Obama: The American Dream is Unattainable without Abortion

Believe it or not, that is essentially what he said.

Barack Obama says the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade is the chance to recognize the “fundamental constitutional right” to abortion and to “continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”

Really? Apparent children are not the future, they are obstacles.

About these ads

79 thoughts on “Obama: The American Dream is Unattainable without Abortion

  1. Sunny

    Really. It is a constitutional right for a person to have control over their own body – determined by the US Supreme Court. If a corporation is a person a woman should have the right to determine what she does with her own body. And conservatives need to stay out of the bedrooms and private lives of American citizens. Is this or isn’t this the land of the free? Or does that only apply to what conservatives consider that should be a free act by an individual? You want the government out our of our health care but believe it is OK for the government to dictate what a woman, her family and doctor believe is in her best interest. Until a man can give birth they need to stay out of a woman’s person decisions about her own body.

    1. Cluster

      It is a constitutional right for a person to have control over their own body

      Then why are they forcing me to buy health insurance?

    2. doug

      Sunny, I think those government mandated injections of various immunizations affected you differently than the rest of us.

      Go ahead with the selfish thinking that a person can kill their own baby because the baby’s rights aren’t nearly as important as their own.

    3. tiredoflibbs

      “If a corporation is a person a woman should have the right to determine what she does with her own body.”

      wow, apples and oranges but you think this is an equitable comparison? The rest of your post is littered with the same type of comparisons that do not have any relationship whatsoever. They are all illogical comparisons having nothing to do with the other. All the while, you claim to be a lawyer and you spew such illogical and ridiculous cr@p. A woman’s “choice” is no longer hers to make since there is another life involved.

      We have had this discussion before. If a pregnant woman is killed then the perpetrator can be convicted of a double homicide. If a woman drinks or does drugs while pregnant, the “woman can determine what she does with her own body” defense does not hold and she can be charged with certain crimes, etc. etc. etc. No matter how you try to spin it, there is more than one life involved. Your post indicates that you seem to accept some Supreme Court decisions while rejecting others. But your stupid comparison – one is about free speech and yours is about murder. Those are not equitable comparisons and there is nothing to justify the murder of the innocent because the mother does not want the responsibility of raising a child.

      Now since I have blown your stupid mindless talking points out of the water, it is time for you to go away and resurface in another thread spewing the same garbage.

      And you wonder why people do not take you seriously?

      1. maudmabelsmithsonianmcdaniel-jones ABC, ASAP, WHO, MbR, IQ0, 86, PBS, MSRP

        Be as delighted as you want to be about killing an unborn child, that does not make it okay. Nothing makes it okay. Being legal is not the same as okay. It is what cowardly weak women do and it is never okay no matter how much the culture of death people claim it is. No one needs “abortion services”. Some weak and cowardly women choose death because they don’t want to be bothered with carrying out the responsibility they took on when they spread their legs. They choose to kill instead of act with integrity and dignity. Many people who are not religious at all much less uber-religious still understand that ending a human life is wrong.

        When anyone is delighted to talk about how it is okay to kill a child it tells everyone that this is a ghoul, someone who can be happy about the end of life and promise. You can curl your lip and pretend to be more advanced and superior and make fun of people of faith but all you do is show us the empty hole where you have betrayed your humanity. At least have the courage to admit that dodging responsibilityis a character defect and not proof of being smarter or better than anyone else. You might need to keep telling yourself and us this to keep from being eaten from the inside because of the inhumanity of what you have done and what you have become but trying to convince us only shows that you have lost what it is that makes people human.

    4. Catherine Elizabeth

      I am sorry but no matter how much you tell yourself the supreme court or state or who ever, states it OK …well its not! Woman only want to make themselves feel less guilty; well you are guilty of murder; of an innocent life…you tell yourself its my right, my choice… to make the killing of the baby more palatable…the fact is its murder, plain and simple, no two ways about it… the baby is Put To Death! So try as yo might to explain it away…you can’t its murder…May God Forgive you.

