Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Carly Fiorina hits out at “typical left-wing tactics” in tying pro-life movement to Colorado shooting

Carly Fiorina hits out at “typical left-wing tactics” in tying pro-life movement to Colorado shooting

Few actual facts are known about the shooter and his motives.

We haven’t written about the shooting at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado yet, because the facts as to the shooting and shooter seem so in flux.

As is usually the case, there is a large-scale media operation underway to tie the shooter to the anti-abortion movement and specifically the undercover videos about Planned Parenthood’s sale of unborn children parts and tissue. The problem is, there are precious few facts proving such a connection. There are reports based on anonymous sources that the shooter mentioned “baby parts” to police, but we don’t know that for sure or in what context.

It’s also curious that the shooter does not appear to have shot people in the clinic, but did kill people, including a policeman, while shooting from the clinic.

Carly Fiorina was on Fox News this morning, and hit out at the attempts to tie the pro-life movement to the shooting as a “typical left-wing tactic.”

That reaction has leftist heads exploding.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Sammy Finkelman | November 30, 2015 at 1:44 pm

The police have not described the gunman’s motive.

– Last sentence of the 8th paragraph in a 16-paragraph story in the New York Times today.

Probably the gunman babbled a whole slew of complaints about the world, and “baby parts” was just one of them.

If he mentioned Planned Parenthood at all it was probably to argue that everybody else kills people – why shouldn’t he?

Jim Hailey | November 30, 2015 at 2:24 pm

Professor, since we on the right do not believe that speech was responsible for the actions of the shooter this past weekend but the left does (maybe) and now blames us for these tragic deaths, Wouldn’t that mean they wanted, encouraged and got their wish when the two cops were assassinated in New York? They have used this rhetoric before (numerous times) Speech = Hate = Killings, and I’m sure there are many more examples out there. I mean it can’t go both ways can it? / sarc

I would love to see you do an article on this premise (USA TODAY). Its either they believe it or it’s a lie, I don’t think it would be too hard to match up some statements from the left and hoist them on their own petard.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Jim Hailey. | November 30, 2015 at 3:17 pm

    “hoist them on their own petard”

    The left is so duplicitous on so many points, it is difficult to find one of their petards straight or strong enough to hoist anything.

    I prefer “Hoist them on their own canards” … like the “Hands up don’t shoot” Brown plea that never was. They win the news cycle with lies and the right is constantly catching up, while the next series of lies are told in the next news cycle. It’s almost as if the media is “in on it”. 😉

    But yeah, you make a good point. Obama tells his people “get in their faces” with their lies, and tells “us” to sit down shut up about the (macro-aggression) truth.

Arminius | December 1, 2015 at 6:52 am

This is a page out of the Al Sharpton playbook. Get the lie out early before the facts are known. Because leftists are going to believe the lie no matter what the facts turn out to be.

Remember Ferguson? A surprising amount of people still believe the “hands up, don’t shoot lie.”

Some playwright named Phelim McAleer wrote a play about Michael Brown’s death based entirely on the Grand Jury testimony. The very liberal LA cast showed up thinking that Michael Brown was somehow going to be vindicated. Or that at least events would be foggy. It wasn’t; it was crystal clear.

“…During the “Ferguson” rehearsal, the performers balked after realizing the only witness in McAleer’s play who says Brown had his hands up is immediately discredited by an FBI agent.

…McAleer’s play also ends with a damning exchange between a witness and prosecutor.

“Do you feel like this could have ended up any other way?” the prosecutor asks.

“Yeah, it could have, if Michael Brown had just stopped running” toward Wilson, says the witness, who is identified as Witness 48 in the grand jury transcripts, but who is given a pseudonym in the play and cast with a young black actress. “It could have ended another way. The officer had no other choice.”

No other choice, in other words, but to shoot Brown.

After those lines were read by actors Deborah Puette and Sydney A. Mason, a kind of awkward quiet fell over the cast members, whose bodies had been bent like question marks as they stared down at their scripts in a rehearsal space near Culver City.

The cast questioned the balance of the 55-page script, and even debated the justification for the shooting…”

It’s a comical read. These libs just couldn’t stand to have their precious narratives challenged. They’d rather quit and believe the lie than to accept the truth.

They’ll make perfect Hillary Clinton voters. If you’re going to vote for her clearly you must have complete and utter disregard, even a contempt, for the truth equal to Hillary Clinton’s own.

Arminius | December 1, 2015 at 7:01 am

By the way the author of that LAT article was a typical liberal clinging to the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie. Even after noting that the one witness who claimed that Brown had his hands up was discredited by the FBI, the author was so attached to the narrative he still had to write that only “some” of the testimony supported officer Wilson. When ALL of the credible testimony, as the author was forced to admit at one point in the article, supported Wilson.

The narrative dies hard. Which is the leftist progressive phenomenon that PP, the MSM, and the Democrats are hoping to take advantage of here.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend