An Article on Obama Everyone should Read

[Abashag]

The following and other substantive articles can be found at Truth Sleuth (http://www.thetruthsleuth.org/?m=200709) Check the Archives from August 2007- September 2007 for more on Obama.

September 6, 2007

WHO IS BARACK OBAMA (Part 6) (http://www.thetruthsleuth.org/?p=26)

Filed under: Politics (http://www.thetruthsleuth.org/?cat=9) — The Truth Sleuth @ 4:19 pm

Although Senator Obama had invited his pastor to pray the invocation at the formal announcement of his candidacy for the presidency last February, the prayer was cancelled at the last moment. Rev. Wright blamed the cancellation of his prayer on Senator Obama’s political advisers, who he felt wanted the senator’s campaign to get out of the starting gate without being saddled with the kind of controversy Mr. Obama’s close association with him would undoubtedly create. Despite the cancellation of his public prayer, Pastor Wright still prayed privately with the Obama family just before the senator’s public presidential announcement.
In an interview in March, Rev. Wright admitted that his constant criticizing of the establishment would not aid Senator Obama in his auditioning for the ultimate establishment position. “If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to distance himself from me,” Rev. Wright conceded. He even admitted that he had “said [so] to Barack personally” and that the senator had responded, “Yeah, that might have to happen.”
While none of us should look for the good reverend to be sharing a public platform with his presidential-aspiring parishioner, there’s no reason for any of us to doubt that the good reverend will continue to have the ear of our would-be president. The Obama campaign may steer clear of the good reverend in public, but one cannot help but wonder how much the campaign’s candidate will be steered by his controversial clergyman in private.
We all know that the old adage “What you see is what you get” is not applicable to today’s politicians. When it comes to present-day politics and the public persona of political candidates, what we see is hardly ever what we get. Being constantly told by their political handlers what positions to take, what words to say, and even what clothes to wear, today’s politicians are nothing more than actors and actresses acting out roles that the latest opinion polls suggest should be played.
If ultraliberal Barack Obama can persuade voters that he is a moderate capable of uniting all Americans between the two extremes of liberalism and conservatism, he deserves an Oscar. His theatrical performance will place him among the greatest political thespians of all times, since he’s really no moderate at all, but an unconscionable liberal who has actually staked out positions to the left of NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League). For example, let’s consider Mr. Obama’s unconscionable opposition in 2002 to Illinois’ Induced Infant Liability Act.
Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse, became a leading opponent of “live-birth abortions” after witnessing the dastardly deed firsthand at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois. In this abominable practice, a newborn that survives a botched abortion is left abandoned until it dies. When Nurse Stanek brought this unconscionable practice to the public’s attention, she was met with stern opposition from a little-known Illinois state legislator by the name of Barrack Hussein Obama.
In 2002, the Illinois State Legislature attempted to outlaw this abominable practice with its Induced Infant Liability Act. Although one would think that no decent human being could possibly oppose such legislation, Barrack Obama did so. His indefensible opposition to a bill designed to protect the lives of newborn babies and his shameless support of abandoning newborns to die should come as no surprise, however, since Mr. Obama twice attempted to kill similar legislation in committee. The first time he did so by voting against a bill brought before a committee upon which he served; the second time he did so by keeping a bill from even coming up for a vote before a committee that he chaired.
Jill Stanek actually appeared before the committee that Barack Obama chaired, the Illinois Senate’s Health and Human Services Committee. Despite photographs of premature babies she presented to the committee and her own eyewitness testimony of how newborns were being left to die after surviving botched abortions, Mr. Obama blocked his committee from even voting on outlawing “live-birth abortions.” In the end, Nurse Stanek chillingly concluded that her words and pictures “didn’t faze him [Obama] at all.”
What kind of a man is Barrack Obama? How can anyone be so calloused and cold toward the most innocent and vulnerable among us? I don’t know about you, but I’m extremely uncomfortable with someone living next door, much less at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, who remains unfazed in the face of something as reprehensible as “live-birth abortions.”
In the same year that Mr. Obama voted against a state law outlawing “live-birth abortions,” the United States Senate voted unanimously for a federal law to do so. Even the U.S. Congress passed the legislation with only fifteen dissenting votes. What’s more, President Bush signed the legislation into law with the support of NARAL; that’s right, even Pro-Choice America couldn’t do what Barrack Obama could—toss newborn survivors of botched abortions into hospital dumpsters.

