and the recipients of a culture, whose bedrock is white Christian civilization, aren't unduly privileged. Our culture is a part of who we are and it is an outgrowth of our race. Yes, if you value these concepts then it is a privilege to be born into a race that manifests these values in the building of communities. It is called our birthright. Those who do not share this birthright, often do benefit from it if they conform to the standards of Western Christian civilization, but it is not their birthright because it is not who they are.

As the statements continued, people of color nodded knowingly. An African-American woman from Oklahoma added the privilege of a white person’s son or brother being able to go running without causing suspicion or fear. To which a Brooklyn minister noted that he doesn’t let a group of young African-American men whom he mentors even walk together in the neighborhood without accompanying them; they likely would be stopped and possibly worse. Had it ever occurred to me that my son’s ability to go for a jog was a privilege? No.

Again, it is white guilt. Is Ms. Klone's son privileged because he can jog without being stopped? Does he live in a financially stable area where jogging is an everyday of occurrence? If he was a white guy running in a black neighborhood I bet he would be stopped. Would that be considered racist? Or would the cop be suspicious that a white guy out of place in a black neighborhood might be looking to score drugs? And would it be racist to be suspicious of a group of black youths walking down the street together? Even black cops get called racist or Uncle Toms for being suspicious of a group of black youths walking down the street. How are these youths dressed? Are their pants hanging down below their rear end? Do they carry themselves with an apparent attitude? The crime rate among black men is staggering and white crime pales in comparison. Could it be the behavior associated with them that gets them stopped or is it just because they happen to be black or Mexican?

White privilege isn’t the same as racism, which involves using social institutions to carry out systematic discrimination against a racial group. But I’m conscious of both right at the moment, as federal and state budget debates are clearly about whom to advantage — wealthy, mostly white people, or poor people, many of them people of color. For example, two-thirds of the cuts proposed by Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan in his Fiscal Year 2012 budget would come from programs that serve low-income people — Medicaid, food stamps, Pell grants and low-income housing.

I was in Ryan’s office in Washington, D.C., last week when a man from New Jersey popped in “just to thank the Congressman, because I’m a taxpayer too.” He was white. When a colleague of mine arrived, he had a hard time joining our meeting because a crowd of people dressed up in tea party costumes was jamming the doorway to cheer Ryan on. They were all white.

Three weeks before, I was in the office of a newly elected tea party conservative, and I heard similar accolades about Republican funding cuts —all from white people.

Okay, the main thing Ms. Krome has pointed out was that the majority of taxpayers she witnessed were white. Is that supposed to mean something? White people paying taxes can't be good according to Ms. Krone's logic. It must be unearned. They are just the recipients of unearned privilege. And what about the unearned privilege of receiving government handouts? That doesn't seem to bother Ms. Krone one bit.

At the same time, a large delegation of people working with community action programs was at the Capitol — and I heard no such accolades from them. They understood that the Republican budgets being unleashed particularly target the most vulnerable population in the nation — many of them people of color.

Startling..really? A group of community action leaders (kind of like the ACORN group Obama worked with that was instrumental in the nation wide home foreclosure fiasco where banks were forced to set aside the traditional idea that you get to buy a home if you can afford it and if you don't then you wait - Ahhh yes, but this was so that people of color around the country could have what the allegedly white "privileged" middle class had - a piece of the American dream. Ms. Klone spoke about financial institutions and corporations discriminating against minorities - hogwash! If anything they are throwing their weight behind every so-called disadvantaged minority neighborhood or family they can get their hands on so they don't get called the "R" word! Racist!d So these community leaders were mostly people of color - shocker! And they are working to take even more tax dollars away from the white (and every other) taxpayer.

I was asked at last week’s workshop if I consider myself a racist. Although I benefit from white privilege, I don’t believe I’m racist. But racism is very real in the lives of millions of Americans, and the only way it gets changed is when people who benefit from it work to change the system so that benefits accrue to all or to none. Republican budget proposals are dangerously biased to champion a system that privileges wealthy, mostly white, people. It’s time to recognize these budgets for what they are.

Poor Ms. Krone! She is filled with so much guilt I don't know how she can sleep at night. But since she's clamoring for a change to benefit all (which only works if you don't have a society based on entitlements and everybody works for what they have) then to ease her privileged guilt ridden mind I challenge her to downsize her residence - maybe get rid of it altogether because she probably also buys into the false idea that we stole the land from the Indians. So Ms. Krone sign your home or condo over to the nearest tribe. Send your paycheck each week to that community group that you raved about, and basically get rid of what you have and give it away. You apparently didn't deserve it after all. And I for one could live without your nauseous drivel infecting others who potentially will come down with guilt fever!

Margaret Krome of Madison writes a semimonthly column for The Capital Times.

The Senate Refused To Take the Funding from Planned Parenthood

WASHINGTON, D.C., In a 44-56 vote, the U.S. Senate has voted against a budget bill crafted by House Republicans that would have eliminated federal funding of Planned Parenthood.

The Democrat-led Senate also failed to pass its own budget bill, which contained much fewer spending cuts and maintained the abortion giant’s funding.

The vote marks the first stage of what promises to be a drawn-out battle between two opposite visions for the 2011 fiscal year, as well as between pro-life and pro-abortion forces fiercely gunning for or against the amendment de-funding Planned Parenthood.

President Obama has promised to veto the House version as it stands.

Be sure to check out the story below also.

Woman charged with Performing her own Late Term Abortion...But That isn't What they are Calling It!

Read the article below and tell me how this is any different than a late term abortion in which the baby is delivered feet first and then while the head is still inside, scissors are stuck into the back of the head cutting the spinal chord to the base of the brain so that the baby can "officially" be declared "aborted" prior to birth. Do a few seconds or minutes really mean the difference between a medical service and murder? And does decapitation by a doctor warrant medical service awards by so-called women's rights groups, but if done by the mother its called murder? And what about those babies born alive, but left in a bucket to die? Does this mean if the baby dies in a bucket in a doctor's office that it is acceptable, but if it dies in a bucket under a woman's sink that it is than murder. Does this mean that the only difference between this story and the stories of thousands of babies who die as a result of late term abortion, is that the woman being charged didn't have a medical license. If a female abortion provider kills her own baby, will she be charged with murder? Hmmm? Something to think about!


Editor's Note: Warning, the contents of this story are graphic

CENTRALIA, Wash. -- A 25-year-old mother has been arrested for allegedly killing her newborn son soon after he was born.

Laura L. Hickey is facing a charge of murder, Lewis County prosecutors said.

The investigation began just before 1 a.m. on March 2 when paramedics were called to Hickey's Centralia home after neighbors heard Hickey call for help, police said.

Hickey was taken to Centralia Providence Hospital where she reported to doctors that she was having a miscarriage, but doctors later determined Hickey had given birth, investigators said.

Police say when Hickey was questioned by hospital staff, she admitted she gave birth and that the child was under the sink in her kitchen.

Medics rushed back to the home and found the body of a baby boy in a container under the sink.

An autopsy later concluded the boy was alive at birth, but had later been decapitated.