Hannity nails Obama and Planned Parenthood
On October 20, 2008, Hannity’s America aired an expose on Barack Obama’s collusion with Planned Parenthood.
Hannity reviewed PP’s legal troubles including falsifying building documents in IL (including a clip of an interview with Chicago PP’s Steve Trombley), covering up rape in OH, and its general willingness to accept donations specifically to kill black babies.
Hannity also took the opportunity to remind viewers of Obama’s opposition as state senator to IL’s Born Alive Infants Protection Act and replay BornAliveTruth.org’s Gianna ad.
Great segment…
[HT: LesforLife]
Oct.21, 2008 3:00 pm |
Uncategorized |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Looks like Hater Hannity and FOX/GOP are desperate to throw out more recycled last minute smears against Obama, since Ayers and Wright, which Hannity has mentioned every 3.2 seconds for the past year have proven to have no traction beyond the Faux News Fanatics.
So much hate, so little time…
wow PPC, talk about hate: you just spew it….
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2008-06/39580853.jpg
Obama as a child with his grampa.
No hate here. I just thoroughly enjoy seeing the GOP and their puppets at Fox completely desperate, believing that one more anti-Obama smear will save the day for McCain/Palin, when their negative campaign has already lost them the election, and the respect of most Americans.
PPC, next time watch the video you’re reviewing before you type. After you’ve watched it, spell out specifically what would be “smears.”
Wow, Hal, talk about family resemblance!!
That’s a cute picture.
Wow, so now in addition to eating fetuses directly from pregnant women’s wombs, Obama is responsible for the successful opening of PP’s Aurora clinic (or as Jill calls it, Auschwitz). Coming up next on Fox News, Obama wants to force you to marry a homosexual!
Jodie Foster for President 2016! No joke.
Kudos to Sean Hannity and FOX!
Correction needed – the alias used by PP was Gemini Office Development, not Gemini Office Management.
The Ban-Abortion movement is a scam.
Any serious strategy for accomplishing anything must include a way to measure how successful it is. Would you support building a moon-rocket, with no way to communicate or monitor the flight? How about buying some land–I can sell it to you real cheap provided you promise never to visit it or make any effort to verify it’s really there.
An abortion ban would make it impossible to verify its own success. It would invalidate not only itself but also all other strategies to reduce the abortion rate and the abortion ratio.
It would replace the current abortion rate not with a smaller number but with a never-changing question mark.
n the other hand, which candidate is more likely to pursue SERIOUS strategies for preventing abortions? Three quarters of abortion patients are motivated, at least in part, by money concerns. How about a medicare-type program for pregnant women and kids?
It comes down to which you want more: to have the President parrot your line about the rights of The Unborn Baby, or to save unborn babies. “Life” vs life. Isn’t there something about worshipping a symbol in the Bible? The Golden Calf thing?
I hate to break it to you, “truth”, but our government has run out of money to give away. We don’t pay killers not to murder born victims, or robbers not to rob born victims, do we?
If legal protection is good enough for born people, it is good enough for unborn people too.
Well, Jill your “infanticide” smear against Obama has been debunked by FactCheck.org, the Chicago Tribune, and every other objective observer.
Claims about the “false building documents” in Aurora have failed before the City Council and the courts. Eric Scheilder lost his lawsuit and is facing having to pay PP $300,000 in attorney’s fees for his legally frivolous claims.
Since none of these claims have any substance or credibility, and have failed when tested before the courts I characterize them as “smears”.
Doyle, you wrote: “If legal protection is good enough for born people, it is good enough for unborn people too.”
Ummmmmmm, no. It’s much easier to get away with an illegal abortion than with a murder. Toilet-disposable body and no mysterious disappearance for friends and relatives to complain to the cops about.
And if as you say we’re too poor to provide health care, then we’re also too poor to spend money enforcing an abortion ban.
PPC,
PP Aurora admits on tape they tried to keep their entrance into Aurora a secret (Did you watch the clip?).
There’s no disputing that. It’s a fact not a smear.
I’m rather enjoying Hannity’s further descent into crazytown. Pretty soon he’ll be the star of Wing Nut Daily. It’s the only “news” org I can think of with less credibility than Faux News.
“PP Aurora admits on tape they tried to keep their entrance into Aurora a secret (Did you watch the clip?).”
Who can blame them? As long as it’s legal, I have no problems with individuals or groups keeping secrets.
Janet 5 pm, could it be PP used a pseudonym to protect their personnel and the public from violence by a bunch of dangerous nutballs?
They filed the permit under a FALSE name. That should be illegal. Its disgusting how they can get away literally with murder and lies.
PP Aurora did not file for the permit under a false name. Gemini Office Development is a legitimate and legal entity.
Liz,
“Its disgusting how they can get away literally with murder and lies.”
No one gets away with anything…
Bobby, we can always repent on our deathbeds…..
That’s right, Hal. Please, never forget that, my friend.
Gemini Office Development is not the name of the company that occupies the space is it? No, its a false name to cover for the REAL business that occupies the space. And their business is killing unborn children, indoctrinating teens and young adults into promiscuous lifestyles, and continuing Margaret Sanger’s mission of destruction of minorities.
Bobby: You’re right.
Also Hal, I wasn’t implying that all those people are going to go to hell. As Catholics, Liz and I believe that there is always some form of retribution for sin in either this life or the next, for both the saved and not saved. There is no sin that does not have its “consequences” so to speak.
There is no sin that does not have its “consequences” so to speak.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at October 21, 2008 5:52 PM
Well, I probably agree with that too. Some call it Karma. Life does seem to catch up with us. I know I paid some price for “sins” of my youth. Best to you.
Wow. Even the FOX/GOP network has noted the implosion of the McCain/Palin campaign, and the many incumbent GOP senators and representatives that will likely go down with them.
Palin announced in an interview with a local NBC affiliate today that as Vice President she will be “in charge of the Senate” and thus be able to dictate policy. Palin is being allowed to do MORE interviews, so hold on to your hat!
Gemini Office Development is not the name of the company that occupies the space is it? No, its a false name to cover for the REAL business that occupies the space.
Liz, when you see an office building do honestly think that the occupant of the building is, or must be, the same entity that built it?
Surely you’ve heard of things called “leases” before…or “tenants”….or “landlords?” Do you not have those things in Nebraska?
Gemini was a developer and general contractor who built a medical office building that was then leased to PP. Do you have developers in Nebraska? General contractors?
It is outside of PP’s mission to work as a general contractor or developer, hence the subsidiary, Gemini. Get it?
Granted, one of the added benefits, and I’m sure one of the main considerations, of utilizing Gemini to purchase and develop the property was to keep the crazies from doing what the crazies do (that is, harass the contractors and their families), but it certainly wasn’t illegal.
Boy, Jill, as soon as you post anything decrying ‘The Messiah’, the Obots are upon it like glue from all corners using fancy names and they try to one-up the others in the skill at skewering what you wrote.
Obama voted against, people died. That’s the truth.
?p?sn?uo? os ?? ?o? ??,no?
The community was angered when it learned that a building, which was permitted and constructed under the fictitious name “Gemini Medical Center,” was really a Planned Parenthood abortion mill.
some in the community wer angered.
We look at the grossest evils perpetrated by Planned Parenthood, and, instead of being horrified, we attack the messenger with charges of smear mongering or worse. Why? because our newly anointed Messiah can simply do no wrong. When I see all that I shiver for our country’s future. Wake up people before you wake up in chains.
“in chains?” come on now.
It’s an election between a fairly moderate republican and a fairly moderate democrat. No one will be in chains.
The community was angered when it learned that a building, which was permitted and constructed under the fictitious name “Gemini Medical Center,” was really a Planned Parenthood abortion mill.
Wow, so many lies in one teeny tiny little paragraph.
A. The “community” wasn’t angered. How do I know this? I am a member of that community. True, certain members of the community were angered. I like to refer to them as “the Brother/Sisterhood of the Perpetually Offended.”
B. There was nothing “fictitious” about Gemini. As noted previously, it was a legitimate and legal entity acting as a developer and GC.
Feel free to continue lying though, since it has no effect on the actual truth, and seems to make you happy by feeding your perpetual outrage.
PPC, 6:08PM
Certainly you heard that Obama’s own VP candidate, Joe Biden, has expressed concern of an impending terrorist action to “test” our young, green, inexperienced president, should Obama indeed be elected. Apparently Biden does not have this concern if McCain is elected.
Does Biden know something we don’t? Why does he suggest an Obama presidency may invite attack?
World despots are evil but they’re not stupid. They know who they can test and will.
But worry not. Our inexperienced leader will have the support and guidance of his already apprehensive VP who now assures us that Colin Powell’s endorsement is proof enough of Obama’s ability to weather any crisis. How comforting.
Keep talking Joe and maybe you’ll even convince yourself.
I wonder how Joe Biden knows this? And then he realized the press was in the room when he was talking and probably regretted his words immediately.
Mary:
Interesting to note Biden has been no where to be seen today. I wonder why? Is the Nobama campaign planning on hiding him now until election day?
I was appalled at Biden saying such things. He is almost creating a crisis himself, by telling enemies of the US that they will have to do things most citizens will not like.
Biden needs to go back to talking about that three letter word j-o-b-s
But back to the subject at hand. I’m so glad Sean is exposing Nobama for the person he really is.
I heard on Fox today that a video has turned up on the internet with girls, teenagers for the most part but EVEN YOUNGER saying how wrong Sarah Palin is. One, predicitably brought up the abortion issue and said its up to her and her parents what she would do if she was raped and got pregnant. Another one was a young girl, maybe 6 or 7 saying that Sarah has no business telling her what she can read. I’m quite sure Sarah said nothing of the kind! And besides, since when did we have videos of MINORS singing for Nobama, and saying the things they are about Sarah?
They filed the permit under a FALSE name. That should be illegal. Its disgusting how they can get away literally with murder and lies.
You know lots of companies have d.b.a relationships. The actual name of the company is one thing but the marketing name is another. For instance the Unification Church writes a daily Washington D.C. paper under the name “The Washington Times”.
PPC: the GOP and their puppets at Fox completely desperate, believing that one more anti-Obama smear will save the day for McCain/Palin, when their negative campaign has already lost them the election, and the respect of most Americans.
How many times have we seen such an approach fail? Many…..
Duh,
Gemini was a developer and general contractor who built a medical office building that was then leased to PP. Do you have developers in Nebraska? General contractors?
It is outside of PP’s mission to work as a general contractor or developer, hence the subsidiary, Gemini. Get it?
Where do you find your facts?
Yo la Tengo,
You changed your name. No more Tangos?
Interesting to note Biden has been no where to be seen today. I wonder why?
Obama gave him a timeout.
Ha! Janet – “time out” – could be….
“Also Hal, I wasn’t implying that all those people are going to go to hell. As Catholics, Liz and I believe that there is always some form of retribution for sin in either this life or the next, for both the saved and not saved.”
Yeah, I guess I can’t say that Obama is definitely going to Hell. Maybe 1,000,000 years in Purgatory will keep him out of there.
Fr. Mitch Pacwa once said that it seems to him that a fitting divine punishment for being a pro-choice politician would be that before the politician gets to Heaven, he has to stop and explain to the soul of every aborted fetus why he supported legal abortion. Once he’s spoken to every single one, then he can enter Heaven.
Sorry to disappoint you. Biden’s still on the campaign trail:
“Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden embraced America’s angst this afternoon, empathizing with their worries about their jobs, mortgages and children’s future.”
http://www.coloradoan.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081021/WINDSORBEACON/310210020
Father Mitch Pacwa is so cool…
John Lewandowski, that’s a great idea! Especially to the babies that were aborted for minor disabilities (like cleft lip or club foot) and for disabilities that they can’t control (Downs Syndrome).
Maybe 1,000,000 years in Purgatory will keep him out of there.
Purgatory is SO Council of Trent.
“Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden embraced America’s angst this afternoon, empathizing with their worries about their jobs, mortgages and children’s future.”
http://www.coloradoan.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081021/WINDSORBEACON/310210020
Posted by: hal at October 21, 2008 8:57 PM
Hal,
They forgot to add: and the angst of people’s worries about terrorism due to an inexperienced empty suit that will have no idea what to do when an international crises happens except to hide out. (Joe said this you know)
I guess people will just have to hang in there while providing comfort to their neighbors and gird their loins all while wondering why the poll numbers are down as Americans are being terrorized by countries that are so small they don’t pose a threat. Or so the Nobama thought.
Where do you find your facts?
Posted by: Janet at October 21, 2008 8:40 PM
Court filings, the City of Aurora attorney reviews of the issues, etc., etc. They removed the lawsuit to federal court at one point, and you can access that if you have a PACER account. Also, Openline blog (local Aurora blog) had a lot of the material posted in pdf format at one point. So did the City of Aurora. Much of it is probably still posted out there somewhere if you care to do some googling.
