Barack Obama Abortionist – in – Chief
May 20, 2009 by Guest Writer 2
Filed under Civil Rights, General
Abortion seems to be one of those flies swarming around President Elect Barack Obama. He has championed partial birth abortion and attempted to deny basic health care to children that survive abortions all while in the Illinois Senate. Now he is in the position to sign into law bills that could damage both the pro-life and the pro-choice movements.
American Sentinel published a thought provoking article about how abortions effect the black community and if anyone has noticed the conflict of interest within the black community by voting in a man who supports the very action that is killing 5% of the black population. It has been reported that 50 abortions happen per 1000 black women. However the numbers are far more alarming when you consider abortions per live births for black women,543 abortions happen per 1000 births . It truly is a dangerous time to be a black baby when you only have a 50% chance of being born. That is a serious wound on the black inner city culture. Anne Hendershot relates that abortion clinics are as common as dollar stores on the streets.National Black Pro Life Union, abortion is the number one killer of African Americans.America. Obama supporters are confident the President Elect will support a measure by congress to reinstitute funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNPFA). Funding to UNPFA was stopped by the Bush Administration in 2002 citing the Kemp-Kasten Amendment. The Amendments prohibits funds from supporting forced or coercive abortions.China‘s one child policy.Some feel it is not only the responsibility of Barack Obama to address this issue, but the responsibility of other black leaders like Al Sharpton, Collin Powell, Condaleeza Rice, Jeremiah Write, and Jesse Jackson.
Barack Obama’s views on abortions not only fly in the face of pro-life advocates but also pro-choice and the reach is far beyond the borders of
According to Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte UNDFA funds went to enforcing
UNFPA provides support for and participates in the management of the Chinese government’s program of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization.”Yet the silence is deafening from the pro-choice crowd in the main stream media, Chinese women are being forced into sterilization and abortion and have been deprived of choice.
For those who enjoy looking at data and statistics. Most of the numbers in the above article can be found at the Guttmacher Institute website. – Courtesy of DaughterofAmerica
Considering the subject of the article, is it any wonder that the Abortionist-in-chief inspired protests from pro-life catholic students and pro-life catholic adults at the commencement speech at Notre Dame today? Barack Obama’s position is not simply that of pro-choice, but is also close to sickening. While he worried about passing laws to allow partial-birth abortions, there were other laws introduced that would have lead to initiatives to curb unplanned pregnancy before the choice of abortion was forced upon a woman. His empty claim in wanting to promote these initiatives falls short of true action, a vote.
Why would a Catholic Institution invite anyone to speak at commencement who has caused so much harm to the unborn innocent lives? Is it not bad enough that Catholicism has to deal with its own demons, as well as trying to convince America that they hold true to a doctrine inspired by Jesus Christ.
Children Indoctrinated into the Cult of Personality
May 19, 2009 by Guest Writer 2
Filed under General
While shopping at Target, the chic side of the WalMart genre store, I found myself looking at a rather irritating sight, two children’s books aimed at introducing young minds to Barack Obama. Now these weren’t the traditional biography books with simple words to teach young patriots about their current President, these were books meant to indoctrinate our children into the cult of personality.
The first book was called Barack Obama: Son of Promise, Child of Hope by Nikki Grimes. The synopsis reads:
Ever since Barack Obama was young, Hope has lived inside him. From the beaches of Hawaii to the streets of Chicago, from the jungles of Indonesia to the plains of Kenya, he has held on to Hope. Even as a boy, Barack knew he wasn’t quite like anybody else, but through his journeys he found the ability to listen to Hope and become what he was meant to be: a bridge to bring people together.
Now see Obama was not this exceptional young man who inspired those around him. Far from it, he was a little boy who was left by his father and raised by a single mother. This is a rather typical childhood for many Americans. What was exceptional was the fact that his mother and grandmother gave him opportunities that most American children do not have. He was able to study abroad while living with his mother and stepfather. He was able to attend a private school in Hawaii! He went to Harvard, how many American children can say the same?
These books paint Obama as a miracle of a little black boy whose personality beat all odds and he because the first African American President of the United States of America. Well here is reality. Obama is half black and half white; his opportunities were given to him by the very people who have been casualties of his new identity. He was not from a humble home, but from a dysfunctional relationship that was supplemented by a wonderful stepfather and loving grandparents. He is no more or less special than any other President, except you do not see children’s books on George W. Bush or Bill Clinton.
Another book I have seen is called Mama Voted for Obama. It was rather cute at first, talking about all the animals mama didn’t vote for, however in the end there was a phrase “ Now some Mamas voted for a man named John, some voted for a mastodon.” John was holding the mastodon by the tail and holding a sign in his other hand that says “no we can’t.” Is it not wonderful that children are taught from an early age to disparage a veteran and compare him to an extinct animal? The animal also represents what Democrats feel about the Republican Party.
Well, Democrats may think the Elephant should be a Mastodon, but at least Republican’s aren’t a bunch of Jackasses.
GOP to Brand Democrats as Socialists
May 14, 2009 by Guest Writer 2
Filed under General, Politics
Politico has reported that members of the GOP have called a special session of the RNC to declare the Democratic Party a Socialist Party.
“A member of the Republican National Committee told (Roger Simon) Tuesday that when the RNC meets in an extraordinary special session next week, it will approve a resolution rebranding Democrats as the “Democrat Socialist Party.”
The resolution will call for Democrats to be honest with Americans and rebrand themselves to be in line with the Obama administration plans that are being hailed European-style socialism. This seemingly rash reaction from Republicans comes at the heels of an increased national debt now projected to be in the trillions, the heavy handed tactics used to cull the banks and businesses, and the increase of government-run social programs.
