A common question from my business students is "Why are some ads so bad?"

It does seem odd. Why would marketing managers (Budget? What budget?) spent millions for what seems to be a bad impression. Or simply to shock.

At times marketers will deliberately make an awful advertisement to make it memorable. So that a consumer walking down a grocery store aisle will remember a product. But sometimes marketers have gone too far.

So Your Business Blogger(R) has assembled two sets of ads: Good and Bad.

Let's start with the good. The motto in my business is Delectare et Docere, To Please and To Instruct.

The first set of advertisements -- or edu-tainment -- is To Please and To Remind. The Georgia-Pacific paper company did a series of Brawny Man ads a few years ago, still alive on YouTube. A bit longer at some 120 seconds on the web which is a destination that viewers tune in and view with a purpose, which is to please. Even a novice will notice that the target market is women. Alert Readers will notice the early 'product placement' in the ad.

There's lot's more Brawny Man -- but let us begin our descent from good to bad.

Some marketing gurus have crossed over to the dark side with dark ads. Ancient Jewish tradition commands the faithful to imagine no evil. "As a man thinks in his heart, so he is." And "Guard your heart, it is the wellspring of life."

It is a sound life strategy to permit only good inside your circle of friends, your house, your head. Imagine world peace, as the new-agers would say.

But some ad messages put darkness on display.

Charmaine recently appeared on Fox to debate shock advertising. (Your Business Blogger(R) married way over his head...)

Charmaine on an earlier FOX appearance Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D., appeared on Fox News on March 1, 2008 to debate the issue of edgy ads and to discuss the prevalence of shock-style advertising in the media.

Charmaine debated Greg Muehler from Serve Marketing who produced some of the shock ads.

FOX, fair and balanced is a family network and showed only those mildest of ads -- Steve McQueen's Bullet had more violent car chase scenes. Or The French Connection. The examples are not too bad.

But bad is coming at the end of this post.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Has some advertising crossed the line? Shock ads linked below.
Caution: Might be safe for work -- but not for kids.

From Newsweek, This Is Your Brain on Scary Ads -- Are these graphic PSAs inspiring or offensive? You decide.,

The image is meant to shock: a little girl's face atop a woman's body, cleavage spilling over a low-cut cocktail dress. ...The ads are disturbing, to put it mildly. But more disturbing, its creators say, is what they're trying to combat: 71 percent of teen pregnancies in inner-city Milwaukee are the result of statutory rape. ... But industry experts say the campaign represents a genre of public-service advertising that's becoming more lurid than ever.

Shock advertising is an age-old gimmick. But compared with milder fare from years past ("This is your brain on drugs"), today's imagery is "like a sledgehammer to the face," says Steve Hall, founder of the industry blog AdRants. For instance: the ad displayed above-an anti-drunk-driving spot for Arrive Alive-featuring a scantily clad girl collapsed in a men's bathroom. Experts have called it muddled and pointlessly provocative.

Alert Reader Dr. Kalynne Pudner, at Auburn University and teaches Biz Ethics, points us to this analysis by By Jeffrey A. Tucker at Mises, as in Ludwig von,

But why must it be tacky and unbearable to so many of us? Well, let's be blunt: business is trying to reach the masses. Mises explains:

"Business propaganda must be obtrusive and blatant. It is its aim to attract the attention of slow people, to rouse latent wishes, to entice men to substitute innovation for inert clinging to traditional routine. In order to succeed, advertising must be adjusted to the mentality of the people courted. It must suit their tastes and speak their idiom. Advertising is shrill, noisy, coarse, puffing, because the public does not react to dignified allusions. It is the bad taste of the public that forces the advertisers to display bad taste in their publicity campaigns. The art of advertising has evolved into a branch of applied psychology, a sister discipline of pedagogy. Like all things designed to suit the taste of the masses, advertising is repellent to people of delicate feeling."

A sister discipline of pedagogy? Yes indeed it is, and it is also art, and those with "delicate feeling" need to learn to appreciate it for what it is. They don't have to believe a word of it. Decline to drink the potion to make you thin. Refuse the breakfast that will make you concentrate. Eschew the hand cream that will restore moisture. Be as skeptical as you want and, instead, save every penny. Turn off the television if you hate it and sit in your perfect environment and listen to Gregorian chant.