Anon was me.
They filed the permit under a FALSE name. That should be illegal. Its disgusting how they can get away literally with murder and lies.
You know lots of companies have d.b.a relationships. The actual name of the company is one thing but the marketing name is another. For instance the Unification Church writes a daily Washington D.C. paper under the name “The Washington Times”.
Posted by: Yo La Tengo at October 21, 2008 7:36 PM
Gemini wasn’t a d.b.a. It was a wholly owned subsidiary, and a separate corporate entity.
More thuggery from Obama supporters….steal a McCain sign, get a free pizza.
http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7687558&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.11.1
Wow, so now in addition to eating fetuses directly from pregnant women’s wombs, Obama is responsible for the successful opening of PP’s Aurora clinic (or as Jill calls it, Auschwitz).
Not responsible but he put his two cents in favor of the obfuscation and decitful practices used to manipulate their way into the city without even the city council knowing Planned Parenthood was opening up in the middle of a residential are and next to the local Dominicks.
Sorry to disappoint you. Biden’s still on the campaign trail:
Posted by: hal at October 21, 2008 8:57 PM
Actually, Hal, I would be disappointed if Biden did not go back on the campaign trail.
I want to hear him talk more about that three letter word…. j-o-b-s.
And speaking of jobs, Biden said the Presidency is not the place for on the job training. He was talking about your hero, Nobama, when he said that.
Not to mention his remarks about guaranteeing a world crisis if Nobama gets in.
So keep talking Joe!
Thuggery, Jasper?
That’s a fantastic word. :D
Hey guys. This is WAY off topic, but I just started a new website that has absolutely nothing to do with abortion! It’s about parenting in Austin. Here’s the thing. I know just about nothing about web design, and what I’ve done thus far is my feeble attempt. I need input! Please take a look around and give me some advice.
Just click on my name to go to the site. :)
Well Blarg. Someone else has made a much better version of my idea. Oh well.
Joanne,
Absolutely, I hope Biden keeps talking. He just keeps getting better and better. From telling a paralyzed man to stand up, to “president” FDR on national TV in 1929, to his three letter word j-o-b-s, to informing us how his inept and inexperienced partner will be tested by terrorists. Hey, maybe he finally got it right.
“truth” speaks: “Ummmmmmm, no. It’s much easier to get away with an illegal abortion than with a murder.”
And that is relevant to the morality of the killing in what way, exactly?
“truth” speaks again: “And if as you say we’re too poor to provide health care, then we’re also too poor to spend money enforcing an abortion ban.”
Where do you think the money is going to come from to pay (bribe) women not to abort? Money to enforce the laws of the land are already allocated, no “new money” is needed. But If it iwas, then which class of murders would you want to stop investigating? Oh wait, I know the answer to that one…..
Posted by: Duh at October 21, 2008 7:04 PM
Boy, does that name fit you!
I’m a member of that community also. You must not crawl out of your house very often or you would have seen the multitude of signs that say “Planned Parenthood bad for Aurora.”
The community IS angered. Mayor Weisner pushed this through knowing full well what Gemini REALLY was. You are deluded.
Sorry, Ray, purgatory existed in Vat Council II as well and goes on existing today to, I suppose, your own consternation and disappointment. In fact, it is assumed that those who kill the lives intended by their Creator will have to make up, undergo all the struggles, sufferings, etc. that they would have met in this life of testing if they had lived as intended…sooooo, maybe not eternity in hell for those who “repent”, from the heart, if possible, on the death bed, but that doesn’t free them up from satisfying the justice that is cried out for by the blood of the aborted in which they had a hand.
And yes, it is frustrating for the just and caring to witness the lies and killing that appears to be now accepted by a possible majority of voters within a now sick, heart hardened culture who will freely use their sacred right of voting to place a sick personality to rule over them. They will drink the Kool Aid finally when they walk into the voting booth and willingly face then the suicide of the soul of a blessed nation. They will then have to cheer on (as Biden proposed) any deadly decisions made by an inexperienced, empty suit known for truly immoral judgements in his past. They too will be culpable for they knew all of this and still voted for it. They will have to stand behind and for the coercion and prosecution of the morally minded in this “brave new future” they’ve created to their own demise as well.
And, btw, did anyone see the interview of Sarah Palin by one of the representatives of the now “elite” excuse for a media? She confronted the interviewer (and his colleagues/accomplices) with the fact that Biden’s scary projections re: Obama’s likely evil world testing due to his inexperience and consideration by our enemies as weak, have gotten, as expected, a pass by this media. She leaned over to him and said that if she had said the same she would have been pummeled by same media…and guess what…he simply agreed with her. No more shame! Nothing sacred! IOW, “sin makes you stupid” and shameless and its own accomplice now without excuse!
The Ban-Abortion movement is a scam.
On the other hand, which candidate is more likely to pursue SERIOUS strategies for preventing abortions? Three quarters of abortion patients are motivated, at least in part, by money concerns. How about a medicare-type program for pregnant women and kids?
Posted by: Truthsetfree at October 21, 2008 4:20 PM
+++++++
Are you aware that Obama voted against extending medical coverage to the unborn children of pregnant mothers who WANT their children?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2094376/posts
http://www.wrtl.org/blog/index.php/2008/10/09/obama-votes-against-program-extending-health-care-to-include-prenatal-care/
Do you know about the all-out war against Crisis Pregnancy Centers, which exist only to help pregnant mothers with this exact problem? These outreach centers are constantly being attacked by pro-aborts trying to discredit them. Since when has it been a crime to help a pregnant mother with the OTHER choice? How is that called “pro-choice”?
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=290564
Get informed, will ya?
KC @ 8:26,
….She leaned over to him and said that if she had said the same she would have been pummeled by same media…and guess what…he simply agreed with her….
Hah! Good for Sarah! I love that woman!
Kristen @ 8:18,
Thank you.
OBB (Obama the baby butcher), the Arab from Illinois has promised to make this extermination his highest priority and first act:
“Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms;everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall….The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
The only problem I have with this video, is that it took almost ten (10) pages to find on search.com, whereas, it should be the number one item on search engines considering its importance to this election.
OBB (Obama the baby butcher), the Arab from Illinois has promised to “not yield” on exterminating black babies in following Margaret Sanger’s, founder of Planned Parentless, extermination policy.
Margaret Sanger stated:
“We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Margaret Sanger also stated: “Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.”
way to raise the level of discourse Ms. Gould. Welcome.
What, Hal…Ms. Gould’s language is too frank for you? If you’re going to continue to defend the murder of human beings, you should really grow a pair.
Not “frank” to repeat the old canard of “arab” and the new canard of “exterminate.” What a load of crap. Seriously, this site attracts some real loathsome people.
Everyone except you, right Hal?
Now who’s the elitist?
No, not everyone at all. Not even you ;)
So tell me, Hal, why do you classify poor Ms. Gould as a “loathsome” person? What is it about a collection of words accurately describing the killing of innocent human beings that so deeply disturbs you?
Is Patricia Gould a “loathsome” person because what she wrote is inaccurate? If so, please be specific about what is inaccurate about her words.
Is Patricia Gould a “loathsome” person because what she wrote does not support your position on abortion, but in fact makes you uncomfortable because it threatens your beliefs in some way? If so, please explain further.
Is Patricia Gould a “loathsome” person because the words she used are hurting people’s feelings who may have had an abortion, may have been involved in aiding someone to have an abortion, or who may be an abortionist themselves? If they have done nothing wrong, then what do they have to be ashamed of? Wouldn’t Patricia Gould’s words fall on deaf and righteous ears if they believed themselves to be completely blameless? If not, why not?
You GO Patty…tell it like it is…just between you and me, the pro-aborts can’t STAND it…it drives ’em up a wall.
PG and PJ I love the smell of desperation in the morning….
PPC I love the sound of typical Democrat overconfidence and bravado just before an election. It’s music to my ears. Really. It is.
In fact, I’m going to read “The Tortoise and the Hare” to my boys before bed tonight. Excellent lesson in life, that story.
While I would not call the woman loathsome, I found Patricia Gould’s post loathsome in that she usues the outdated term “Arab” in an offensive manner. Not all Muslims are terrorists, you know. Many of them are good people, and most of them are pro-life.
And Barack Obama is not a Muslim, though I find it sad that people like Patricia Gould consider that an insult. I wouldn’t call him a Christian, either, but that’s what Obama considers himself to be.
PJMama,
If hal is so offended by the truth about OBB’s (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois record, as to call me “loathsome,” Honorable U.S. Supreme Court Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, and Alito thought the extermination by Haskell was loathsome, and yet OBB actively supports Haskell’s extermination.
The words, concerning Haskell’s extermination of that baby were quoted directly from the U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion, written by Honorable Justice Kennedy and joined by the above listed Justices which case Planned Parentless fought for, argued for, and lost all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case is known as Gonzales vs. Carhart or known as Gonzales vs. Planned Parentless.
OBB has said he will put in more U.S. Supreme Court Justices like the ones that approved of Haskell’s extermination of that young baby.
Bee,
If you want to challenge my statements, do so in truth.
I never called OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois a Muslim.
I posted he is Arab, and in the case you are ignorant of the truth, this is OBB’s racial descent, OBB is 50% white, 43.25% Arabic, and 6.25% African Negro. 12.5% is the legal threshold one must prove to claim racial status under the law.
Alert to all prolifers in the Illinois Fox Valley/Kane Co./Dupage Co. area, judge who backed PP to go after local prolifers who were slandered and accused of violence is on the ballot asking yes or no whether to be retained for another term. Democratic State Rep. and U.S. Rep. are touting that they are endorsed by PP. Please spread the word.
Then why didn’t you call him a caucasian/Arab/African Black? Why would you use his ethnicity as a slur, regardless of what it is?
I may have been mistaken in thinking that you were using the term “Arab” meaning Muslim, as I have heard many people do recently, but I still find it loathsome you would use someone’s ethnicity, regardless of what it is, as an insult, as I do believe you have done.
Is Obama even eligible to be placed on the ballot? Why aren’t people more aggressively demanding proof? Wading through this link below, it’s unconscionable that this history is largely either unknown by most or literally prevented by media and political thugs from seeing the light of day in the greater media:
The Obama Timeline:
http://colony14.net/id41.html
“If Obama did not relinquish his Indonesian citizenship and become a naturalized U.S. citizen, he remains an Indonesian citizen, and has not been a U.S. citizen since moving to Indonesia in 1966 or 1967. Thus, he is ineligible to be President of the United States. (He is also ineligible to be a United States Senator.) Obama’s repeated failure to provide documentation to prove he is a U.S. citizen suggests it does not exist, and he is therefore possibly perpetrating a colossal fraud on the 300 million citizens of the United States. Obama may, in fact, be an illegal resident alien, subject to expulsion from the United States Senate, arrest, and deportation to Indonesia. [258,300]
…….
“In an article in the Jakarta Post of November 29, 2006, Julia Suryakusuma, a long-time friend of Obama’s mother and an outspoken feminist writer, states that Obama could run for President of Indonesia; it is assumed she means that Obama retains his Indonesian citizenship; because Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, Obama cannot be an American citizen if he has not renounced his Indonesian citizenship. [120
………
“A lawsuit is filed in the State of Washington demanding that the Secretary of State obtain proof that Obama is eligible to be President of the United States or remove his name from the November 4 ballot. [307,331]
…….
“The Cloward-Piven method is to push society into an economic collapse, thus forcing a fear and resentment of capitalism, making it easier to usher in socialism. The Cloward-Piven strategy is one of the tactics used by “community organizers” (e.g., storming welfare offices and violently demanding immediate action) to impose intentional strains on the system, like forcing the hiring of more government workers to deal with their ever-increasing demands. [327]
……
“Obama learns from the Alinsky crowd the method for getting people to support radical change they would ordinarily not be willing to accept. “They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future.” [192] Thus, just as it has been the theme of most Democrat Presidential campaigns over the last 30 years, so is it Obama’s: “Everything is terrible and headed in the wrong direction, your lives are in shambles, greedy capitalism is at fault, and you need to trust a bigger government and my plans to solve all your problems.”
………….
“Obama continues to refuse to provide the media with school records, passports, college theses, law school records, law firm clients, medical records, Illinois State Senate files, and other documents about his record.
Original birth certificate – not released
Obama/Dunham marriage license – not released
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license – not released
Soetoro adoption records – not released
Besuki School application – released
Punahou School records – not released
Selective Service Registration – released
Occidental College records – not released
Passport (Pakistan) – not released
Columbia College records – not released
Columbia thesis – not released
Harvard College records – not released
Harvard Law Review articles – none
Baptism certificate – none
Medical records – not released
Illinois State Senate records – none
Illinois State Senate schedule – not released (alleged to have been lost)
Law practice client list – not released
University of Chicago scholarly articles – none [23,29,56,186,239]
Bee,
OBB’s (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois racial descent is important only in the fact that he calls himself “black” which he cannot legally do. In other words, OBB is ashamed of his own Arabic descent, and is lying about his heritage.
