Michelle “Child/Sacrifice” Obama
Michelle Obama prequeled her disaster of a speech to the International Olympic Committee with a disaster of a speech to Chicagoans who had worked to bring the Olympics to the Windy City. Much attention has been paid to the “sacrifice” portion of her narcissistic discourse, but here is the part that seethed me…
I’ve spent much of my first 9 months trying to open the doors to the White House to kids who might not otherwise see themselves having access to these institutions, because that’s where I came from – communities like that where kids never dreamed that they could set foot in the White House, let alone live there… And Barack and I made a point of doing the same thing when we lived in Chicago – making the concerns of kids in all sorts of communities our own.
Just once – just once – when a pro-abort like Michelle Obama tries to impress the world with her love of children, I wish a reporter would ask the obvious question: “If you love children so much, why do you support abortion?
In Michelle’s case the question could go a step further: “If you love children so much, why do you support what you call a ‘legitimate medical procedure‘ where children are delivered breech up to the head, stabbed in the nape of the neck, brains suctioned, skull collapsed with forceps, and delivered dead?”
[Top photo via the White House]
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.
How do you know what lurks in her mind? I believe that a key point has been made here. Kyrie Eleison…
Every time I see a picture of a human being aborted I wish it was front page of the newpaper and news. I keep telling myself we win in the end. God bless the soul of children in the womb.
I reckon that, like her husband, Michelle supports discrimination. She must believe that some children are to be deemed fully human & worthy of life while other children are to be deemed less than worthy & deserving of dismemberment & being delivered alive or having their brains sucked out. Interesting that she does not seem to be mindful of a time in American history when a whole race of human beings were legally at the discretion of their owners. Someone needs to send Michelle & her husband: http://www.maafa21.com/
Where did you get that photo of the infant, Jill?
My heart hurts for the poor little infant in the picture. I truly don’t understand how people who are in favor of abortion (particularly of the late- or mid-term varieties) can look at that stuff and still say that abortion is OK. They can try all kinds of twisted logic and verbal gyrations to try and get around the earlier abortions, but how on earth could you possibly justify what happened to the child in the picture above, under any circumstances? To even the most ardent abortion supporter, that should obviously be a CHILD, not “products of conception”, “tissue”, or the “property” of its mother (or father).
Every now and then when a horrific infant murder case comes up in the news and the law enforcement personnel who had to process the crime scene are quoted about how terrible it was and how the memory of the scene will stay with them forever, etc. – I think of abortion and wonder if they’d feel the same. It’s just as much a murder scene as any crime they would have investigated. Where is the anger? The outrage? The desire to bring justice for the person (or persons) responsible for such a heinous crime?
C’mon do they really sound narcissistic?
I’ve spent … my first … I came … Barack and I made … we lived … our own.
Actually, is that really kids’ dreams? To step foot in the White House?
Well, maybe it is … now that the Obamas moved in.
Narcissism, eh?
I’m on facebook on this app called Argumentum and there’s someone who had the nerve to say that the baby is leeching off the woman’s body and uninvited. And this person is ignorant of the law because she thinks abortion is only legal through the first three months.
Quite sad. I’m tired of the leeching argument.
And I wonder how those poor daughters feel about abortion……..wouldn’t it be ironic if in 10 years those girls became pro life activists?
Liz, any biologist will tell you that a fetus is not a parasite. A parasite weakens and eventually will kill its host. Yes, we feel tired during pregnancy but a healthy pregnancy will not kill the mother. This is nonsense.
Lizfromnebraska–i’m tired of the leeching argument too. you leeched off your mother, I leeched off my mother–we all were embryos once! What a dumb argument. My toddler still can’t get into the fridge to fix his lunch or pour a cup of milk by himself. He has no money to buy food for himself…i guess he is “leeching” off of me! Could i then kill him if I wished? What a DUMB argument!
pro-aborts are all hypocrites. They always pretend to just “love children!” then turn around and push for more children to be killed in the womb. I wish someone would shove a picture of a baby killed in a partial birth abortion in Michelle’s face and make her give a straight answer! So-called “journalists” in this country make me sick the way they pander to the “elite” in Washington.
Liz-the fetus is not a parascite because parascitism is between two members of different species. The fetus is leeching off the mother because it has a mammal nature(bestowed on it by having biological mammal parents) and is in gestation. The reason why the fetus is in the womb is because it was created by the biological parent’s action that puts two reproductive cells together-hence, offspring. Just like any other mammal, and not to be held responsible for his or her creation.