Newsweek continues,

Still, deterrence by disgust can work. In 2006, a series of Volkswagen safety ads drew attention for showing its cars in heart-stopping traffic accidents; within weeks, sales inquiries were up. A more recent ad for Canadian workplace safety features a glowing young chef describing her fiancé, whom she'll never marry, she says, because she's about to be in a "terrible accident." She then slips and scorches her face with a cauldron of boiling water. ... "Some small amount of discomfort is worth it if it creates positive change," says Gary Mueller, founder of Serve, the agency behind the statutory-rape ads. The small discomfort, though, is getting bigger.

Danger: gallery of shock ads on Newsweek.

See: Reality, Marketing and Aristotle. Your Business Blogger and Charmaine were extras background artists in a movie. But The Dude was the star. And gave us a lesson in marketing.

Ludwig von Mises. Mises is pronounced "MEE-zus." Charmaine told me.

Kalynne Pudner earned her Ph.D. at the University of Virginia. Auburn was lucky to get her.

For more on the ads click here.

Please watch the video and let us know what you think or comment below.

Cross Post from Management Training of DC, LLC: click here Advertising: The Good and The Bad

Posted at 10:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Is nuclear power safe? John Howland and his vast readership offer observations on nuke power on its most intimate terms: a submarine.

And how's that working?

From the other side of the leaded glass pane.... I spent three years and five specops in fast attacks and enjoy showing nuke-doubters my radiological med-record for that period: I received less high-energy bombardment that if I had been on a small boy or (sorry for forgetting...) fossil-fueled CV deployed anywhere. 0. ZERO.

[The Penta-Posse is pictured in the forward torpedo room of a WWII submarine. There is not much more room in the new subs.]

And that was with about half of my workspaces next to the Tunnel, just forward and a deck or two above the you-know-what. Whatever other scientific wonders we were near is unknown to me, but I once heard a rumor that our detachment's enlisted people slept in the torpedo room.


It being true in any endeavor of consequence that "One Oh-heck" wipes out a billion atta-boys, the nuclear field cannot tolerate any mistakes greater than a burnt out lightbulb, and our erstwhile Comradette Jane used her cinematic best to take it well beyond the Pale in that regard.


Chernobyl's long term effects will not be known for several thousand years, but there are data that suggest BOTH that life of both flora and fauna types were impacted by the 1986 accident AND that renewed organic chemistry has burgeoned there since a couple of years after it. For fascinating details, see website "kidofspeed.com" a photographic reportage made by a recklessly brave (kinda cute, too!) Ukrainian lady motorcyclist who managed to enter the permanently closed region around the defunct power plant and record its emptiness for posterity. Thanks be, Chernobyl did not start Nuclear Winter -- and our photog lives to do other reckless things (politics, for one) without her suntan turning into a full-body keloid scar.

"Wer rastet, rostet," the Germans say: "He who stops, rusts." What, with the clear and present danger of merely being alive faces us TODAY, nuclear power, with its Rickoverian no-mistake rules looks mighty advantageous to this former cryppie.

If we don't have some new benefits from same, who will provide all that electricity to cook the Sierra Club's granola bars, assemble their Birkenstocks, or to blend blue and yellow basic colors to make green ones?

Forgive an old salt for waxing poetic over an X-ray film, but....

Steve
=============================================

If France can manage to produce 80% of their power from nuclear piles, I have to think we have it within us to do likewise.

With vast respect & ear-trumpets for sea-daddies everywhere,

Jason W.

There is no way to eliminate all risk on this side of eternity. Nuclear power is the safest method to generate power.

Posted at 9:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

The House Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel will be conducting a hearing on the issue of homosexuals in the military. Among the witnesses who will offer testimony will be Brian Jones, a highly-decorated former Sergeant Major of the US Army's elite Delta Force, who served with the Department of Defense in Iraq in 2004.

Sgt. Maj. Jones will testify in support of the 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible for military service. The law passed Congress with veto-proof majorities in 1993 and has been upheld as constitutional several times.

The hearing will take place in Room 2118 of the House Rayburn Office Building, at 2:00 PM on Wednesday, 23 July .

