Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Clinton’ Category

I stumbled onto this one posted at Dry Fly Politics yesterday and the word needs to spread. Personally, I like Gov. Mitt Romney, have even more recently decided to take a stand more aggressively on this issue. Giving women a choice and then “hoping our culture will turn the tide and choose life for itself” isn’t going to happen anywhere in the near future.

I watched videos of these “late-term” abortions and couldn’t believe what I was seeing. If you want to wake up to reality, roam around Abort73 for a while and get a grip at what’s going on (check here from Abort73 to see a bit more).

But here Barrack Obama has voted TWICE to allow live-birth abortions to be shelved in utility rooms. This is the BAIPA act.

As a nurse at an Illinois hospital in 1999, I discovered babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in soiled utility rooms. I discovered infanticide.

Legislation was presented on the federal level and in various states called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.

BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote. Even Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry agreed a mother’s right to “choose” stopped at her baby’s delivery.

The bill also passed overwhelmingly in the House. NARAL went neutral on it. Abortion enthusiasts publicly agreed that fighting BAIPA would appear extreme. President Bush signed BAIPA into law in 2002.

But in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left.

I testified in 2001 and 2002 before a committee of which Obama was a member.

Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women’s rights or abortionists’ rights. Obama’s clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed.

In 2003, as chairman of the next Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion clinics.

(As chair of that same committee, Obama once abruptly ended a hearing early, right before Scott and Janet Willis, the parents of six children killed as a result of Illinois’ drivers licenses for bribes scandal, were to testify in favor of Choose Life license plate legislation. I was there for that one, too. The Willises had traveled three hours. Reporters filled the room. Obama stalled. He later killed the bill when no one was around.)

[snip]

Obama insinuated opposition to abortion is based only on religion, lecturing pro-lifers like me to “explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.”

I don’t recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash.

Neither do I recall religion being brought into the partial-birth abortion ban debate. I recall comparisons made to U.S. laws ensuring animals being killed are treated humanely. I recall testimony that late-term babies feel excruciating pain while being aborted.

Obama stated pro-life proposals must be “amenable to reason.”

OK, Sen. Obama, let’s reason. Explain why you support abortion for whatever rationale, at whatever gestation, by whatever means. Explain why you support infanticide, if banning it might interfere with abortion.

Okay everyone, wake up out of your “rock fan groupie” trance and dig to find out what this Obama-monster is really all about.

Read Full Post »

Campaign Dishonesty from the Clintons and McCain

By George Will

Some highlights about the Clintons:

The week before South Carolina voted was the week when, at last, even some Democrats noticed. Noticed, that is, the distinctive cloud of coarseness that hovers over the Clintons, seeping acid rain.

That cloud has been a constant accouterment of their careers, and has been influencing the nation’s political weather for 16 years. But by the time Bill Clinton brought the Democratic Party in from the wilderness in 1992, the party had lost five of the previous six, and seven of the previous 10, presidential elections. Democrats were so grateful to him, and so determined not to resume wandering in the wilderness, that they averted their gazes to avoid seeing, and hummed show tunes to avoid hearing, the Clintons’ routine mendacities.

And about St. John of Arizona (McCain)

This was a garden-variety dishonesty, the manufacture of which does not cause a Clinton in midseason form to break a sweat. And it was no worse than — actually, not as gross as — St. John of Arizona’s crooked-talk claim in Florida that Mitt Romney wanted to “surrender and wave a white flag, like Senator Clinton wants to do” in Iraq because Romney “wanted to set a date for withdrawal that would have meant disaster.”

Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, the Clintons should bask in the glow of John McCain’s Clintonian gloss on this fact: Ten months ago Romney said that President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki should discuss, privately, “a series of timetables and milestones.” That unremarkable thought was twisted by McCain, whose distortions are notably clumsy, as when Romney said, accurately, that he alone among the candidates has had extensive experience in private-sector business. That truth was subjected to McCain’s sophistry, and he charged that Romney had said “you haven’t had a real job” if you had a military career. If, this autumn, voters must choose between Clinton and McCain, they will face, at least stylistically, an echo, not a choice.

And of course all of us Romney fans know this to our core, but it’s so great to hear it:

But that dreary scenario need not come to pass. Romney seems to have found his voice as attention turns to the economy, a subject concerning which McCain seems neither conversant nor eager to become so.

