Latest baseball scores, trades, talk, ideas, opinions, and standings

Archive for the ‘abortions’ Category

>Obama’s Confusing Opposition to Abortion

>

Officials: Obama to reverse abortion policy

By LIZ SIDOTI and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writers Liz Sidoti And Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writers – 29 mins ago
Featured Topics:
Raw video: Obama's trip to WH Press RoomPlay Video AP – Raw video: Obama’s trip to WH Press Room
The story by AP reporters Lee and Sidoti above is fuzzy. How I would have written this story, to make it understandable is found below. The story by writers Sidoti and Lee is poorly written. Because of this liberal piece of hashish, they have muddied the issues so much the reader may wonder if Obama is for or against abortion, except in the first graph which I would leave alone. Beyond that, it is all down hill for the writers who are supposed to be good interpretative reporters. They’re biased. Fire them. Reporters should not comment, just write the facts. Working interpretation into news assumes readers are idiots, which is not the case.
WASHINGTON – In a long-expected move, President Barack Obama plans to sign (has now signed) an executive order ending the ban on federal funds for international groups that perform abortions or provide information on the option, officials told The Associated Press on Friday.
Liberal groups welcomed the decision while abortion rights foes criticized the president. The policy that Obama eliminated was known as the “Mexico City policy.” This is truly one of the most partisan acts Obama will make. Democrats like abortion, but to Republicans abortion is repulsive and wrong and they believe that taxpayer money should not be used to help abortionists at home or abroad.
GOP President Ronald Reagan established the ban on abortion funding in 1984. President Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but President George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.
The GOP-backed ban to be reversed by Obama prohibits U.S. taxpayer money, usually in the form of U.S. Agency for International Development funds, from going to international family planning groups that either offer abortions or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion.
The ban on U.S. money going for abortion was depicted by Democrats the “global gag rule,” which on its face is confusing and deceitful. It merely prohibited taxpayer funding for groups that lobby to legalize abortion or promote it as a family planning method. I don’t see a corresponding and equal use of taxpayer money to advertising against abortion, do you? Using phrases like “gag rule” is sheer Madison Avenue propaganda. It is intended to help two-faced bureaucrats communicate a falsehood. Democrats like to shine up the tawdry to make it palatable. They are masters of deceit and obfuscation when they could have just plainly said they were against any rule that banned taxpayer money going to pro-abortion groups.
Democrats have had it their way so long – since there doesn’t exist funding to lobby against abortion – that when their guy isn’t president, they cheat by changing the name of what they’re cheating about so even their supporters will want to rise up in anger against this politically-charged phrase with them. They use the words “ban” and “gag rules”, which have negative contemptuous connotations to the American public, which language favors the Democrats. Republicans are not smart enough to have a similar but opposite funding for anti-abortion. This just proves one thing: Democrats are more deceitful, contemptuous and successful than Republicans.
Obama’s Signing of This Rule is bad for America, atrociously so. He and his donkey party cohorts have so far been successful in hoodwinking the populace into thinking it is a good thing to fund a partisan concept with taxpayer money – that is abortion – while funding for just the opposite would be a bad thing. We the people should not be funding groups for or against abortion any more than we should fund pro-National Rifle Association members or pro-shoot first and ask later people. But if we fund propaganda for abortion, logic and fairness says we must also fund anti-abortion propaganda. Tell me where we do this?
In fact, abortion advocates and their ilk have been successful in banning prayer, the Bible, the Pope, and any kind of religious activity at public schools where children might learn about the negative affects of abortion and the primacy of life and a baby’s right to live rather than be killed in full or partial abortion even if the mother doesn’t want the child. There are plenty of people who would adopt that child that under Obama is destined to die without ever experiencing what God intended, life on this earth and a chance for joy and happiness in this critical step of our eternal progression.
Obama was expected to sign the executive order without too many reporters present to avoid the derisive partisan criticism he expected and to put out a false show that he isn’t about partisan politics – though this proves he certainly is. He wants you to think that he is above partisan politics – but all about bringing factions and parties together, a fairy tale that this executive order disolves. Democrats and their press said it would be a low-key event, but then they timed its signing to the annual commemoration of a very high-key event for liberals, the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion. If this isn’t phony, two-faced politics this writer doesn’t know what is. It has the “duplicitous” written all over it.
The move was not a surprise as both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will oversee foreign aid, had promised to do away with the “gag rule” during the presidential campaign. See, when Democrats use a pejorative adjective like “gag” with rule, it sounds like something we as blue-blooded Americans should do. Yes, get rid of that nasty “gag rule.” By all means. It’s just when you think about it you realize gag had nothing to do with anything except the negative perception Democrats wanted to convey so that their people, the poor and downtrodden, the illiterate, the less apt, could think they were doing a good thing.
Clinton is to visit the U.S. Agency for International Development, through which much U.S. foreign aid is disbursed, later on Friday.
The AP story said that “Obama has spent his first days in office systematically signing executive orders reversing Bush administration policies on issues ranging from foreign policy to government operations. But, save for ending the ban, Obama has largely refrained from wading into ideological issues, perhaps to avoid being tagged a traditional partisan from the outset after his campaign promises to change ‘business as usual’ in the often partisan-gridlocked capital.”
The AP story continues: “Rather, Obama has chosen to focus initially on issues in which there is consensus across the political spectrum and support from the public, such as closing the prison camp for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to making government documents more accessible.” I take issue with the word “concensus” when used to discuss Gitmo. Fifty-Seven million Americans, almost half of those voting, said they did not want the base and prison at Guantanamo, Cuba closed. There is no consensus, except in Obama’s mind.
In a move related to the lifting of the abortion ban, Obama also is expected to restore funding to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA) at his earliest opportunity, probably in the next budget. Both he and Clinton made this a campaign issue.
The Bush administration had barred U.S. money from going to the fund, contending that work in China supported a Chinese family planning policy of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization. UNFPA has vehemently denied that it does.
Organizations that had pressed Obama to make the abortion-ban change were jubilant.
Anti-abortion groups criticized the Obama move. “President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee.
Advertisements