John Howland from USNA-at-Large sends this along from Allan Slaff,

I am delighted that...Sergeant Major Jones will be on hand to testify before the House Armed Service Committee on Personnel on 23 July in regards to gays in the military.

I am confident that...he will do a superb job. I have a concern...on the unique sociological problems that would be generated by permitting openly practicing gays to serve in the ships of the fleet. These unsolvable problems make it absolutely impossible to permit that to happen.

Let me summarize here:

The habitability standards under which our enlisted personnel serve in the ships of the fleet afford almost no possibilities for human privacy. I examined the habitability standards afforded our bluejackets at sea for the Secretary of the Navy many years ago and found that the habitability standards afforded our enlisted personal in the ships of the fleet were less than 50% of the habitability standards allowed our federal prisoners.

Other than a privacy curtain which may be pulled across a man's berth, there is none. Outside that small space of stacked berths the remainder of the compartment is completely open; thus public nakedness is the norm. The same applies to the heads, washrooms and showers.

These ships deploy for normally 9 months at a time and sometimes much longer. Unlike our air force and army personnel there is no leaving the base after normal working hours except on very restricted liberties when in foreign ports from time to time.


That compartment is our bluejackets' home 24/7 as long as the ship is deployed. It would create a truly impossible sociological situation to permit openly gay personnel to live in such an environment.


It would most assuredly wreak havoc with the good order and discipline of the ships company Requiring gays to abstain for long periods would be akin to berthing two heterosexual men in a compartment of essentially naked women for long periods; especially when those young men were being driven by an absolute rush off hormones. Impossible!


There is another issue. Homosexuals are as intellectually capable as heterosexuals. Therefore, eventually the gay will win advancement in rate. He will then be in a powerful position to bring exquisite sexual pressure on the non-rated personnel under his control.


As you know, I am also opposed to women serving in the combatant ships of the fleet. I base my opposition not on any failure of intelligence, courage, patriotism or ability of women.


It is based solely on the absolute impossibility of eliminating the powerful drive of sexuality. At least, however, in the case of the women, they may be isolated into their own living accommodations on board ship.


Instead of establishing my qualifications to speak with authority on this vitally important issue, I shall send along an abbreviated curriculum vitae. Please note the enormous experience I have had in serving in eleven ships of the fleet and commanding four of our very best.

Under a B. Hussein Obama administration, homosexuals will be allowed to openly serve in the armed forces. As Allan notes, this will destroy unit cohesion and hurt our military readiness.

Military Readiness will not matter under Obama anyhoo. He will simply surrender to the jihadists making our military power moot.

Voting for John McCain is important. He knows how to run the military.

B. Hussein Obama is an accomplished community organizer.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Update: Alert Reader CourtneyMD comments below on the need for the presentation of a compelling argument rather than two homosexuals pictured enjoying a cruise. This may help:

CourtneyMD, You are close: I'm not 14, but this is an argument any 14-year-old understands. Even My 15-year-old daughter.

We all may not have the reasoning power of a 14-year-old, but let us attempt a review.

The arguments are simple to comprehend, especially for those few that have served in the armed forces.

Close quarters, intimate surroundings strip away modesty. It does not promote good order and discipline in a military unit to enable sexual attraction. The military mission does not have the margin of error to tolerant the distraction caused by having a girlfriend or boyfriend in arm's reach in harm's way 24/7.

See close quarters -- men and women -- on a submarine.

This is different than the soft civilian life most people enjoy, even in dangerous occupations. Females and homosexual firefighters and police-persons can go off-duty.

Can't really go off-duty on a submarine.

In the absence of privacy, no person -- whatever they may tell the pollsters -- does not want other service members lusting after their bodies.

A sailor wants his buddy to watch his back -- not covet his backside.

As requested, see a compelling argument for unit cohesion.

And let's not forget B. Hussein Obama's other sugar stick women in combat.

B. Hussein Obama and Jesus.

Double standards for women in the military.

And thank you for noticing the repetition of B. Hussein Obama -- and thank you for repeating it back. Perhaps you are trainable.

Repeating back a negative is something even the professionals have trouble with. See the Bimbo Awards with the late Tony Snow.

