Latest Tweets

  •  

Black Child Poverty & Government Dependence

Posted by Meg | Posted in Big Issues, Democrats, Misleading, Must See, Obama, State Senate, Videos | Posted on 19-02-2009

Tags: , , , , , , ,

1

You need to see this. Yet another beautiful little present that the Dems stuffed into the stimulus bill, which will end up stuffing us.

Now, I may just be an evil white woman, I dunno, but I saw real black child poverty up close and personal in the early 90’s when I was still a child myself. It changed me utterly and entirely. I was never the same after seeing the slums my friends lived in, the hell they went through as children, and the prejudice they faced from nearly everyone around them. Clinton changed that, Clinton changed the incentives for welfare funding, changed it so that the States could actually accomplish the supposed purpose of welfare: take care of people while they’re struggling, but get them back to work, get them self sufficient again. You know, that whole idea of, ‘give a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a lifetime.’

Obama has just killed that plan. And worst of all, he’s done it in the name of “racial equality” and “desegregation”. Sorry, Mr. Obama, I saw what real segregation looks like, and you’re bringing it back. It has your name all over it. Do you think black children will thank you when they finally see what you’ve done to them? Will they thank you for making them endlessly dependent on the government? Because I’m sorry, but you’ve tipped your hand and exposed that, in your mind, welfare is not about teaching a man to fish. It’s about getting him hooked on the fish you’re selling, so that he becomes your property to control. That isn’t just segregation, that’s slavery.

The Born-Alive Infant Protection Act

Posted by Meg | Posted in Abortion, Feminism, Misleading, Must See, Obama, State Senate, US Senate | Posted on 28-09-2008

Tags: , , , , , , ,

0

Needless to say, abortion is a heated topic of debate, one that opponents rarely find much common ground on which to stand. There is, however, one exception to that rule:
The Born-Alive Infant Protection Act.

This bill, known as H.R. 2175 (you can read it in full here) passed unanimously in both the US House and Senate in 2002. It received support on both sides of the aisle, from Ted Kennedy to Rick Santorum.
The bill stated that any child born alive – either through natural birth or a failed abortion – was entitled to the same rights as any American as guaranteed by the Constitution. Meaning that any child born alive, even in the process of an abortion, was entitled to any measure necessary to save and prolong their life.
Or, in other words, if a baby were born during a failed abortion, that child couldn’t just be left to die.

A version of this bill also arose on the state level, including the Illinois State Senate, where Obama was serving at the time. Aside from his duties as a state senator, he was also the chairperson of the Health & Human Services Committee, through which the bill had to pass. Considering the unanimous support this bill received elsewhere, it’s surprising that its only opponent was Barack Obama, who sought to block the bill on all fronts.

Before continuing, it’s important to clarify the exact record regarding Obama’s opposition to the bill in the Illinois State Senate. So after the jump, we’ll examine his record, his explanation as to why he opposed the bill, as well as the discrepancies between that argument and the actual records from the Illinois State Senate. On top of that, we’ll explore how we’re left to wonder about what Obama really does believe. Finally, I’ll provide a video from CNN as a decent synopsis of this topic. Click “More” for more of this vitally important topic every voter should be aware of. :!: