May 16, 2019

Wait, are these African-American community leaders accusing Planned Parenthood of targeting a black neighborhood to push rampant abortions while trying to hide what really goes on in their clinic from the public?  Why, this is unprecedented!

And that’s how I would illustrate the term “sarcasm” to a non-English speaker.




I told you briefly why this little-noticed, seemingly dull Supreme Court decision was actually a ground-shaking game-changer that will send shock waves through the liberal establishment.  Here, Peter Skurkiss at The American Thinker makes the same observation in greater detail.

Commentary continues below advertisement


A new anti-abortion law passed by Alabama legislators was signed Tuesday by Gov. Kay Ivey, who said, “To the bill’s many supporters, this legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians’ deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God.”


The Alabama Human Life Protection Act is very strict, including 99-year prison sentences for doctors who perform abortions that aren’t necessary to save the mother’s life, and no exceptions for rape or incest.  As I wrote yesterday, for all the media outrage, even the lawmakers who passed it don’t expect it to go into effect.  Gov. Ivey even explained that it’s similar to a longtime Alabama abortion ban that was rendered unenforceable by Roe v. Wade, and is probably just as unenforceable.  Supporters expect opponents will immediately get a federal judge to put a stay on it, and hope that will set up a court battle that will lead to the Supreme Court reconsidering Roe v. Wade.


Opponents know that’s the strategy, as well, so it’s worth bearing in mind when you hear all the hysterical reactions that it’s largely political theater. Both sides know the law won’t go into effect unless the SCOTUS alters or overturns Roe V. Wade, and all the fury on the left about it is really disguised fear of that possibility, not concern that this particular law will actually be enforced.  


One question is whether this law is the right way to challenge Roe v. Wade.  Even the Rev. Pat Robertson thinks it’s too extreme and is likely to lose in court.


But the bill’s creators wanted it to be extreme to insure that it did get challenged. The hardline aspects such as prison for abortion doctors might be viewed as the type of items you demand when you’re going into deal negotiations and ask for things you know you won’t get just so you have something to give up while preserving what you really want. Whether that kind of Trumpian “Art of the Deal” strategy will work in dealing with the Supreme Court remains to be seen. 

Commentary continues below advertisement

In the meantime, the pro-abortion sector is reacting to this and other, less extreme recent state moves to limit abortion in ways similar to the reaction you get by whacking a beehive with a baseball bat.  One reaction to the Georgia “heartbeat” law was so ridiculous, it was condemned and mocked by all sides.  That was actress Alyssa Milano’s “Lysistrata”-style call for women to go on a “sex strike” until the Georgia law is repealed.  So far, that appears likely only to harm her own husband (assuming he is, as she puts is, a “cis male.”)  But even he claims it’s not serious.  Or hopes it isn’t.


That story also points out one of the favorite straw man fallacies of the pro-abortion lobby: that the pro-life position is just about men wanting control over women’s bodies.  It’s actually about concern over the life of a third, separate and distinct human being: the baby growing in the woman’s body.  Calling on women to go on a “sex strike” for abortion would never work because polls show a slightly larger percentage of women than men are pro-life. 


And as some opponents pointed out, they were glad to see Milano admitting that sexual abstinence is an effective method for preventing abortions.


Another specious pro-abortion cliché being trotted back out is the claim that pro-life people only care about babies before they’re born and do nothing to help children or single moms after birth.


To put that to rest once and for all, here’s what happened when an author on Twitter challenged pro-lifers, “What have you personally done to help single mothers?  I’ll wait.”  She didn’t have to wait long.  At last check, the responses were closing in on 3,000.  They were far more generous and charitable than the standard pro-choice response: “I help single mothers by making sure their babies can be dismembered.”

Commentary continues below advertisement



Dear Miss Mannerly:

I wrote to you a while back, wondering if I should change some of my behavior that I know seems kind of weird, such as making huge gestures with my lanky arms and jumping up on bar counters and tabletops to make speeches, so I’d be able to get this really, really super-powerful job I want.


Sure, I might be able to go for the same job later in my life, but by then I probably wouldn’t have my youthful Kennedy-esque looks. In fact, come to think of it I might end up looking less like Robert Kennedy than an older, heavier Ted Kennedy, which wouldn’t do the trick. So it’s gotta be now!


Before I took this little break I’ve been on, I was already getting tired of making apologies for everything. You said that I might not be very well suited for this major job I’m after and might want to try something else instead to fulfill myself, like maybe joining a little theater company, but after spending lots of time driving around and communing with the trees and furry creatures and occasionally eating some special dirt, I still haven’t changed my mind about wanting this job! At least I don’t think I have. Oh, I don’t know, I’m just not sure. No, I think I do want it. Probably. Yes!