If you want to take offense in the word “Arab”, you should take offense in the fact that OBB is the one shaming his Arabic background.
Of great concern is OBB’s ties to Arabic terrorists like Ayers. How anyone can vote for OBB when his attachments are so tightly linked to terrorists is beyond me.
On this one issue, I will agree with you that it is surprising that OBB actively supports Margaret Sanger’s, founder of Planned Parentless, extermination policy of the blacks since he is from Arab descent. As for OBB’s religion, who cares?
It is OBB’s baby extermination policies and record that cause me great concern as an American.
OBB has no leadership except in extermination.
OBB has zero governmental leadership, and is far less qualified, as a leader, than Governor Sarah Palin.
In fact, his own running mate BBB (Biden the baby butcher) and Hillary Clinton have both clearly stated that OBB is not prepared to be Commander-in-Chief.
I was not aware that Ayers was of Arabic descent? Is this true?
Not that it matters, but is that really his ethnicity?
KC,
You asked if it is the media that is preventing the truth to be known about OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois, and this much I do know. The Minneapolis Star Tribune is actively removing pro-life, pro-McCain/Governor Sarah Palin posts. A liberal didn’t believe me, and tested what I said by posting a post of mine verbatim with his/her login. The liberal’s post remained, whereas, my exact post was removed.
ABC news, this past March, removed 50+ pro-life posters with well articulated comments on an article on Planned Parentless.
Patricia,
Take heart. When McCain/Palin win the election, the victory will be all the more sweet in the knowledge that the enemy did all within their power (media, ACORN, etc.) to cheat their way in, to no avail.
The silent majority will prevail, as always. We’re just biding our time.
Bee,
I find it puzzling that you are not upset at OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois lying about his descent which is obvious he is ashamed of, but you can attack me for stating the facts.
OBB has lied about being “black” to win sympathy from black voters and to falsely accuse those who won’t vote for him, knowing his baby extermination record, as racists, and his mis-use and lie about his racial background is apparently just fine with you. In other words, you are angry with the truth.
I note that you suggest OBB is not Christian. That is not for you to decide, but factual data which debunks OBB’s lie, about his descent, is proper to bring to light.
Also proper to bring to light is OBB’s baby extermination record which shows he promises to continue the legacy of racist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parentless who made her life’s effort to exterminate black babies. As you can listen for yourself, to this video, the majority of Planned Parentless clinics are in minority neighborhoods.
It should concern blacks that OBB has promised to “not yield” on fulfilling Margaret Sanger’s extermination legacy.
12.5% is the legal threshold one must prove to claim racial status under the law.
Posted by: Patricia Gould at October 22, 2008 12:06 PM
This is just whacked. Most ignorant thing I have ever read anywhere. It’s simply and utterly untrue.
Bee, my typo about Ayers descent, and I also inadvertently left out my name on a comment.
It does not matter what descent Ayers is now does it?
What matters is that Ayers did not believe that enough destruction was done to America, when he stated: “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” in his book, Fugitive Days.
It is not Ayers who is lying about his descent, it is OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois.
Ayers is not being vetted for the office of President, it is his close friend, OBB who should be being vetted but who is being protected from being vetted.
hal,
OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois is not black just because you want him to be.
I note that you did not refute OBB’s baby extermination record nor his Arab descent that OBB is lying about.
Here is more of OBB’s baby extermination record compared to real life parents”
The New York Sun posted a story on its website, by staff political reporter Russell Berman on the evening of August 17th, which stated in part: “Indeed, Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday when he said the federal version he supported ‘was not the bill that was presented at the state level.’ His campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate …”
There are parents who, as their baby battles for his life, being delivered 15 weeks prematurely, simultaneously fight for their baby’s life.
Then there is former Chairman OBB of 2001-2003 who objects to a bill because it defended the proposition, “A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.”
There are parents who save their 1 pound, 7 ounce, 12 inch baby who was delivered at 24 weeks and 6 days whom professionals give only a 65% chance of survival.
OBB voted to deny medical care to babies born alive after abortion — a bill too extreme even for Nancy Pelosi.
OBB:
“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.”
There are parents, who when their baby needs heart surgery, agree to the needed operation.
Then there is OBB who kills SB 1082 in 2003 which bill would have passed the Illinois Senate if Chairman OBB had not killed it in his committee.
There are parents who, when the baby is diagnosed with pneumonia, parents agree to the necessary medical attention.
Then there is OBB who presides over the meeting at which the Illinois bill was transformed into a clone of the federal bill, and then votes down the bill.
There are parents, who after 96 days in the NICU, take their baby home.
Then there is OBB who, in 2003, Obama took a position on the abortion-survivor legislation that was more extreme than any member of Congress of either party.
There are parents like Governor Sarah Palin who has a baby with Down Syndrome and calls her five (5) children blessings.
Then there is OBB who voted against an identical bill to the one I above posted, when he was an Illinois Senator. The language in the Illinois bill contained language identical to the federal act. Where, on the floor, of the Illinois Senate, OBB gave a speech attacking the bill (being the only senator to speak), OBB applying his reasons for attacking the bill as being applied to SB 1095 (the BAIPA). OBB voted present to bills which were deemed to pass only with an absolute majority which operative effect of the “present” vote is the same as a “no” vote – a tactic recommended by his local Planned Parentless, in Illinois.
OBB, is aggressively for the same cause as Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parentless who once said:
“We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Margaret Sanger also stated: “Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.”
OBB promised Planned Parentless in July 2007 that his “first act” as President would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act which would mean the end of every state and federal regulation of extermination, and the end of all restrictions on government extermination funding.
By referring to Barack Obama as “Arab,” and making no reference to his other ethnicities, how is that any different than him calling himself black??
Bee,
You have not addressed OBB’s (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois record which is the material point here. All you want to talk about is whether or not OBB is a Christian and why he should be allowed to lie about his race. Why?
Is it because OBB’s baby extermination record and promises are so horrific and because OBB has no leadership qualities to lead our nation?
Is it because Governor Sarah Palin is far more qualified to lead our nation than OBB?
Patricia Gould, I am PRO LIFE. That is why I am not addressing the issues in your post that I agree with!
I am telling you that throwing out ethnic terms as if they are insults is not going to help the pro-life cause any. It is only going to succeed in making us look like a bunch of hysterical racists. At least that’s how it’s going to make you look.
Jeez.
Ongoing Federal case against Obama, claiming he lacks qualifications to be President since he is not a natural born citizen:
http://obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/1-main/31-new-video-posted-at-you-tube-details-the-issues-in-berg-v-obama
obamacrimes.com
Obama/DNC are attempting to delay it or get it dismissed. Must not have the documentation to show his qualification is natural conclusion. Media won’t even acknowledge that this case has been to the courts now for some time! People need to demand Congress look into this and order discovery to be made. This is massive!
KC,
You asked if it is the media that is preventing the truth to be known about OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois, and this much I do know. The Minneapolis Star Tribune is actively removing pro-life, pro-McCain/Governor Sarah Palin posts. A liberal didn’t believe me, and tested what I said by posting a post of mine verbatim with his/her login. The liberal’s post remained, whereas, my exact post was removed.
ABC news, this past March, removed 50+ pro-life posters with well articulated comments on an article on Planned Parentless.
Posted by: Patricia Gould at October 22, 2008 12:28 PM
This is totalitarianism at its best. Liberals who won’t tolerate any view other than their own. No prolife groups on campuses in Canada, letters to the editor distorted so that they don’t make sense (happened to me in the 1970’s in Canada), human rights tribunals that force people to have the liberal view otherwise they lose their businesses, are fined heavily etc.
This will be the new world order – it’s just taking a little while to get around to everyone….
Recently Henry Morgantaler, an abortionist who admits to over 100,000 deaths, was given the Order of Canada.
I wrote a letter to my local paper about this, and it was ignored. The paper wont publish it, because of course its a pro life letter. And I expressed my dismay and disgust at this “award.”
So much for free speech! It’s free it is agrees with their point of view.
Joanne: this has been going on for years in Canada.
I heard on the news today when I was driving my daughter to a doctor’s appt that Katie Couric was asking Sarah Palin where she got her information from. The newcaster was ridiculing Palin because *gasp* she didn’t mention one single newspaper. Of course not you nitwit! Who would get their information from the rags put out everyday that spout liberal propaganda. I only hope Prime Minister Harper has the guts to gut the CBC.
Patricia: I agree with you, although I think CTV is even worse than CBC.
I absolutely cant stand CNN (Communist news network) any longer. Yesterday I called my cable provider and switched over to Fox news.
Joanne: I see the University of Guelph has denied accreditation to the prolife group on campus.
The club’s accreditation was pulled in the wake of their “Life Fair,” in which pro-life speakers addressed the audience and pro-life signs and images were displayed. Life Choice describes their group as “committed to proclaiming, celebrating and defending the dignity of all human beings from conception to natural death by educating people about pro-life issues.”
The CSA, which governs the pro-life student group, stated that the pro-life activities of Life Choice were in violation of CSA policy. According to an official CSA memo posted on a student’s blog, these rules state that one of the rights afforded to female students is “the fundamental right of all women to control their bodies,” including “access to safe, reliable birth control and family planning information and the right of choice in the method” and the “freedom of choice choosing one’s stance in the matter of abortion.”
“[Life Fair] wasn’t pro-life, it was anti-choice. Many of the documents distributed were anti-choice. It was a clear violation to CSA policy and rights to students and women,” Joel Harnest, CSA’s Human Resources Commissioner, told the Ontarion, the university’s newspaper. The CSA claimed that the Fair constituted an “unsafe space” for women due to the “misinformed and/or misleading” information promoted.
we are sinking more and more into totalitarianism and the incredible thing is we don’t know it.
it is like the frog in the pot of warm water….
Oh I cant tell you how sick I am of hearing “pro choice” and the “right of all women to control their bodies”!
It’s awful what has happened in our country. No abortion laws whatsoever! Its hard to even get Christians to believe what is happening to our country.
We are standing idly by and doing nothing.
Last Sunday in my church there was a petition for people to sign against the legalization of prostitution. While I dont want it legal either, its not as important as abortion. I mentioned to a couple of people we need a pro life petition.
At least people involved in prostitution willfully made that “choice”… no such choice for the unborn innocents!
@ Joanne: i hear ya sister
“Oh I cant tell you how sick I am of hearing “pro choice” and the “right of all women to control their bodies”!”
I understand. I turn, I’m so sick of people who want to restrict the right of a woman in the first trimester to have an abortion, who think Christianity is relevant to anything, or want to vote for McCain. I’ll handle it though. Takes all kinds I guess.
The heart begins to beat in the first trimester. The baby is alive. This is medical fact.
we know that Liz.
“Oh I cant tell you how sick I am of hearing “pro choice” and the “right of all women to control their bodies”!”
I understand. I turn, I’m so sick of people who want to restrict the right of a woman in the first trimester to have an abortion, who think Christianity is relevant to anything, or want to vote for McCain. I’ll handle it though. Takes all kinds I guess.
Posted by: hal at October 22, 2008 6:08 PM
yeah, I guess the truth hurts eh Hal?….
doesn’t hurt me…I’ve been smiling since that glorious day McCain picked Palin
hal,
me too.
The tone is improving. We’re coming together as Americans.
For Hal.
Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.
Matthew10:29
So don’t be afraid, you are worth more than many sparrows.
Matthew10:31
Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God.
Luke12:16
Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don’t be afraid you are worth more than sparrows.
Luke12:7
Patricia (the original): FYI, there is a pro-life group on campus here in Lethbridge and some sort of pro-life organization around town. I forget what it’s called.
In any case, there is not an absence of pro-life activism and it isn’t as though it’s squashed out. It’s here. Even in Canada.
Carla, very nice. I had no idea sparrows were so popular in the Bible.
Patricia of the OBB: Obama’s father was from Kenya. How does this make him an Arab? Of African descent, maybe, but Arabic, no. Not even slightly. President Bush, who fancies himself close pals with the Saudis, is more Arabic than Barack Obama.
http://oddculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/bush_saudi2.jpg
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l176/musiclover1992/BushSaudiKing.jpg
“It’s awful what has happened in our country. No abortion laws whatsoever!”
Wrong, Joanne. Per Wikipedia:
>The United States Supreme Court decisions on abortion, including Roe v. Wade, allow states to impose more restrictions on post-viability abortions than during the earlier stages of pregnancy.
>As of April 2007, 36 states had bans on late-term abortions that were not facially unconstitutional (i.e. banning all abortions) or enjoined by court order.
>Also, 13 states prohibit abortion after a certain number of weeks’ gestation (usually 24 weeks).
abortion= excommunication from the body of Christ
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm
“Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.”
