I know some of you won't like the source, but relax, it's just an op-ed piece.

 

 

On Monday, Senator Obama uttered one sentence that could haunt him until Election Day. He said of Senator McCain and Governor Palin telling voters they would bring change, “they must think you’re stupid.” Given his stances on the surge, social issues, and his past, Mr. Obama will regret those words.

 

Let’s start with social issues like Second Amendment freedoms. Mr. Obama denies that he’s ever supported banning handguns, right after the landmark Heller case where the Supreme Court struck down Washington D.C.’s handgun ban.

 

When a 1996 questionnaire surfaced that had asked if Mr. Obama supported banning all handguns, his one-word written answer was “yes.” He said an unnamed staffer must have filled it out without his knowledge. Then another copy surfaced — this one with his handwriting on it. He says he must not have read that particular question. Sure.

 

On the hot-button issue of abortion, last month saw a growing concern over Mr. Obama’s opposition to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which states if an abortion is botched and a live birth results, the baby is entitled to medical care. The federal version of this law unanimously passed the U.S. Senate.

 

However, when a version of this bill came to the Illinois Senate, Mr. Obama opposed it. When confronted last month with the fact that the federal version of this bill had been supported by the likes of Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, Mr. Obama said the he would have supported the federal version. Those suggesting otherwise were lying, he said. Then it was revealed that a second bill was introduced in the Illinois Senate, and this one was identical to the federal version. Mr. Obama opposed that bill as well. He has yet to come up with an explanation on that one.

 

Link to the rest of the article.

I know some of you won't like the source, but relax, it's just an op-ed piece.

 

 

On Monday, Senator Obama uttered one sentence that could haunt him until Election Day. He said of Senator McCain and Governor Palin telling voters they would bring change, “they must think you’re stupid.” Given his stances on the surge, social issues, and his past, Mr. Obama will regret those words.

 

Let’s start with social issues like Second Amendment freedoms. Mr. Obama denies that he’s ever supported banning handguns, right after the landmark Heller case where the Supreme Court struck down Washington D.C.’s handgun ban.

 

When a 1996 questionnaire surfaced that had asked if Mr. Obama supported banning all handguns, his one-word written answer was “yes.” He said an unnamed staffer must have filled it out without his knowledge. Then another copy surfaced — this one with his handwriting on it. He says he must not have read that particular question. Sure.

 

On the hot-button issue of abortion, last month saw a growing concern over Mr. Obama’s opposition to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which states if an abortion is botched and a live birth results, the baby is entitled to medical care. The federal version of this law unanimously passed the U.S. Senate.

 

However, when a version of this bill came to the Illinois Senate, Mr. Obama opposed it. When confronted last month with the fact that the federal version of this bill had been supported by the likes of Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, Mr. Obama said the he would have supported the federal version. Those suggesting otherwise were lying, he said. Then it was revealed that a second bill was introduced in the Illinois Senate, and this one was identical to the federal version. Mr. Obama opposed that bill as well. He has yet to come up with an explanation on that one.

 

Link to the rest of the article.

 

 

You do realize that over 60% of the American population supports a woman's right to choose?

 

These are the only two issues you got . . . holy cow, and they impact my daily life how???

You do realize that over 60% of the American population supports a woman's right to choose?

 

These are the only two issues you got . . . holy cow, and they impact my daily life how???

What percentage of the American people support infanticide? The US Senate voted 98-0 to require hospitals to provide medical treatment to living, breathing newborn babies who are victims of unsuccessful abortions. Obama voted against an identical bill in the Illinois Senate.

 

This is the man who wants to foist his version of national health on this country. When McCain decides to educate the general public on this issue through paid political ads, I am guessing that the number of people who will be appalled at Obama's action will be substantially higher than 40 percent. Infanticide is not just another surgical procedure.

Once again, abortion is not even one of the top five issues in the presidential race. I don't know why so many people get hung up over it when it's time to elect a president.

Show me one place where Obama says he supports Infanticide??? You can't, you will never be able to do so, it won't happen. You and Sean Hannity can say it every chance you want, but the American people are not buying it. If it really was the case then Hillary would have used it and won, and John McCain would have already used it and won. Read the bill in its entirety and compare it the national one that WE ALREADY HAVE. Then, tell me if the bill was as pure as you believe and if it did anymore than the national bill. If that is the case I will listen to your argument, but I have not found that to be true.

Show me one place where Obama says he supports Infanticide??? You can't, you will never be able to do so, it won't happen. You and Sean Hannity can say it every chance you want, but the American people are not buying it. If it really was the case then Hillary would have used it and won, and John McCain would have already used it and won. Read the bill in its entirety and compare it the national one that WE ALREADY HAVE. Then, tell me if the bill was as pure as you believe and if it did anymore than the national bill. If that is the case I will listen to your argument, but I have not found that to be true.

The bills are virtually identical and even the Obama campaign has given up on the explanation that Obama opposed the Illinois version because it lacked the language of the federal law. The campaign's new explanation, adopted after a copy of the Illinois bill surfaced along with a record of the committee vote, is that Illinois already had a law that required hospitals to provide medical care to infants.

 

I have already posted links in a previous thread comparing the Illinois bill with the BAIP act. I understand that many Obama supporters simply avoid what they view as Obama "bashing" threads but this will become a major issue before election day and Obama knows it. That is probably why his campaign is putting so much effort into destroying Palin instead of focusing on the top of the Republican ticket.

 

If you believe that the two bills are different, then please make your case by comparing and contrasting the last bill that Obama helped defeat in his committee to the federal law that passed the Senate by a 98-0 vote. Please, show me where I am wrong. (I have already posted the bill, so the ball is in your court.)