      O Lord, Jesus Christ, grant us mercy father with this prayer, we ask You to enlighten the minds and hearts of those blinded to the truth that life begins at conception and that the unborn in the womb are already adorned with Your image and likeness; enable us to guard, cherish, and protect the lives of all those who are unable to care for themselves. O Lord, to those who, through ignorance or willfulness, affront Your divine goodness and providence through the evil act of abortion. May they, and all of us, come to the life of Your Truth and glorify You, the Giver of Life, together with Your Father, and Your All-Holy and Life-giving Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.

      1. Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F.

        I am so delighted to inform you Catherine Elizabeth that you are simply dead wrong. It is okay to abort a child that cannot live outside of the womb. The law of the United States of America says so. Unless you want to live in the Vatican or in Iran or some other Muslim country, where your views on abortion are the law I suggest you do what any true American should and that is to let those who need abortion services get that service and those who do not opt out. Just because your life path has taken you to uber-religious Disneyland because of whatever tragedy has befallen you or whatever miracles you think you’ve witnessed doesn’t mean the rest of America should fall in line with what you think is right. Freedom means that from time to time you are going to be bloody offended by someone else enjoying a right you think is wrong.

      2. neocon1

        diane vicous forker, nerd freekzoid FU BO A U2 ESAD

        The law of the United States of America says so.

        The LAW of GOD says different forker.

    5. Amazona

      Velma, you can have all the control over your own body you want. But if you are so profoundly stupid that you do not realize that an unborn child is not YOUR body but is, in fact, another body, with another heart, another brain, another intellect, another personality, and is another complete person, then you really are exactly as you come across.

      Which is, of course, profoundly stupid.

      This “woman’s decision about her own body” crap is the stupidest argument that can be made, for the reason I explained above.

      Second in the stupidity stakes is the “stay out of our bedroom” whine.

      And then of course you regurgitate the lie that the Supreme Court said “a corporation is a person”.

      What IS it about you people? Are you really that bone-deep stupid, that you truly cannot understand what is said? Or just so bone-deep dishonest that you simply don’t CARE about the truth, preferring to just spout your ignorant nonsense ad nauseum?

      Too bad you have no foundation of knowledge of law, or you might be able to read the Court ruling and learn that it never once said “a corporation is a person”.

  2. dennis

    To attribute the statement or even the general idea that “the American Dream is unattainable without abortion” to Obama is laughably absurd.

    One might just as logically accuse a person who defends the constitutional right to free speech of saying “the American Dream is unattainable without profanity.” It makes exactly the same amount of sense.

    You omit Obama’s statement that “No matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption.”

    I oppose abortion on moral and ethical grounds, and from the above statement one can reasonably infer that Barack Obama does as well. But he apparently supports the right and responsibility of people to make moral decisions for themselves without the interference or legislative weight of government policing their private lives.

    1. doug

      Murder is a moral issue, so is theft, yet the government still polices that. It just so happens that murder of babies who can’t defend themselves is a type of murder that is protected by the government, while the others are not.

      When Obama acts to abolish the federal laws that make immoral and inethical things criminal acts, then he can take the position that people can make moral decisions for themselves without government interference.

      1. dennis

        Doug, for those who are biblical Christians, so are keeping the Sabbath, not taking the Lord’s name in vain, not making graven images etc. moral issues. But we do not legislate those matters, as they are between individuals and God.

        I believe it’s right to define an unborn child as a human person from a moral and ethical perspective, certainly from an emotional one – but from a legal standpoint the issue is far less clear. Legal rights apply to people, legally defined as such. A mother is legally a person – is her unborn baby?

        How far back can that be carried – to implantation, or to conception? When a fertilized ovum becomes a human being with all the constitutional rights thereof, an entire universe of new legal complications arise with virtually unlimited potential for government mischief, intervention and bungling. Conservatives and libertarians,of all people should realize the dangers inherent in such absolutism. Which is why even Mississippi rejected a life-at-conception amendment. For most of recorded history a person receives official legal identity at birth and some things are better left alone.

        I’m sympathetic to moral arguments against abortion, but legal ones have no credibility unless one extends the pro-life principle impartially to wars of choice, to capital punishment and every avoidable kind of killing. Such moral consistency is summarily rejected by most conservatives. Which is why I view most “pro-life” rhetoric as political demagoguery, not genuine reverence for life. If it were, we wouldn’t see so many of the same people clamoring for the death penalty, shooting traitors or going to war with Iran.

