Thursday, May 29, 2014

Gosnell's banker

Warren Buffett has given $1.2 billion to abortion groups
That's $1.2 billion.

A man with his kind of money could do so much good. Buffet's choice: millions of dead kids.



  1. But Planned Parenthood desperately needs our (taxpayers') money. They can't live without it. And if they don't get it, women aren't going to get mammograms and they'll die.

    And it will be all. your. fault.

    Too bad PP doesn't do mammograms.


  2. America must have lax defamation laws. In Australia, claiming wrongly that someone is funding criminal activities (a felony) and calling someone a 'bastard' unless in jest ('which of you bastards called this Pommy bastard a Pommy bastard?') would be grounds for a defamation suit.

    Although, I doubt Warren Buffett would be worried by such a flea as Egnor.

    Anyway. My opinion of Warren Buffett has just increased markedly. Annoying Egnor is enough of a reason.

    1. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 7:26 AM

      bonfire, it's good to see you back in action. Been burning kittens?

      Anyway, your take on defamation law in Australia is fascinating. Your laws sound so much more punitive than ours. That puts your comment about Jo Nova's "manipulating" European Space Agency graphs for fraudulent reasons in a whole new light.


    2. Sadly, killing children in the womb is not a criminal activity in this country, so I don't understand your point.

      We have free speech, which I guess confuses those, like you, who persistently give in to the authoritarian impulse to gag others.


    3. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 7:36 AM

      BTW, bonfire, it just occurred to me the other day when I was looking at my John Deere manual to replace a broken belt....

      The displacement of your "automobile" engine and my John Deeres are exactly the same! In the US, we call vehicles like that "riding lawnmowers". Mine also have room for a dog. A small dog.

    4. Senile old fart,

      Jo Nova would have no chance of suing me. I'm anonymous and all I did was suggest that she could have manipulated the graph. But anyway, my main objection was that YOU provided a link to a uncaptioned graph, as though it meant anything.

      For all I know, her website could have provided adequate details. You only provided the graph to hide the fact that you reckoned sea level rises would be confined to that coming from the melting of West Antarctic glaciers. Ignoring the other sources.

      By the way - have you stood too close to your completely unnecessarily lit patio heater this Summer?

    5. JQ,

      Kermit Gosnell was convicted of felony crimes and sentenced to a virtual life sentence. Egnor claiming that Warren Buffett is his banker (and therefore funding Gosnell's crimes and would therefore be a crime too) is arguably defamatory.

      Senile old fart,

      You're really off topic today aren't you. I have a Smartcar - a car. They're very popular in Europe and perfectly adequate most of the time. I don't need phallic symbols like you using the size of your car when you can't display your gun(s).

      Anyway. I can transport a dog in my car. Easily. A 20kg dog with room plenty to spare.

    6. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 7:57 AM

      bonfire, you only think you're anonymous. Trust me, Google would pop your IP so fast it would make your head swim. You don't have the skills to be anonymous on the internet.

      I can refer you to an "anonymous" young woman, "feralpower", in San Francisco who threatened to burn a house down in Boulder in a comment thread (yeah, she was a pyro freak like you). The San Francisco police were knocking on her door in less than 48 hours.

      ISPs and search engines don't really like little freaks like you.

      "You only provided the graph to..."

      Woo-woo. The Force is strong with this one. It must be a burden, bonfire, sorting out all those mind waves and dealing with invisible gorillas at the same time.

    7. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 8:13 AM

      I know about Smartcars and how smart they are. I used to own a Mini (a real one) when I lived in the UK. It was quite the adventure on the autobahn and the autostrada.

      The marketing people named them Smartcars. It's an appeal to the terminally stupid, like Free Trade clothesline. "If I own a Smart car, how can I be stupid?"

      "I don't need phallic symbols like you using the size of your car"
      When they market a DickCar, call me back, Dr Fraud.

      I swear, eek!oloons will fall for anything. But I had already observed that bonfire had a sharp eye for a deal when he was describing the stench he savored from the penguin colonies during that lovely random cruise he took to see ice.