Thanks George for painting reality the way it is. And of course the vantage point RealClearPolitics gives us is “priceless”.

Read Full Post »

American United have a beauty. It’s a movie titled “Hillary the Movie”. They want to pay for a 10 second commercial/trailer for “Hillary the Movie“, BUT because of McCain-Fiengold they can’t show the 10 second trailer without a 4 second disclaimer from disclaimers from candidates. This is a complete violation of free speech that has been muzzled and the group intends to take this to the Supreme Court. But in case you can’t wait, you can see the trailers at their website or even buy the DVD.

Explosive New Hillary Movie Exposes the Clintons

Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:42 AM

By: Kenneth R. Timmerman

Hillary Clinton supporters will hate the new movie that premiered last night in Washington, D.C.

Although the movie is about their idol, executive producer David N. Bossie is hoping that Obama and John Edwards supporters will pounce on it with glee to warn voters of the dangers of a third Clinton presidency.

Bossie, a former congressional investigator, says he intentionally released “Hillary: the Movie: before the Super Tuesday primaries in February to give pause to Democrats weighing their choices in the upcoming primaries.

The movie was written and edited by veteran documentary film maker Alan Peterson for Citizens United, a conservative political action group based in Washington, DC.

Far from a rehash of the 1990s, “Hillary: the Movie” is like the sediment at the bottom of an old wine bottle. It is the hard, crystallized essence of Hillary’s contribution to the Clinton years.

The Clinton camp is hoping that Americans are weary of the decade of scandals that plagued Bill Clinton’s eight years in the White House, and dismiss attempts to dredge up the scandals as “old news.”

But don’t worry, says former Clinton pollster Dick Morris, who writes regularly for Newsmax. If you thought you’d had enough of the old scandals, “the good news is, we’ll get new ones!” Read more here

To see more about the litigation process, take a peek at this…

January 10, 2008, 4:25 PM

Hillary The Movie, Now In Courtrooms

Posted by Brian Montopoli

Judges are now deciding whether a movie critical of Hillary Clinton and the ads promoting it constitute political advertising.

The makers of “Hillary: The Movie” say the movie and its ads should not be subject to campaign finance laws, which limit when ads can be broadcast and require disclaimers. But the judges deciding the case seem skeptical of their claims, according to an Associated Press report.

An attorney for Citizens United, a conservative advocacy group, said the film and its ads should be considered “issue-oriented” speech, since there is no direct appeal over who to vote for. Here’s the exchange that followed a judges inquiry into what the issue is, according to AP:

“That Hillary Clinton is a European Socialist,” [attorney] Bopp replied. “That is an issue.”

“Which has nothing to do with her campaign?” U.S District Judge Royce C. Lamberth interjected.

“Not specifically, no,” Bopp replied.

In the film, AP reports, conservative commentators make the case for why Clinton is not fit to be president. One ad for the movie features conservative commentator Ann Coulter offering “a kind word” about Clinton: She “looks good in a pant suit.” An announcer then says, “Now, a movie about everything else.”

Looks like a goodie.

Read Full Post »

From Jonah Goldberg:

Conservatism’s buzz-kill

…The problem is that conservatism, even Reagan’s brand, wasn’t as popular as we often remember it. Government spending continued to increase under Reagan, albeit a bit more slowly. Today, the U.S. population is 30% larger but government spending is 84% greater (adjusting for inflation) than it was when Reagan delivered his 1981 inaugural address. That was the speech in which he declared: “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem,” and vowed to “curb the size and influence of the federal establishment.”

Liberals have an inherent advantage. As long as they promise incremental, “pragmatic” expansions of the government, voters generally give them a pass. And every new expansion since FDR and the New Deal has created a constituency for continued government largesse.

If Hillary Clinton promised to socialize medicine — which, let the record show, she has attempted to do in the past — she would lose. But her current campaign promise to simply expand coverage sounds reasonable enough — even though there’s no reason to think she’ll stop pushing for a national single-payer healthcare system (a.k.a. socialized medicine).

…”Liberals sell the welfare state one brick at a time, deflecting inquiries about the size and cost of the palace they’re building,” writes William Voegeli in an illuminating essay, “The Trouble with Limited Government,” in the current issue of the Claremont Review of Books.