      2. doug

        Dennis, I understand your argument and I also recognize Roe’s definition that allows an unborn child to have rights conferred upon them by the state. They can attain the rights to survive once they have reached the point where they can survive outside the womb – at that point Roe recognizes the ‘right to privacy’ of the mother is transfered to the state as their right to protect the unborn. Even the Roe court proscribed constitutional rights to an unborn through the state, but like you said, just not further back than that. The problem is, they decided at a particular stage in their development that they can gain constitutional rights (through the states) rather than at birth. Of course, with modern medicine, it will be soon that any fertilized egg can become viable outside a body with medical help and as such each state could then outlaw abortion all they way to conception.

        However, your argument precludes states making suicide illegal. Some make it a crime to attempt suicide as well. Others make assisted suicide illegal or at least that action has to be legalized in order to occur. These all in your argument should be considered moral issues and not be be legislated, yet they are.

        My assumption would be yours, that it would not be constitutional to regulate morality, that therefore those laws must currently be regulated as to lawful reasons rather than moral issues. I don’t see how abortion would be any different if you interpret the unborn baby as the woman’s body extended.

      3. js03

        nice try dennistooge…but you are full of shx?…life begins at conception…this is the christian belief…not twenty seven days or 93 days later…

        the truth is that pushing abortion removes the risk of pregnancy…allowing young adults to escape the consequence of misbehavior…having sex is for making babies…this is the natural function of our bodies…

        ripping our children out and killing them is not…it defies the purpose of sex both in nature and spiritually…science has confirmed all of this

        the sympathies of idiots and mental midgets wont change that…nothing you can do will change it…it is a fact of nature

      4. tiredoflibbs

        denny the drone: ” but from a legal standpoint the issue is far less clear.”

        Really?

        If a pregnant woman is killed then the perpetrator can be charged with a double homicide. The woman can be charged with a variety of crimes if she drinks or does drugs while pregnant. The law is pretty clear to me. If what you said is true, then Mark Peterson would not have been convicted of double murder of his wife and unborn child.

        “…moral issues. But we do not legislate those matters, as they are between individuals and God.”

        Then you should be demanding the release of Mark Peterson and Charles Manson (and all the rest of the murders and thieves in prison) convicted by the government for immoral “crimes”. They should only be tried at the Pearly Gates of Heaven.

        Wow, and you wonder why people don’t take you seriously?!?

      5. Amazona

        I don’t see how abortion would be any different if you interpret the unborn baby as the woman’s body extended.

        True—but just look at how utterly stupid it would be to claim that an unborn child is nothing more than “the woman’s body extended”.

        It has its own independent life system, of heart, brain, nervous system, even emotions. It can feel and react to pain. It engages in behaviors commonly associated with emotional comforting, such as thumb-sucking. It is NOT “an extension of a woman’s body”. It is a whole new human being.

        It is dependent on the gestational creature for nurturing, for providing sustenance and oxygen and protection until it is developed enough to live without her. But “dependent” does not mean “the same as”.

        And my respect for the strength, courage and morality of real women does not allow me to use this word to describe a creature who will kill her own child because she just doesn’t feel like going through the inconvenience of carrying it to the end of the term of pregnancy.

        Some of these creatures are so vile and malignant that even when the child is removed from their bodies they still demand that they be killed.

        And Barack Obama supported them in this desire.

      6. consigliereciucava

        Tiredoflibbs you only addressed half of what Dennis said. Why is it that pro life persons can defend the rights of the unborn to live while they cannot distance themselves from murderous wars or the death penalty? Matters such as these are not always black and white my friend.

      7. maudmabelsmithsonianmcdaniel-jones ABC, ASAP, WHO, MbR, IQ0, 86, PBS, MSRP

        Are you saying there is no difference between ending the life of a brutal criminal who has killed others and that of an innocent child who has never done a single thing wrong? Are you saying there is no difference between someone who made the choice to act in an inhuman way and risk losing his life and an infant who is helpless and never had any control over its life? Are you saying there should not be consequences for evil decisions but it is okay to destroy a life that is still pure? Are you one of those who claims there is never a legitimate reason for war? Offer to trade abortion for capital punishment and see how fast the killer culture backs off from that comparison. Tell them if they agree to make abortion illegal then capital punishment will be illegal too and just watch them change their story.

