1
As someone pointed out in the Riehl thread, they have to lie; they don't know any other way of doing things.

2 There's nothing more creepy than partial birth abortion.

3 That's how we do science, Kagan-style.

I wrote a song about her.  Didn't cast her in the video, though.

4

These are not the droids you're looking for

5

There's nothing more creepy than partial birth abortion

 

actually, i have a few ideas

6
actually, i have a few ideas

Everything old is new again.

7 Protoplasm.  Yeeeccchhhh!

8 It's only a lie if a Republican does it.

9 I want to hear her views on whales, or maybe harp seals.  For consistency.

10

Ace loves referencing Dr Zauis.  Loves it.

11

O/T -- Everyone expresses their grief at the passing of Bobby "Cyclops" Byrd.  Worth it.

http://bit.ly/bhKog1

 

 

12
But this is what I mean when you don't support the social conservatives. The Left will not stop at abortion. They keep pushing and pushing and pushing...

13 If I have a nightmare tonight about getting a pap smear from Elena Kagan in a Dr. Zaius mask, I am going to sue Ace.

14 I tell you what - old Homer Simpson hit the nail on the head when he talked about Planet of the Apes.  And when did he do it?  Right before he went to space and accidentally released those ants.  And what did Boehner talk about?  That's right - nuclear weapons and ants.  And what caused Planet of the Apes to happen in the first place?  That's right - nuclear weapons.

This highlights the need for the more progressive justices on the Supreme Court.

If you can't figure this out, you're a jackass.

15 Hey, I wrote another song about Kagan.

"Quad erat demonstrandum, baby."

"Oooh, you speak French!"

16 This new information does not in any way diminish my attraction to Elena Kagan.

17

Kagan-style

Oh no, that phrase is going to live in infamy.  I'm already throwing up in my mouth thinking about how the ONT will use it. GAG.

18 You have to wonder where all the defenders of science—those intrepid guardians of the freedom of inquiry who throughout the Bush years wailed about the supposed politicization of scientific research and expertise—are now.

Shut up, that's why.

19

. . . the same as the politically-supreme orang-utans in Planet of the Apes.

Nice. Reminds me of Dr. Frank Poirier at THE Ohio State University.

20 She needs to be sent back to the forest moon of endor.

21

I'm thinking that this country could have benefitted from a bunch of 4th trimester abortions.   Stanley Ann Dunham, Mrs. Biden, Mrs. Frank, Mrs. Kagan--I'm looking at youse....

22 kagan-utans?

I got nothin'. Move along.

23 Seriously, nobody cares about "science".  It's just another label for another religion for the elites.  They aren't interested in the scientific method.  They want scientists as oracles and priests.

24 Well shoot, if a fetus is incapable of feeling pain at 24 weeks, what's another 13?  I'm sure that babies who experience partial birth abortion don't feel a thing.  The science is settled.

25 First there was the uterus-obsessed Andrew Sullivan, now gyno Kagan.  I expect to see new wimmins' wings of ObamaCare centers to be named for these libtards.

26 Kagan has a huge out on this one.

What the fuck is ACOG doing adopting, verbatim, words from the White House?

That's a serious blow to their credibility if you ask me.  I cannot believe they submitted their fucking draft language to the White House.

Are they independent or not?

27 Without commenting on whether it was appropriate for Kagan to recommend a language change to ACOG, I do have to comment that the notion that the recommended change was "at odds with" or "100%" opposite from the original language. Any dufus - and I mean this with no disrespect to dufuses - can figure out that "could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman" is consistent with "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman" - Even with out the ellipses in the original. Only to some one so incredibly stupid that "only" means exactly the same thing as "best" are the two statements at odds with each other.

28 She may leave the Court out of sheer sadness and disgrace after enough of her law clerks taunt her for having as much judicial experience as they do - or for being a political sop to angry gays who feel they've been disenfranchised by "Civil Unions" Barry. 

Sonia Sotomoyor won't be a good shoulder to cry on since she doesn't want to hear any cry-babying from a Jewish juera.

29

Posted by: smijer at June 29, 2010 05:17 PM (b3chg)

Yes, but the correct full statement would have been, "Although partial-birth abortion may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman, this Committee could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman."