Hal,
God takes care of even the smallest of creatures including the sparrow. You are compared to the sparrow in the Bible. He takes care of sparrows, He will certainly take care of you. He knows when one tiny bird falls out of its nest, of course He knows your every concern.
Those verses have brought great comfort to me in some very trying times.
Patricia (the original): FYI, there is a pro-life group on campus here in Lethbridge and some sort of pro-life organization around town. I forget what it’s called.
In any case, there is not an absence of pro-life activism and it isn’t as though it’s squashed out. It’s here. Even in Canada.
Posted by: Leah at October 22, 2008 9:52 PM
Leah, I’m sorry but you are wrong. The Alberta situation is just not representative of the rest of the country. Alberta is the last holdout mainly because it has a more conservative media and it’s strong rural roots.
Since the Canadian Federation of Students is vehemently proabortion, they are supporting those university’s not allowing prolife groups on campuses across Canada. Guelph no longer has one, prolife debate was stifled at York earlier this year, Carleton University has no prolife group and neither does Lakehead Univeristy-both were banned, Memorial University in Newfoundland also has no prolife group – again banned.
BC’s Capilano College had to go through the human rights commission to make sure it would be allowed on campus.
Just FYI: CFS had this successful motion at the May 2008 meeting:
“Be it resolved that member locals [of the CFS] that refuse to allow anti-choice organizations access to their resources and space be supported. And further, be it resolved that a pro-choice organization kit be created that may include materials such as a fact sheet, buttons, contact information for local pro-choice organizations and research on anti-choice organizations and the conservative think-tanks that fund them,”
Free speech in Canada has been dead a long time…
It’s interesting to note that they think that “conservative think tanks” fund university prolife groups… we wish!
Carla, you are so sweet. Those verses have brought me comfort many times over the years as well.
Bee,
The only issue of race is why is OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois ashamed of his race?
Why does OBB keep calling himself black when he’s an Arab?
Why does OBB hide what he is?
Is there a bigger issue, perhaps, a legal issue?
hal, You posted: “The tone is improving. We’re coming together as Americans.”
Really? Is that why long-time Democratic Lynn Forester de Rothschild has departed from OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois stating he’s taken the Democratic party “too far to the left” and “will continue to”.
Is that why this top Hillary Clinton fundraiser has thrown her support behind and endorsed McCain?
Is that why Rothschild accuses the Democrats of becoming too extreme?
Is that why Rothschild states that McCain will lead the country in a centrist fashion?
Rothschild was a member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee.
Patricia Gould, per my posting above, where are you getting the Obama is an Arab nonsense? His father was from Kenya…not even remotely Arabic. He was born in the USA…as American as you and me. So what gives? Who is spoon feeding you this Arab pap?
Ray, his father was a Kenyan Arab. Not that it matters, but that’s what Patricia is referencing.
Ray,
Federal law requires that to claim a minority status, you must be at least 1/8 of the descriptor (i.e. 12.5% ). OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois, claiming to be African is half the legal threshold. Obviously, OBB could not be Americas first African president.
OBB proclaims his ethnic identity is African, “and it is the ethnic identity he craves. Without it, he is just another mixed race Caucasian Arab with an African influence playing on his skin’s pigmentation.”
OBB is “50% Caucasian, that from his mother.”
OBB’s father was ethnically Arabic. OBB is 43.75% Arabic
OBB has only one (1) relative ethnically African Negro – a maternal great-grandparent (OBB’s great-great grandparent, thus the 6.25% ethnic contribution to OBB’s ethnic composition.). OBB is 6.25% African Negro from his father’s side.
“Why do you think he has an Arabic name? Why does his father have an Arabic name? Why does every ancestor on his father’s side have an Arabic name?”
“The answer is obvious: They have Arabic names because his father’s side of the family tree is Arabic.”
“Need proof? Research the Kenyan records for yourself. You will find that his father was officially classified as “Arab African” by the Kenyan government.”
To tell the truth means OBB “will have to admit that which he has never been forced to admit before, even in the face of the massive lies of his autobiography”: OBB’s “entire projection of who he is, and what he is, is a lie.”
OBB “would have to say to the world: “I am not what I’ve told you I am. I lied to you in my autobiography when I told you I am black. I lied to the Admission Committee at Harvard so I could get in. I lied to my constituents in Chicago so I could get elected to the State Senate. I lied to my constituents in Illinois so I could get elected to the US Senate. I lied to my supporters across America so I could be President.
“I have lied all during my life to play the race card, and use it, cynically, to advance myself by playing upon the racist presumption of Americans to accept, without question, that anyone of color is African”.
Kenneth E. Lamb
Ray,
No, there is no proof OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois is American. There is no proof OBB was born in America. As a matter of fact, his grandmother says he was born in Kenya. Only natural born American citizens can become President of the U.S. under the U.S. Constitution. OBB refuses to provide proof of his birth certificate to a court case that has ensued requesting proof that OBB is an American citizen. The DFL has joined with OBB in blocking the proof and is hiding behind legalities and technicalities to prevent the information from coming out before the election.
By the way, I am not saying OBB is not American, there are considerable serious legitimate questions.
However, OBB is not black.
Why is OBB lying about his race?
OBB has lied about his baby extermination record and plans. Thankfully, as this video shows, his Senate record is public information, and even though OBB continues to lie about his baby extermination record and plans, the proof is easily accessible .
I am not Republican, I am independent. As a matter of fact, I vote for pro-life Democrats all the time. I have also voted for Reform party candidates. I refuse to vote for a baby butcher regardless of whether or not posters try to falsely call me racist.
My spouse can legally claim Native American status, and he is pleased to have a Native American heritage even with the high level of prejudice against Native Americans in the area where I live.
I am a good portion Polish, and I am not ashamed but pleased to be Polish.
Why is OBB ashamed of having Arabic ancestors? It is time OBB tells the truth about many many issues.
“Research the Kenyan records for yourself.”
Been to Kenya yourself, have you, Patricia? For someone who claims to not be racist, you are awfully obsessed with race and percentages of ethnicity.
Patricia Gould, your preoccupation with Obama’s race, and race in general, is scary. Personally, I do not care what race Obama is. And I certainly do not care about the ethnicity of you or your husband. Why don’t you report back with a detailed report of John McCain’s family tree? Maybe you’ll uncover some cover-ups there, as well. I don’t care either way.
I vote according to other issues, thank you very much. I am not a racist.
Patricia G.
My concern here is that race can be classified officially, not necessarily accurately or biologically.
For instance, the people we consider black in the US might well be classified a white in Africa. Racial classifications in the old south were rigid. People with minimal black blood were “black”. People with a certain amount of Native American blood are classified as Native American.
Obama’s father may well have been Muslim, which would explain an Arabic name. Perhaps the gov’t
referred to Moslem Kenyans as “Arabs” because of some prejudice or animosity or to officially designate them in the population.
Ray,
Why is OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois so obsessed with hiding his race? It looks like OBB is a racist and desires to exterminate the black population.
OBB’s record, ties with Planned Parentless, and promises to fulfil Margaret Sanger’s, founder of Planned Parentless, policies show his active determination of exterminating black babies. OBB has, as this video shows, received campaign finances from Planned Parentless as well as campaign ads attacking OBB’s opponent John McCain which ads cost millions of dollars to air. OBB stated that he will protect the policies of Planned Parentless and “will not yield.”
Planned Parentless and OBB are successfully implementing racist Margaret Sanger’s black extermination policies. Black babies are being exterminated at the rate of 5%, whereas, white babies are being exterminated at the rate of 1%. This video shows that 79% of Planned Parentless extermination clinics are targeting minority neighborhoods.
Bee,
OBB’s (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois lies and refusal to disclose and lack of transparency is the real issue. What I said was, and I think you know that, is OBB appears to be ashamed of his Arab heritage. Why?
Personally, I don’t care whether or not you care about OBB’s race. I don’t care about OBB’s race but about the fact that he’s lying about it. Why would a Presidential candidate lie about his race?
Is there a legal reason OBB would lie about his race?
As you know, McCain has released his birth heritage. In fact, McCain stated whatever documents one wanted, he would be only too happy to supply.
Again, why is there no birth certificate for OBB, why does OBB’s grandmother, say he was born in Kenya, why did OBB use a Kenyan passport in the past?
These are serious questions.
OBB appears to be using the race issue to hide his Arab Kenyan heritage.
As I said, OBB has lied about his race and Kenyan background the same way he lied in the last debate that no one wants extermination when that is a lie, he wants extermination, he said he “will not yield” on the issue of extermination.
I find it strange that all of your jargon and mannerisms of false accusations and all of your key words are clearly words that Planned Parentless utilizes on a daily basis which are words constantly used against pro-life posters on other forums.
Mary,
You may be right, but the material point is nobody knows because OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois have overtly and covertly hidden his record. All we know is piecemeal information that has come from earnest Americans trying to research OBB’s record which researchers have found that his record has gaping holes. In the lawsuit, which demands proof of OBB’s citizenship or that he must be removed from the PA ballot, he and the DNC, in the latest I read, are in the failure to respond to charges mode. The attorney bringing the case has sought for summary judgment. OBB and the DNC are hiding behind technicalities to keep from having to respond to the complaint.
We are not discussing classification of race 100 years ago under slavery rules. I am surprised that you would even go there. It sounds to me like you will openly defend OBB even if he is directly violating the U.S. Constitution and may bring about a Constitutional crisis if elected. These are serious issues not to be brushed aside by the mainstream news and Planned Parentless backing of OBB. If OBB wants this to be resolved, all he need do is to provide a freedom of information authorization for his birth and educational records for both here in the U.S. and Kenya.
OBB’s father was Arab by birth not religion.
Perhaps, OBB is hiding his racial background because of some prejudice or animosity toward his Arab background, or perhaps OBB cannot release his background due to legal reasons. No one knows!
Seeing OBB’s willingness to be deceptive about his past fits in with his deception about where he stands on the extermination of the unborn. As I said, OBB has lied about his race and Kenyan background the same way he lied in the last debate that no one wants extermination when that is a lie, he wants extermination, he said he “will not yield” on the issue of extermination.
“It’s awful what has happened in our country. No abortion laws whatsoever!”
Ray,
Joanne and Patricia are from Canada, hence Joanne’s statement.
Patricia Gould, are you trying to say I’m here as some sort of Planned Parenthood spy or something? Ha ha ha ha!! I just feel that we need to remain as credible-sounding as possible if we want the pro-life movement to be taken seriously by those who may be “on the fence” or unsure about the issue. Hysterical ranting and raving about topics such as Obama’s race and homosexual rights is not going to help any.
Really, it sounds to me like you’ve become a tad too invested in this particular conspiracy theory.
Patricia G. 1:09PM
You are overreacting to what I said. I used the racial example of the south, which existed AFTER slavery, as an example of why racial classification is more subjective than objective. Nor would I defend Obama or anyone else violating the Constituttion or creating a crisis.
To me the issue here is citizenship, not racial or ethnic classification. If there is indeed an issue of American citizenship, I want it addressed.
His father may be a black man who is the citizen of an Arab country. Arab countries certainly have black citizens. Obama would still be considered black, or biracial and of Arab descent. Much like I’m a white American of German and Russian descent.
Bee,
Once again, you have made false charges against me, a pro-lifer which is a tactic of the pro-Planned Parentless group. In your support of OBB’s (Obama the baby butcher)the Arab from Illinois policies, you are not remaining judicious or credible on the issue. In fact, you are making an incredulous showing.
Every post of yours brings in a new subject not found in my posts that you inaccurately ascribe to my posts. For instance, in your last post, you brought up homosexuality that has nothing to do with anything I posted.
Again, your posts are clearly incredulous and deceptive not unlike the Planned Parentless ilks’ postings.
Stopping the extermination of the unborn has always been serious and no one that is for the life of the unborn could ever suggest protecting life is not credible as you imply.
Again, I ask you a direct question, why is OBB apparently ashamed of his Arab descent, and why would you defend his prejudiced behavior against Arabs as to deny his descent?
It is a very serious issue if OBB is not a citizen of the U.S., and yet you brush it aside. There is a court case on the issue at present. It is not a conspiracy theory. Again, a rotten attempt to paint me falsely.
Why don’t you be honest, you are not pro-life and intend to vote for OBB regardless of his baby extermination record and regardless of his possible violation to the U.S. Constitution.
Patricia Gould,
Again, I ask you a direct question, why is OBB apparently ashamed of his Arab descent, and why would you defend his prejudiced behavior against Arabs as to deny his descent?
That’s quite a presumption you’re making – that Obama’s ashamed and prejudiced – By the way, I’m not a fan of his, in case you want to accuse me of voting for him too.
I don’t think Bee is a plant for Planned Parenthood and it’s bizarre that you would try to compare her to them. Let’s be civil.
Signed, Another pro-lifer.