What percentage of the American people support infanticide? The US Senate voted 98-0 to require hospitals to provide medical treatment to living, breathing newborn babies who are victims of unsuccessful abortions. Obama voted against an identical bill in the Illinois Senate.

 

This is the man who wants to foist his version of national health on this country. When McCain decides to educate the general public on this issue through paid political ads, I am guessing that the number of people who will be appalled at Obama's action will be substantially higher than 40 percent. Infanticide is not just another surgical procedure.

 

Are you sure on the bolded? Why would the Illinois state senate need to pass an identical bill that had already been passed?

Lets assume all of the above is true. You think this is going to cost him the election by itself?

The bills are virtually identical and even the Obama campaign has given up on the explanation that Obama opposed the Illinois version because it lacked the language of the federal law. The campaign's new explanation, adopted after a copy of the Illinois bill surfaced along with a record of the committee vote, is that Illinois already had a law that required hospitals to provide medical care to infants.

 

I have already posted links in a previous thread comparing the Illinois bill with the BAIP act. I understand that many Obama supporters simply avoid what they view as Obama "bashing" threads but this will become a major issue before election day and Obama knows it. That is probably why his campaign is putting so much effort into destroying Palin instead of focusing on the top of the Republican ticket.

 

If you believe that the two bills are different, then please make your case by comparing and contrasting the last bill that Obama helped defeat in his committee to the federal law that passed the Senate by a 98-0 vote. Please, show me where I am wrong. (I have already posted the bill, so the ball is in your court.)

 

I noticed the change in this post (first bolded) from my last, so you can ignore my last post.

 

Second bolded part...when did this new explanation come about?

The bills are virtually identical and even the Obama campaign has given up on the explanation that Obama opposed the Illinois version because it lacked the language of the federal law. The campaign's new explanation, adopted after a copy of the Illinois bill surfaced along with a record of the committee vote, is that Illinois already had a law that required hospitals to provide medical care to infants.

 

I have already posted links in a previous thread comparing the Illinois bill with the BAIP act. I understand that many Obama supporters simply avoid what they view as Obama "bashing" threads but this will become a major issue before election day and Obama knows it. That is probably why his campaign is putting so much effort into destroying Palin instead of focusing on the top of the Republican ticket.

 

If you believe that the two bills are different, then please make your case by comparing and contrasting the last bill that Obama helped defeat in his committee to the federal law that passed the Senate by a 98-0 vote. Please, show me where I am wrong. (I have already posted the bill, so the ball is in your court.)

 

 

This was the clause added to the Illinois state bill that passed after Obama left that was not present on the Federal bill.

 

Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affect existing federal or State law regarding abortion.

 

Obama's argument from the beginning has been about the Constitutional implications of bill.

 

I think it’s important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births.

 

Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – a child, a nine-month-old – child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute.

 

Obama's guilty of flip-flopping on his reasons for not supporting the bill. Infanticide? Nope.

Are you sure on the bolded? Why would the Illinois state senate need to pass an identical bill that had already been passed?

Obama voted against the bill containing the language that, until recently he had claimed was missing and cited as the reason that he opposed the bill. The language was missing the first two times that he voted against it (or "present") but it was included the third time that he voted against it and the bill was defeated in committee by a 6-4 vote.

 

Here is a link containing details. Please do not complain about the source. As I said in my previous post, after accusing his critics of lying, the Obama campaign has dropped Obama's original defense. In other words, Obama blatantly and repeatedly lied about this issue until Nation Right to Life released proof that he had been lying.

 

National Right to Life White Paper:

 

Barack Obama’s Actions and Shifting Claims on the Protection

of Born-Alive Aborted Infants -– and What They Tell Us About His Thinking on Abortion

And, just to be clear, I do not support abortion, Obama's votes here, or his handling of it. I'm sick of reading the red herring "infanticide" in every thread.

Obama voted against the bill containing the language that, until recently he had claimed was missing and cited as the reason that he opposed the bill. The language was missing the first two times that he voted against it (or "present") but it was included the third time that he voted against it and the bill was defeated in committee by a 6-4 vote.

 

Here is a link containing details. Please do not complain about the source. As I said in my previous post, after accusing his critics of lying, the Obama campaign has dropped Obama's original defense. In other words, Obama blatantly and repeatedly lied about this issue until Nation Right to Life released proof that he had been lying.

 

National Right to Life White Paper:

 

Barack Obama’s Actions and Shifting Claims on the Protection

of Born-Alive Aborted Infants -– and What They Tell Us About His Thinking on Abortion

 

When was the National Right to Life White Paper released?

This was the clause added to the Illinois state bill that passed after Obama left that was not present on the Federal bill.

The Illinois Senate passed the same bill that Obama killed in committee the previous year.

 

Obama's argument from the beginning has been about the Constitutional implications of bill.

Obama has been claiming for at least the entire campaign that he would have supported the bill had it contained the language that he claimed was missing. The bill did contain the language that he claimed was missing and he voted against it.

 

Obama's guilty of flip-flopping on his reasons for not supporting the bill. Infanticide? Nope.

Guilty as charged. He had three opportunities to support a bill requring potentially life saving medical treatment to newborn babies who had been victimized by a botched abortion procedure and he opposed it three times. The excuse that he gave matched the facts for the first two votes but he got caught lying about the content of the final version of the bill that he helped kill.

 

I am not accusing Obama of committing infanticide, just failing to prevent it when he had the chance. 98 US Senators showed good judgment on this issue. Obama did not.

When was the National Right to Life White Paper released?

Follow the link. I started a thread not long after the National Right to Life released the marked up bill and the committee vote tally.