The leeches are the two that indulged in sex, and when conception resulted,they demonstrated they were the irresponsible leeches who wanted to abort the outcome.
In Michelle’s case the question could go a step further: “If you love children so much, why do you support what you call a ‘legitimate medical procedure’ where children are delivered breech up to the head, stabbed in the nape of the neck, brains suctioned, skull collapsed with forceps, and delivered dead?”
Remember the Red Envelope Project?
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2009/02/red_envelope_pr.html
Maybe they could start a new campaign to ask Michelle this very question.
Just to be clear Lizfromnebraska is not saying SHE thinks the fetus is a leech but rather she was arguing with someone online who believes that. And I’ve met quite a few pro-aborts who believe that line of thought.
I wish a reporter would ask the obvious question: “If you love children so much, why do you support abortion?
That’s not an obvious question at all. There is no contradiction between loving children and supporting legal abortion.
You just think it should be legal for them to be chopped up in their mother’s womb, scraped out, and thrown into an incinerator.
YES, THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE! YOU MUST LOVE CHILDREN!
If this is how you express love for someone, I can’t imagine how you’d want someone to be treated that you hate.
Hal @ 1:24PM,
You must be pulling our leg. Come on, admit it.
Love doesn’t abort.
What about the unborn children in their mother’s wombs, Hal? When do they become human infants/children to you?
Delivering a child to its head, stabbing it in the back of the skull, sucking its brains out and delivering the dead child=Partial Birth Abortion.
Michelle supports this and LOVES CHILDREN!!
And you, Hal?
IF you love children, you would NEVER encourage abortion and/or be an accessory to an abortion.
The parasite arguement got me for the longest time. But it’s true–under no circomstance can a fetus be scientifically catigorized as a “parasite.” However, I can see how someone would be fooled by that–I had rebuked with, “We were all parasites once, and if that’s a capital crime then shouldn’t we all plead guilty? A crime does not lessen with years, after all.” And the person I was arguing with said, “But our parents willingly let us be parasites, so we didn’t commit a crime.” And I was stumped. I wish I could find them again and pursue the matter, but in the end they all revert to that “overpopulation” bull, and whenever I try to argue against it they are at liberty to call me a liar and my sources lies. It’s not even a question of whether or not overpopulation is really a threat. It’s a question of how to deal with it: through intelligence or by brutal means like abortion. Are we really back to square one, here? When will man learn to stop clinging to his pride and the present and love his fellow human beings?
P.S.- I’m beginning to think you’re a closet pro-lifer, Hal, and you get a kick out of riling us up because you feel the same way. No pro-abort would go at this for as LONG as you have. But, it could just be you have absolutely nothing better to do than peep at the other side and make toddler-level comments with absolutely no purpose.
Isn’t it obvious… Michelle Obama is probably post-abortive. When you are post abortive, you want to help people make a “good” decision. She is hurting like other women out there.
Every time I see a picture of a human being aborted I wish it was front page of the newpaper and news. I keep telling myself we win in the end. God bless the soul of children in the womb.
Posted by: Rose at October 5, 2009 6:36 AM
Rose,
That’s right! WE WIN IN THE END! :)
There is no contradiction between loving children and supporting legal abortion.
Posted by: Hal at October 5, 2009 1:24 PM
None, Hal? You really buy that?
Because I really can’t think of a whole lot of worse ways to die than by having your body torn apart, limb by limb, and then having your scull crushed.
D&E and D&C abortions aren’t even the *really* controversial ones, either.
How, exactly, does one support this procedure and then turn around and claim to love children?
How does a person support sucking out a living human being’s brain, and then go on to say that she loves human beings?
Hal,
If your statement had been, “There is no contradiction between loving certain children and supporting legal abortion”, then that would make sense.
The fundamental nature of abortion is that some children are to be lovingly welcomed and others are to be discarded. I do not question that you care about certain groups of children, those that are of a specific age and older, but there are children that you have deemed too young to matter.
M.O, like her husband B.O. is a progressive liberbal humanist.
It is a complete waste of time to give their ‘blah’ [as HAL defines it] any consideration. Pay close attention to what they do and give no weight to what they say.
yor bro ken
This just in:
Barack Obama cancels meeting with Dalai Lama ‘to keep China happy’
President Barack Obama has refused to meet the Dalai Lama in Washington this week in a move to curry favour with the Chinese.