I brought up homosexuality because it is an issue that I sometimes see pro-lifers bring up when the topic of discussion is abortion, they way you are harping on Obama’s ethnicity. It distracts from the argument at hand and makes pro-lifers look less credible, IMO.
Again, I ask you a direct question, why is OBB apparently ashamed of his Arab descent, and why would you defend his prejudiced behavior against Arabs as to deny his descent?
How should I know and why should I care why Obama identifies with one aspect of his ethnicity over another, or why he would do those things? His race has absolutely nothing to do with why I’m voting against him. When the court case you mentioned is setttled I’ll take a look at the findings.
I do not appreciate being accused of lying, or being accused of not being pro-life.
Thanks Janet, for the support. :)
Bee,
Your first post, on this forum, was directed at me where you falsely charged me with calling OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois a “Muslim” which I did not. Then, in support to your false statement about what I posted, you falsely said I considered being Muslim an insult. Another lie you created. Some of my husband’s best friends are Muslims.
Your next post was directed at me falsely accusing me of using OBB’s ethnicity as a “slur”, and that is not what I asked, I asked why is OBB ashamed of his Arab background and why is OBB lying about his Arab background? Then, you falsely accused me of using Arab as an insult which you knew I was informing people that OBB has been lying about his racial background to gain the sympathy vote from the blacks and to accuse those who don’t vote for him as being “racist”.
You accused me, in another post, of being: “hysterical racists. At least that’s how it’s going to make you look.”
You then said that my postings showing OBB is hiding his descent is “scary”. You falsely accused me of not following-up with John McCain’s descent. That is not true, my husband and I did. John McCain’s descent is an open book. Then, you accused me of accusing you of being a “racist” which I never did.
You then accuse me of being incredulous.
So, if I have wrongfully accused you in any way, I should think I have considerable leeway in doing so given your aggregious past postings. I noticed again your wording is much like a Planned Parentless person which wants pro-lifers to be apologetic for stating that butchering babies is just that – butchering babies. There is no way of saying it other than the truth. I refuse to use the exterminists labels of “abortion” “pro-choice” to cover the hideous slaughter of the unborn. To even use the word “abortion” suggests that the extermination is simply an “abortive” procedure. The exterminists love pro-lifers using the word “abortion” because they coined that word for their murderous butchering.
If you are for the life of the unborn, then why do you use all of Planned Parentless arguments and attacks, against pro-lifers, which have nothing to do with the subject? In fact, it is the pro-deathers and the exterminationists that bring-up, as you did, other subjects like gay marriage, etc. to draw off the conversation from the real issue – the butchering of babies.
I can watch what I post very well, thank you, and I do not need your guidance as if I am posting out of line.
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. openly opposed those that supported racial parity when the same people said we can’t speak out harshly against racial injustice, and King openly opposed those that suggested time would take care of racial injustice. His great words were that time is neutral and that those working for evil have made better use of their time and words.
King said that those that quietly voiced opposition to racial injustice but opposed direct action were worse than and did more harm to the racial parity movement than those who openly opposed racial parity like the KKK.
Your obsession to prevent me from holding OBB to his record and his lies or distortions and his racial dishonesty or cloak still stinks with Planned Parentless, and if you are not a Planned Parentless supporter, I suggest you seriously take a good look at your writing if you want anyone to take you seriously as a pro-life supporter.
Janet, you don’t need to speak on behalf of Bee, she can speak on her own behalf as I have grounds for my statement as stated above. It appears, Janet, that you approve of Bee openly insulting me, in every post he/she posted to me, but have a problem with my legitimate scruples of Bee’s pro-life standing based off of his/her postings.
This is the most important vote that will be taken on the pro-life behalf since unconstitutional Roe vs. Wade was voted on, by the nine U.S. Supreme Court Justices, in 1973. Regardless of the other serious issues pro-lifers have facing our nation, pro-lifers cannot pass on this vote to take a chance that one candidate might be better than the other when dealing with our nation’s financial issues.
This is the day for pro-lifers to make a difference if there ever was one. On this issue, OBB must not become President!
Planned Parentless also knows that this is the most important election for them as one more conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice will reverse Roe, and they know it. Planned Parentless also knows that the older U.S. Supreme Court Justices are their old pro-death standbys (i.e. Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter, and Breyer).
Conservative Scalia is also getting up there, so the most likely Justice to be replaced first is a liberal, and Planned Parentless knows John McCain will place a conservative making the Court, for the first time in a long 30 years, a 5 – 4 pro-life Court.
Your first post, on this forum, was directed at me where you falsely charged me with calling OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois a “Muslim” which I did not. Then, in support to your false statement about what I posted, you falsely said I considered being Muslim an insult. Another lie you created. Some of my husband’s best friends are Muslims.
I stated that I was mistaken in my following post. Did you not see that?
If you are for the life of the unborn, then why do you use all of Planned Parentless arguments and attacks, against pro-lifers, which have nothing to do with the subject?
It is you who is carrying on about something that has nothing to do with the subject of abortion. Obama’s race.
If you are trying to get the point across that Barack Obama is a liar, a point with which I agree, then call him “OBB the Liar from Illinois.” Referring to him as “the Arab from Illinois” really does make it look as if the term “Arab” is an insult. Please, point out his history of lies to everyone you meet.
Please calm down, and leave Janet out of this. She is one of the kindest, most compassionate posters here.
Your first post, on this forum, was directed at me where you falsely charged me with calling OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois a “Muslim” which I did not. Then, in support to your false statement about what I posted, you falsely said I considered being Muslim an insult. Another lie you created. Some of my husband’s best friends are Muslims.
I stated that I was mistaken in my following post. Did you not see that?
If you are for the life of the unborn, then why do you use all of Planned Parentless arguments and attacks, against pro-lifers, which have nothing to do with the subject?
It is you who is carrying on about something that has nothing to do with the subject of abortion. Obama’s race.
If you are trying to get the point across that Barack Obama is a liar, a point with which I agree, then call him “The Liar from Ilinois.” By referring to him as “The Arab from Illinois,” really does make it look as if the term “Arab” is an insult. And yes, in my opinion it makes you appear to be racist.
Please calm down, and leave Janet out of this. She is one of the kindest, most compassionate posters here.
Good night.
PG,
Janet, you don’t need to speak on behalf of Bee, she can speak on her own behalf as I have grounds for my statement as stated above. It appears, Janet, that you approve of Bee openly insulting me, in every post he/she posted to me, but have a problem with my legitimate scruples of Bee’s pro-life standing based off of his/her postings.
You don’t need to tell me who I can speak on behalf of either, if you want to be snarky about it. I don’t see that she insulted you. It “appears” you have a tendency to overreact and be extraordinarily judgmental.
Bee, Thank you. Ditto.
Bee, You won’t think so after reading my last post. :)
The claws only come out when necessary! Even my sweetest cat could get in your face when she felt like it.
Janet,
I expected to receive the response I did from you. Protecting the life of the unborn can never be considered “overreact”ing, and I refer the readers to Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.’s words which I posted earlier. King was judged for supposedly “overreact”ing for devoting his life to the cause of stopping the oppression against blacks. Yet, had it not been for King’s work, blacks would be entering restaurants from a back door, segregation would still exist in schools, blacks would not be allowed to look a white in the face at eye level, and blacks with be still being forced to sit in the back seats of a bus. I know, I learned in school that it was only a matter of time before the southern states gave up their oppression against the blacks and that the Civil War was unnecessary. If what I was taught in school was true then why did it take King’s movement and another 100 years to stop the oppression?
Four (4) U.S. Supreme Court Justices, Honorable Kennedy, Alito, Scalia, Roberts, and Thomas did not believe it to “be extraordinarily judgmental” to write the following concerning Haskell’s extermination procedure, the four Justices found it to be truth to write the hideous extermination in the majority opinion in Gonzales vs. Carhart also known as Gonzales vs. Planned Parentless which is as follows:
“Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms;everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall….The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
After the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban on this horrific extermination, OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois stated: “I am extremely concerned that [Gonzales v. Carhart] will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman’s right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade.”
Bee,
You have posted nothing on this forum that indicates you are pro-life in fact quite the contrary. I expected to receive the response I did from you. Now returning to the subject at hand, OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois co-sponsored the Freedom to Exterminate Act and, as seen in this video, OBB promised Planned Parentless in July 2007 that his “first act” as President would be to sign the Freedom of Extermination Act which is a bill that would invalidate all state and federal regulations on extermination, and end all restrictions on government extermination funding. This, obviously, also includes Haskell’s hideous procedure I just posted.
OBB stated, “I have consistently advocated for reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President.”
Patricia Gould,
How did you get so smart?
OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois promises to continue the killing fields of Planned Parentless by making their money making business of exterminating babies his first priority and highest act, whereas, even pro-death doctors who have turned from the evil have the decency to call baby exterminations exactly what they are – executions, as below seen:
Quoted in “The Ex Abortionists: They Have Confronted Reality” Washington Post April 1, 1988 pg 21
“You have to become a bit schizophrenic. In one room, you encourage the patient that the slight irregularity in the fetal heart is not important, that she is going to have a fine, healthy baby. Then, in the next room you assure another woman, on whom you just did a saline abortion, that it is a good thing that the heartbeat is already irregular….she has nothing to worry about, she will NOT have a live baby…All of a sudden one noticed that at the time of the saline infusion there was a lot of activity in the uterus. That’s not fluid currents. That’s obviously the fetus being distressed by swallowing the concentrated salt solution and kicking violently and that’s to all intents and purposes, the death trauma. ..somebody has to do it, and unfortunately we are the executioners in this instance…”
–abortionist Dr. Szenes
Patricia Gould: (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois co-sponsored the Freedom to Exterminate Act
Silliness like this among those who are against Obama. Now, is Obama going to win? Of course – when the nuts come out of the woodwork, whether it be in desperation or not, they’re going to be on the losing side.
Doug,
If you really don’t know your candidate’s record, maybe you should research it.
OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois co-sponsored the Freedom to Exterminate Act.
OBB promised Planned Parentless, in July 2007, that his “first act” as President would be to sign the Freedom of Extermination Act which is a bill that would invalidate all state and federal regulations on extermination, and end all restrictions on government extermination funding. This, obviously, also includes Haskell’s hideous procedure which was banned:
“Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms;everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall….The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
Patricia, I don’t think you’re feeling too well.
Doug,
Since OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois does not feel “too well” about answering questions such as these below which are found in the present lawsuit to determine whether or not OBB can even legally run as President, can you answer them? Afterall, they should be a cinch.
1. Was OBB born in Kenya?
2. Is OBB a Kenya “natural born” citizen?
3. If OBB is of foreign birth, is it registered in the State of Hawaii?
4. Did Barrack Hussein Obama, Sr. admit Paternity of OBB?
5. Did OBB’s mother gave birth to him in Mombosa, Kenya?
6. Is OBB’s mother’s maiden name Stanley Ann Dunham a/k/a Ann Dunham?
7. Is the COLB [Certification of Live Birth] posted on the website “Fightthesmears.com” a forgery?
8. Was OBB adopted by a Foreign Citizen?
9. Was OBB adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia?
10. Which hospital does OBB claim he was born at?
11. Which hospital does OBB’s sister claim OBB was born at?
12. Is OBB a citizen of Indonesia?
13. Has OBB taken the “Oath of Allegiance” to regain his U.S. Citizenship status?
14. Is OBB a “natural born” United States citizen?
15. Is OBB’s date of birth August 4, 1961?
16. Did OBB travel to Pakistan in 1981 with his Pakistan friends?
17. In 1981, did OBB go to Indonesia on his way to Pakistan?
18. Did OBB travel to Pakistan when Pakistan was a no travel zone in 1981 for American Citizens?
19. Did OBB, in 1981, travel to Pakistan when Pakistan was not allowing American Citizens to enter their country?
20. Did OBB travel on his Indonesian Passport to Pakistan?
21. Did OBB renew his Indonesian Passport on his way to Pakistan?
22. Is OBB’s senior campaign staff aware of the possibility that OBB is not a “natural born” United States Citizen?
23. Is OBB proud of his Kenya Heritage?
24. Have OBB’s relatives requested changes to the portion of OBB’s birth certificate that identifies his first name?
25. Have OBB’s relatives requested changes to the portion of OBB’s birth certificate that identifies his last name?
26. Have OBB’s relatives requested changes to the portion of OBB’s birth certificate that identifies his place of birth?
27. Has OBB requested changes to the portion of his birth certificate that identifies his first name?
28. Has OBB requested changes to the portion of his birth certificate that identifies his last name?
29. Has OBB requested changes to the portion of his birth certificate that identifies his place of birth?
30. Is the document identified as OBB’s Indonesian School record from Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia genuine?
31. Did OBB go to a Judge in Hawaii to have his name changed?
32. Did OBB go to a Senator and/or Congressman or other public official in Hawaii to have his name changed?
33. Did OBB have a passport issued to him from the Government of Indonesia?
The United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.
