On Jan. 20, 2009, Barack Obama began his death march as the most anti-life president in U.S. history.
Today marks Obama's 100th day in office. This list substantiates Obama's personnel and policies to that end. He actually started way before Day 1:
Day -75: Names pro-abortion Rahm Emmanuel as chief of staff, who earned a 100 percent approval rating from NARAL while congressman.
Day -59: Appoints executive director of EMILY's List, Ellen Moran, as White House communications director.
Day -56: Names Melody Barnes, who previously served on the boards of EMILY's List and Planned Parenthood Action Fund, as his director of the Domestic Policy Council....
Day -51: Nominates pro-abortion Sen. Hillary Clinton as secretary of state.
Day -51: Nominates pro-abortion Susan Rice as Ambassador to the United Nations; Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards commends her in press release.
Day -51: Nominates pro-abortion AZ Gov. Janet Napolitano as secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security, who vetoed her state's partial birth abortion ban.
Day -41: Nominates pro-abortion and pro-universal health (abortion) care Sen. Tom Daschle as secretary of health and human services.
Day -41: Appoints pro-abortion Jeanne Lambrew as deputy director of newly created Office of Health Care Reform under Daschle, which Planned Parenthood heralded as "exciting" in a statement.
Day -41: White House transition team publishes 55-page list of demands from pro-abortion groups.
Day -31: Nominates embryonic stem cell research and human cloning advocates Harold Varmus and Jonathan Moreno to the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
Day -16: Chooses pro-abortion Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine as Democratic Party chairman.
Day -16: Nominates pro-abortion, pro-porn David Ogden as deputy attorney general.
Day -16: Nominates "pregnancy is slavery" and former ACLU and NARAL counsel Dawn Johnsen as assistant attorney general.
Day -16: Nominates Thomas Perrelli, former pro-euthanasia attorney for Terri Shindler Schiavo's husband Michael, to head the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice.
Day -16: Nominates pro-abortion former Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan as solicitor general, with the buzz she is on short list as next Supreme Court nominee; she supports taxpayer funding of abortion.
All of these pro-death actions occurred even before Day 1! Continue reading "Obama's 100 days of death" on WorldNetDaily.com for Obama's pro-death actions Day 1 and beyond....
[Graphic courtesy of Conservablogs.com]
Yep! I'd say he's hell bent on pushing the abortion agenda, which is where he'll probably wind up for pushing it.Posted by: MIke D. at April 29, 2009 12:27 PM
Absolutely chilling. This administration is evil.Posted by: Joanne at April 29, 2009 12:31 PM
But if you don't mind abortion, he's doing great!
:(Posted by: Janet at April 29, 2009 12:39 PM
Jill, just read your article. Never has anyone put out such a complete and comprehensive listing of facts and data concerning Obama's pro aboriton crusade!
Thank you for providing this, I will pass this on along with some links to horrific graphic images of what abortion really is from PriestsForLife.org and abortionNo.org.
I must say I have been discouraged and surprised by several friends and family who claim to be pro-life (and they are I believe) but who get quite upset and even hostile to the messenger when I have encouraged them to spend time viewing these horrific graphic images I reference above.
In other words, is the reason that places like Notre Dame and Georgetown welcome this disgraceful man to town because abortion has, unwittingly or somehow, been sanitized, given something of a benign image... i.e., bumper stickers that say pro-life with a picture of a cute little baby, terminology such as "terminating the pregnancy" instead of the bloody, graphic dismembered child laying out on a table, re-assembled from its 5 or 10 severed members, much like the exploded view we used to get from the assmbley instructions to our model airplanes?!
I have to agree with Father Pavone who says.... "America will not reject abortion until America sees abortion!"
Yes, evil personified. One of Satan's elite.
Won't he be surprised when he enters his eternal destiny (unless he repents, that is).
"I've come back to report to you, the American people, that we have begun to pick ourselves up and dust ourselves off, and we've begun the work of remaking America," the president said at a town hall meeting in a high school gymnasium in Arnold, a St. Louis suburb.
I have no desire to "RE-MAKE AMERICA". I love the OLD AMERICA that's been around for 200+ years. Why do we/ the media/ politicans allow our President to speak this way?Posted by: Janet at April 29, 2009 1:19 PM
Sickening!Posted by: heather at April 29, 2009 1:20 PM
It might be cool to see this list made into a graphic with the faces of each of the appointees. If I were talented in that way, I'd offer to do it myself. Unfortunately I'm not.:(Posted by: Janet at April 29, 2009 1:34 PM
Full list and more details on each item also at http://www.lifenews.com/obamaabortionrecord.html
Thanks Jill. I was hoping to get a report somewhere after Obama's first 100 days about all the he had done against life. Very troubling.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at April 29, 2009 2:38 PM
I do not understand the importance of this list. You picked apart the people he supported without even mentioning why he supported them. Maybe it has nothing to do with their abortion policies. Maybe they are intelligent people that will help our country become a better place for everyone.