      I never doubted you for a moment, trustfund boy.


    8. Senile old fart,

      You're the one with the fire obsession, wanting to light your patio heater in Summer.

      Anyway. Threatening to light a building is a felony. Of course the police would be very interested. Defamation is a civil matter. The police wouldn't be interested (it's difficult enough getting them interested in small burglaries even when the burglar is identified by the victim).

      And anyway. Jo Nova isn't her real name. Her website is free access, so there's no damages too.

      You're still a senile old fart. I hope I'm defaming you, but I doubt it because it's true.

    9. Senile old fart,

      I own a Smartcar, because that's its name. I chose it because it's the perfect size for me. And I don't do long distances - no more than 5km.

      I doubt that your (again) uncaptioned photo is a Smartcar. They don't carry a spare wheel (unlike the squashed car with a wheel sitting in the boot) and the passenger cell is extremely rigid, so the car wouldn't concertina like the one in the photo (although it still wouldn't be survivable).

      Anyway, small cars are safe because they make the driver feel unsafe. Large cars are unsafe because they make the driver feel safe.

    10. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 8:30 AM

      bonfire: "Defamation is a civil matter. The police wouldn't be interested..."

      So what? I didn't say the police visited the ISP. The ISP handed over the "anonymous" commenter's information to the police. Apparently, you lack the brains to even understand the issue.

      You don't have the skills to be anonymous, bonfire, and if you have any brains at all, you know that is true. It is incredibly difficult to be anonymous on the internet if any government agency has any reason, civil or criminal, to identify you. Any "anonymity" you think you may have is strictly a courtesy of Google and your ISP. Read your Terms and Conditions. If you can.

    11. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 8:31 AM

      bonfire: "small cars are safe because they make the driver feel unsafe. "

      That's a keeper.

    12. Senile old fart,

      But it's also true. Drivers when they feel unsafe drive defensively.

      Anyway. The ISP isn't going to hand over details in a civil case unless requested. And who's going to ask when there isn't any damage?

      BTW - which car was in your linked image? It almost certainly isn't a Smartcar.

    13. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 9:13 AM

      bonfire: "which car was in your linked image"

      Read the URL. If you know what a URL is.

    14. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 9:21 AM

      bonfire: "Drivers when they feel unsafe drive defensively."

      So I assume you have data - "evidence" - you can refer me to showing that people who drive "unsafe" cars suffer lower overall injury and death rates than people who drive "safe" cars. I look forward to seeing it.

    15. Senile old fart,

      The URL isn't displayed on an iPad. I still doubt it's a Smartcar. Marnasleeps doesn't like Smartcars because they offend her by not taking up enough space on the roads. One of my brothers send me a similar image of a purported Smartcar after a crash from a website. With a little searching I found out that it was actually a Ford...

      Small cars are safe because they make their drivers feel unsafe comes from the Royal Automobile Club of WA. I don't have any evidence that it's true. I just drive as though driving is an intrinsically unsafe activity.

    16. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 11:58 AM

      bonfire: " I just drive as though driving is an intrinsically unsafe activity."

      It is, for you:

      Simple laws of physics sometimes dictate truths that are hard to swallow when your aim is to save fuel. Large, heavy vehicles have lower real-world fatality rates than smaller, lighter vehicles.

      That's from the website "How Stuff Works", which has no graphs to confuse you. It is a site you probably should visit more often.

    17. The Australian Prime Minister was once called 'a bastard' in the Australian Parliament.


    18. Senile old fart,

      The safety of driving also depends on distance travelled, time of day, weather conditions, whether tired or not when driving, degree of concentration and speed.

      I drive very little, always during daylight hours, on good roads (no icing or flooding in Perth), never when tired, and I never drive above the speed limit or after drinking alcohol.

      So I'm safe. I have a small car because it's the right size. I don't have your phallic complex.


      And the MP who called the PM a bastard was probably suspended. Or made to withdraw the remark. MPs can't be sued for remarks made in parliament because of parliamentary privilege.