34 Is OBB ineligible pursuant to the United States Constitution to serve as President and/or Vice President of the United States?
35. Did OBB ever renounce his possible citizenship as it relates to his possible citizenship to the country of Indonesia?
36. Did OBB ever renounce his possible citizenship as it relates to his possible citizenship to the country of Kenya?
37. Is OBB an Attorney who specializes in Constitutional Law?
38. Was Kenya was a part of the British Colonies at the time OBB’s birth?
39. Is it true Kenya did not become its own Republic until 1963?
40. Is OBB a “Naturalized” United States Citizen?
41. Did OBB obtain $200 Million dollars in campaign funds by fraudulent means?
42. Can OBB produce a “vault” (original) long version of a birth certificate showing his birth in Hawaii?
43. Does OBB’s “vault” (original) long version birth certificate show his birth in Kenya?
44. Were the only times OBB was to a Hospital in Hawaii for check-ups or medical treatments for illnesses?
45. Why doesn’t Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii have any record of OBB’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to him?
46. Why doesn’t Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii have any record of OBB’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to him?
47. Was OBB born in the Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya?
48. Did OBB represent on his State Bar application in Illinois that he never used any other name other than Barack Hussein Obama?
49. Did OBB go by the name Barry Soetoro in Indonesia?
50. Are OBB’s Indonesian school records under the name of Barry Soetoro?
51. Did OBB take an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when admitted to the State Bar of Illinois to practice Law?
52. Did OBB take an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when he was Sworn into his United States Senate Office?
53. Does OBB hold dual citizenship with at least one other Country besides the United States of America?
And McCain is under direct control of space aliens.
Patricia Gould, you are raving nuts.
Answer this question: If you were a woman and an American citizen would your child be a citizen of the US no matter where it was born? If not, why not?
Patricia likely believes that George Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks beforehand. You’ll always have people who go for the crazy stuff.
No, I don’t believe President George Bush knew anything about the 9/11 terrorist attacks beforehand, and I agree with you that would be off the wall seeing how magnificently he managed our county as Commander-in-chief when our nation was under attack, after the attack, and for the past eight (8) years. President Bush is a true patriot and loves our county and has done everything in his power to protect our nation and keep our nation safe.
Conversely, OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois who has terrorist friends may well have known that our nation was going to be attacked. I don’t know and haven’t given much thought along those lines. However, now that you mention it, OBB may not be American. I do not believe he will ward off threats to our nation. Afterall, he commenced his campaign in the house of someone who said he wished he could have done more damage to our GREAT nation.
President George Bush is strongly pro-life and believes in the sanctity of life. OBB is strongly pro-death and has stated that he would not want his daughters to be inconvenienced with a pregnancy notwithstanding his mother (in his words) was inconvenienced by him.
I don’t think OBB’s mother was inconvenienced by OBB, I think OBB’s mother did the proper thing and showed responsibility for her actions. I, however, do not believe the baby is the sin when a baby is conceived from sex out of wedlock by a minor or by anyone else for that matter.
Knowing how OBB views life, who can say what he might have known before the awful damage and carnage was done to our nation. It was a horrible day which I will probably never forget. I think I cried all day, and wished it never really happened.
Like you say, you always have people who go for the crazy stuff like believing a Presidential candidate does not need to be forthcoming about his background and birth and has close terrorist associates and may be in violation to our U.S. Constitution, thereby, causing a constitutional crisis.
It is a great privelege to be born an American and with that blessing from the LORD comes a responsibility. I would think the LORD was punishing me if I had to live in another county. I love America and am very patriotic and would fight to the death under attack. Like our statesman said, I regret that I have but one life to give to my country.
The framers of the Constitution were knowledgeable men who had very good and proper reason for what they wrote in our U.S. Constitution.
If you went to any responsible school, you should have been taught civics. In our state, a parent must educate a child to be a good citizen of the state by law. In Missouri, you are not supposed to be able to graduate without knowledge of the U.S. Constitution.
From my understanding, therefore, any highschooler should know the answer to your question. OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois, as I understand, is an attorney that specializes in Constitutional law. I understand that he has problems as does BBB (Biden the baby butcher) on what the responsibilities are of a Vice President. BBB is also an attorney that specializes in Constitutional law. Notwithstanding their lack of knowledge on the duties of a VP, OBB should know that even if his mother was American and his father was American and he was not born in the U.S. or on a military base or U.S. protectorate or any other location considered an U.S. territory, he is not American.
People can go through a naturalization process which results in U.S. citizenship, however, the U.S. Constitution does not allow naturalized citizens to become President of the U.S.. Only natural U.S. born citizens may become President.
Our nation is a nation of laws, and our human rights are guaranteed by the Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These human rights are what allow us as citizens to have our freedoms. Without these Amendments, any citizen would have no secure personal rights. The human rights we enjoy should never be taken lightly. No other country on the face of the earth enjoys freedoms like Americans. If an American’s rights are being denied, the American can have his/her rights addressed in the courts of our land.
Once a rift is made in the U.S. Constitution, no American rights are protected. It is a very very serious matter that all Americans know whether or not OBB is American.
Doug,
Why didn’t you answer these questions which OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois refuses to be forthcoming about?
They should be a cinch, and it bothers me that you, a supporter of OBB, do not know the answers.
These questions if unanswered, by OBB, and heaven forbid, he is elected and then it is proven that he is not American (but a fraud) will bring our nation under a Constitutional crisis, and all OBB’s supporters can talk about are space aliens?
Well, the space aliens comment is no different than any other nonsensical garbage being spewed by OBB supporters. The OBB way is, afterall, if you cannot answer a question, insult or blame someone else that had nothing to do with it.
Is Patricia Gould yllas?
She’s getting almost that crazy
Once a rift is made in the U.S. Constitution, no American rights are protected.
Our right to privacy has been long established and affirmed by many court decisions..
You want to go against the principles of freedom, liberty, and yes – privacy – that our Constitution contains.
Hal,
Typical insulting response from an OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois supporter who
says nothing, contributes nothing and just posts character assassinations. I note, however, that you did not refute anything I posted.
On the other hand, there are those, on this forum, who have actually contributed and stated facts from which I learned that not only did OBB vote four (4) times to deny medical treatment to babies born alive after a botched extermination (as was stated in this excellent video) but OBB
voted “against extending a health care program to cover pregnant women and their unborn children” (Steven Ertelt).
BBB (Biden the baby butcher)also voted against extending a health care program to cover pregnant women and their unborn children.
Biden, in the VP debate, said that for 30 years in the Senate, he voted against qualified, Constitutional judges based solely on where the judge stood on the life issue. Butchering babies 101: a pro-death national curse with instructors OBB and BBB.
John McCain backed the amendment to support pregnant women and their unborn children.
OBB has promised to fine the poor and lower middle class (in an amount he refused to disclose) who cannot afford medical insurance as he stated in the second Presidential debate.
OBB will also take away the five hundred dollars per child that Americans now receive. It is obvious OBB is making war on parents.
On this forum, I also learned that there is a present lawsuit to determine whether or not OBB can even legally run as President, from which I took the 53 above questions which OBB refuses to answer which should be so easy, perhaps, Hal you can answer the above questions.
Doug,
No Doug, YOU want to go against the principles of freedom, liberty, and yes – due process guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution and case law rendered from the U.S. Constitution.
The butchering of babies and the refusal to provide medical care to babies born alive after a botched extermination is not protected anywhere in the U.S. Constitution or its Amendments. As a matter of fact, the word “privacy” is not even found in the U.S. Constitution or its Amendments. The only right of privacy is a person to be secure from “unreasonable searches and seizures” of their persons, houses, papers, and effects. This says nothing about the right to butcher a baby, and NO doubt you know that the Roe judges authorized the extermination policy off of their own ideas and not the U.S. Constitution. In other words, it was an unconstitutional act by those five pro-death judges.
Case law that protects our rights of privacy, as you call it, (to be secure in our home and belongings) provides no support for the right to murder or slaughter a baby with the exception of the Roe ruling and its following rulings. The Roe anomaly in the law created by those judges, created to violate the spirit and letter of the U.S. Constitution, is the only warp in our privacy laws that allows a person to premeditate the killing or slaughter of another being at a location outside of his/her home where he/she is not defending his/her or another’s life.
In other words, there is no life or liberty granted in the U.S. Constituition to butcher a baby as you suggested in your posting. The Roe decision is an unlawful attempt to create an unlawful Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which is not allowed by the judiciary. You cannot hide behind privacy to create this anomaly to allow this butchering of babies. Privacy has never had authority over life. What the Roe judges did, in their self-willed departure from the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments, was to authorize the wholesale butchering of life and the taking of that life’s right without due process. Again, a woman’s and a doctor’s conspiracy to premeditate to butcher a baby cannot, in any way, be construed or determined in any legal language, as fulfilling the due process clause required by the U.S. Constitution for taking a life. In fact, anyone taking a life without due process is a criminal according to the U.S. Constitution, and even then the criminal has a right to due process.
In fact, the lawyers arguing on both sides of the Roe case clearly stipulated, in their arguments, that if a baby inside the womb can be determined as being alive or in other words, “life” that that life is, without question, protected by the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments and has full protection by the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments
OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois argues against both sides of the attorneys in Roe stating regardless if the baby is life, he and Planned Parentless “will not yield” in the slaughter.
Since 1973 with the anomaly of the Roe decision, it has now been determined, without question, that a baby in the womb is life. In the Gonzales vs. Carhart case also known as Gonzales vs. Planned Parentless, even a liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Honorable Kennedy stated that the killing of such a life of the baby in the womb, by Haskell’s extermination method, was a taking of life and that the states and/or federal government have an interest in protecting that life.
OBB promises, as his highest priority and first act, to reverse U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion penned by Justice Kennedy, a liberal Justice.
Also since 1973, 70% of Americans polled agree that extermination, like Haskell’s or in any form, is a taking of life. Over 50% agree that abortion should only be allowed to protect a mother’s life.
No Doug, YOU want to go against the principles of the U.S. Constitution that guarantee the fundamental right of each person born or unborn to due process at law.
No decision by a woman to take the life of the child inside her can be construed as due process in any form of due process that is defined in the U.S. Constitution or in case law with exception to the Roe hearing and its sundry unconstitutional renderings.
Patricia g.: No Doug, YOU want to go against the principles of freedom, liberty, and yes – due process guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution and case law rendered from the U.S. Constitution.
Wrong. The unborn are not protected under the Constitution. You might wish they were, but it’s not that way. And it’s not impossible they would be, but again, reality is that now it’s not that way.
….
the lawyers arguing on both sides of the Roe case clearly stipulated, in their arguments, that if a baby inside the womb can be determined as being alive or in other words, “life” that that life is, without question, protected by the U.S. Constitution
Nope – I think you are talking about personhood – that if the personhood of the unborn were ever established, then the case of the abortion-rights side would not hold sway, to paraphrase.
Over 50% agree that abortion should only be allowed to protect a mother’s life.
Patricia, wrong again. You are either just making that up, or copying it off an untruthful website.
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
A great many polls are listed there, and you can clearly see that what you said is false.
The trick is to find a poll that’s actually worded the right way.
“Only woman’s life” = from 12% to 17%, much less than the false “over 50%” you said.
Some good affirmations of the Roe decision:
Doug,
All persons born and unborn are protected under the U.S. Constitution. According to the 14th Amendment, “Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The 14th Amendment clarifies that a person need not be a citizen of the U.S. nor even born. It simply says, “any person”. I think you know that, and it is YOU who want to go against the principles of freedom, liberty, and yes – due process of other persons guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution and case law rendered from the U.S. Constitution. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that allows a woman and her doctor to conspire to premeditate the butcher of her baby. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that allows a woman to premeditate the butcher of her baby.
Read the briefs, the attorneys from both sides stated that if the fetus was life, the baby is protected by the U.S. Constitution. The attorney for McCorvey argued that the baby was not life.
I don’t think I could describe the Roe Justices creating an anomaly any more accurately than the U.S. Supreme Court Justice, appointed by President John F. Kennedy did: “I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the court’s judgment. The court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.”
“Even statistics from abortion advocates such as the Planned Parenthood-associated Guttmacher Institute show that abortions for rape, incest, and the mother’s health account for fewer than 10% of all abortions in America.”
Doug,
UNITED STATES, May 24, 2007 The annual Gallup Values and Belief survey shows Americans are evenly divided along “pro-life” and “pro-choice” lines, although a majority supports restrictions on abortion in most or all cases.
The survey conducted May 10-13, 2007 shows 49% of Americans consider themselves “pro-choice” and 45% call themselves “pro-life.” The relatively even split has been constant for nearly the past ten years.
