Friday, May 08, 2020

Gov. Inslee: "Republicans View Elderly As Disposable"

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Wednesday night, Washington State's Governor Jay Inslee told a national audience on CNN that "Republicans view the elderly as disposable human beings."

And he said a lawsuit filed Tuesday by Republican lawmakers challenging his authority to prolong the state's economic shut down stems from "biological ignorance and kind of human heartlessness."

"This boils my blood," the governor says.

I wonder why his blood does not boil as Planned Parenthood regularly kills unwanted, unborn babies across the state?


Be informed.

What really caused Inslee's blood to boil.

He was challenged.

The reason Inslee was on CNN being interviewed by Chris Cuomo Wednesday evening is because on Tuesday, several Republican Washington State lawmakers sued him for exceeding his authority and "unacceptable tyranny" in refusing to lift his stay-at-home order which has closed businesses and banned social gatherings.

In fact, Inslee has now extended the order from May 15 to May 30.

The suit says Inslee should trust people to protect themselves, their workers, and their customers.

The lawyer who filed the suit on behalf of the lawmakers told the press:
"This is not a disease that effects the youth of this state. No one under 20 has died from it. It doesn't even really [effect] people under 60 unless they're already sick."

Rep. Andrew Barkis of Olympia, one of the lawmakers who is part of the suit, says: "There's randomness in the order that is a constitutional problem."

And he said, "We could be under a state of emergency all the way through the summer months and we just don't feel that it is appropriate at this point in time."

Joining Barkis in signing onto the lawsuit are House lawmakers Drew MacEwen (Union), Brandon Vick (Clark County), Chris Corry (Yakima), Kelly Chambers (Puyallup), Drew Stokesbary (Auburn) and Morgan Irwin (Enumclaw).

Blowing off steam on CNN

In regard to Inslee's constitutional authority to shut things down, he said this:

We're authorized by the U.S. Constitution to act, and by the vote of our people and our states, both Republicans and Democrats. So I think we're going to be on firm ground. I think we'll prevail in these lawsuits that are more political statements than anything. So that we can protect our people.

And he said this about his blood and the Republicans:

And I just really -- it boils my blood when I hear the comments from some of these Republican legislators that this is just a problem with folks at some age, so we shouldn't just worry about it. I can't stand that. That will not stand.

He continued telling Chris Cuomo, who has tested positive, that most of the people in his state agreed with him.

As the governor continued,  he seemed to self-correct a little, by making sure the viewers knew that he's not mad at the "Republican people" of the state---just the "Republicans" they have elected.

He said, "I can tell you, the majority of Republicans in my state get what they're doing. They get it. They care as much as I do. They understand science."

Yes. Most all Republicans do understand science.

Host Cuomo quipped, "It is scary how quickly life got cheap in America."

Whether Inslee and other governors have the constitutional authority to shut down state economies, bankrupting individuals and companies, remains to be seen.

But let's look at the "value of life."

How quickly did life get cheap?

Were the folks who voted to legalize abortion in Washington in 1970 all Republicans and conservatives? Or did liberals and so-called progressives vote against life?

If it's the latter, and it is, then that should make everyone's blood boil because Inslee's far-Left are hypocrites.

Here's how it began:

On November 3, 1970, Washington voters approved Referendum 20, which legalized abortion in the early months of pregnancy. Fifteen other states had liberalized their abortion laws by that time, but Washington was the first -- and so far the only -- state to do so through a vote of the people. It was a triumphant moment in a campaign that had its genesis in 1967, in the office of Seattle psychologist Samuel Goldenberg (1921-2011), who had been asked to help two patients, one middle-aged and the other a young college student, both desperate for a way to end an unwanted pregnancy.

Over the years, Planned Parenthood and NARAL have been celebrated by the Left for their work and fundraising on behalf of "women's health care." All while it wasn't health care---it was killing unwanted babies.

In fact, the obsession with killing these unwanted humans is so strong among the elite Left that in 2018, the Seattle Times felt it necessary to publish an article to calm the anxieties of the pro-abortion folks.

The Times began,
"With Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court and nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh likely waiting in the wings, the high court majority appears to be headed toward conservatism. Some Washington state reproductive-health advocates are concerned that could mean a challenge for the landmark abortion-rights case Roe v Wade."

The feature story continues with--
"In Washington state something else would come into play: a 27-year old state law intended to defend abortion rights from challenges at the national level. Initiative 120 declared that a woman has a right to choose physician-performed abortion before fetal viability. The law emerged from a political climate not unlike today's and was passed narrowly in 1991 by a vote of the people,"

The Times gives a brief overview of those who have stood against abortion over the years They name Jerry Falwell and the conservative wing of the Catholic Church---evangelicals, Ronald Reagan, etc. as enemies of abortion.

The Times notes that the names and faces have changed, but the anti-abortion agenda has not changed.

In the early 2000s, even I was used as an example by NARAL as the kind of voices that need to be silenced, and a reason to financially support their pro-death causes.

So which is it, governor? Are we fighting to save lives or kill unwanted lives?

Nobody wants their grandparents to die. I am a grandparent. So are many of you.

This is really about selective sanctity of life and selective outrage---which is the hallmark of far-Left secular progressivism and its ever-evolving, changing values.

It's about selfishness, not virtue. It's about politics and power more than it's about values.

Mother Teresa said, "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you can live as you wish."

And she said this:

"America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father's role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts -- a child -- as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters" And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners. Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign" (Mother Teresa -- "Notable and Quotable," Wall Street Journal, 2/25/94, p. A14).

Be Informed. Be Outraged. Be Faithful, Be Prayerful. Be Fearless.