Conservatives Suggest Defeating Birth Control By Calling It 'Abortion'. No, really.

Found on Daily Kos, written by "Hunter":

At CPAC, some top conservative minds (stay with me here) got together to try to decide how to defeat the previously not terribly controversial law mandating insurance cover contraception. Their conclusion? Conservatives should just lie about it:

Stop talking about birth control. That was the key message from some of the most prominent leaders of America’s anti-abortion movement, speaking Friday at the Conservative Political Action Conference. During a talk on how to advance the movement through messaging, an all-female panel discussed the Obama administration’s birth-control-coverage mandate and suggested that the best way to defeat it is by calling it an “abortion mandate.” And people wonder why I lose all respect for someone when I find out they proudly proclaim themselves a member of the Republican party.

Rick Santorum On Small Government

Rick Santorum - verbatim, "They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and regulations low, that we shouldn't get involved in the bedroom or in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world." Courtesy of Fox News, believe it or not:

Necropolis Now

Paul Constant, writing for The Stranger:

And then it finally came. Iowa Republicans, in a confluence of Santorum’s relentless retail politicking and rabid anti-Romney sentiment, finally spent seven minutes in heaven with Rick Santorum—a racist, homophobic, Bible-thumping warmonger who thinks government doesn’t belong anywhere but in brown people’s backyards and in everyone’s pants. A good write up of the Iowa Caucus results and the state of the Republican Party's candidates.

Rick Santorum For President?

Rick Santorum just tied Mitt Romney in the Iowa Caucuses last night, which is hilarious for dear old Mittens. What's even more hilarious (and you're probably aware of already), is that whenever you search for Rick Santorum in Google or Bing, the website spreadingsantorum.com is usually featured in the top few results. If a concerned conservative (or liberal) voter tries to learn about Rick Santorum's policy platform or Rick Santorum for president, or even Rick Santorum's family values, said voter is instead subjected to a mental association likely to hurt Santorum's chances of winning the Republican nomination and the White House. And that is a problem for America. Why? Because spreadingsantorum.com isn't the top result. But we can fix that. This post contains a handful of keywords and phrases Santorum needs to own if he's going to direct curious voters from Google or Bing to Santorum-friendly websites. This post probably needs more (and should probably contain hostile keywords Santorum will likely buy in order to bury spreadingsantorum.com in search results), and you can add them by editing the post when you reblog it. Which you should probably do now. Go to work, Internets. via Geoff Barnes.

Rumsfeld's War Games

Digging up an old article that written by Joe Galloway courtesy of Olivier Knox:

The referees stopped the game, which is normal when a victory is won so early. Van Riper assumed that the Blue Force would draw new, better plans and the free play war games would resume. Instead he learned that the war game was now following a script drafted to ensure a Blue Force victory: He was ordered to turn on all his anti-aircraft radar so it could be destroyed and he was told his forces would not be allowed to shoot down any of the aircraft bringing Blue Force troops ashore. This topic comes up, due to to today's events. Some defiant, short-sighted conservative heckled Knox on Twitter over the reporting, claiming something along the lines that the Iranian navy didn't stand a chance at hurting the U.S. Navy ships. Knox replied, referencing this article, that this was an example of how it could be done. I wonder if the generals in the Pentagon, now that Donald Rumsfeld is gone, have bothered to plan for this eventuality?