Blame The Workers!

Lately we have been bombarded with politicians discussing the "Big 3" bailout. Almost all have been pushing Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. Why? Not for restructuring the companies to increase efficiency or force them to "go green" but because of the union workers who "have been taking advantage of this system for many years." (Gov. Mitt Romney) That's right! Lets punish those unions for taking care of their workers. No sales. No increase in mpg. Damn unions! We continually alleviate these major companies of any responsibility and now politicians are blaming the workers! Mind you these are the main politicians (right-wingers) pushing for fewer restrictions on the so called "free market". So when we remove restrictions and oversight and the companies continue to make poor financial decisions we blame the workers? Am I against a bailout? With my money Hell Yea! Why don't we let the Big Oil bail them out. All of the oil companies have the "Big 3" in their back-pocket. I refuse to believe that the oil companies aren't directly responsible for the fuel efficiency standards of the American auto industry. Think about it! Who stands to gain if we force car companies to increase their fuel efficiency on their cars ? Or dare we say go electric? The Consumer, The Environment, The Earth! But the real question is who stands to lose? "Big Oil" that's who. No person benefits from gas guzzling cars and high fuel prices, least of all the economy. No one, that is, but the oil companies. But lets face it, the oil companies ain't bailing out sh*t. Why would they. We continue to give them the major contracts (Iraq) and billion dollar tax breaks! For what? Now they can rape us at the dealership and then again at the gas pump. Americans better watch out because after the unions and workers, the only ones left for politicians and major corporations to blame for their mistakes is us, the consumers.

Critique of "Why do we think we have the right to kill the unborn"

Kill the Unborn?
A very interesting title to defend the pro-life position. Even using the word "unborn" seems to deny the baby its individual rights to life for which you advocate. I enjoyed reading your blog even though I disagree with it; it demonstrates the type of fear mongering and scare tactics that the pro-life movement has come to rely heavily on in order to control the minds (and bodies) of women. Instead of facts, your blog seems to rely on sensationalism and innuendo. In your article there were some factual errors to your "Baby Rowan" story, which I thought to be a very strong part of your argument. Certain aspects of the story were cited correctly, however the Dade County Medical Examiner determined that Baby Rowan's death was "[n]atural, due to extreme prematurity"(CBS 4 NEWS). Also I would like to point out that all of your citations are from either pro-life authors or articles. I understand that when someone is making an argument they look only for information sources and statistics that help prove their point, but on a topic so controversial one must explore both sides equally in order to distinguish fact from fiction. I would also highlight the point that not all abortions are a choice. In some cases an abortion saves the mother's life. So should those women forfeit their right to live so that the fetus might have a chance to live? Or what about when an 11 yo girl (or any woman for that matter) is raped and becomes pregnant? In closing, I wanted to answer the question you asked, "what's the difference between a grown man dismembering his wife's body and an abortion doctor dismembering a baby's body?" The answer is one of these is a choice (and a legal right according to a supreme court decision) between a woman and her doctor and the other is murder.