Your Business Blogger(R) works at teaching business sense. Here, we are reduced to teaching common sense.

Thank you for commenting,
Jack

See Dana Milbank from the WaPo. Your Business Blogger(R) is not related to the Cynthia Yost mentioned in the Milbank article

Posted at 9:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Alert Reader Richard Neault sends this email,

Mr. Yoest,

I was stationed on the Bonefish (SS-582)from 1984-1988. In 1988 we had a fire that killed three of our friends and ended the career of the Bonefish. I had met the widow of the CO of the first Bonefish when she presented the crew with a Holy Bible.

I have been assembling different items for a framed tribute piece for both the first and second bonefish. I have always been fascinated with the first boat and what happened to her.

I have been trying to find information about the battleflag of the first bonefish and have been unable to. I have also been trying to find an original, or at least a good reproduction, of the patch from the first bonefish. If you can help me with either of these items, I would be very grateful. I am in the process of founding a local museum about the Cold War and hope one day to place these items in the museum. It must have been an honor to have had a father who was a part of the Greatest Generation.

I appreciate his service to our country.

Please tell your wife that I also appreciate the things she has done and that we are one family that appreciates the FRC and the real conservatives in politics.

Richard Neault
www.calcoldwar.org

Here is the patch of which he may be speaking. I would be honored to donate the Bonefish artifact to the museum, if the item would be helpful.

If there are other Alert Readers who might have items of interest, please contact Mr. Neault through his website -- or email Your Business Blogger(R)

Thank you (foot)notes:

Also see USS Bonefish Lost: A Remembrance 18 June

See Virtual Paintings of Bonefish by Tom McMahon

Posted at 12:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Your Business Blogger(R) teaches business, marketing and management at the local college.

I like to remind students and clients that the hardest product to sell is an intangible, an idea. The easier product to pitch has tangible characteristics -- it has a form that can be introduced through the senses, a product that can be seen and touched.

One of the most interesting marketing campaigns of the century is the promotion of abortion as 'choice' and 'reproductive freedom.'

And for many, abortion has become a vote-changing issue during the current presidential campaign.

To learn more about this interesting abortion-vote market segment, I stepped out of the DC summer heat in Your Nation's Capital and sat in on an off-the-record meeting on abortion polling data for battle ground states.

The confidential numbers revealed that 57% of the public was self-identified as Pro-Life.

This raised two marketing questions:

1) Why is Obama still actively embracing an abortion position? And,

2) How did the country move from supporting abortion rights to Pro-Life?

I was curious about the Obama Abortion Marketing Machine. He is in favor of abortion and in denying medical treatment of some infants born alive. He aggressively supports the feminist's power position of control of a mother over her baby.

Power is an intangible and intangibles are normally a 'difficult sell' as we old sales guys are wont to say. It seems odd that any seller of public policy would take pride in working this hard.

But this intangible is what has sold in the past -- a woman's complete control over her body and absolute power over her destiny, even if this meant killing her unborn baby. Power sells and people will pay most anything to get it, use it and to project the appearance of power.

It was absolute power. And Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

But it was not Lord Acton's theorem that changed the mind of the American public. It was a picture. Or rather two pictures:

A) If a woman sees a picture, a sonogram of her baby, she will not have an abortion.

B) The Chicago hospital room where babies can be left to die.

Nurse Jill Stanek has the story and original reporting of the Chicago hospital's "Comfort Room" where babies born alive are left to die without medical intervention. She has more pictures.

Polite society might call this 'infanticide.' Calling the venue a "Comfort Room" is clever marketing. Like "Pro-Choice." A case study on word framing to sell. Brilliant.

But the new pictures are powerful images that can now sell the product: a child.

The tangible child is trumping the intangible power.

This provides a clear choice this presidential election between a women's power and a person's right to life.

McCain is Pro-Life.

Obama has a clear pro-abortion position: He would sign the Planned Parenthood backed Freedom of Choice Act which codifies Roe v Wade:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8

Thank you (foot)notes:

Bill Bennett and Jill Stanek on Obama Abortion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPZCXcTwZPY&NR=1

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity. Your Business Blogger(R) of Management Training of DC, LLC, is a licensed agent for the William Oncken Corporation presenters of Managing Management Time(TM) fondly known as Monkey Management.

