Anti-abortion female Republican candidates could change political e...

Full story: Fox4KC

An unusually large contingent of female Republican candidates with strong anti-abortion views is heating up debate on the issue and could change the political equation in the next Congress.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of217
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Robert

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Fortunately they will run smack into the Constitution as interpreted by the supreme court when they try to put their religious views into law.

Maybe we need tea party democrats. They would be liberal on social issues like shoving your religion down a pregnant womans throat but conservative about finances and the size of government.

That would give us a little balance.
Dems Unite

Oscoda, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Obviously, an anti-Christ worshipper is more appealing to the Republican party! LOL!
Seeking truth

Dearborn Heights, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

3

3

What about Eddie Long?

http://mindprod.com/image/people/bushdancelea...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

4

4

3

More FEAR MONGERING from leftist filth.
Obama tries to EXPAND & Increase Abortions so don't expect support for his idiocy.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Robert wrote:
Fortunately they will run smack into the Constitution as interpreted by the supreme court when they try to put their religious views into law.
Maybe we need tea party democrats. They would be liberal on social issues like shoving your religion down a pregnant womans throat but conservative about finances and the size of government.
That would give us a little balance.
Democrats already have their new conscience called the DSA.

http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

Obama knows this group well and has been a speaker for them in the past ('96).

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Obama is not only Pro-Abortion, he out right wants abortion attempts to succeed with 100% Efficiency.

Obama is the Scumbag-0-crat that voted Several Times to DENY BASIC MEDICAL ATTENTION to new born Babies surviving an abortion Attempt.

He preferred they Die cold and Alone in a soiled linen closet.

FU-BO!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Obama's infanticide vote cover-Up exposed

More coming out on Obama's support for neglectful infanticide and the votes of "The Illinois Six" who voted against SB 1082 in 2003:

The National Right to Life Committee has obtained documents that prove presidential candidate Barack Obama has been blatantly covering up his actions as an Illinois state senator to actively defeat legislation to protect the lives of living, breathing babies who survive abortion attempts.

Douglas Johnson, the organization's legislative director, released the documents from 2003 this week revealing that Obama voted for a "neutrality clause" amendment to an Illinois bill requiring treatments for the tiny abortion survivors and led the charge in committee to kill the amended bill by a 6-4 vote.

"The Illinois born alive bill is virtually identical to a federal law he now is saying he would have supported had he been in the U.S. Senate at the time the bill was voted on," said Susan Armacost, Legislative Director for Wisconsin Right to Life.

The need for the legislation on both the federal and state levels was sparked by Jill Stanek, a nurse who worked at Christ Hospital in Chicago who blew the lid on the hospital's practice of inducing premature labor in women seeking late-term abortions. However, some of these babies were born breathing and alive. Eyewitness accounts revealed that babies were left on the cold counter in the soiled linen room until they died...

In 2002, the U.S. Congress responded by enacting the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) with not a single dissenting vote in either house...

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisrev...

http://www.ilga.gov/senate/committees/members...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Obama LIED about his desire for Infanticide!

"Barack Obama had the opportunity to right a terrible wrong that was occurring right under his nose," said Armacost. "But instead, he used the power of his committee chairmanship to prevent Illinois doctors and nurses to attempt to save the lives of living babies, fully separated from their mothers, leaving them to die alone - in the dark - in filthy conditions."

Obama has repeatedly stated during his presidential campaign that his votes on three separate occasions against Illinois legislation to provide treatment for babies who survive abortion attempts were because there was no "neutrality clause" and he feared that the legislation would negatively impact Roe v. Wade.

"Barack Obama is blatantly trying to cover up his infanticide votes," said Armacost. "The heartlessness and callousness of this individual needs to be exposed. The vast majority of Americans care about protecting human life. They deserve to know the truth about Barack Obama's utter disregard for human life."

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisrev...

Obama = Infanticide!

IMPEACH THE MAGGOT!!!!!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Obama's Infanticide: The facts about Obama's votes against 'Born Alive' bills in Illinois.

At issue is Obama's opposition to Illinois legislation in 2001, 2002 and 2003 that would have defined any aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.

Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 "born alive" bills as backdoor attacks on a woman's legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been "fully in support" of a similar federal bill that President Bush had signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.

We find that Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee's 2003 mark-up session.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama...

Obama voted to Deny a living breathing baby Medical Attention after surviving a brutal Abortion attempt. WHAT A PIECE OF FILTH!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Obama's Infanticide: The facts about Obama's votes against 'Born Alive' bills in Illinois.

Same Words, Different Effect?

Obama’s campaign now has a different explanation for his vote against the 2003 Illinois bill....

...The Obama campaign statement says that "Illinois And Federal Born Alive Infant Protection Acts Did Not Include Exactly The Same Language." That's true for the earlier versions that Obama voted against. In the case of SB 1082, as it was amended just before being killed, it’s false.

On the Record

While we don't have a record of Obama's 2003 comments on SB 1082, he did express his objection to the 2001 and 2002 bills.

Obama on Senate floor, 2002:[A]dding a – an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.… I think it’s important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births.

Obama on Senate floor, 2001: 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.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama...