[MrJim]

He's a pro-"choice" lib~the details matter little...

[SweetDaisyMae]

I will not vote for him.

[imind]

i will, and look forward to it.

[Abashag]

Would you care to explain why?

[ReformedChapin]

I can't vote but if I could I wouldn't vote for the lib.

[rrguy]

Read this from the story above.

the same year that Mr. Obama voted against a state law outlawing “live-birth abortions,” the United States Senate voted unanimously for a federal law to do so

Is not Senator Obama part of the senate?




The truth sleauth is about as reliable as fox news IMO. It is more about voicing a point of view than discovering the truth. To be honest it angers me people post Opinions with some truth & allow readers to believe it is the Truth. So I don't know how much of that I read I dare believe?

I originally had no plan to vote for Obama or any pro-choice democrate. Yet these guys seem to be joining the Mainstream Myths. I am sick of people distorting the truth.

[mont974x4]

simply read up on his "church" and what they beleive and are involved in. They are on par with the disturbing westburo baptist church. His pastor makes jesse jackson and al sharpton look like moderates with no racial issues.

Of course, understanding these things it is clear why his wife is suddenly "proud" of America.

[Simon_Templar]

Read this from the story above.

the same year that Mr. Obama voted against a state law outlawing “live-birth abortions,” the United States Senate voted unanimously for a federal law to do so

Is not Senator Obama part of the senate?




The truth sleauth is about as reliable as fox news IMO. It is more about voicing a point of view than discovering the truth. To be honest it angers me people post Opinions with some truth & allow readers to believe it is the Truth. So I don't know how much of that I read I dare believe?

I originally had no plan to vote for Obama or any pro-choice democrate. Yet these guys seem to be joining the Mainstream Myths. I am sick of people distorting the truth.
read more carefully... Obama was in the Illinois STATE senate. The US NATIONAL Senate voted unanimously.

The article is pointing out that Obama opposed something at the state level that EVERY US senator including all the libs and pro-choicers supported at the national level. In other words, his stand was even more extreme than the most liberal pro-choice US senators at the national level.

[Rodolfo]

I am not voting for him or Clinton! I vote for Huckabee in the caucases because he stood for pretty conservative things and he is a Baptist. I do not trust Clinton or Obama because they stand for some pretty evil things: abortion, gay adoption and marriage, embryonic stem cell research. I think that Obama went to a Muslim school but he is enlisted in some kind of a church...anyway I am not going to vote for either of them.

[edb19]

Sen. Obama has the most liberal voting record in Congress. Of course, Sen. Clinton is right up there too. They both lean strongly towards a socialist government (heaven forbid we actually take responsiblity for ourselves).



My dad (82 years old) calls all of his daughters every Sunday evening. He and I both live in Ohio - with our primary this coming Tuesday. This past Sunday when he called me he asked if I was being inundated by political phone calls and advertisements. I told him I pretty much ignore all of them.

He then pointed out to me that presidential candidates make all sorts of campaign promises - but most of the things they promise are beyond the scope of the office and that congress passes the laws.:doh: Good thing he told me that or I might have believed that as president Sen. Obama could promise the sun and the moon to everyone in the USA. (I'm really not making fun of my dad - he's so sweet. He just wants to be sure his daughters, ages 48-53, are well informed)

[Spudgrandma]

Sen. Obama has the most liberal voting record in Congress. Of course, Sen. Clinton is right up there too. They both lean strongly towards a socialist government (heaven forbid we actually take responsiblity for ourselves).



Boy ain't that the truth, if we don't get back to personal responsiblity we are in really big trouble. :sigh: :cry:

PLEASE NOTE: I bolded what is bolded in the quote.

[tulc]

I am not voting for him or Clinton!