That puts the question into stark focus: is it worth restricting women to a less-than-optimal procedure that still saves their lives and health if doing so spares babies from partial-birth abortion?

30 What we need is a duet of Kagan and Koz singing It Ain't Necessarily So.

31 So let's all send money off to the GOP Senate nominee from NV running against Harry Reid. She is against ALL abortions including pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.

32 28:

"could identify no circumstance..."

"may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance"

To what "particular circumstance" are they referring in the latter statement when the former statement said they could identify "no circumstance" ?

They are contradictory.

33 Chalk up another victory to the human spirit.

34 28: Oh yes legally the meaning has not been flip flopped. "MAY BE" is such a useful legal expression. It MAY BE possible for me to complete an ironman triathalon too, but chances are remote that I am going to learn to swim, run 26 miles on my creaky knees and then bike for 100 miles.

35 "She bleeds! The Lawgiver bleeds!"

36 32:

Nice to see the Soros checks have been shipped out so that all the trolls and turfers can get the ball rolling for November.  How does it feel to be shilling for Harry Reid, BTW ?  That must make you so proud inside, serving a great American statesman like that - so proud that you spend your time trolling on rightwing sites hiding your identity and trashing his opponent rather than telling the people about Harry's distinguished record of uncorrupted public service and touting his myriad legislative milestones.

37

 smijer

Why did they need to change it?  Why would it have been a disaster to leave in the original wording if the 2 statements are totally consistent with each other?

One would think that courts are not dufuses and they could see that the words "only" and "best" are not the same thing...

Apparently it made a big difference to change the wording. 

I guess everyone but smijer is a dufus.

38 @30 You're right that your formulation would be more complete than the final language. However it would not be more correct, since the latter clause is implied in the first clause. The latter clause leaves open the possibility of the first, but does not imply it - so it alone is less correct and less complete. And yes, there is room for some moral calculus there. For me, if it's a female relative of mine, if there is a first best option, and the baby is already dead or brain-dead, then when it comes to options for saving the life or health of my female relative, I'm not really interested the second choice options. If this is the case and there is a ban in place forcing her to the second best option, I'm going to be ticked off. And I question the moral calculus that led to the ban. If this procedure is the best option and the baby is conscious, then I'll listen to the second best option very carefully. If this is the case, and a ban is in place that only applies to this case, then I will be more sympathetic to the ban.

39 Interestingly, ACOG has changed its official name from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Cute, isn't it?

40 @susanita #38 - check my reply to #30 and my original statement. I'm not addressing the appropriateness of Kagan offering suggestions to the ACOG (or them accepting such suggestions). And the reason for changing it should be obvious, especially from my reply to #30.

41

Denny,

that is some weak ass troll-fu.

If forced to choose your false dichotomy between someone who doesn't think abortions should happen at all, ever, and someone who thinks that fully-formed and viable babies should be torn to pieces for a woman's convenience, I think I'm going to go with teh pro-life zealot.

BTW, what Kagan wrote had a palpable impact on the issue.  What Angle believes is going to amount to jack squat.

42

If this procedure is the best option and the baby is conscious, then I'll listen to the second best option very carefully

Posted by: smijer

That's very nice of you smijer, being willing to compromise and go to the second best option for killing a conscious baby.

Quite the humanitarian.

43

And yes, there is room for some moral calculus there. For me, if it's a female relative of mine, if there is a first best option, and the baby is already dead or brain-dead

Then that baby would be stillborn.

In other words, not an abortion.

44 2 There's nothing more creepy than partial birth abortion.

Posted by: rdbrewer at June 29, 2010 04:56 PM (EIWgh)

even I say it's murder. How can anyone deny it?

45 #44 Warden Still-born is a post-partum status. The contemplated ban treated D&E removal of the dead or brain-dead fetus no differently than a live and conscious baby.

46

really a infant moves or cries, and someone says it's not a real?

they really have a problem, same fkrs that can't kill a mouse, what the mind fk world are they in.

47 The contemplated ban treated D&E removal of the dead or brain-dead fetus no differently than a live and conscious baby.

First, I don't believe you.

Second, if that was the only objection, that's an easy exception to carve out, is it not?

48

smijer,

The point of changing it IS obvious.  To try to hide the fact that other options are available. 