Obama voted to Deny a living breathing baby Medical Attention after surviving a brutal Abortion attempt. WHAT A PIECE OF FILTH!
Lance Winslow

San Leandro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

2

2

RU 86 has relegated abortion to the issues minor leagues...perfect for the candidate minor leagues.
Left is Right

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

4

3

3

There's an unusually large number of far-right female nitwits in the Tea Party these days, that's for sure. ANY party (or parties) which supports the likes of Angle, Bachmann, Palin, O'Donnell, and Brewer can't be all good. Or any good at all, really.

Abortion rights aren't going to be eliminated. The American people won't stand for it. Time the anti-abortion fanatics on the right got that through their pretty little heads!
Left is Right

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

4

4

4

The laughing liberal wrote:
Obama's Infanticide: The facts about Obama's ..blah, blah, blah...Abortion attempt. WHAT A PIECE OF FILTH!
Abortion isn't "infanticide," you idiot. Stop slandering abortion rights supporters and your President. Want "filth?" LOok in your mirror.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

2

2

President files U.N. human rights complaint against Arizona

Obama is a disgrace!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Left is Right wrote:
<quoted text>
Abortion isn't "infanticide," you idiot. Stop slandering abortion rights supporters and your President. Want "filth?" LOok in your mirror.
Never said it was YOU IDIOT! ROFL!

Obama Voting to Prevent a helpless Baby from getting basic Medical Care after a failed abortion attempt; Is Infanticide, according to (D) Daniel Patrick Mohnehan.

Try READING and if you can't COMPREHEND what you read, stay silent so that we only SUSPECT that your an Idiot, instead of confirming it.
Lance Winslow

San Leandro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

3

3

2

The laughing liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Never said it was YOU IDIOT! ROFL!
Obama Voting to Prevent a helpless Baby from getting basic Medical Care after a failed abortion attempt; Is Infanticide, according to (D) Daniel Patrick Mohnehan.
Try READING and if you can't COMPREHEND what you read, stay silent so that we only SUSPECT that your an Idiot, instead of confirming it.
You expect people read your posts?

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Obama: "I never voted against giving babies that survived an abortion, medical attention"

Politi-Fact: Yes you did. At least Twice and you gave a speech about the merits of such a hideous endeavor.

Obama: "Buy, uh, uh, uh, I did that because of a missing "Neutrality Clause"

Politi-Fact: The Neutrality Clause and language, in the Legislation YOU Voted Against TWICE, was for all intents and purposes, IDENTICAL to the Federal Legislation that Passed the US Senate.
denise

Nashville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

5

4

3

You don't have to be a right wing nut nor a religious nut to find abortion on demand a repugnant option in a woman's effort to control reproduction. Although a person can legally pull the wings off a butterfly or crush a slow moving caterpillar beneath his shoe, I question the content of such a person's character, to borrow a phrase. With adoption available and just 9 months of invested time, what possibly could justify the snuffing out of another human life regardless of its stage of development? For many of us on the right, this is beyond a Constitutionally-protected right (as the right to discriminate on the basis of race was once Constituional but not moral) but about humanity.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Lance Winslow wrote:
<quoted text>You expect people read your posts?
Yes. I expect leftwing apologist to cringe and foolishly try to defend the Maggots Voting RECORD in Illinois.

Seems you and will have been schooled on this matter. Who's next?

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Wake Forest, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Sep 23, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Obama is no moderate: His radical position on 'abortion' after birth

By ABRAHAM KATSMAN
Recently, Hillary Clinton presciently warned that she would be the best Democrat presidential candidate because she's already been "vetted." Now, that's not necessarily a good thing for Mrs. Clinton considering her (and her husband's) checkered past. But she does have a point when it comes to Barack Obama, the new, fresh, moderate-sounding, wildly popular-and largely uninvestigated-frontrunner candidate. And, as it turns out, pro-abortion radical.

Reasonable people may differ in their opinions regarding abortion and thorny questions of precisely when life begins. But once a baby is born, even prematurely, there is across-the-board agreement that a new human life exists. Certainly, there is no longer any threat to the health of the mother. Abortion is no longer an option, as there is no longer a pregnancy to terminate.

So, what are we to make of Obama's votes against protecting the right to life for living babies who have survived attempted abortions?

Earlier this decade, such living, breathing, babies who survived labor were "shelved" - left to die and disposed of with other medical waste, or were "aborted" - killed outside the womb. The practice was ultimately banned by unanimous Congressional votes, as even the most pro-abortion Senate Democrats - including every defender of partial-birth abortion - recognized that killing these breathing babies is no longer abortion in any real sense.

It crosses the line; it is infanticide. Yet, incredibly, Obama repeatedly worked to deny these living babies any right to life.

Obama's position essentially boils down to this: a woman who contracts for an abortion is entitled, one way or another, to a dead baby.

A dead baby must result, even if that baby had already been a distinct living being. The killing of some live babies is just part of the price we must pay in order to keep the sacred right to an abortion supreme and absolute, beyond any shadow of a doubt.

What kind of principle is this?
What core value is Obama expressing?
What extremist doctrine or interest is he defending? And how doctrinaire must one be to defend actual infanticide?

This goes well beyond any reasonable advocacy of a woman's "right to choose;" it attacks a living baby's right to life.

His position is not simply "pro-choice;" it is radically anti-life. It is, in fact, pro-death.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of217
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••