    2. Amazona

      I oppose abortion on moral and ethical grounds, and from the above statement one can reasonably infer that Barack Obama does as well.

      Yeah, from this ONE statement, you might be able make the assumption you make.

      This is why we need to look at Obama’s actions.

      You do realize that he was the only Senator to vote for the “right” of society to kill a fully formed, viable, living, breathing child out of the womb, if the gestational creature who already tried to kill it once is bound and determined that it not live?

      If he doesn’t oppose outright murder of a living, breathing, outside-the-womb human being, it’s pretty darned hard to accept the premise that he “opposes abortion on moral and ethical grounds”.

  3. bardolf

    Obama is wrong for 100 different reasons:

    1. College men register for the selective service and women don’t.
    2. If there was a constitutional right to do control of one’s body irrespective of societal desires then clearly drugs would be legal and doctor assisted suicide would be a constitutional right.
    3. There is no evidence that the girls who get pregnant vs. the boys who get them pregnant have different economic outcomes. Even theoretically, one can ask for the males responsible to pay child support.
    4. Plenty of liberal and conservative scholars have shown that the ‘right to privacy’ was made up from nothing but the opinions of the judges. (I WILL REMIND NEO they were mostly GOP nominees).

    I think the GOP doesn’t need to get distracted with these social issues this year. Focus on the economy which is what the electorate cares about. Let’s put people back to work, giving them enough self-respect so that one day they will have an opportunity to abort a child who is getting in the way of their dreams.

    1. neocon1

      baldork

      If there was a constitutional right to do control of one’s body irrespective of societal desires then clearly drugs would be legal and doctor assisted suicide would be a constitutional right.

      BINGO

      the left loves death, just ask hitler, stalin, mao and killer tiller.

      1. bardolf

        Warren E. Burger- Richard Nixon
        Associate Justices
        William O. Douglas ·Roosevelt
        William J. Brennan, Jr.-Dwight D. Eisenhower
        Potter Stewart-Dwight D. Eisenhower
        Byron White-Kennedy
        Thurgood Marshall-Johnson
        Harry Blackmun-Eisenhower
        Lewis F. Powell, Jr.-Nixon
        William Rehnquist-Nixon

        So 6 of 9 justices were GOP appointed and 3 of 9 Dem appointed. The dissenters were Byron White (Kennedy appointment) and Rehnquist(Nixon).

        The likelihood a Dem opposed Roe. v. Wade was 1/3 while the likelihood a GOP opposed Roe v. Wade was 1/6 or half as likely. That was mainstream conservative thought in the early 70′s. Just in case you doubt, here is a quote from a conservative icon

        “Today’s so-called ‘conservatives’ don’t even know what the word means. They think I’ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That’s a decision that’s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the Religious Right. “=Barry Goldwater

      2. neocon1

        baldork

        a conservative icon

        “Today’s so-called ‘conservatives’ don’t even know what the word means. They think I’ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That’s a decision that’s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the Religious Right. “=Barry Goldwater

        which proves “conservative icons” can be wrong, if he was such an “icon” how come he was NEVER elected on the national level??

      3. bardolf

        Neo

        The question for the thread should be where the candidates stand for life and how long have they held that position. Some people favor the converts more than life long believers. I am more conservative and think the life long believers are more relaible.

      4. neocon1

        baldork

        if you are under 20 and not a liberal you have no heart.
        if you are 30 and not a conservative you have no brain……

        people change, and life changes people and their minds.

  4. Green Mountain Boy

    Everybody has the right to control thier bodies. Except for a person that happens to reside inside a womans womb. That person has the right to be murdered at his/her mothers whim. That is the only right that person has.

    You want to debate when life begins? Fine go ahead. One fact remains. Having an abortion does not make you un pregnant. It makes you the mother of a dead baby.

  5. Cluster

    Let’s not forget that it was Obama who said that he didn’t want his daughters to be “burdened” by pregnancy. And whoever said that women don’t have a choice? They have plenty of choices – using birth control is just one of them. Abortion is manslaughter at the very least, and a detestable practice.