    19. Senile old fart,

      And I've found another site with the photograph of the purported Smartcar:

      To quote from the thread:

      "While there are still very few Smart ForTwo's on American roads, other "fuel-efficient vehicles" have proven exceedingly poor performers when matched against larger vehicles".

      "This photo depicts a fatal accident in which an undersized gas-sipper (not a ForTwo) met up with a semi".

      And the image:

      Exactly the same one. Not a Smartcar.

      Pity your Internet skills don't extend beyond 'cut and paste' and random YouTube videos.

  3. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 7:16 AM

    One of Buffet's "charities" (IPAS) distributes a hand-held suction pump used to suck babies from the uterus.

    The pump, invented in 1958 by the Chinese, has been enhanced over the years and one of the latest enhancements, the Karman cannula, was invented by an unlicensed psychologist, Harvey Karman, who was imprisoned for killing a California woman by performing an abortion with a speculum and a nutcracker.

    In an interesting historical convergence, a "clinical trial" for another one of Karman's clever inventions, the "super coil", an abortion tool intended for amateur abortionists:
    [The trial] took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on May 13th and 14th, 1972. Fifteen women in their second trimester traveled from Chicago to Philadelphia, where Kermit Gosnell performed the abortions using Karman's method. A public television crew from a station in New York filmed the procedures at Karman's invitation. 9 of the 15 had complications, 3 of those with major complications.
    --- Wiki: Harvey Karman

    Karman was eulogized on his death by the Los Angeles Times:

    Harvey Karman, a psychologist and inventor who contributed to women's reproductive health by easing the pain, cost and complexity of abortions, died May 6 in Santa Barbara, Calif.
    --- LA Times (2008)

  4. There will always be rich people who want to >>reduce the surplus population<< as Ebenezer Scrooge once said to Bob Cratchet. They will always give their money to Murder, Inc, (Planned Parenthood). So why should I be fleeced to give to them as well? Are they hard up for cash or something?


  5. Bachfiend, you can chime in any time now with a lecture in Troy's general direction about libel.


  6. JQ,

    Troy is anonymous (unlike Egnor). He also didn't defame an identifiable person (unlike Egnor with Warren Buffett). And it's also difficult to see how there would be financial damages requiring redress. Warren Buffett could argue that Egnor has dissuaded some of his audience (assuming they have any money) from investing in Berkshire Hathaway.

  7. Tough shit. Freedom of speech means just that; it doesn't come with a disclaimer about hurting other people's feelings or businesses. And good for Egnor if his comments dissuade others from participation in the murder of the innocents. bachfiend, you give me the impression of a would-be totalitarian, seeking to have those who disagree punished for thought crime. But then you are an atheist so par for the course.

  8. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 9:11 AM

    Michael: "bachfiend, you give me the impression of a would-be totalitarian"

    Your impression is correct. And bonfire is one of the most disgusting kind: the trustfund socialist. The prototype is Tony Benn, British Leninist and Labour politician, who gave up his aristocratic peerage. But not his money. :-)

  9. Senile old fart,

    You're strong on mind reading aren't you? I'm not a socialist, I'm an individualist - getting me to do anything for social good if I don't want to is impossible. And what's this with 'trust fund'? Are you suggesting that my wealth is inherited? It isn't. Facts aren't one of your strong points. Brainless aspersions are though.

  10. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 11:51 AM

    bonfire: "I'm an individualist"

    And a charter member of Individualists for Gun Control, eh? Meetings sparsely attended, are they?

    bonfire: "getting me to do anything for social good if I don't want to is impossible"

    Being an asshole is different from being an individualist.

  11. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 11:54 AM

    Glad to, Popeye. Think of it as charity, as I have no doubt you have trouble doing it yourself. That's why you stink the place up. Then I'll "Dress you in your favorite widdle outfit and abandon you at a gas station."

  12. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 12:02 PM

    " favorite widdle outfit "

    Sailor suit?

  13. "Warren Buffett has given $1.2 billion to abortion groups."

    It figures.