Michael Steele opposes the resolution saying it will only invite further criticism of the Republican Party. Republicans, however, are also tossing around a vote of no confidence in Steele as their party leader. When asked the question “Will this resolution mean Michael Steele must refer to Democrats as the Democrat Socialist Party?” one RNC member said, “Who Cares?”
If one is to argue against Obama’s plans for socialism one only needs to remember his words to Joe the Plumber. He is going to “spread the wealth around.” Key words used by those who advocate a socialist agenda. Within Obama’s first 100 days in office he has passed a 3 trillion dollar budget, a 700 billion dollar stimulus package, fired a CEO of a private business that accepted government assistance, jockeyed for more power over banks, and countless other actions that all smack of big government set up to placate populist views. The GIVE act also came dangerously close to mandating government service and government led education programs influenced by William Ayers.
A defector from the USSR weighed in on the subject of socialism in America. He indicated that he does not think Americans will allow socialism to take over. However he indicated if that does happen it will come at the cost of freedom and violence. He explained that if people are on the government dole they will have no initiative to work. How do you get people to work when they are completely provided for? You make them work at the point of a gun. This brings to mind the outrageous gun control laws of Chicago, and the support Obama has for those laws.
So are the tax-and-spend Democrats advocating socialism? Many in America think so, and now the internet is abuzz with one simple quote that bears repeating.
“The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
Is the Obama Administration Seeking to Control All Banks?
May 13, 2009 by Guest Writer 2
Filed under Business, Economy, General
Banks that have accepted TARP money are in quite a jam, they now fall under the “gentle guiding hand” of the government run by the Obama Administration. Congress slipped in pay regulations in the recent economic stimulus bill. The last minute additions had banks scrambling to pay back the money, but the government will not allow this till the banks can prove their strength and success without government intervention.
The new considerations, while not concrete, do carry with them the weight of the federal government. Remeber that many of the Banks that recieved TARP funds did so only because they were threatened with an audit if they did not accept. The considerations on the table include:
…incorporating compensation as a “safety and soundness” concern on official bank examinations as well as expanding the existing regulatory powers of the Securities and Exchange Commission and Federal Reserve to obtain more information regarding compensation. – New York Times
These Guidelines are attached to the rules put forth in the economic stimulus bill and may reach beyond the banks that accepted funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program. They are already extending to Wall Street as an example of Obama’s move to secure financial institutions that support much of the weight of America’s economy.
The question that begs to be asked in this situation is this; do we really want the government to control the banks? Consider these government run institutions which are in trouble and failing, as well as the personal habits of many in congress and the Obama appointees.
The United States Postal Service is raising stamp rates yet again. The USPS is also contemplating not delivering on Saturdays to save operating costs. While the government run services wags its accusing finger at emails, three fingers are pointing right back and they are labeled, waste, lack of innovation, and poor quality of service.
Rubbergate is still being investigated and there is a never ending flow of information on Congressional Democrats and some Republicans who bounced checks at the House Bank. They ran debts of tens of thousands of dollars and received no fee for the bounced checks. Yet the Congress had the gall to pass legislation on the little guy to punish them for floating checks.
Obama Appointees and Obama himself seem to be running afoul of the scandal police and the IRS left and right, no pun intended. Timothy Geithner is the worst of the bunch, having neglected to pay taxes on services received and is now in charge of the Treasury. Last but not least are the Obama’s alleged dealings in real estate that echo Hillary Clinton’s own troubles.
Should the government be in control of the banks and the economy? The evidence points to no.
The Obama Tax Reforms Causing Further Gap in Employment
May 12, 2009 by Guest Writer 2
Filed under Economy, General
The concept that it takes money to make money is a very basic concept in the scheme of economics. One must use money to build a business from the ground up, including materials, storefront, technology, information systems, marketing, and the most important support of a business, the labor. Small businesses are credited for employing the most people across America. They are the life blood of employment in the country, and they are being tapped and drained by the Obama Tax Policy.
Taxing small businesses cuts into monies made which means they have less to invest. That means small business owners cannot expand their business or afford to pay many workers or to pay them well. In the end the less people making good money the lower the tax revenues being collected by the government. High taxes are the surest way to destroy an economy.
J.D. Foster, a senior fellow in economics at the Heritage Foundation, who performed the analysis, argues Obama’s policies will only widen the gap. Unfortunately, the president’s policies will more likely decrease employment than help to reach his target,” he wrote in his analysis. Policies like higher tax rates on small businesses, sustained massive budget deficits, doubling the national debt (and the consequent upward pressure on interest rates) and the building threats of government meddling in companies are eroding the foundations of the economy today and for the future,” he said.
President Barack Obama estimated that his stimulus package would create 3.5 million jobs by 2010, but his other economic policies seem to be cutting into that ambition. A recent report suggests that only 150,000 jobs have been created and that is using creative mathematics. Over 2 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office and the degradation of the labor force can no longer be blamed on President George W. Bush.
In April alone around 539,000 jobs were lost. Many are relieved to see the number of jobs lost shrinking in comparison to the last 4 months, others still say the job losses are one too many considering the new unemployment rate is 8.9%, the highest it has been in 26 years.
One has to wonder if there are less taxes being generated because of the tax burden on small businesses, less jobs because businesses cannot afford them, and a still growing number of jobless who are tapping into unemployment, how is the Obama Administration going to obtain the money they need for the largely expanded government programs in the United States? Perhaps Obama and his Democrats are trying to devalue the dollar more than the Yen so foreign businesses bring jobs over here? Who knows, but what people do know is that failed policies of the past are no way to take us to the future.
