A Nation Of Charlie Browns

To give Joe Biden victories in the coming election, most Americans will have to become Charlie Brown. The ever-optimistic Peanuts character believes Lucy won’t pull the football away when he tries to kick it. Charlie never gets Lucy’s character. He always ends up on his back.

Since Joe Biden has been in politics and even earlier, he has s had an estrangement with the truth. Finding the plagiarized British socialist leader Neil Kinnock’s speeches derailed his earlier presidential run. Stealing another man’s work aligns with Joe’s lack of ethics.

Biden has led us to believe he came from a Scranton, Pa., blue-collar family. Joe’s father grew up well off. He had a white-collar managerial job in Scranton. A down period for the family followed World War II, but it didn’t last long enough that Joe couldn’t attend a top-notch Catholic School. Rather than an economic struggle, Joe had cars to chauffeur friends and dates. His father had become a top used-car salesman. 

Joe claimed he had a stellar undergraduate career. None of it was true. He was in the top half of his law school class. 76th out of 85 is far from the top half. One of the reasons for the low standing was he was found to have plagiarized a law review article.

With this background, the idea that Joe would use his position to sell influence doesn’t seem far-fetched. The Biden family, including Joe, benefitted from routing payments through his son. Hunter. Of course, Joe claimed he never discussed “business” with his son.

These claims are in the face of emails recovered from his son’s laptop, indicating he was directly involved. Worse, Tony Bobolinski, a business associate of the Bidens, identified Joe Biden as the “big Guy” due to a piece of the action. He detailed meeting Joe Biden.

After dozens of former government officials claimed Biden’s son’s laptop was Russian “disinformation,” the laptop is now considered authentic. No one has ever challenged Bobolinski’s story. This fact could only mean Joe lied about the influence-peddling schemes.

Compulsive liars are usually easy to expose. Anyone taking the time can find Biden’s dishonesty. How readily others support and propagate them isn’t so easy to handle. It isn’t just the intelligence and foreign policy people soiling their reputations over Hunter Biden’s laptop. It’s the seventeen Nobel Prize winners backing Biden’s Biden’s $3.5 billion Build Back Better Program as non-inflationary when Inflation was already evident to anyone who looked. Just ask Larry Summers.

Which is worse? The liar or those making common cause with him when they know or should know it’s a lie? This support is how we get a stream of bold-faced deceits. Afghanistan is an excellent airlift success; Inflation is transitory, crime isn’t exploding, the inflation reduction Act reduces Inflation, and the border is secured are some apparent untruths. 

The latest deception has to do with abortion. One of the more potent issues for Democrats is the Dobbs decision overturning Roe. In response to Senate majority leader Schumer’s bill protecting abortion up to birth, Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced a bill restricting abortion to the first fifteen weeks except for rape, incest, and the mother’s life. While Republicans are vexed at his timing drawing attention from other issues, understanding how the Biden administration and its allies are attacking the proposal is essential. This knowledge shows us how widespread misinformation works in the Democrats’ favor.

Google Graham’s abortion bill, and you’ll find a page of articles all referring to it as a radical abortion ban. CNBC, Politico, the Washington Post, the Hill, and the New York Times use a “ban” to describe the legislation. A smoking ban implies fines and arrests if you ever light up. Limiting smoking to designated areas is just a restriction. 

Graham’s bill doesn’t “ban” abortion. It just restricts it after fifteen weeks. Why, then, does so much of the media uniformly mischaracterize it? Could it be to motivate people to vote a certain way? 

Graham, a strong pro-life senator, tries to show where to compromise this divisive issue. Fifteen weeks makes a lot of sense. At that point, we have a sonogram, know the sex of the baby, have given tests, and can even perform surgery if needed. It’s hard to say this isn’t a child when giving it anesthesia.

These observations contributed to the vast majority of nations allowing abortions limiting the practice to fifteen weeks or less—only twelve countries, including the U.S.allow later abortions up to birth or after. Rather than a radical solution, this is where most of the world resides.

Correcting the crisis caused by a preference for boys in a state allowing only one child will take generations. Combining the knowledge of the baby’s sex with unlimited abortion resulted in China’s vast sex imbalance. No wonder other nations won’t go there.

While not as extreme as in China, Americans still prefer boys over girls. While we don’t limit the number of children you can have, the average American family has less than two. Sexual preference could drive abortion even here. Do we need to destroy life while unbalancing the population?

Testing at fifteen weeks is more reliable, and if it doesn’t already will soon include DNA. The LGBTQ community maintains they were born that way, meaning it’s in their DNA. I know of a reason to doubt this. If it’s in the DNA, testing will ultimately find it.

The results will bring up questions. Knowing your child is gay or transgender and you can abort without anyone knowing could pose problems. There is a difference between accepting and desiring LGBTQ children. Transgender children will need lifetime medical care. Do we want to find what people will do in this situation? Given that most families now have only one or two children, will they opt for one that’s LGBTQ? Could this community be much diminished? 

Most other nations have thought through these problems and limit abortions to fifteen weeks or less. Instead of misinformation, we need a similar discussion to arrive at a compromise that is less than we might desire but can abide. I think this is what Sen. Graham was attempting to do. 

Instead of diffusing the situation, the Administration and other Democrats think they can, along with keeping Trump on the front page by using Federal and State law enforcement, utilize abortion Ban hysteria to win the mid-terms. Like so much to do with Biden, truth has nothing to do with it.

Biden and the Democrats have been rising in the polls. They’re bragging all over the media about their chances. Filmmaker Michael Moore, who called Trump’s 2016 victory, sees a Democratic landside.

If this turns out to be accurate, the American people will have set a new world standard for gullibility. Lucy pulls the ball again.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s