I also have to quibble with your example.  If a baby is dead (or even brain dead probably), they just deliver the baby.  There is no abortion part needed.  The only time this would come up is in the case that it is a viable fetus. 

49

And yes, there is room for some moral calculus there. For me, if it's a female relative of mine, if there is a first best option, and the baby is already dead or brain-dead, then when it comes to options for saving the life or health of my female relative, I'm not really interested the second choice options. If this is the case and there is a ban in place forcing her to the second best option, I'm going to be ticked off. And I question the moral calculus that led to the ban.

?who's arguing the mothers life?

That Is rare!

50 other options are available. 

I also have to quibble with your example.  If a baby is dead (or even brain dead probably), they just deliver the baby.  There is no abortion part needed.  The only time this would come up is in the case that it is a viable fetus.

right

51 susanita, #49 - one type of case where D&E is the best procedure is in cases of severe hydrocephalus which prevents the cranium from safely passing through the birth canal. This condition usually results in a dead or brain-dead fetus. The "other option" usually available is a Caesarean Section, which is substantially more traumatic to the woman and less safe.

52

So, has this info been brought up at her confirmation hearings or do you think it will?

I was pretty repulsed and actually recoiled when I saw this picture http://tinyurl.com/27zboew

but after reading this I am even more sickened.....

 

53

hydrocephalus which prevents the cranium from safely passing through the birth canal

duh........-

54 severe hydrocephalus which prevents the cranium from safely passing through the birth canal.

The fluid can be drained to yield a safe delivery.  At the end of the day, you're just going to have to state plainly that you support an abortion at any stage for any reason or no reason, because that's really the opposition to partial birth abortion bans.  You do know that we read what your side writes - and just because Lefty blogs don't let dissenters post doesn't mean that we're not reading. 

55 substantially more traumatic to the woman and less safe.

Posted by: smijer at June 29, 2010 06:04 PM (b3chg)

how many women die ;Caesarean Section, which is substantially more traumatic to the woman and less safe.

should all women that have Caesarean Section babies be discounted? let's not do v'backs either.

56

Posted by: smijer at June 29, 2010 06:04 PM (b3chg)

just go the fk away.

57

The fluid can be drained to yield a safe delivery.  At the end of the day, you're just going to have to state plainly that you support an abortion at any stage for any reason or no reason, because that's really the opposition to partial birth abortion bans.

smijer is not in birthing or he would know this argument is dopey.

58 Remember. It's only a lie if you think it's a lie.

59 That's right willow.  Stupid semantic gamesmanship whose only purpose is to keep the abortion money flowing.

60 #56 willow - C-sections are a great alternative for live birth, but an unnecessary risk in the case of severe hydrocephalus. #55 Alec - the half d&e that you describe is no less lethal than the full d&e that is subject to the propopsed ban, and hardly less gruesome. In fact, the language of the ban was vague enough that it might have prevented your half d&e. That said, I'm not here to debate the merits of the ban. I feel like pro-choice people should craft a ban that does carve out exceptions for severe hydrocephalus and other major medical concerns and pass it, if they sincerely want to keep abortions legal. That's a win-win - pro-life people get their ban, and pro-choice people no longer have to face the the political hazards of opposing it. I'm commenting because I noticed someone say that the final bill language was inconsistent with the original language.

61 Both sotomayor and kagen are totally unqualified, but thats what you get when you elect a community organizer prez.

Just think about Roberts and Alito vs sotomayor and kagan, the former are so obviously deeper level thinkers than the latter that it really astonishing once you think about it.

62 No smijer, you're commenting because you're an evangelical abortionist.  If the language held the same meaning, we wouldn't be talking about kagen changing it to make it more acceptable.  She wouldn't have characterized the original language as a "disaster".  Go back to what Leamus said.  You think ALL abortions are just marvy.

63 susanita, #49 - one type of case where D&E is the best procedure is in cases of severe hydrocephalus which prevents the cranium from safely passing through the birth canal. This condition usually results in a dead or brain-dead fetus. The "other option" usually available is a Caesarean Section, which is substantially more traumatic to the woman and less safe.