Nearly 6 in 10 Americans (58%), however, believe abortion should only be “legal in a few” circumstances (40%) or “illegal in all” (18%). 4 in 10 Americans favor keeping abortion “legal under any” circumstances (26%) or “legal under most” circumstances (15%).
A resounding 72% think “partial birth” or “late term” abortion ought to be illegal, up from 68% in 2003, the year Congress passed the federal partial birth abortion ban.
On the issue of Roe v. Wade, however, 53% of Americans said they would not like to see the US Supreme Court overturn the 1973 decision that made abortion legal on demand, while 35% favor overturning it. Back in July 2005, 63% supported keeping Roe the law of land. Considering that the majority of adults polled did favor abortion restrictions, the numbers may reflect a pervading misconception among some Americans that reversing Roe v. Wade would make abortion illegal, instead of simply letting the issue be decided on the state level by individual states.
On the matter of elections, 16% of Americans said they would only vote for a candidate that shared their views on abortion, while 59% said abortion was just “one of many important factors” in their decision.
For Republican voters, less than 1 in 5 (17%) said a candidate must share their views on abortion as opposed to 14% of Democrat voters. Yet among pro-life Republicans, 22% said their candidate must agree with them on abortion to get their vote, while 34% of pro-choice Republicans said it was “not a major issue.”
Gallup interviewed 1003 American adults of voting age. The maximum margin of sampling error is stated to be ±3 percentage points.
Doug,
A new poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation for CNN earlier this month find that a majority of Americans say they are pro-life when it comes to the issue of abortion. The survey also shows abortion is a key issue for the 2008 presidential campaign and that pro-life voters are more resolute than abortion advocates.
When asked to self-identify as “pro-life” or “pro-choice” on the issue of abortion, 50 percent of Americans call themselves pro-life while just 45 percent say otherwise.
Doug,
A new poll conducted by CBS News makes it clear that a majority of Americans are pro-life when itcomes to the issue of abortion.
The October survey finds 54 percent of Americans take one of three pro-life positions opposing all or almost all abortions and another 16 percent want more restrictions on it.
The October 12-16 poll asked Americans to tell CBS News their “personal feelings” on abortion. The survey found that 16 percent of the public only favors allowing abortions “only to save woman’s life” and another 34 percent think abortions should only be allowed in the very rare cases of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life.
Another four percent of Americans want all abortions to be made illegal.
With the Planned Parenthood-affiliated Alan Guttmacher Institute showing that less than two percent of all abortions are done in cases of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life, the CBS News poll shows 54 percent of Americans oppose 98 percent of all abortions.
According to the survey, just 26 percent of the public wants abortions permitted in all cases. Another 16 percent want abortions to remain legal but to be subject to greater restrictions than they currently face.
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
A poll has revealed surprising statistics about Americans: 84 percent agree that abortion should be significantly restricted…
The poll surveyed 1,733 Americans from across the nation.
The results on the issue of abortion were particularly unexpected:
* Only 8 percent of those polled believed abortion should be available to a woman at any time in her pregnancy
* Of the 50 percent who called themselves pro-choice, three-fifths said abortion should only be available in the first three months of pregnancy
* 71 percent of registered voters said they would support a candidate who maintains that life begins at conception
* 71 percent of those calling themselves pro-choice said they would approve of significant limits to abortion access beyond our nation’s current laws on abortion
* 84 percent of the total believes abortion should be significantly restricted, favoring a variety of limits, from permitting the procedure only in the first three months of pregnancy, to only in the case of rape or incest, to not at all
Doug,
Note my post at October 25, 2008 1:36 PM which was a 1999 poll and my post at October 25, 2008 2:01 PM, which was a November 3, 2007 poll. In the latter poll, “only less than two percent of all abortions are done in cases of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life” whereas, in 1999, only 10% of exterminations were in those cases.
In other words, the majority of money Planned Parentless has received, since it was founded by Margaret Sanger, has been used to fulfill Margaret Sanger’s racist extermination policy.
One of the Republican candidates this year, Dr. Ron Paul stated that in all his years, as a pediatrician, he never found it necessary to perform an extermination to save a mother’s life, and Dr. Ron Paul never performed an extermination.
OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois stated neither he nor Planned Parentless will “yield” on their extermination policy.
OBB has promised to make his highest priority and first act to continue Haskell’s extermination, and how anyone can say this extermination is supported in the U.S. Constitution is beyond me:
“Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms;everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall….The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
All persons born and unborn are protected under the U.S. Constitution.
Patricia, that’s where you’re wrong – we attribute personhood at birth.
Abortion could not be legal as it is if you were correct, but you’re not.
…..
the attorneys from both sides stated that if the fetus was life…
I do not think you are correct. If you have an actual link or quote, let’s see it. Meanwhile, I know what the Roe decision says.
“If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the (14th) Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument. On the other hand, the appellee conceded on reargument that no case could be cited that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
The annual Gallup Values and Belief survey shows Americans are evenly divided along “pro-life” and “pro-choice” lines, although a majority supports restrictions on abortion in most or all cases.
Patricia, that does not support what you said about most people being against abortion except if the life of the mother was at risk.
I agree that lots of people are on the “Pro-Life” side though they still constitute a minority in the vast majority of polls.
A new poll conducted by CBS News makes it clear that a majority of Americans are pro-life when itcomes to the issue of abortion.
The October survey finds 54 percent of Americans take one of three pro-life positions opposing all or almost all abortions and another 16 percent want more restrictions on it.
The October 12-16 poll asked Americans to tell CBS News their “personal feelings” on abortion. The survey found that 16 percent of the public only favors allowing abortions “only to save woman’s life” and another 34 percent think abortions should only be allowed in the very rare cases of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life.
:: laughing ::
Oh Patricia….
Do you remember what I said about you “copying it off an untruthful website”?
I think you got that from LifeNews or some similar site, known to portray things falsely.
What you either are choosing to hide, or which you don’t realize since the site is lying, is that the poll was not taken among “Americans” like that. It is not representative of Americans as a whole.
Do you know why?
It’s because the poll was of “white evangelicals” in the first place.
I think you are taking what a certain website says, at face value, when it’s patently false.
Anyway, if you want to see the real, whole poll, which is interesting on its own, here’s a link:
http://tinyurl.com/5wx6ek
Go down to where it says “Click here to view the complete poll results.”
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
A poll has revealed surprising statistics about Americans: 84 percent agree that abortion should be significantly restricted…
Heh – “WorldNet” – another massively suspect site. Let’s see the actual poll.
For that matter, we already have “significant restrictions” – the restrictions we have at viability.
Note my post at October 25, 2008 1:36 PM which was a 1999 poll and my post at October 25, 2008 2:01 PM, which was a November 3, 2007 poll.
Again, Patricia, I think you are taking things off pro-life websites which purposely present things in a false manner.
Let’s see the actual polls – the fact remains that most Americans are in favor of the Roe decision, that most are in favor of legal abortion with restrictions, which is what we have now, and that it is only a small minority that is against abortion except for the mother’s life at risk, etc.
Doug,
The polls clearly show 84% of Americans want stricter controls on Roe; between 50% and 60% show they want severe restrictions on Roe; a high number of minority want Roe reversed altogether; and the majority state they are pro-life. These are 2007-2008 polls.
However, that is not the real issue. The real issue is, was Haskell’s extermination, of the baby, a killing in your mind?
I note that you have avoided that issue in your posts.
Five (5) U.S. Supreme Court Justices (i.e. Alito, Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Kennedy) concurred ruling this was the taking of a life: “Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms;everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall….The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
The majority of Americans agree that this is killing.
Now, I’m asking you, was Haskell’s extermination, in your mind, a killing? If you answer nothing else, please answer that question.
Your posts, up to this point, falsely claim indirectly Haskell’s extermination is a liberty and right protected under the U.S. Constitution although you fail to show where because you cannot show where.
I have quoted the U.S. Constitution, both in the 14th and 6th Amendments, to show where this baby is a person and must be protected and granted due process at law.
The polls clearly show 84% of Americans want stricter controls on Roe; between 50% and 60% show they want severe restrictions on Roe; a high number of minority want Roe reversed altogether; and the majority state they are pro-life. These are 2007-2008 polls.
Again, let’s see the actual polls, for your information has been shown to be suspect. Additionally, I have not yet seen any “majority” being pro-life outside the falsehood you earlier presented, nor have you supported what you said or refuted what I’ve said.
…..
However, that is not the real issue. The real issue is, was Haskell’s extermination, of the baby, a killing in your mind? I note that you have avoided that issue in your posts.
Since when was this the issue? Yes, agreed that it’s a killing. Yes, there is a life there, and that it’s human and that it dies in an abortion – no question about it.
Your posts, up to this point, falsely claim indirectly Haskell’s extermination is a liberty and right protected under the U.S. Constitution although you fail to show where because you cannot show where.
Was it a legal abortion or not? If it was legal, then what you say has no merit.
…..
I have quoted the U.S. Constitution, both in the 14th and 6th Amendments, to show where this baby is a person and must be protected and granted due process at law.
Well, if it was a born baby then I do think it’d be pretected under the Constitution.
Doug,
You posted, “Well, if it was a born baby then I do think it’d be pretected under the Constitution.”
You seem to agree with OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois who voted four (4) times, as shown in this video that a baby born alive after a botched extermination be denied medical treatment which is too liberal for even Pelosi, Kennedy, and Clinton. As for the Haskell extermination of that clearly, alive, healthy baby, Planned Parentless fought for, argued for, and lost all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to continue the Haskell extermination method claiming the baby as not being life but simply a fetus.
You wrote: “Patricia, that’s where you’re wrong – we attribute personhood at birth.”
Wrong, the killing of the baby, in Gonzales vs. Carhart was considered a taking of a life.
On April 18, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to uphold a law that prohibits the “abhorrent procedure of partial birth abortion,” (President Bush’s words) . In this ruling, the High Court of the land banned a specific procedure over how to perform an abortion, and “Doctors who violate the law face up to two years in federal prison.” MSNBC. The five Supreme Court Justices, I mentioned in my post, ” said the Constitution permits a nationwide prohibition on a specific abortion method.” MSNBC. Honorable Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion and stated what I above posted. This ruling is said to be “the most monumental win on the abortion issue that we ever had.” Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the conservative American Center for Law and Justice. Planned Parentless was very upset that their desire to continue to exterminate, by way of Dr. Haskell’s procedure as is OBB who promises, as his first act and highest priority to continue the extermination by way of Haskell’s procedure, and OBB has stated that he and Planned Parentless “will not yield” on continuing the extermination.
Oops,
The last sentence, in my last post, should have read:
Planned Parentless was very upset that their desire to continue to exterminate, by way of Dr. Haskell’s procedure, was determined to be unconstitutional, therefore, OBB, in solidarity with Planned Parentless, promises, as his first act and highest priority to continue the extermination by way of Haskell’s procedure, and OBB has stated that he and Planned Parentless “will not yield” on continuing the extermination.
PatriciaG,
You are speaking the truth.
Doug,
You posted, “Since when was this the issue? Yes, agreed that it’s a killing. Yes, there is a life there, and that it’s human and that it dies in an abortion – no question about it.”
That is precisely the issue! It does not make it a Constitutional killing simply because the bizarre ruling in Roe, departing from all previous case law and the U.S. Constitution, says it is okay.
Planned Parentless forced this horrific ruling upon us, that departed from the U.S. Constitution, 30 years ago. Planned Parentless knows that Carhart vs. Gonzales, in essence, has already reversed Roe in that the High Court has determined that that state does have a compelling interest in protecting unborn persons.
The only way Planned Parentless can prevent the domino effect of Carhart will be to get OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois elected and Carhart reversed by placing U.S. Supreme Court Justices who are again willing to write their own Amendments to the U.S. Constitution as the Roe Justices did, clearly articulated by Justice White, appointed by President John F. Kennedy: “I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the court’s judgment. The court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.”
Haskell’s extermination of the unborn is not an isolated act as Doctor Tiller, of Kansas, has bragged of killing 10,000 such alive persons. Of the 10,000 “Tiller the Killer” brags 8,000 were clearly viable, without question. In fact, Tiller’s butchering, of viable alive persons, since it diverges from Haskell’s procedure, may not be banned through technicalities. OBB, not being satisfied with just Tiller’s mass extermination efforts, has promised to reassert Haskell’s extermination method.
You wrote: “Patricia, that’s where you’re wrong – we attribute personhood at birth.”
Wrong, the killing of the baby, in Gonzales vs. Carhart was considered a taking of a life.
P, what do you have to support this? Are you talking about the unborn?
I mean, geez – it’s self-evident that if what you say would be true, that abortion could not be legal, but of course that is not the way it is, therefore, what you say is incorrect.
If you mean that the killing of a born baby would be illegal, then sure, yeah.
As to the “taking of a life,” re the unborn, sure, yeah, no doubt – as before, agreed that the unborn here are human and alive, but that’s not the issue.