Posted at 7:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

The following was made available thru John Howland at USNA-AT-Large and deserves a wide audience.

General to General

Richard Carroll asked my opinion of General Tony McPeak, and his
current support of the far, Socialist-Left. He is co-chairman of
Obama's National Election Committee. I have been asked the same
question by many others.

Rich wrote this and asked for as much coverage as possible...

I consider this a weak version of how I really feel about Wesley
Clark, Tony McPeak, the traitor Army Generals, and the rest of their
ilk who are supporting the far-left in this election.

Most, if not all, waited until they thought there was a predictable winner to the
Democratic nomination, then ran to show their support in hopes of
receiving a Cabinet appointment after the election. This is
absolutely unforgivable to me, and the majority of the military
members that I served with for upward to 35 years. In my opinion,
they are supporting the destruction of our military, and willing to
do irreparable damage to our country strictly for their own personal gain.

J. C.
B/G, USAF, Ret.
==========================================
A Four Star Tool;
Generally Speaking

by Rich Carroll

'As one who for 37 years proudly wore the uniform of our
country'. General Merrill 'Tony' McPeak, Co-Chairman of Barack
Hussein Obama Campaign.

History, General, will remember you by not how proudly you wore your
uniform, but by how you betrayed our trust and by how defiantly your
current boss refuses to wear an American flag pin.

Veterans will remember you for choosing to support a political party that trashes
and degrades our military. You have separated yourself from 'those
who served' to become entrenched with a candidate inextricably
connected to a political and religious cult determined to control
America and murdering millions in their effort to do so.

Continue Reading »

Posted at 8:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The new Leadership Development Carnival #1 is up and running at Great Leadership, hosted by Dan McCarthy. The Carnival is a clearing house of leadership and leadership development advice and commentary from over 30 leadership pundits, including Your Business Blogger(R).

Carnivals serve a vital function in the blogosphere that is missing in most conventional blogs: Editorial oversight.

Dan McCarthy does this ably and without direct compensation. Bloggers work for links and traffic. Go visit.

Dan will be working as the editor of the Leadership Development Carnival every month. If you'd like to submit an article, use the carnival submission form.

My humble submission was The Four Speeches Every Speaker Delivers.

Most people fear public speaking more than death itself. The public-speakers'-adrenaline rush forces the talker to review his podium performance.

And while there at Great Leadership be sure to visit Keeping Your Study Skills Razor Sharp that I may have to steal borrow for my students.

Posted at 10:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Charmaine calls early morning from Edinburgh. "I'm having trouble flying into London," she says.
I'm still waking up -- I didn't see the news. I ask, "When can you come home?"

"I don't know," she says, her voice unsteady, "They're still clearing the bodies."

Three years ago Your Business Blogger(R) sent the Little Woman to the G-8 with the B3: Bono and Branson and Bush.

We here in the US of A have not been attacked on our soil since 9.11. We must be doing something right.

Bush must be doing something right. Would Obama be able to protect us as Bush has? As McCain would?

Charmaine on the plane with Richard Branson

Following is an edited cross post from Reasoned Audacity, July 1 - 7, 2005.

Charmaine calls early morning from Edinburgh. "I'm having trouble flying into London," she says.

I'm still waking up. I ask, "When can you come home?"

"I don't know," she says, her voice unsteady, "They're still clearing the bodies."

A wake up call.

London, welcome to the war.

It started, as most things these days do, with Powerline.

Following is original posting from London as Charmaine called it into me, when her site went down. Any inconsistencies may be due to transcription overload.

This is Jack, the husband: Charmaine called. Her site is still down, but she wanted to file a report to Powerline.

"Flew into Heathrow airport and took a $150 cab ride into north London to conduct interviews and document the bombsites. Bobbies cordoned off area around the sites sealing the scene of the explosions. I got to within a block or so of Edgware Tube station entrance with Londoners sitting calmly, relaxing in pubs. Everything is strangely calm, business as usual. I interviewed a woman, an interior designer, expecting some emotional display. There was none. "We don't do a lot of group hugging in England," she said, making me think of the stiff-upper lip. "We are not sentimental."