Posted by: smijer at June 29, 2010 06:04 PM (b3chg)

Incorrect.  The other option is to euthanize the fetus before starting the process of removing it from the uterus.  There used to be something called a saline abortion, in which the doctor drew out amniotic fluid and injected saline solution that killed the fetus.  Over the space of a day or so, the dead fetus became pliant and easier to expel by vaginal delivery.  My wife is a RN and used to have to catch dead babies from saline abortions.  (There were times her colleagues caught live ones -- and the one time the live one stayed alive in the specimen bucket, long enough that the nurse rushed it to the NICU, where it survived and grew strong.)

The partial-birth procedure is a time-saving measure, mainly for the doctor's convenience.  No tedious waiting -- just breech-deliver the baby up to the neck, then kill it with a scissors jammed into the base of its brain and use the hole you just made to insert a vacuurette.  Suck out the brain, collapse the skull, and voila! he or she pops right out.  And the doctor doesn't miss his tee time.

There are quite a few babies born with hydrocephaly who get a shunt installed to drain the excess cerebrospinal fluid from their skulls and go on to live normal lives.  Indeed, the shunts are often installed by intrauterine surgery before the babies are born.

64

61 #56 willow - C-sections are a great alternative for live birth, but an unnecessary risk in the case of severe

so you are saying first,

hydrocephalus babies that can live for years  (yes limited)aren't of worth.

babies born by c section shouldn't be because mothers risk,, which can include a distinction of only a small pelvis,

 considering some women have them just to have them on Time for convenience along with doc.s.. let's now outlaw  Caesarean's and vbac's

65

Leamus Leamas

Sorry

66 stuiec - I won't argue that there aren't times when D&E is *not* the best available option. You described some better procedure sometimes available. And, yes, hydrocephalus comes in a wide range of severity - and for some relatively mild cases a fetus can survive it with no ill effects. And that's great. Now it's possible that the ACOG didn't really believe the language they inserted at Kagan's suggestion. I don't think they would have inserted it if they couldn't stand behind it on a factual basis. And they know more about it than me or my RN wife, or your RN wife. You are free to disbelieve them, and to adopt a position on D&E consistent with that disbelief. But the fact that there are cases where a D&E is not indicated does not logically imply that there are no cases where it is.

67

relatively mild cases a fetus can survive it with no ill effects. And that's great.
Posted by: smijer

relatively mild cases a baby, human, object of love, apple of someone's eye, fetus can survive it with no ill effects. And that's great.

Very generous of you to not insist that the survivors not be hunted down and killed to keep the batting average up.  If you're going to prosletyze for abortion, you should tone down the fetus talk, especially when you're talking about the survivors.

68

who said there where NO cases? of course there are. when a baby cannot LIVE outside the womb at all.

parents have to normally feed an infant, stay up all hours, listen to screaming at times hours on end, sometimes our children are blind, sometimes deaf, where do you say  a child is not worth life?

69 so is there some arbitary line when a human is not human?

70 we are talking partial birth here, way beyond a few weeks gestation.

71 stuiec, susanita, alec - thanks for the articulate and fair discussion. I'm going to jet, but I'll check back for replies tonight or tomorrow. Good to talk with you.

72 68

relatively mild cases a fetus can survive it with no ill effects. And that's great.
Posted by: smijer

in your world  they are dead.

73

if i would have had a D&c at my Doc's suggestion my 14 year old wouldn't exist.

 

74

A-B student btw.

75

As- in math, they want him in the gate program.

just think about it

 

76 Now it's possible that the ACOG didn't really believe the language they inserted at Kagan's suggestion. I don't think they would have inserted it if they couldn't stand behind it on a factual basis. And they know more about it than me or my RN wife, or your RN wife. You are free to disbelieve them, and to adopt a position on D&E consistent with that disbelief. But the fact that there are cases where a D&E is not indicated does not logically imply that there are no cases where it is.

Posted by: smijer at June 29, 2010 06:29 PM (b3chg)

You talk like you know what D&E is.  In most cases, D&E is simply the procedure of reaching into the womb with a forceps and pulling on parts of the fetus until they come out.  The abortionist has to be sure to pull out all the parts of the fetus -- counting the parts and verifying that they're all there falls to the guy in the pathology lab (my wife's cousin was engaged to one).

Again, they used to do D&E after euthanizing the fetus, or in cases of natural fetal demise.  And the initial decomposition process meant that the fetus would break apart at the joints pretty easily, with no sharp edges.