You wrote: “Patricia, that’s where you’re wrong – we attribute personhood at birth.”
Wrong, the killing of the baby, in Gonzales vs. Carhart was considered a taking of a life.
P, you’re talking about two different things – that’s your error.
liberals and all who think like them, hate children. obama is the worst liberal our country has ever seen. he’s anti life, with his big mouth. Sean Hannity is a smart and honest man. unlike the democratic party, that has lost its soul.
liberals and all who think like them, hate children
Silly. Is your side going to win, when you say things like that?
Doug,
You are wrong, the U.S. Supreme Court has defined that the state has a responsibility and a compelling interest in protecting pre-born persons.
In other words, Carhart has really destroyed Roe which is why OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois wants to be President so that he can, as his first act and highest priority, sign the Freedom to Exterminate Act which he co-sponsored as an U.S. Senator. If OBB becomes President and signs the death warrant on babies, that bill he co-sponsored will eliminate any restrictions on baby extermination. Obviously, to include babies exterminated in Haskell’s method (which again is the case where the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban known as Gonzales vs. Carhart or Gonzales vs. Planned Parentless):
“Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms;everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall….The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
A child in the womb, according to your argument, a day before the child passes the woman’s vaginal canal belongs in a class of “non-persons”, and a child who has passed through the vaginal canal belongs to a class of “persons”, and by your argument then has full Constitutional rights. Therefore, according to your argument a child that has not passed through the vaginal canal belongs to the “non-person” class. That argument is completely bankrupt, and you know it.
However, OBB has determined that a live child, who has passed through the vaginal canal, still does not belong to “the person” class and still must not be provided medical treatment required by law.
So, OBB doesn’t buy your class distinction either, his class distinction appears to be that if a baby passes alive through the vaginal canal, due to a botched extermination, the baby belongs in the “non-person” class, but if a baby passes through the vaginal canal alive due to non-exterminative methods, then the baby belongs to the “person” class. That would mean children, passing through the vaginal canal due to induced birth, whether it be for the purpose of exterminating the baby or whether it be for the purpose to save the baby because the baby is over-due, the baby would have to belong to the “non-person” class, according to OBB’s definition because the baby did not pass through the vaginal canal due to natural means.
With these obviously bankrupt and evil class descriptions that OBB is trying to sell to Americans, it will not be long before the idea is conceived, if not already by this Arab, that a baby with the wrong political parents or wrong geneology can be classified as a “non-person”. Wait! That is what the founder of Planned Parentless, Margaret Sanger, devoted her entire pathetic life to accomplish and did accomplish by the extermination of 49,523,945+ babies which neither Planned Parentless nor OBB believe is ENOUGH DEATHS ALREADY as they have classified these 50,000,000 dead babies as “non-persons”, and, therefore, have no U.S. Constitutional rights.
Your argument leads to the Hitler conclusion that people of certain political, religious or ethnic backgrounds, for instance Jews and blacks, could be killed through genocide as they did not have German lineage, and, therefore, could not be described as a person according to the class structure according to what Hitler and his gestapo set up. Wait! That sums up OBB’s and Margaret Sanger’s extermination theory that only certain alive humans are persons, according to their class definition.
The latest U.S. Supreme Court decision has already mooted your argument in that the state has compelling interest in protecting human life born or unborn.
Hannity had his old buddy Hal Turner on for an interview. Hal Turner of the Hal Turner Show where he openly calls for a new race war against “ni**ers, sp*cks, and k*kes”. Who publishes the home addresses of judges and politicians and calls for assassinations. Whose headline read “GOTCHA” when the husband of a judge who had ruled against White Power people was murdered.
Patricia, keep reminding everyone that Obama’s an Arab, that’s working real well. And don’t forget Jeremiah Wright, why should he be off limits? And don’t let the voters forget his middle name is Hussein.
Oh and Patricia, the lawsuit challenging Obama’s citizenship was filed by a crazy “9-11 Truther” (Phil Berg) who has appeared on al Jazeera arguing that Osama bin Laden was not responsible for 911 and has filed racketeering charges against the Federal Government on behalf of one of the 911 victims.
Also, the lawsuit against Obama was dismissed yesterday or a couple of days ago.
Keep trying.
the U.S. Supreme Court has defined that the state has a responsibility and a compelling interest in protecting pre-born persons.
Wrong, Patricia. The states, if they want to may protect the unborn life after viability. They are not deemed persons, personhood is not attributed – that is a different thing.
Patricia: A child in the womb, according to your argument, a day before the child passes the woman’s vaginal canal belongs in a class of “non-persons”
No – if you see a child being killed, call the cops.
As far as the fetus, or “unborn baby” if you want – you are right – personhood is attributed at birth. That’s when we say the right to life, etc., is there. Prior to that, it is different.
…..
and a child who has passed through the vaginal canal belongs to a class of “persons”, and by your argument then has full Constitutional rights.
Not “a class of persons.” But that is when personhood is attributed, at birth, yes. Prior to that, the right to life, etc., isn’t deemed to be present, though the restrictions on abortion past viability could be said to be going in that direction somewhat, per the desire of the individual states.
And of course – yes, after birth then Constitutional rights are there.
…..
Therefore, according to your argument a child that has not passed through the vaginal canal belongs to the “non-person” class.
Nope, not a “child,” though personhood is indeed accorded at birth.
Arguing over “child” or not is a waste of time – it’s a subjective thing. You can call it anything and you are free to do so.
What you want here is a policy change – you wish for the unborn to be protected under the Constitution, have right-to-life granted, etc.
Margaret Sanger is ancient history. Racism was the norm in the first half of the Twentieth Century and there were other strange and oppressive ideas floating around as well, like for instance the idea the women should not vote, which was heavily promoted by the Catholic hierarchy. Not formally by the Church but it was the “personal” opinion (publically expressed) of nearly all Catholic priests, and the Church effectively prevented France from allowing les femmes to vote until 1944.
“Since when was this the issue? Yes, agreed that it’s a killing. Yes, there is a life there, and that it’s human and that it dies in an abortion – no question about it.”
Patricia: That is precisely the issue! It does not make it a Constitutional killing simply because the bizarre ruling in Roe, departing from all previous case law and the U.S. Constitution, says it is okay.
No, not the issue. Abortion was legal to quickening prior to the appearance of the various state laws in the US. Nothing “changed” with regard to the Constitution, and the 9th Amendment should have protected women’s rights all along in this matter.
To quickening, abortion was legal before, during, and after the writing of the Constitution.
In no way was it made illegal on Constitutional grounds. It was other concerns, in large measure many doctors felt that midwives were encroaching on what the docs felt was there rightful territory. (Even when illegal, two doctors saying an abortion was needed was all that it took.)
Truthsetfree, good points. Likewise, it was practically the end of the world in some people’s eyes when interracial dating and marriage was allowed.
There are always going to be certain people wringing their hands and moaning about this or that – it’s the way of the world. Some of the writings from the time of the ancient Egyptians show this clearly.
Truthless set in bonds of falsehood,
Poor attempt to cover the truth, as the lawsuit that I am referring to has not been dismissed and was brought by a Democratic attorney against OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois. Enough said.
Doug,
Truthless set in bonds of falsehood did not bring anything to the conversation on this forum to date. If he commences to tell the truth, he/she may.
You mention racial intermarriage parity, and as you are most likely aware of the Lovings case where the U.S. Supreme Court wrongfully denied the couple proper hearing, it took a re-hearing where the couple had to suffer discrimination, for their interracial marriage for almost 20 years, before the High Court, on rehearing, finally addressed the wrongs done to this interracial couple and fulfilled their Constitutional duty.
Likewise, it will take a Constitutional Court to rehear Roe before the 4,000 baby exterminations/per day will end by the High Court reversing its creation of an unborn class of “person” which class the Roe court then denies the right to due process and other Constitutional rights, which the Roe court manufactured, and which OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois and Planned Parentless are determined to continue.
Truthless set in bonds of falsehood,
As for your disgusting attempt to defend Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parentless by stating that she is ancient history, the truth is the opposite of your post.
Margaret Sanger is not ancient history. She founded Planned Parentless in the mid-late 60s while the majority of Americans were wrestling with bringing about racial parity. Sanger’s efforts, including the creation of Planned Parentless was overtly and covertly targeting the opposite of racial parity to implement her extermination policy.
It was obvious as early as the unconstitutional Roe court that Sanger’s and Planned Parentless covert efforts forced their way through the court systems to establish and enforce Sanger’s extermination oppression.
The following words are direct quotes from Margaret Sanger: “We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Margaret Sanger also stated: “Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.”
You sound like the type who censored the book, “Killer Angel” from the Toledo, Ohio library to prevent the truth to be known about Planned Parentless origination and its founder, Margaret Sanger.
Sanger’s extermination policy is still alive today in Planned Parentless extermination results of extremely high percentages of blacks being exterminated and Planned Parentless targeting racial neighborhoods as shown in this video.
50,000,000 exterminated babies in the killing fields of Sanger and her organization (Planned Parentless) needs to stop.
In fact, while our young Americans were expending their lives, giving their full devotion of honor taking down the Hitler regime who were attempting to exterminate the Jewish race, Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parentless was overtly and covertly setting-up her racial extemination process and plans in America.
Hundreds of thousands, of American soldiers of all race and color, were thrown into the Great Battle of anti-racism in WWII while here at home, Sanger’s efforts were realized by the following generation from WWII with the alliance and umbrella of the Warren Court.
The Great Generation did not accept Margaret Sanger’s, founder of Planned Parentless, extermination theology, and that is why Sanger had to work undercover including deceitfully using religious leaders to quietly and covertly spread her extermination message under the covers of feminist activism.
Leaders and supporters of the feminist movement were attempting and working hard to bring about sexual parity and rightfully so, however, the exterminationists connected themselves covertly to the feminist movement that was needed in America and saddled that movement with the Sanger butchers, and even today the feminist movement is still saddled with the extermination policy of Sanger’s.
OBB (Obama the baby butcher) the Arab from Illinois, and his ilk fight desperately to keep the Planned Parentless – Margaret Sanger extermination policy saddled to the feminist movement, dragging the feminist movement through a pool of human blood despite the fact that 70% of Americans oppose extermination.
OBB has promised as his highest priority and first act to continue Sanger’s extermination legacy.
Doug,
You know you are being deceptive when you say extermination was legal pre-Constitution, pre-1900 and pre-Roe. It was a crime in all that time for anyone to harm a live child in the womb. In fact, it was a crime to harm a child in the womb as early as in the days of Moses that our laws pre-Constitution, post-Constitution, and up to the Roe court were fashioned after. The Roe court diverted from all previous case law and Constitutional thought where they created the “non-person” class of pre-birth that never existed in our entire past written history with few exceptions. My answer to your group of postings today is as follows:
A child in the womb, according to your argument, a day before the child passes the woman’s vaginal canal belongs in a class of “non-persons”, and a child who has passed through the vaginal canal belongs to a class of “persons”, and by your argument then has full Constitutional rights. Therefore, according to your argument a child that has not passed through the vaginal canal belongs to the “non-person” class. That argument is completely bankrupt, and you know it.
However, OBB has determined that a live child, who has passed through the vaginal canal, still does not belong to “the person” class and still must not be provided medical treatment required by law.
So, OBB doesn’t buy your class distinction either, his class distinction appears to be that if a baby passes alive through the vaginal canal, due to a botched extermination, the baby belongs in the “non-person” class, but if a baby passes through the vaginal canal alive due to non-exterminative methods, then the baby belongs to the “person” class. That would mean children, passing through the vaginal canal due to induced birth, whether it be for the purpose of exterminating the baby or whether it be for the purpose to save the baby because the baby is over-due, the baby would have to belong to the “non-person” class, according to OBB’s definition because the baby did not pass through the vaginal canal due to natural means.
With these obviously bankrupt and evil class descriptions that OBB is trying to sell to Americans, it will not be long before the idea is conceived, if not already by this Arab, that a baby with the wrong political parents or wrong geneology can be classified as a “non-person”. Wait! That is what the founder of Planned Parentless, Margaret Sanger, devoted her entire pathetic life to accomplish and did accomplish by the extermination of 49,523,945+ babies which neither Planned Parentless nor OBB believe is ENOUGH DEATHS ALREADY as they have classified these 50,000,000 dead babies as “non-persons”, and, therefore, have no U.S. Constitutional rights.
Your argument leads to the Hitler conclusion that people of certain political, religious or ethnic backgrounds, for instance Jews and blacks, could be killed through genocide as they did not have German lineage, and, therefore, could not be described as a person according to the class structure according to what Hitler and his gestapo set up. Wait! That sums up OBB’s and Margaret Sanger’s extermination theory that only certain alive humans are persons, according to their class definition.
The latest U.S. Supreme Court decision has already mooted your argument in that the state has compelling interest in protecting human life born or unborn.