Uhmmm I thought the voting age was 18? :scratch:
tulc(not arguing, just wondering what States 17 year olds can vote in)

[tulc]

deleted, forgot where I was posting. :sorry:
tulc(hates when that happens) :sigh:

[MrJim]

deleted, forgot where I was posting. :sorry:
tulc(hates when that happens) :sigh:

Looks like someone hasn't had enough yet today...here ya go


http://www.mediatinker.com/blog/images/coffee-d70.jpg:thumbsup:

[tulc]

Looks like someone hasn't had enough yet today...here ya go

Ahh Jim, as always you know the answer to my confusion! :)
tulc(that hit the spot..several of them actually!) ;)

[MrJim]

Ahh Jim, as always you know the answer to my confusion! :)
tulc(that hit the spot..several of them actually!) ;)

I know there's no such thing as too much coffee but I think I might have hit my limit today;)

[mont974x4]

That's why I put a Farmer's Brothers commercial coffee maker in my store.

[MrJim]

That's why I put a Farmer's Brothers commercial coffee maker in my store.

Never heard of 'em~is it extra good?

[mont974x4]

They generally supply cafe's and restaurants. Like most coffee it's better to not leave it to burn in the pot. LOL

I brew a pot and then put it in a air pot.

[NDNgirl4ever]

I plan on voting for Senator Obama if he gets the nomination. I think that he could make a good President.

the article suggests fully developed, viable babies are born and tossed into dumpsters. absurd, but i've learned never to trust the publications from the far right. there are instances where this procedure is appropriate, and should be left to doctors to decide if and when it is used
I agree 100%. This article obviously has an anti-choice bias, so it's going to twist the truth. You really shouldn't believe everything that it says.

[Albion]

I plan on voting for Senator Obama if he gets the nomination. I think that he could make a good President.


I agree 100%. This article obviously has an anti-choice bias, so it's going to twist the truth. You really shouldn't believe everything that it says.

That article is hardly the only reason to say that Obama is in favor of infanticide. That's how he voted, and this has been reported in more than one article!

For myself, this is troubling, even if he has a nice style about him, just as are his other extremist positions.

[Simon_Templar]

Personally I think the odds are that Obama will be the next president. This is just proof that substance no longer matters even remotely in American politics.

Obama has practically no experience in high level political office. In his campaign so far he has gone to pains to not say anything about what his beliefs and his policies are, or will be.

He is a good speaker, but in his campaign so far I haven't heard him say a single thing of substance. Everything that comes out of his mouth is some generalized non-committal platitude about change and hope for the future.

The vast majority of his supporters literally know nothing about him, his record, or his beliefs, and he has done everything he can to keep it that way because on those issues he looses every time. What little record he has shows that he is one of the most liberal, leftist, people on the scene. His personal affiliations show this as well. Virtually every one of the very few times he has actually said anything about what he would do as president it has been a huge bomb, again on the extreme left.. such as saying he would reach out to dictators like Ahmedinijad and Chavez.

Many of the republicans I know in the later primaries went out and voted for Obama because they wanted him to beat hillary. First because they are scared of Hillary and second because I think they think Obama will be easier to face in the general election.
I personally think they are wrong on both counts. I think Obama is more dangerous than Hillary and more radical. Republicans also have the attitude that Obama will some how get flushed out in the general election when the "real politics" begin and once he is in the light he won't be able to play his non-comittal don't say anything game.
I think they are wrong. If Bill and Hillary Clinton can't out politic him, there is no way John McCain is going to.

[mont974x4]

How about obama's horrid handling of Scripture?

Obama: Sermon on Mount Justifies Same-Sex Unions
By Terence P. Jeffrey
CNSNews.com Editor in Chief
March 03, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told a crowd at Hocking College in Nelsonville, Ohio, Sunday that he believes the Sermon on the Mount justifies his support for legal recognition of same-sex unions. He also told the crowd that his position in favor of legalized abortion does not make him "less Christian."

"I don't think it [a same-sex union] should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state," said Obama. "If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans." ((Hear audio from WTAP-TV) (http://www.cnsnews.com/cns/audio/2008/030308Obama1.wav)) St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans condemns homosexual acts as unnatural and sinful.


http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200803/POL20080303b.html

[rrguy]

Well I was actually surprised he defended marriage, to hear he would not consider same sex couples to be married.

I still can't find justice in voting for anyone but Ron Paul. He is about the only one I trust.

[ladyt28]

I can't vote but if I could I wouldn't vote for the lib.

I'm curious, why can't you vote?