————————————————–
Wouldn’t it make more sense to ‘curry’ favor with India?
The Chinese have only occupied Tibet for 58 years.
It’s been longer than that senses the Cubs have won the World Series.
But as everyone knows, the business of America is business and a billion people can buy a lot T-bills.
yor bro ken
typo alert.
Dang it! should have read ‘since’ or at least ‘sins’ the Cubs won the World Series.
Homonyms, those are words that attracted to words of the same person.
Sinonyms, those are homonyms who act in accordance with their desires.
Antonyms, those are words that say ‘no’ but they really mean ‘yes’.
Thesaurus: a small herbivore that uses a plethora of flowery words to lull preditors to sleep to facilitate ecapes from life threatenging situations.
yor bro ken
ken,
Where to begin? LOL!
ken,
The Cubs will win the World Series the year Chicago gets the Olympics.
I agree with the person who said Michelle is probably post-abortive. And I wonder how it made her children feel when Obama made the public comment about not wanting them “punished with a baby” if they became pregnant. They are sooner or later going to wonder where those words came from, and if their mother and father felt “punished” with them.
Never have I seen a president who is almost “single issue” on abortion. Heck with jobs, the economy and foreign policy – gotta kill those babies or no health care. The two of them are sad people, despite the so called glory of living in the White House. I pray for them and await the 2010 elections.
It is utter hypocrisy and empty words IMO.
Exactly WHAT sacrifice did Michelle and Barak make in order to be in Copenhagen? Anyone?
“they all revert to that “overpopulation” bull, ”
I see them do that a lot. I tell them there are better ways to deal with that none of which involves reverting to the kind of human rights nightmare China is in right now:
*offer discounted or easily obtainable sterilizations
*no more IVF
*if it actually gets to be an issue, why not do tax incentives or something
*make more semi-permanent forms of birth control readily available
*Be serious in education of proper birth control use.
Just a few suggestions. I’ve never had a pro-choicer say that these wouldn’t help.
Neither have I pip. That’s because they do the opposite of what they say.
Hi Janet 10:55PM
Puh-leeze Janet, how can you even ask? Surely you can see how travelling alllll those miles in a luxurious private plane with some, you know, low class unknown like Oprah, to some God forsaken hole like Copenhagen is such a sacrifice.
How enduring such luxury, not to mention a taxpayer paid tour of Copenhagen and, horror of horrors, lunch with the Queen, can be viewed as anything other than a sacrifice by our courageous First Lady is beyond me Janet. It should certainly make you and all of us proud to be an American.
And our men and women who serve in Afghanistan and Iraq thought they were roughing it!
And you, Hal?
Posted by: carla e at October 5, 2009 4:43 PM
Me too Carla. I love children. They’re fantastic. People who have had abortions,and people who don’t want abortion made illegal do love children. And puppies too.
Abel-you can’t spout the overpopulation argument without agreeing with the pro lifer that the unborn are part of the human species and that abortion kills them. Its like saying ‘Fox hunting is a control on the population of foxes.’ and then saying ‘But the things killed and taken away from the main population during a successful fox-hunt was not a fox’
If fetus’ are not human and abortion kills them rather than humans, I would expect a dramatic decrease in the fetus population, but not the human population. If you want to decrease a population of certain species, it would make more sense to kill members of that species rather than non-members of that species.
I’m really confused…I know Abel is pro-life, and it seems to me that so is oryxx… but it also seems that they are arguing… am I missing something?
I think Oryxx is arguing with the people Abel talks about having to argue with… not Abel himself. Abel spoke of having to deal with those who revert to the overpopulation line and Oryxx is discussing his take on the overpopulation line…. or, possibly Oryxx was reading too quickly and didn’t realize Abel wasn’t the one making that argument….
ah, in that case, I apologize for my lack of netiquette-in both cases I was expanding on my fellow prolifers arguments
Bah. No, I’m just a slow old man :)
You know, these’s Senator’s and Congressman,{and the current people in the White House} before they vote on these issues, they should be made to be in a room, when an abortion or partial birth-abortion is being done and lets see how they would react to that. Let them hear the sounds and see how life is being destroyed, and see what is done with those’s precious little one’s when the abortion is done. I wonder how many would change their minds and I wonder how many are made of stone!!