    Well, at least we finally know what he will spend his own money on -- I'm referring to his politicing with the Dems and RINOs to force you and me to pay more in taxes, even as he very aggressively protects his own wealth and income from taxation.

    1. Ilion,

      Warren Buffett pays the legally required amount of tax. He's on record as stating that it's intrinsically unfair that he pays a lower percentage in tax than many of his employees.

      He's a major philanthropist, donating a lot of money to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

      He's also on record as advocating inheritance tax (I agree - I wonder if that's what senile old fart means when he refers to me as a 'trust fund socialist' as an insult - and neither of which are true).

  14. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 2:33 PM




    That's reel sailor talk, strait out. Navy. Right.

    What do you do in the "defense industry"? Crash dummy? Ballast?


  15. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 2:38 PM

    You know, Popeye. You better check your Turkish-to-English dictionary. You don't really have the American slang thing down.

    And homonyms. Work on your homonyms. I know it's difficult to get them strait, but it's to easy too give yourself away.

  16. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 29, 2014 at 3:22 PM

    Popeye Pooperman, here are some usages of "turgid" from an online dictionary:

    The river is a brown, turgid stream

    Any fears of unnecessary verbosity and turgidity are misplaced.

    The day I was there, the head of the OEB hearing panel was turgidly churning through a ruling

    The article is is turgid and convoluted

    Oops, pooped. Again, sailor.

    You would do better as a foreign troll to follow Trog's example and just be as much yourself as you can possibly bear. Or is it bare?

    Anyway, nobody makes fun of Trog when he says things like "that's a load of crock". Idioms are hard (but not turgid). We know he's Dutch. And he's proud of being Dutch, I think.

    Wise up, troll.

  17. Moreover, the idea he was excitedly trying to convey is the very opposite of the word he thought he was using.

  18. Senile old fart,

    I'm more of an individualist that you are. I don't belong to dictatorial organisations as you do - such as your church. I'd love to see you stand up and disagree with one of your church's just as a test. Or the NRA - why don't you announce to your fellow members, just as a trial of course, that you favour restricting guns to 2 a person, and see what happens.

    And what's this about 'trust fund'? You've made this comment several times as though it's an insult.

  19. Replies
    1. Ilion,

      Care to indicate where I'm lying? When has Warren Buffett campaigned to prevent taxation on the rich increasing?

  20. " I don't belong to dictatorial organisations as you do - such as your church."

    I think you're projecting. Every organization controlled by progressives is run like an authoritarian dictatorship. If a Christian strays from the gospel teachings, they are not pummeled in the media and given the pink slip by the Church. Whereas if someone objects to SS'M, abortion or any other socialist-communist PC pet issue, they're relentlessly ostracized by the merciless secular media, pressured to resign (so as to wash the left's hands of having to fire the employee for thought crime), demanded an apology for "hurting their feelings," pressured to undergo "sensitivity training" (i.e. brainwashing), et al. They're a bunch of crazy lunatics seeking to transform America into another Orwellian communist third-world cesspool. And you lunatics expect for us to kowtow and accept this open hostility towards ourselves and our beliefs? Go shove it where the sun don't shine.

  21. Michael,

    No. My point was that the church and NRA are dictatorial if any of its members disagree with tts core beliefs. They're totalitarian because it's disagreement with the underlying ideology.. Not authoritarian, which would be disagreement with just the leaders not ideology.

  22. I wonder if you feel the same about Americans who, regardless of political affiliation, believe in freedom of speech, expression and so forth. That people actively protect their rights is a good thing. Look at all the propaganda in the MSM, how often they use emotional ploys to use as a justification to "do something," meaning infringe upon our rights. I cannot speak for the NRA as I'm not affiliated with them; however, with regards to the RCC, people disagree all the time and yet I don't see the Church acting as "dictatorial" in response. It has a responsibility to uphold doctrine and preserve the truth, but it cannot control what people choose to believe. Rarely does it excommunicate individuals but it's certainly has the authority to do so (and for good reason).

  23. Thanks for the heads-up as I didn't catch that.