And she seemed to reflect the mood of the London population. Not for what they were doing but for what they were not doing: No candles, no out-pouring of grief, no hoards of gawkers milling around police tape, no teddy bears, no bouquets of flowers. No movement. No tears. Everything normal, except, maybe for that bus with the top blown off. Workers cleared and cleaned up the area real well. Spiffy. And got back to their pints.

I visited hospitals and learned that 'only' 37 were confirmed dead at that time. More confirmations were expected.

There were no moms with little children in downtown London. I interviewed middle-aged businessmen on cell phones and kids with Mohawks, none who were surprised.

Londoners gently reproached me about my concern over the bloodshed, "You Americans get sentimental over silly things. We're used to getting bombed." The IRA Troubles had hardened hearts as well as the London infrastructure.

I expected some grief, at least as much as there was when Lady Di died. And grief I got. I interviewed three very ordinary, normal teenaged English Muslims, one with short spiky hair (dressed not unlike my 10 year-old-dude). All three seems to be parroting Muslim talking points. "The bombings were a conspiracy by Blair to generate support for the war," they recited in a charming British accent.

The bombers were quite indiscriminate. Edgware is not far from the heart of Little Beirut, a Muslim ethnic neighborhood.

A young British black woman told me, "The bombings are Tony Blair's fault -- they killed a 100,000 Iraqis -- and it's like a boomerang [coming back at the British]." Most everyone I talked to believed that the British caused the bombing or had it coming.

Of the dozen or so people I interviewed only white males in business attire expressed surprise that anyone would think the British were at fault in anyway.

But these gentlemen were the minority. Most felt that the Brits were complicit. The people at London's ground zero were sounding like the "wobbly" Spanish after their train bombings.

The day is a cloudy, cold, rainy 7.7."

Charmaine is still out on the streets -- 9pm local London time and will be sending pictures soon.

Read the entire story at My Wife Flew off with Bono and Branson; Bombed in London 7.7.05 .

Posted at 12:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

"Let all the babies be born. Then let us drown those we do not like."
Babies and Distributism, GK's Weekly, 11/12/32

Where do Obama and McCain stand on abortion and 'live birth' abortion?

Position/
Candidate........Sonogram of baby......Picture of baby

Pro-Life ......................Live ...................Live

Pro-Choice .................Die ....................Live


McCain .......................Live ...................Live


Obama .......................Die ....................Die

Obama is the full-service abortion candidate.

Abortion from conception to birth
Abortion at partial birth
Abortion after birth

Obama aggressively demands that some babies born alive be left to die. Obama does not support any Born Alive Infant Legislation. Amanda B. Carpenter writes in Human Events, Obama More Pro-Choice Than NARAL where Obama spoke out against the legislation similar to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act,

Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.) portrays himself as a thoughtful Democrat who carefully considers both sides of controversial issues, but his radical stance on abortion puts him further left on that issue than even NARAL Pro-Choice America.


In 2002, as an Illinois legislator, Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions. That same year a similar federal law, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, was signed by President Bush. Only 15 members of the U.S. House opposed it, and it passed the Senate unanimously on a voice vote.


Both the Illinois and the federal bill sought equal treatment for babies who survived premature inducement for the purpose of abortion and wanted babies who were born prematurely and given live-saving medical attention.

Here is what Obama has said about abortion and judges he would appoint,

Thirty-five years after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, it's never been more important to protect a woman's right to choose. Last year, the Supreme Court decided by a vote of 5-4 to uphold the Federal Abortion Ban, and in doing so undermined an important principle of Roe v. Wade: that we must always protect women's health.

With one more vacancy on the Supreme Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a women's fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe v. Wade. The next president may be asked to nominate that Supreme Court justice. That is what is at stake in this election.

Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.

When South Dakota passed a law banning all abortions in a direct effort to have Roe overruled, I was the only candidate for President to raise money to help the citizens of South Dakota repeal that law.





When anti-choice protesters blocked the opening of an Illinois Planned Parenthood clinic in a community where affordable health care is in short supply, I was the only candidate for President who spoke out against it. And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president."

Obama is not the candidate of change.