[MrJim]

Not so much~liberal when it comes to abortion and gun control then ~"zing"~ automatically tossed into the scrap heap. Not really interested in anything after that.

It would be fun to watch an Obama administration though~my anarchist side would revel in it ^_^

[Rodolfo]

Uhmmm I thought the voting age was 18? :scratch:
tulc(not arguing, just wondering what States 17 year olds can vote in)
I am eighteen in time for the general elections so I was able to vote for the caucases.

[Rodolfo]

I plan on voting for Senator Obama if he gets the nomination. I think that he could make a good President.


I agree 100%. This article obviously has an anti-choice bias, so it's going to twist the truth. You really shouldn't believe everything that it says.
Why would you vote for him if you are a Republican? He is basically the most liberal person in the U.S. senate.

[Voegelin]

Here is what Senator Barack Hussein Obama's pastor, Rev. Wright, had to say last March to a German magazine:

I mean, you got Christians who lynch people in the name of Jesus, and you got Muslims who fly planes into buildings. But you got some Muslims who don't do that. You got some Christians who ain't got time to lynch people . . .

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,471221,00.html

From Senator Obama's own webpage (http://www.barackobama.com/2007/03/06/obama_man_of_the_world.php):
Mr. Obama described the (Muslim) call to prayer as ''one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.''

Senator Obama speaking to Planned Parenthood last year:
With one more vacancy on the Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a woman’s fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe versus Wade and that is what is at stake in this election . . .I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law. Not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality . . .We’re at a crossroads right now in America—and we have to move this country forward. This election is not just about playing defense, it’s also about playing offense . . .


http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction

[MommaBuckaroo]

There was a great story on this on Hanity's America. You can probably go to Hanity's website and read it. It also told how he is friendly with a known terrorist.

I will NOT be voting for him. I will not be voting for Bill I mean Hillary again either. I think that this country should honestly be very scared if either of them get elected.

[imind]

Would you care to explain why?i would gladly and, in fact, did, try to explain. but the rules of this particular portion of the board apparently forbid me from mentioning what i believe to be true regarding this candidate, even when invited by you.

wow, is all i can say. i understand needing a safehouse, so-to-speak, but this is a bit much. but if its felt that some need to be sheltered from opposing viewpoints, at any cost, who am i too condemn?

[Abashag]

That's absurd! I'm sorry that that happened to you :( In fact... I think it happened to a couple of posts on this thread... I didn't think I'd said anything objectionable...

Anyway, I have a few things to say in response to one of the posts on this thread:

the article suggests fully developed, viable babies are born and tossed into dumpsters. absurd, but i've learned never to trust the publications from the far right. there are instances where this procedure is appropriate, and should be left to doctors to decide if and when it is used I agree 100%. This article obviously has an anti-choice bias, so it's going to twist the truth. You really shouldn't believe everything that it says.

If a woman has a baby (that she wants) and it is born prematurely, every effort is done by the doctors to keep that baby alive, and they can do amazing things now. Babies weighing only a few ounces are now capable of being supported until they are a healthy weight.

However, in the logic line that you are following (not saying that you hold this position, only following the source to its natural conclusion) a baby that is born too early and would die if neglected ought to be neglected, as it is not viable.

If a man is beaten up nearly to the point of death and left in an alley, should he be left to die by those who pass simply because he's no longer 'viable'? It's murder by neglect. If not in man's laws, then in God's laws. If your brother is in need and you have the means to help him, do not deny him, and do not delay.

What are the four scientific qualifications for something to be deemed alive? (NOTE: I'm not sure if I have these in the right order...)
1. Must have DNA.
2. Must have a method by which they extract energy from the surroundings and convert it into energy that sustains them.
3. Must be able to sense and respond to environmental changes.
4. Must be able to reproduce.

1. Babies have DNA. Human DNA.
2. Babies feed off the mother's umbilical chord.
3. Babies feel pain. Babies move within the womb. Babies' cells send signals to each other, and within each other.
4. Babies' cells reproduce.

Babies are live humans. Killing a live human is called by God to be murder.

If it's possible, I ask that my post be left on the thread. I don't intend to engage in a debate, this is only a statement of my opinion, and a sample of the evidence for having that opinion. I ask that you would extend the same courtesy to Imind. Thank you :)
~Lily