Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (510716)	10/1/2012 2:05:03 PM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794221

Under the guise of upholding abortion rights, Barack Obama could favor denying legal protection to babies after they are born and the press wouldn’t bat an eyelash. In fact—he did. In the Illinois legislature, he opposed the “Born-Alive Infants Protection Act” three times. The bill recognized babies born after attempted abortions as persons and required doctors to give them care. Obama’s stalwart opposition to the bill came up during the 2008 campaign, and his team responded with a farrago of obfuscation and distortions. The bill was supposedly redundant. Except it wasn’t. Protections for infants who survived abortions were shot through with loopholes, which is why the bill was offered in the first place. (Abortion doctors were leaving infants to die without any care.) The bill was supposedly a threat to abortion rights. Except it wasn’t. Obama opposed a version that stipulated it didn’t affect the legal status of infants still in the womb. About a year after his final vote against the bill, Obama gave his famous 2004 Democratic convention speech extolling post-partisan moderation. But he couldn’t even bring himself to protect infants brutalized and utterly alone in some medical facility taking what might be only a few fragile breaths on this Earth. Some moderation. The federal version of the bill that he opposed in Illinois passed the U.S. Senate unanimously. Some post-partisanship. President Obama is an extremist on abortion. He has never supported any meaningful restriction on it, and never will. He opposed a partial-birth abortion bill in Illinois, even as the federal version passed the House with 282 votes and the Senate with 64 votes and was signed into law by President Bush in 2003. He arrived in the U.S. Senate in time to denounce the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the ban. politico.com Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80013.html#ixzz284Ve7Gbp

To: Neeka who wrote (510716)	10/1/2012 9:06:29 PM
From: simplicity	7 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794221

All I can tell you is that the excerpt I posted came, verbatim, from an article in the October 1st issue of National Review. I have been reading N.R. for more than thirty years and I have never found the editors to post anything irresponsible. With that said, I, too, would like to hear a transcript of what Obama said (not that I doubt N.R.'s sources, but I'd like to know the exact quote(s)). If you like, I will provide you the name of the article so that you may e-mail N.R. and inquire (I am at my office now and don't have it here with me). A semi-related aside ... our township's financial administrator and I have lunch together maybe every other week. She is a sweet, honest, hard-working woman, but not very interested in 'politics', so we rarely talk about anything political. During our lunch a couple of months ago, the topic of abortion came up (can't recall under what circumstances), and she said to me, 'It bothers me how so many people misunderstand President Obama's beliefs on abortion.' I asked her to elaborate, and she said, 'I saw him on Oprah (there's a clue for you right there) when he was running for president, and when she asked him if he was pro-abortion he said no he definitely is not, but it is his job to uphold the laws of the country which make it legal in many cases.' I put down my sandwich, looked her in the eye, and proceeded to tell her about his Illinois senate vote on the Born Alive Act, his support of partial birth abortion, his description of an unwanted fetus as a 'mistake'/'punishment', etc. Fortunately, she is very receptive to information, so she drank it all in. And, since then, I occasionally have been forwarding her information on Obama's countless crimes against the Constitution and the American people that are generally not reported by the mainstream media. She thirsts for that kind of thing, but finds it nowhere in her general, haphazard sources of 'information'. Multiply this woman by tens of millions of voters who want to 'do the right thing', but for whatever reason have not done their homework -- and add in mainstream media whose cheerleading for this president no longer knows any bounds -- and the results of this election, should Obama win a second term, will not be a mandate regarding his performance his first four years, but instead will be a testimony as to how effective the constant drumbeat repetition of blatant lies is in determining the future of freedom worldwide. If an average American believes as fact the repeated lies (be they regarding abortion or any other national issue) of a pathological liar, and sees Oprah Winfrey as a reliable podium, our republic is in deep peril.