Pro-abortion and pro-choice is not evil. These are just the people who prioritize the already living mother over her unborn child. Pro-lifer's have done so much to "prove" how developed the fetus is when it is aborted, but I am positive that the mother is a little further along and has more of a right to her life than the sack of cells in her womb.Posted by: Liz at April 29, 2009 2:58 PM
In whose Image and likeness?? Definitely not God's.
"...sack of cells in her womb."
(sigh)...here we go again....
Well put Liz (@2:58)Posted by: Kate at April 29, 2009 3:09 PM
We are all a sack of cells.
Hi Kate!!Posted by: Carla at April 29, 2009 3:11 PM
"I am positive that the mother is a little further along and has more of a right to her life than the sack of cells in her womb."
How does one human being have "more" of a right to life than another human being? Is the right to life something that is earned by what we have done, in which case some of us typing on this blog have more of a right to life than others? How does a right to life calculus work? God love you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at April 29, 2009 3:13 PM
And the point of this article is what exactly? That a pro-choice, liberal politican tends to nominate pro-choice, liberal people to work in his administration? I hope you ran such a revealing exposé on George W. Bush's equally pernicious habit of appointing people he considered like-minded to work for him as well.Posted by: Ahab at April 29, 2009 3:32 PM
The hypocrisy found on this site is nothing short of comical.
I crack up over this movement to stop our President from speaking at Notre Dame.
Where was your bitter indignation when Bush addressed the university ?? During his term as Governor of Texas, he signed off on the executions of 131 Americans. Not fetuses, but actual walking around type people.
Gotta' love you " Pro Lifers " !!
I'm saying hi (waves) but I'm not the Kate that is on here more frequently these days who you probably think I am....? Different Kate :-)
Ethel, if you don't think fetuses are "actual walking around type people," why compare their deaths to deaths of convicted "actual walking around type people" murderers and rapists? You make no sense.Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 29, 2009 4:06 PM
I wasn't comparing fetuses to actual, live people. I was contrasting the two in order shed some light on the hypocrisy of your movement.
And nothing from you about a "murderer" like George W. speaking at Notre Dame ?
"Pro-abortion and pro-choice is not evil. These are just the people who prioritize the already living mother over her unborn child. Pro-lifer's have done so much to "prove" how developed the fetus is when it is aborted, but I am positive that the mother is a little further along and has more of a right to her life than the sack of cells in her womb."
Liz, have you SEEN abortion? If someone dismembered your limbs and cut you to pieces, is that not EVIL?? How would you like to drown in saline solution?? Does that not sound like TORTURE to you??
I fully agree that women have the right to choose but not at the expense of another human being, esp an innocent child which a mother is meant to nurture and protect.
Also, prolifers are not trying to prove anything. Science has shown/proven this a loooooooong time ago. Don't forget, you were once a zygote/embryo/fetus too!
"The hypocrisy found on this site is nothing short of comical."
Ethel, HYPOCRISY = PLANNED PARENTHOOD = ABORTION
Lies, lies, and nothing but lies
Which "non-profit" org do you think is earning millions of dollars worth of profit by forcing their lies on women??
Which "non-profit" org loves to kill babies and yet censor those who show pictures/videos of aborted babies?
By the way, we stand for LIFE not just of the unborn but also abortion survivors and those of us "walking around type people"
May God bless you both with wisdom and compassion for the helpless, defenseless innocents whom the people listed here would love to see dead. Such a hall of shame really.Posted by: Margie at April 29, 2009 4:33 PM
Ethel, are you saying you oppose the death penalty?Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 29, 2009 4:43 PM
I was saying that as Governor of Texas, George W. executed live people, and then got a pass from your "Pro Life" movement.
2 Kates? Awesome! :)
Thank you. Very well said!!
We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed.
what is your religion.Posted by: Jasper at April 29, 2009 6:19 PM
Still not getting you, Ethel. You're comparing with a straight face the murder of innocent children who have not been given due process under law with the death penalty of convicted murderers who have been found guilty of their crime by peers?Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 29, 2009 6:20 PM
Fantastic Article Jill..Posted by: Jasper at April 29, 2009 6:20 PM
So what's your point Jill? That some bright, talented, knowledgeable people who have been chosen by our President for some high-level positions in government happen to be pro-choice? Um..... okay........
Virginia, just “happen to be,” as if it was all one big coincidence? What are the odds then that no pro-lifers just “happen to be” on his staff? Not bright, talented, and knowledgeable enough?Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 29, 2009 6:23 PM
The Prez happens to be Pro-Abortion and Pro-Infanticide. The bright, talented and knowledgeable part is debatable.Posted by: Carla at April 29, 2009 6:24 PM
"We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed."
