That's what they say. But if President Obama has his way, all restrictions on abortion will be removed, including those protecting babies born alive and left in utility closets or dumpsters to die. What's more, we get to pay for such deeds with our tax dollars. All this would come about if the Freedom of Choice Act is passed into law. Scott Richert doesn't consider this likely.
I do not think that Barack Obama will sign FOCA -- not because he will go back on his promise to supporters of abortion, but because he will not get the opportunity to do so... As far as I can tell, there aren't enough votes in Congress at the moment to pass FOCA, and, despite his pledge to sign it, I don't think Obama will squander his political capital early on by twisting arms on Capitol Hill on the most divisive issue in American politics... Obama is also a very cautious politician. Both as a state senator in Illinois and as U.S. senator, he has often avoided votes on controversial issues...
Oh??? I wasn't aware he was afraid to remove restrictions on killing babies born alive during his tenure with the Illinois legislature. Still, even with Pelosi and Reid in his corner, he may not have the support to allow abortion, to the extent that even a majority of the American people wouldn't allow. Meanwhile, the newly published agenda statement on the whitehouse.gov website does not mince words.
President Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.
Personally, crushing the skull of a newborn delivered by force, or leaving it to die on a hospital tray, is not my idea of showing "respect" for much of anybody. A man who touts the call for national "unity" may wish to consider the alternative, especially one close to home. Click on the video to find out.
.
2 comments:
David, I doubt that you and I disagree on this question. The example you cite to imply that my analysis is wrong, however, doesn't really work. In 2002, in his Illinois legislative district, Obama's vote on the Induced Infant Liability Act was, sadly, not controversial.
On other matters that were, Obama often abstained.
In my long-past life as an editor for a daily nespaper in California, I had a reporter who regularly reminded people that a certain President from that state was "not MY President, I didn't vote for him!"
It is probably a very good thing that politicians at all levels tend to have amnesia regarding some of their campaign "promises".
As for Obama, we've only been stuck...I mean...he's only been in office two days, so I'll reserve judgement until he actually starts doing something. Like a subtle slide toward the "center".
Post a Comment