Anyway, so after sort of spectacularly flaming out, I decided to “reset” and change my personality to try to get this job, which I still really, really want because it would be so cool. I’m smiling a lot but I think I also know when I’m supposed to pull a serious face to show how much I care about people less privileged than me, like all the people south of the Rio Grande, who should all just cross on in and live right here in the good old USA, every last one of them, getting free health care and free, well, everything! Because that’s who we are!


I still find myself doing a lot of apologizing, though, maybe even more than I did before, mostly for things I can’t even help, like being white and male and wealthy and on the cover of VANITY FAIR. But I’m learning and making some changes! For example, this time around, instead of doing something really dumb like livestreaming video of myself in the dentist’s chair getting my teeth cleaned, I got wise and livestreamed a video of myself getting a haircut and talking about needing my ear hair trimmed. Very different. (And it was a lot easier to talk this time!) That should show I’m a serious contender! I sent it to you so you could see...


Miss Mannerly, my question to you is, do I have to keep apologizing for being white and male and privileged? Those things are not going to change, so when have I apologized enough? Just so you know, there are plenty of other white, male, privileged competitors for this job. More of them almost every day, in fact! Although one is gay, so I guess he doesn’t have to apologize as much as the rest of us do.


Gentle reader:

Miss Mannerly believes that what she told you before about your career still stands. You would do much better and be more fulfilled in another sort of position, and since you’re already well-off and don’t actually need the money, the possibilities are endless.


Perhaps you’d like to be a forest ranger, or a gardener (since you like dirt) or even a long-haul trucker, as I remember you like to hit the roads. Or, considering your physical build and exaggerated movements, have you ever thought of studying tap dancing with Tommy Tune? If all else fails, you could hire yourself out as one of those “wacky inflatable arm-flailing tube men” and travel to breezy shopping center parking lots all around this great country. You would be much happier, I’m sure, doing any one of those things, as it occurs to Miss Mannerly that you and the other white, male, privileged individuals vying for this job will NEVER be able to apologize enough.



Dear Miss Mannerly:

I haven’t been arrested yet –- and if life were fair I would never, ever see the inside of a jail cell, as I am literally THE MOST moral person you could ever find, especially here in Washington DC –- but there’s increasing talk of my actually going to prison, maybe, at some point. I leaked some information and may have broken some laws, they say, but if that’s what I did it was totally justified, Miss Mannerly, believe me. I am just about the only one around here who still has his soul intact, and, speaking humbly from the heart, I think they should be giving me a medal and a parade for the things I did.


Other people are just so...weak. I stand tall and anyone can see I am head and shoulders above the rest. Still, I hear that a lot of material is going to be declassified very soon and it doesn’t look good for me and a number of my colleagues.


Anyway, Miss Mannerly, my question to you is this: As I am very tall --- I mean, VERY...tall --- does that mean I should take the bottom bunk and let my cellmate have the top? If I’m on the top bunk –- which, admittedly, I would prefer –- my legs and feet will hang down quite far over the edge, which will just be ludicrous and might irritate my cellmate, who for all I know will be a former co-worker of mine. (Gee, I hope it’s not the guy I trashed in a speech the other day; that would be awkward.) But if I sleep on the bottom bunk, my cellmate surely will trip over my outstretched legs in that small cell and fall flat on the cold concrete floor. Speaking as the most moral human being in the entire world –- perhaps the only person who’s ruled by moral absolutes –- I want to do the right thing as always. So, top or bottom bunk?


Gentle reader:

Miss Mannerly wonders if perhaps with this strange letter she is being hoaxed. (Some things are actually discovered to be hoaxes, you know.) But she will play along, and suggests the bottom bunk for you, only because it might lend a touch of humility.


Also, with your kind permission, she has perhaps a more important question for you: How will your cellmate sleep at night with that constant glare from your halo?



Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Comments 1-9 of 9

  • rodney burke

    05/17/2019 01:25 PM

    well dummies! Roe vs wade is NOT a law, it's a curt decision. Last time I checked a SCOTUS does NOT make laws. They make decisions BASED on law. All these POC libs are screaming over nothing. And yes, this SHOULD be a state decision. not a dem decision. Now is it too strict?, I think so from a rape POV. What if the man has HIV or syph? What if the man and woman are NOT RH compatible? Is that gonna be ignored? What about if the mother is impaired in some way? Mentally retarded, dying of a disease? is that going to be ignored. I think they need to go back and amend that bill. I don't think an OB/Gyn physician was consulted in this matter and they should be.

  • Nancy Leone Schriver

    05/17/2019 11:50 AM

    I absolutely adore Miss Mannerly!