Charmaine says, "It's all about women's perceived power -- the power a woman has over her fate, her future, her convenience."

The mother-feminist even wants control of life and death: The ultimate power.

The power-hungry feminist does not choose life for her baby. The pro-choice, abortion-option movement is the desire to have the power of life and death."

Obama believes that feminist power over the baby is more important than the life of the baby.

Obama claims to support a women's health, but what he is demanding is the women's power over life and death.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Gary Bauer pointed us to the Obama speech.

Tom McMahon may not the originator of the 2 X 2 matrix, but no one does them better. Enjoy his intellectual property at the 4-Blockworld. Free! It takes hard work to make complicated subjects so simple. Bookmark him.

Tom provides us perhaps the real reason women will vote for John McCain: Who can keep us safe in our current war?

A New Report Indicates Voters Most Interested in Barack Obama's Position on Abortion

The Internet traffic monitoring firm HitWise indicates abortion is now the number one political issue voters are looking for when they conduct a search on Obama's campaign web site.

As a great leader, Mr. Obama should take a principled stand on the issue of Muslims and Islamophobia. While anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. is substantial, it is not an insurmountable challenge.

The vast majority of Americans are sincere and open-minded; anti-Muslim sentiments are a product of fear and lack of understanding. These sentiments can be overcome.

From an article in the The Wall Street Journal by Mr. Junaid M. Afeef, director of public and government Affairs at the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago.

Posted at 10:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)

"It is something you only want to do once," said Gary Bauer.

"What's that?" I ask. "Running for president?"

"No," he says. "Falling backwards off the platform."

Alert Readers will well remember Gary Bauer falling off the podium while flipping flapjacks on his run for president. It was funny and no one got hurt.

Except, maybe, his chances for president...

The Baby-Boo, the caboose on the Penta-Posse, made a similar slip and fell off the elevated platform at a press conference today.

Falling is something everyone has to do. Baby-Boo has got his 'falling' out of the way -- and is now ready to run without a slip for president.

Baby-Boo may not be 35 years old, but, then, he's not that much younger than Obama.

Gary Bauer still laughs about his tumble and the uncertainly all presidential campaigns generate on the trail. Gary is a class act. (Your Business Blogger(R) would still be mad and a-blaming someone...)

Watch Baby-Boo's fall and his quick recovery. Click here for the Family Research Council site and then click on Judy Bruns's talk.

Pictured behind Judy Brun is Baby-Boo, The Dude and The Diva.

Incidentally, Judy's speech is terrific on the meaning of words.

Following is The Diva's YouTube of her pro-life encounter with teachers at her school. See Pro-Life Student Forced to Remove Abortion T-Shirt.

Continue Reading »

Posted at 10:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Charmaine is quoted in Obama works to mobilize 'Christian left.'

She says that all voters should care, "...[A]bout the public policies the person is going to put in place."

Charmaine is pictured at left on an earlier CNN appearance debating abortion.

The policies of which Charmaine speaks are the 'vote-changing' issues Grover Norquist writes about in his book Leave Us Alone: Getting the Government's Hands Off Our Money, Our Guns, Our Lives.

The Leave Us Alone coalition is made up of groups who want the government to do only constitutionally-restricted work, and to, well, leave us alone.

Following is a short list of loose associations Norquist cites who want less government and less outside intrusion:

Homeschoolers
Gun Owners
Church-goers
Taxpayers
Pro-Lifers

The Alert Reader will note that this conservative Leave Us Alone coalition includes the Pro-Life community. This is the only group in Grover's group that wants the government and the courts to protect life and stop the option of killing of unborn children -- just as the government stopped the option of slavery.

The Christian Left is willing to sacrifice freedom in order to pay higher taxes -- this small segment that occasionally attends church is delighted with large government and the government confiscation of property, life and wealth.

These young Christians are confusing government with God -- remember, for most liberals, the government is their god.

The Leftist group is a bit confused on Biblical teaching and looks forward to the tyranny of a ObamaNation. Mature followers of Jesus Christ look to the Ten Commandments, including the directive, Do Not Kill, or more accurately, Do No Murder.

The deliberate taking of innocent life is a vote-changer for thinking Christians.

Posted at 3:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)