But in the push for efficiency and convenience, the doctors took to doing the D&E (dilation and evacuation) right after euthanizing the fetus.  Tearing it apart so quickly after death led to bones breaking, leaving sharp edges that could perforate the uterus or cervix.

And then there are the cases where the fetus is too big to pick apart, in the third trimester.  There, convenience says that it's faster and simpler to deliver the baby feet-first up to the neck, and then suck out its brain to make it easier for the head to pass the cervix.  That's the partial-birth abortion.  It's not really quite like the classic D&E.

Oh, and no, the ACOG doesn't know more about medical abortion than my RN wife.  It isn't gynecologists who catch the dead babies, it's ob-gyn RNs like my wife.

77  It isn't gynecologists who catch the dead babies, it's ob-gyn RNs like my wife.

Posted by: stuiec at June 29, 2010 07:04 PM (7AOgy)

 

yes

78

ugh

srsly.

79 stuiec, the ob-gyn RNs do indeed know a lot about it. Catching the fetus doesn't help a lot with the question at hand (which is what procedure is indicated under various scenarios of complications in pregnancy), but they have more medical knowledge than most people give them credit for that does relate to indications. Still, between the best, most knowledgeable RN and the best, most knowledgeable doctor in the same field, it is the best, most knowledgeable doctor who knows what options exist and what the risks of each option are. So, in that regard, the ACOG should know more about the question of whether there are pregnancies where intact D&E is the best and safest option available than you & I or our RN wives. Doesn't make them right and you wrong. Just that there is reason to take their opinion seriously. I'd rather it be the case that you are right. But I'm not sure I'd be willing to risk the health of my wife or granddaughter on the likelihood that you are right & they are wrong.

80 May be the best is a great phrase for when it isn't, but you don't want to say that.

81 Holy fuck. Aren't submissions made to a court the equivalent of being made under oath?

82

My RN mom, who worked for ob/gyn's and ran the nursery during different times of her career, would tell you that there is no need for any abortion past the 2nd month, at most the end of the 3rd, if the woman is going to a competent ob/gyn and receiving comprehensive care like she should.  Especially now, with the fetal screening tech that we now have.  Anything later than that, and you should be dealing with a D&E to deal with an already dead/dying fetus (and if it is not terminal but going that way, you do the moral/ethical thing and euthanize it first before the procedure).  If you are doing late term abortions on healthy fetuses after a certain point in the pregnancy (ideally in the first trimester) you are risking serious complications to the mother's health -- both general and reproductive.  It not only is a gruesome and morally/ethically questionable act; it just doesn't make a lot of sense medically (unless of course your goal is to make the women in question run the risk of sterility down the road).

Her words -- but what the heck would she know, right?

83

Dear God. stuiec, that is horrible. I'm sick to my stomach. How can your wife possibly stand this? How can the doctors?

 A c-section is a lot less traumatic than having someone stick scissors into your head and suck your brains out, or rip your limbs off with suction.

With the amount of medical technology we have, ultrasounds, surgical advances, etc, what possible situation can we have where this is the only option? Oh, wait, ACOG said THEY couldn't think of any, either.

This is no better than experiments that the Nazis ran on people in concentration camps. Gosh, I guess the left DOES have more in common with Nazis than just Socialism and anti-semitism. They also like to see their sick theories carried out in the real world. I wonder if liberal women are required to undergo abortion to get their ID for the Church of Liberalism?

Partial-birth abortion is nothing more than a legal fiction. What's the difference between a baby who has been delivered and has only just had the umbilical cord cut, and one who is LITERALLY only minutes from being in the exact same state?

We're very close to outright legalizing infanticide, and that scares the shit out of me. If we won't protect our babies, then our society is well and truly fucked and we deserve whatever fate ultimately befalls us.

Dogs involved in dogfighting have more protection than our unborn.

84 Is that where Salazar and the IPCC learned to do post-signoff edits?

85 Want to backup iPhone files to iPad? Sometimes we often meet such conditions that there is no extra space in our iPhone, but we do now want to delete iPhone files, because they are our favorites, then we need to transfer them to computer or iPad, this  iPhone to iPad Transfer is specially designed for this aim.