    And barstool – that was pretty good post

    1. Amazona

      Why do they call themselves “Liberal” when they support and defend the most intolerant, illiberal political system this nation has ever experienced?

      Why do they use the word “Progressive” to describe a completely REgressive political model that goes back to an always-failed collectivist ideology?

      The Left plays with semantics because they know there will always be a new crop of gullible dupes too lazy or uninvolved to learn anything beyond the empty promises of words.

  6. Chrissy Ann

    It is now a “fundamental constitutional right”? Didn’t he say it was an “inherent right” before? How come we have all these dang adjectives to define a right? Roe vs Wade was BAD LAW, had nothing to do about abortion except the right to privacy.

    As long as “our sons” are getting “our daughters” pregnant..there is nothing constitutional about it! As long as “our daughters and sons” can have free sex without any consequence this issue will be with us forever.

    Forget military Selective Service…start Vasectomy Selective Service.

    1. neocon1

      start Vasectomy Selective Service.

      and sterilization,
      ran into a 35 yo black woman (not employed of course) with six kids at a party and her boyfriend (not employed) has four (not any of the six) this insanity has to be stopped.

    2. neocon1

      Roe vs Wade was BAD LAW,

      brought to us by left wing ideologues making up “rights” that were not there for 200+ years of jurisprudence.

      1. neocon1

        “Obama: The American Dream is Unattainable without Abortion”

        to bad your mama and daddy didnt end the “dream” of their bastard child……

      2. Amazona

        eugenics [juːˈdʒɛnɪks]
        n
        (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Genetics) (functioning as singular) the study of methods of improving the quality of the human race, esp by selective breeding

        Using race, intelligence, and other characteristics as the bases for selective breeding would qualify as eugenics.

        Halting the irresponsible breeding of some people regardless of race, ethic background, education, intelligence, body type or condition, natural talent, etc. would not.

        The goal would not be to “improve the quality of the human race” but merely to stop the production of children whose sole purpose appears to be the means of acquiring government support, or the result of simple irresponsibility.

      3. bardolf

        Amazon

        I don’t think anyone has children primarily to accrue more government money. I hold it to be so slight that I am willing to pay the little extra in taxes.

        The eugenics movement stars people like Margaret Sanger of planned parenthood. Best to keep far far far away.

  7. Cluster

    I have to say that it is highly offensive to me how cavalier liberals are with the practice of abortion. To define it as a constitutional right is appalling, and to label it as simply a “choice” is equally nauseating. Life begins at conception people, period.

    1. neocon1

      when we lost our 23 week (in the womb) old grand son, his parents had to name him and he was issued a birth and a death certificate.

      (more than I can say for SOME people)

      1. neocon1

        just talked to my Obama voting sister again, she now likes the fig and Romney second.

        so much that women will hate him and he is unelectable BS!
        Give em Hell Newt!!

      2. neocon1

        let akbar through but stop a sitting US senator……pure insanity.

        Rand Paul’s Pat-Down Standoff With TSA in Nashville Ends

        Sen. Rand Paul told his communications director this morning he was being detained by TSA at the Nashville airport.

      3. neocon1

        Ooh Rah !!

        Allen West Defends Obama‘s ’Food Stamp President’ Label: ‘It’s a Fact’

        “There is no race code.”

      4. neocon1

        Carney Asked if ‘Saul Alinsky Portrait’ Is Hanging in the White House

        Fox News Ed Henry Asks Jay Carney if Barack Obama Displays Saul Alinsky Portrait in White HouseDuring a White House press briefing on Monday, Fox News’ Ed Henry asked Press Secretary Jay Carney if the White House displays a portrait of Saul Alinsky for its staff to look up to. Carney’s answer was less than direct, and would seem to hint that there just might be something to the Alinsky portrait rumors.

      5. neocon1

        Two women injured in Alabama: run-down abortion clinic has no gurney access

        Birmingham, AL, January 23, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Two women were transported from a run-down Alabama abortion clinic Saturday, after apparently being injured during botched abortions, according to the pro-life organization CEC for Life. The incidents took place at the New Women All Women abortion clinic in South Birmingham.

