Sunday, September 21, 2008
Abortion survivor and Obama
So Obama came out with a rebuttal add:After viewing both adds I went to the actual remarks Obama made on the floor of the Illinois State Senate, you can read them on page 86 of this senate record"> I found his argument and the language he used to be very disturbing to me. You can get more information concerning the issue here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Page 86 forward presents some wonderful political jargon that demonstrates the ability to not stand for anything.
The Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) both in the Illinois and Federal legislatures was meant to make illegal death by neglect of born but unwanted infants.
These bills were opposed by the bulk of the Democrat Party because of the fact that the original bills could have been construed to say that a pre-birth fetus was a "person" that was protected by law. So, the bill in Congress was altered to address that concern by adding a "neutrality clause" that made it clear that the bill would not protect a fetus in utero.
As Obama continues to tell the tale, as a State Senator he said he voted against the Illinois bill because the Federal "neutrality clause" was not included and that therefore he could not support the Illinois bill.
Turns out he is not telling the truth about this fact. Even worse, he knows better because he was part of the legislative committee that added that very "neutrality clause" to the very bill he voted against in 2003.
In March 2003, state Senator Obama, then the chairman of the IL state Senate Health and Human Services Committee, presided over a committee meeting in which the "neutrality clause" (copied verbatim from the federal bill) was added to the state BAIPA, with Obama voting in support of adding the revision.
Yet, immediately afterwards, Obama led the committee Democrats in voting against the amended bill, and it was killed, 6-4.
Jim, thanks for posting that...I was going to, but I started feeling that I was getting close to the line of endorsement by undermining one candidates position over the other. Quite frankly I am getting more and more jaded by the lack of substantive debate and constant talking points by both parties. My initial ray of hope with the coming in of Palin has clouded over by the shallow positioning and redundant and flimsy points that the McCain camp has propped up.
There are very real differences in the party but I am finding more and more disillusionment with the future when I hear the ideas, policies and same old politicking that is going on. It seems that so much of this political race gets reduced to stuff that in the end is mere spin.
The abortion and Obama stuff really gets my goat...I was not aware of how much of an agenda he had with his views and policy stance. It's the kind of thing that only comes to the surface when you study the issues...if you let the media portray the candidates for you...you get exaggerated caricatures or deceptively fashioned doppelgängers.
Post a Comment