This is perfect, Carla. Thanks.
Posted by: Janet
at April 29, 2009 8:36 PM
there is a difference between human and person. a fetus is human. But a fetus is not yet a person with thoughts, feelings, and emotion. I can not say that I support abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy but early enough in the pregnancy, I believe the mother's rights take priority. A late abortion seems irresponsible to me unless it is to save the life of the mother. But, done early, an abortion may save the baby in a different way than you are considering. Life is a hard and disturbing place and to bring a child into the world that is not wanted is putting pain in that little baby's life from day one.
Virginia, I agree with you completely.Posted by: Liz at April 29, 2009 8:40 PM
"But a fetus is not yet a person with thoughts, feelings, and emotion."
What makes these things constitute personhood? How do we measure such things? In fact, certainly a late term fetus which you said you are opposed to (normally) aborting as well as newborns do not have thoughts, feelings, or emotions, and as such should not be considered persons as well under this definition.
"I can not say that I support abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy but early enough in the pregnancy, I believe the mother's rights take priority."
This line confuses me. I'm just not quite sure what your justification for abortion is. If the fetus at a certain point is not a person, there does not need to be any evoking of a woman's right to her body in order to obtain an abortion anymore than she needs to evoke her bodily right to have a tooth pulled.
"But, done early, an abortion may save the baby in a different way than you are considering. Life is a hard and disturbing place and to bring a child into the world that is not wanted is putting pain in that little baby's life from day one."
I fail to see how anyone could ever make the decision for someone, claiming to know what their future would hold, and killing them to keep them from going through it. This is simply a matter of playing God. In fact, does this argument work if we are talking about infanticide? Suppose a 1 year is abandoned by her parents, and must grow up in a poverty ridden lifestyle in a very poor area. May we then kill the 1 year old because that child is not wanted and is in a world full of pain from day 365? Of course not. The argument is question begging because it already assumes that the fetus isn't a person and does not have a fundamental right to life simply because it is a human being. Your above argument would never be convincing if you argued that way with an infant, so why use it here unless you already assume that the fetus is not a person? God love you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at April 29, 2009 9:10 PM
What's not to get?
You claim that a fetus has the same rights as a person. You claim that abortion is the taking of the "life" of a fetus, and that this act is murder. So why do you not also treat the execution of an adult as murder ?
Is George W. any less of a murderer than a physician who performs abortions ?
Bravo, Jill, great compilation. I almost fell off my chair last week when I read Obama said that the U.S. has lost its moral bearings over the torture of some terror suspects. Tonight he said abortion is a moral issue, but I guess we haven't lost any of our moral bearings because of it. I shake my head in disbelief.
Posted by: Anonymous
at April 30, 2009 8:32 AM
Jill, maybe you missed my emailed reply to your question? What are the odds there just happen to be no pro lifers on his staff? Pretty good I imagine.
anon was mePosted by: Virginia k. at April 30, 2009 9:01 AM
Please educate yourself on the development of the child in the womb. That "sack of cells" as you call it, has a heart beat by 21 days and detectable brain waves around 40 days. And as early as 11 weeks after conception resembles a tiny little human baby.Posted by: LizFromNebraska at April 30, 2009 10:20 AM
Thank you, Carla. God bless you! :)
Ethel, INNOCENT, DEFENSELESS CHILDREN vs. CRIMINALS. World of difference.
Sadly, thousands of lives were lost during the war and their families still suffer from the death of their loved ones but you see, millions (about 50 million since 1973) defenseless, INNOCENT children have died in the hands of abortionists and REAL WOMEN are in great pain and deeply regret having aborted their baby.
It seems to me you are unable to grasp how evil, how awful, how merciless, how barbaric it really is. I dare you to watch this: AbortionNo.org then please let us know what you think.Posted by: Margie at April 30, 2009 9:38 PM
Liz @ 2:58:
I completely agree that the mother has at least as much right to her life as her child does. But that's not what is being debated. You are arguing that the mother has more right not to be a little uncomfortable for 8 1/2 months than her child or children have a right to his/her/their life/lives.
How dare you impose your religious views on me and my children. If you choose to believe that my 5-week-old unborn child or my 11 1/2-month-old born daughter are not "people," I suppose that is your right--but you want to enshrine in law that my youngest is not a human being? Keep your religion off of my children's bodies.
"Personhood" versus humanity is a religious or philosophical--not scientific--construct used almost entirely to oppress those humans considered non-persons. I demand a debate based on science and reason rather than personal religious views.Posted by: YCW at May 1, 2009 7:01 AM