        The botched abortions occurred on the day before the 39th memorial of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that decriminalized abortion in America. That decision promised that women would be insured “safe, legal abortions.”

  8. tiredoflibbs

    I love the way these liberals are pointing out the Supreme Court says…… abortion is a right.

    Well, think of this….

    At one time, the Supreme Court said slavery was legal and that these people were property.

    Are you willing to put the same argument to that as well? The Supreme Court said so.

    You drones don’t even realize how stupid your arguments really are.

    1. neocon1

      tired

      it is like recount voting, 25 recounts their guy loses all….keep counting
      one win after 25 counts they declare themselves the winner.
      marx alinsky 101

    2. Sunny

      tired, until the Court reverses its ruling in Roe, it is a constitutional right for a woman to get an abortion within a certain period of time. If the Court overturns Roe, you will find more problems like the one posted by neo above where botched abortions are taking place because doctors are threatened and even killed by extreme activists. Many doctors who would be willing to perform safe abortions are now refusing to do so because of threats against their lives and that of their families. If the Court does overturn Roe, you will find that there will once again be women having abortions on kitchen tables and back alleys and dying. You may be very opposed to abortions, but the fact is is that women have had them since the beginning of time and will continue to do so as long as they have financial struggles and other family issues where they believe this is the only answer for them. When conservatives decide that it the more reasonable solution to this issue to provide real educational information for both young men and women and the consequences of their sexual behavior the fewer abortions will be sought. As long as conservatives fight against the sexual education for our youth the longer this problem will persist. And if the conservatives defund organizations like Planned Parenthood that provide contraceptives to women who do not have the funds to pay for them, abortions will continue to happen. So, do we stick our heads in the sand and pretend that sex education is unnecessary and organizations that provide contraceptives are evil or finally wake up and support education and organizations that help prevent unwanted pregnancies?

      1. tiredoflibbs

        wow, velma you have the dumbed down fear mongering talking points committed to memory! Can you ever think for yourself?

        Please show us where in the Constitution is the “right to have an abortion” apart from the spin and twisted legal maneuvering brought to us by the Supreme Court.

        Also, please show us the “right to privacy” in the Constitution also apart from the spin and legal maneuvering brought to us by the Supreme Court.

        We have asked this countless of times and no one can provide these simple requests other than the “decisions” from activist courts.

        Again, at one time the Supreme Court has said slaves were legal property and the like. How can murder be a Constitutional right? If you believe such nonsense from activist judges then something is wrong with you. I know it is pointless to argue with you about this, you have the “decision” you want – abortion made legal by bypassing the legislative branch and handing down “rights” from the bench, but when the court enforces free speech you have a cow.

        Your original challenge to Matt was proven wrong ever so easily. You accuse him of ridiculous statements but obviously you have never read your own posts.

    3. consigliereciucava

      SCOTUS has two purposes. To uphold current law such that it allows for the continued business of the nation and to correct laws that deny rights to those in changing social and economic times. Slavery was immoral yes but it was de jure and de facto until 1866. SCOTUS did that then to protect the Union and the corporate farmers of the South who would have fled otherwise. [See the US Civil war 1861-65 for proof ]. The tenets of segragtion were even upheld in Plessy v Ferguson 1898 because American society had not grown to realize that color of one’s skin does not make a man a man.

      What you fear tiredof libbs is justified because abortion is placing a drain on the white advantage in America. But so is the Internet and women’s rights. You could go back to 1920 and blame most of this decline and fall of White America on women’s suffrage which along with Prohibition were fully supported by the conservative KKK especially in places like Indiana where the Klan ran the state government.

      1. consigliereciucava

        From the history channel the KKK in Indiana and its control over the GOP state legislature in the 1920s.

  9. Sunny

    Matt, as usual you take things to the ridiculous, making such a statement. Is that like saying “The American Dream is Unattainable Without War” since conservatives can’t seem to stand it unless the US is involved in a war somewhere? Three of the GOP presidential wannabees are pushing for war with Iran. It seems to be the American Dream for the majority of conservatives to get another war started. They seem to be pretty hacked off that Obama got us out of Iraq and plans to get us out of Afghanistan. So, we need to find a new war to send the sons and daughters of the middle and lower income families off to war so profiteering like Dick Cheney can continue to create more wealth on the backs our our nations young men and women. I wonder how many of the candidates beating the war drum are willing to send their children and grandchildren to war with Iran. Talk about killing your children.

