Obama supports the Born Alive bill state and Fed that does not encroach upon Roe v. Wade rights
Besides being mistaken in logic and facts, I find it bizarre that many call extremely successful people hateful names and labels. Maybe those could learn lessons from their successes instead.
First:
At the time of the first proposed Illinois state born alive bill, there was already an existing Illinois law that insured that life-saving treatment would be given to infants, but sponsors of the BAIPA said that the law did not go far enough. This is a ploy used by Illinois abortion opponents to implement their ultimate agenda of overturning Roe v. Wade.
Barack Obama supports the 2002 federal bill b/c it does not encroach upon Roe v. Wade.
In 2005, a Born Alive bill was signed into law by the Illinois Senate and this bill specifically provides that it does not affect any existing federal or state laws regarding abortion. That means that it does not encroach upon any of the rights granted under Roe v. Wade.
Obama supports this 2005 version of the Illinois Born Alive bill. The legal point is that the bill only passed after the Roe v. Wade exclusion was added.
Second:
You must not agree with thousands of economics experts. http://media.economist.com/media/pdf/Totals1.pdf
Overall rating of tax plans:
1 is very bad, 5 is very good
| Rating | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McCain | 42 | 47 | 22 | 17 | 2 |
| Obama | 6 | 23 | 48 | 39 | 13 |
Third:
Iraq's problems need to be tended to by Iraq. They have an $80-billion surplus they are not tapping, yet the US spends $10-billion/month there. If you were a fiscal conservative, you would be outraged. Let's instead get bin Laden.
Last:
Please be aware of the value-laded terms published and promoted out of the Luntz Republican Playbook, which uses emotionally-laden doublespeak. When ever you hear terms like "Healthy Skies," "Born Alive," "Freedom," "Patriot Act," etc. you know for sure some part of the legislation enacts exactly the opposite of those terms or a clever diversion from the real intent.
In sum:
A vote for McCain is a vote for an erratic, dumb, rash decision-maker. It is a vote for the rich people getting richer and more corrupt while the poor and middle-class get poorer as a result of the weight. It is a vote for a continuation of the whole worlds' hatred of us. A vote for McCain is an invitation for more aggression/"nukes" against us. He is not smart enough to manage complex systems and sanctions. It is a vote for continued killing of our sons and daughters in wars because we think we know best what other countries must do.
A vote for McCain is a vote to increase the deficit. It is a vote against middle-class values, strength, and growth. It is a vote against new, innovative industries of energy and economic development. It is a vote to subsidize risk for fat cats. It is a vote for someone who doesn't think of Plan B. It is a vote for someone who doesn't rely on empirical data from scientific consensus to make decisions. We want a president who can actually understand that data and its implications.
Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy. For the approximately 147,000 families that make up the top 0.1 percent of the income scale, the difference between the two plans is stark. While McCain offers a $269,364 tax cut, Obama would raise their taxes, on average, by $701,885 - a difference of nearly $1 million.
Get the facts, please http://www.barackobama.com/issues/. Be suspicious of bizarre, value-laden, emotional terms and odd logic and character assassinations.
To those of you who wish to abstain from voting all together, I'm sorry, but our founders, country-folk, and enlightenment thinkers died and sacrificed for you to vote. For the commoners to not rise up and voice their right is shameful. This process, the actual exercise of inalienable freedom is, in fact, the beacon of light in the dark world that can never go out. Not after 1776 happened.