    05/17/2019 11:34 AM

    With all of the hype on the abortion laws - I wonder why there isn't any discussion on "the night-after" pill to prevent pregnancy? Birth control? I believe abortion is wrong as a means to avoid pregnancy; however, it doesn't feel right to burden a victim FOR LIFE with a child that is the product of incest or rape. The "victim" is reminded daily of that trauma. It takes two to create pregnancy; why is it always the woman's fault ??? Women can obtain IUD's (yes they don't always work). Men should also share the responsibility to avoid pregnancy and use condoms (also not fool-proof). A man's demand for "satisfaction" tends to outweigh his ability to say "NO".

  • Amelia Little

    05/17/2019 11:19 AM

    Miss Mannerly is always filled with (real) dry humor! As for the last letter, I just heard that he was bemoaning what AG Barr and Special Counsel Mueller have determined as the outcome of the kangaroo court. One should certainly remind him that Mueller was HAND PICKED by him and other democrats, and he )mueller) hand picked a panel of democrats, anti-Trumpers, pro-hilarys, big democrat/hilary donors. That being said, what this "most moral" individual is complaining about is that an investigation into the Trump/Russia hoax would negatively affect him. It seems what he is most worried about is that all this will destroy his "legacy." Legacy of what, would be a good question, because it seems he has been underhanded and crooked for some time now. I can't think that his legacy as it stands is positive. PS--I think the solution about which bunk to take is easily solved. How about solitary confinement for at least as long as Paul Manafort had to endure whilst waiting for his "trial." Problem solved--no roommate to worry about whether tripping over his legs or his perhaps getting a backlash if the roommate is a former co-conspirator whom he has dissed and thrown under the bus.

  • Anita Mae Barker

    05/17/2019 04:29 AM

    In spite of all the convolutions over abortion, I remain against abortion for any reason. Bless you.

  • Anne Amato

    05/16/2019 10:56 PM

    Dear Governor,
    Your commentary regarding abortion was excellent (as are all your columns). I have what I believe is a miraculous personal story regarding this issue, but won't share it here.
    However, I just wish to say that it is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception....after all....what will the result be...a bear, or giraffe, or...gazelle? No...the end result is a human being. And it is also my personal belief that God endows that life, at conception, with a soul (heartbeat or not).....after all...a heartbeat is only one placemark in the development of God's gift of human life.
    At my age, I should probably not be surprised by much....but the lack of concern by people who are pro-abortion (regardless of the reason) is so....disheartening.
    I found myself considering an analogy: What if? What if God used a different method of communication? What unsuspecting female went to the mail box, and a letter clearly recognizable as a congratulatory on their pregnancy--and that letter was from God? And....inside the letter was information about this new soul...this new gift to humanity.
    How many females would just take out a pen, mark it "Return to Sender", and place it back in the mail to be returned to God....unopened? How many would read it, and then return it?
    When the final end comes for those who have had abortions....will they meet the soul-child they discarded? How will they feel then? And how will they answer to God?
    And...although abortion was not legal in my day...I would not have considered it at all. My two children...were the real, tangible, and (by far) the most important miracles of my life.....such indescribable gifts! Was raising them challenging at times? Yes. Work at times? Yes.. Requiring patience sometimes? Of's called "being a parent".
    Even "special needs" children are gifts from God. If anyone has ever seen a person with Down's Syndrome smile...the innocence, the light in their eyes....and their smile..... is enough to light up the world.
    My infinite sadness is many "letters" have been returned to God? How many truly great gifts has humanity missed because of those returned to Him?

  • GAry Stilwell

    05/16/2019 07:46 PM

    Comment on the rekindled abortion issue---
    This one is going to be somewhat controversial----
    A lot of the opposition to the abortion issue is housed in the claim that it is a woman's/female's/ladie's/non-male's right to do to their body what they want. This is not the issue--the woman/female/lady/nonmale can commit suicide if they want, but they can't kill another human--they currently don't have that right.
    I propose that any woman/female/lady/non-male can kill the child they are carrying anytime-even after birth. This process will do three things--
    1. It will eliminate a human who will necessarily be raised without any semblance of moral character(since the mother had none in the first place, and will pass this trait on to the youngling)
    2. It will prevent the Human Species from degenerating to a point that they are incapable of procreating the species.
    3. It will potentially stop the "de-Evolution" of the Human species(although I seriously doubt this is enough to stop it)

  • Linda Hebert

    05/16/2019 07:41 PM

    Absolutely loved Laura's Miss Manner's letter to O'Rouke! LOL, LOL, LOL! Laughter does wonders for the heart and soul! Thank you Laura and thank you Governor Huckabee! Just what we need for times such as these! God Bless you!

  • Melana L MacLeod

    05/16/2019 06:56 PM

    I do believe Alyssa Milano may just be on to something. Think about it....if all the women went on a "sex strike" we wouldn't have the need for abortions now would we! I think it's a fabulous idea!