    1. tiredoflibbs

      I see velma is posting from the lunatic fringe once again. Her comparisons again are off completely illogical.

      Your president said that our daughters can’t realize their dreams without the fundamental right to an abortion. He said it. It was a moronic statement and here you are “defending” it. The problem is you can’t. You cannot defend murder of the innocent.

      obAMATEUR did nothing to “get us out of Iraq”. He followed Bush’s timetable and is now taking credit for it. And like a good little drone, velma mindlessly regurgitates that dumbed down talking point.

      Please velma, educate yourself before making more moronic statements. For a “lawyer” you sure do have no logic abilities.

      1. consigliereciucava

        Simply put tiredoflibbs it is better for a 14 year old girl a 24 year old woman or a 44 year old woman to abort a child than have it become another criminal statistic be in a broken home. I don’t know if you’ve seen any of the Freakanomics programs on Showtime but if yoju’ve notice the drop in violent crime over the last 39 years or so the right to an abortion can account for quite a large percentage of the drop.

      2. neocon1

        consigliereciucava January 25, 2012 at 8:45 am #

        Simply put tiredoflibbs it is better for a 14 year old girl a 24 year old woman or a 44 year old woman to abort a child than have it become another criminal statistic be in a broken home

        Too bad your mama missed out on dat

      3. bardolf

        The legalized abortion vs decline in violent crime theory has been rebutted in oops-onomics available on the web.

        It goes without saying that if abortion is correctly classified as murder, the violent ‘crime against human life’ rate has soared.

        The eugenically statements about broken home or abortion alternative have quickly lead to black Americans being represented as a smaller portion of the population. The Klan should love abortion since it is disproportionately used by minorities. Try and find a nice, rich neighborhood with a clinic.

    2. neocon1

      scummy

      there were MORE murders in DC during the war than were soldiers killed.

      not to mention the 100 thousand+ murdered on our streets in America compared to 4 thousand killed in a 10 year war.

      GET REAL!
      Moron

      PS do a DOJ demographics on those murders while you are at it.

      1. Amazona

        But…but…but…profiteering….Dick Cheney…..sons and daughters….lower and middle income…..wealth on the backs of…..

        Right out of the CPUSA handbook, spewed by one of the most ignorant dupes in the shameful history of dupes and drones.

        Dumb as a box of hair…….

      2. consigliereciucava

        Neocon more white people have been eliminated from the population by way of abortion than murdered on “the streets of America” and it is perfectly legal and necessary.

      3. neocon1

        consigliereciucava January 25, 2012 at 8:47 am #

        Neocon more white people have been eliminated from the population by way of abortion than murdered on “the streets of America” and it is perfectly legal and necessary.

        wright? fartacan? is DAT you?

    3. Amazona

      Velma, we already know your IQ is barely high enough to allow you to breathe on your own—you don’t need to keep reminding us.

      As you do with this pearl of wisdom you drooled: you will find more problems like the one posted by neo above where botched abortions are taking place because doctors are threatened and even killed by extreme activists.

      So tell us, Velma, how many baby-killers have been killed by those “extreme activists”?

      Tell us just how you know that these back-alley abortions are being done because these otherwise fine upright physicians feel the need to practice their craft in secrecy, hidden from view?

      Tell us why filth is an integral and necessary part of the stealth these poor “doctors” feel forced upon them?

      In other words, you are so full of BS it oozes out from every word.

      Abortion is Big Business. Pure and simple. It’s about money. It’s about killing for money.

      It is supported and promoted by liars like you, who work so hard to convince frightened, panicky women that they have no option but to simply make their unwanted pregnancies “go away”—-at any cost.

      The entire business is vile and despicable, from the supporters like you to the butchers who do the dirty deeds. Some wash their hands, some don’t, but all have blood on them.