Continue here


Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg

Also see: Glenn’s Recommended Reading List

Glenn Beck talks more about the great importance of this book – read complete transcript here:

I’m curious about something and I’ve been curious on this one thing and it is a way for me to be able to afford the research that would have to go into it. And one of those books was on — I said, what was it, about six months ago I don’t believe that the communist party ever went away. I don’t believe that Russia actually collapsed. I think they all went in hiding. I don’t think that after we had the situation with McCarthy that those communists just went away. We just stopped looking for them. What happened to all of them? Where did they all go? And so what I’ve wanted to do is fund the research to be able to track them. How did it happen? When did it start? When did it come here? How did it go underground? Part of the reason why I wanted to do it is because Amity Shlaes’ book called The Forgotten Man. It shows some of the beginning, the Progressive movement that Hillary Clinton is talking about. “Well, I like to consider myself a modern early 20th century Progressive.” Remember what we first looked that up on the air? What is an early 20th century Progressive? That should spook the living bat crap out of you. What a early Progressive was is a fascist.

Read more here

Another book Glenn is promoting is “Amity Shlaes’ book called The Forgotten Man”

Also do some reading on the Fabian Society:

Fabian Society Socialism

The Fabian Society is a British socialist intellectual movement, whose purpose is to advance the socialist cause by gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary means. It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning in the late 19th century and then up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party during this period; subsequently, it affected the policies of newly independent British colonies, especially India, and is still in existence today, one of 15 socialist societies affiliated to the Labour Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society), Canada (the Douglas-Coldwell Foundation and in past the League for Social Reconstruction), and New Zealand.

Read Full Post »

22 WAYS TO BE A GOOD DEMOCRAT
IT’S NOT SO HARD, EVEN A CAVE MAN CAN DO IT….


1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are more affected by soccer moms driving SUVs than by scientifically documented cyclical changes in the earth’s climate.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.

7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can’t teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

9. You have to believe that hunters don’t care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make The Passion of the Christ for financial gain only.

12. You have to believe that the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and Alexander Graham Bell.

15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.

17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried is because the right people haven’t been in charge.

18. You have to believe that conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.

19. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites, and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

20. You have to believe that illegal Democratic Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States .

21. You have to believe that it’s okay to give federal workers the day off on Christmas Day, but it’s not okay to say “Merry Christmas.”
 
22. You have to believe that this message is part of a vast right wing conspiracy.
 
Ready to vote?

Read Full Post »

President Clinton, Sen. Hillary Clinton Believe McCain’s Immigration Plan “The Right Thing To Do.”

“Thirdly, I think the humane thing to do here is to give the people that are here and are working and have no law problems, except that they’re not here legally, a chance to work their way into legal citizenship. … It’s also consistent with the bill that Senator McCain supported in the Senate. I think it’s the right thing to do, and so does Hillary.” – President Bill Clinton (Pres. Bill Clinton, Hillary For President Campaign Event, Bow, NH, 1/5/08)

In New Hampshire On Saturday, President Clinton Said He And Sen. Hillary Clinton Agree With Sen. McCain’s Immigration Plan:

President Clinton: Hillary And I Agree With Sen. McCain’s Immigration Bill. PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: “Thirdly, I think the humane thing to do here is to give the people that are here and are working and have no law problems, except that they’re not here legally, a chance to work their way into legal citizenship. You know, the vast majority of these people are completely law abiding, and they pay taxes, even, but they’re not here lawfully. … I talk to people, you know, and I try to figure out what’s going on. I think that is the fairer system. It’s also consistent with the bill that Senator McCain supported in the Senate. I think it’s the right thing to do, and so does Hillary.” (Pres. Bill Clinton, Hillary For President Campaign Event, Bow, NH, 1/5/08)

Sen. McCain Also Revealed That He Still Supports McCain-Kennedy:

Sen. McCain Still Supports His Immigration Plan That America Rejected. QUESTION: “But fundamentally, don’t you still have the same plan for a path to citizenship that you fundamentally held months ago?” MCCAIN: “Sure.” (ABC/WMUR, [Unverified Transcript], Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Manchester, NH, 1/5/08)

Read Full Post »