    4. neocon1

      scummy

      The American Dream is Unattainable Without War” since conservatives can’t seem to stand it unless the US is involved in a war somewhere?

      REALLY??????

      In the twentieth century, every war has been led by a democrat in the white house with the exception of the Persian Gulf Conflict.
      WWI, Wilson,
      WWII, Roosevelt,
      Korea, Truman,
      Vietnam, Johnson.
      People will say its the republicans in congress, but since 1931, the republicans have been inpower a total of 16 years, many times the democrats held a filibuster proof majority, especially during the vietnam war, at one point in the 70s, there was a 74-16 democrat majority. and even so, the president has to present it to congress and sign it into
      action.

      NEXT???

  10. tiredoflibbs

    What I find amazing is the liberals want to stop any “impedance” to a woman having an abortion whether it is a waiting period or counseling because it “interferes with their Constitutional right”. This “right” mind you is not explicitly stated in the Constitution.

    However, these same liberals are all too willing to impose restrictions to your right of free speech (Fairness Doctrine) and your right to own a gun (waiting periods, background checks, fees, heavy regulations, etc. etc.).

    Kind of backwards don’t you think?

  11. Pingback: FOR THE RIGHT, THE DEVIL IS ALWAYS IN THE LACK OF DETAILS: PRESIDENT OBAMA’S MESSAGE ON THE 39TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ROE V WADE DECISION « Editorials from Hell's Leading Daily Newspaper

  12. Pingback: DIANE VALENCEN EXPLAINS IT ALL « Editorials from Hell's Leading Daily Newspaper

  13. js03

    Women already have a choice…they have complete control over thier own bodies, just like men up to a point.

    Women that dont have sex dont get pregnant. Complete control, abstain from sex, is the most effective means to prevent pregnancy. They have other choices that protect them from becoming pregnant, the option to use them is without any doubt unrestricted.

    When none of these means are employed, and a new life in conceived, the right to choice is already over. The unborn human being has rights, and our courts have ignored them, resulting in the deaths of 53+ million human beings in this country alone. This does not represent the hundreds of millions in other nations that comply with the same faulty logic about abortions that America’s example set that other nations have followed.

    If the example set in RvW is the law of the land, then the right to privacy would cover suicide, homicide, slaughtering cats, dogs, all types of creatures that (for whatever reason) are in the way to ones pursuit of happiness (ie…a college degree..satisfaction of any number of criminal lusts…including rape…and pedophilia…). The sword of truth swings both ways..either it stands for justice and truth, of selfish lies and deceit, but not both.

    In the end, the corrosion of moral behavior in this country has been on the superhighway of sin. When it lands there is hell to pay.

    1. consigliereciucava

      js03 you don’t have a right to use your religion to tell others who don’t share your belief whether they should have sex or not. Human beings have free will and you have no idea if your rules are the right ones or just some story made up to keep you and those with weak minds like you from running riot from fear of your inevitable death.

      1. js03

        BS…stop trying to tell me what my rights are…and then protect the slaughter of millions of unborn human beings…

        and then…you ignorantly try to tell me that im telling others not to have sex…and that is a total lie…i stated FACTS…you lied about what i said…you dont even belong on the same blog with me libtard…bend over because here comes my boot…

        in your ignorance you express the idea that human beings have free will…right after you lied about what i said…proving that free will without responsiblity is about as useless as 2 tails on a pig…

      2. Majordomo Pain

        We feel you are either weak of mind or a prevaricator. You said: “Women already have a choice…they have complete control over thier own bodies, just like men up to a point.

        Women that dont have sex dont get pregnant. Complete control, abstain from sex, is the most effective means to prevent pregnancy.”

        This was your first choice of control. Abstinence. Then you moved on to offer contraception because you were concerned that your views would appear to draconian. Crimes that you listed cuase harm to living Human Beings and animals who also have earned a right to life by existing ex utero. These arguments are fallacies.

      3. js03

        your ignorance fails to shine any light on the truth stooge…nothing of what i posted was a fallacy…you are possessed of a reprobate mind…your ignorance does not affect facts…nor will those facts change if you posted a thousand word essay…

        abstinance is a choice…and this is control over ones body…Absit reverentia vero

Comments are closed.