Filed under: abortion, Barack Obama, Bush, Constitution, current events, family, Federal Courts, Federal Judges, Ivy League, law, Law Related, law school, marriage, military, Obama, Politics, pro family, pro life, Right to Life, Supreme Court, United States |
Leave a Comment
While I also approve of the notion that the High Court could use a “real attorney” and that too many experienced Federal Judges end up on the Supreme Court while many great attorneys in this country remain unconsidered–I assumed that Obama would select a real attorney–a real experinced trial attorney!!!
Why would anyone possibly think Kagan is qualified, if she has never fought in the trenches? She’s apparently never fought a case for the little guy! At least that is my understanding from this quote from Focus on the Family:
“Ms. Kagan is an accomplished scholar, but has never served as a judge and has spent very little time inside a court room. Prior to becoming solicitor general in 2009, she stated that she had never tried a case all the way to a decision or verdict.”
She’s just another elitest, Ivy League, Washington D.C. insider who doesn’t understand what regular blue collar, hard working America is. Kagan doesn’t get it.
She doesn’t appreciate traditional family values or think that preserving the traditional definition of marriage is important. And even worse yet, she’s been so busy promoting her far-left liberal ideological interests at Harvard Law and undermining sound Constitutional law as Solictor General that she apparently never found the time to take a case to trial in her entire legal career!
This appears to be a shady, disgraceful nomination of someone who does not deserve the title of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Never mind ideology–the Senate ought to CAN her for lack of necessary experience. Period. She ought to have the decency to withdraw her name much like Harriet Miers had the good sense to do.
Filed under: Americans, Christians, Gospel, love, materialism, money, Service |
Leave a Comment
Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas!
Filed under: babies, Civil Rights, disability, family, health, healthcare, human rights, law, Law Related, money, Obama, Palin, parenting, Politics, pro choice, pro family, pro life, profits, Right to Life, United States, universal healthcare |
Gosh, I thought somebody did say something about possible death panels in government-run health care. But with government-paid doctors like the ones in the UK’s universal healthcare system, who needs death panels? Your own doctors will seek to pull the plug when you get to be too expensive.
Filed under: Christians, creativity, culture, faith, God, Gospel, Halloween, hope |
Leave a Comment
“What is it like to be a Christian?”
“It is like being a pumpkin. God picks you from the patch, brings you in, and washes all the dirt off of you. Then He cuts off the top and scoops out all the yucky stuff. He removes the seeds of doubt, hate, and greed. Then He carves you a new smiling face and puts His light inside of you to shine for all the world to see.” — Anonymous
Filed under: abortion, Barack Obama, Congress, culture, current events, family, health, health insurance, healthcare, human rights, law, Law Related, life, money, Obama, Politics, pro choice, pro family, pro life, reproductive rights, Right to Life, Taxes, truth, U.S. Policy, United States, universal healthcare, voters |
Leave a Comment
Here’s a thought: healthcare reform should be about maximizing the health of a nation and extending coverage for everyone — including the unborn. Healthcare reform must promote and encourage better health for generations yet to come — not destroy them.
On October 7, 2009, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the following when asked about federal dollars for abortion : “Well, I don’t want to get me in trouble at church, but I would mention there’s a law that precludes the use of federal funds for abortion that isn’t going to be changed in these health care bills.”
I give Mr. Gibbs all the credit in the world for such an accurate, skillful and deliberately misleading non-answer. The expertise necessary to dissect such a disarming reply is most remarkable. Thank goodness for fact-checkers like the National Right to Life Committee.
“[T]here’s a law… that isn’t going to be changed.” Accurate ? Yes. Misleading? Absolutely.
Pro-life people just want to know the truth. Are government monies going to be used to help pay for abortions in Obama’s healthcare reform?
Yes. Assuming proposed reform ultimately passes–yes.
FACT #1: There is no current federal law that would prevent the new programs created by the pending healthcare bills from paying for abortion on demand. And every attempt to add such limitations to the healthcare bills has been blocked.
Democrats are hiding behind the “Hyde Amendment” when they say federal funds cannot be used for elective abortions. Guess what folks? Democrats are completely bypassing the Hyde Amendment which only applies to appropriations bills. The new premium subsidy programs are not funded through appropriations bills.
FACT #2: Under H.R. 3200, as amended by the Capps-Waxman Amendment, under the public option, the Department of Health and Human Resources is explicitly authorized to pay for elective abortions using funds drawn on a U.S. Treasury account.
“[T]here’s a law… that isn’t going to be changed.” Accurate ? Yes. Misleading? Absolutely. It ignores the real question. What about the unborn?
Any person intentionally misleading the public on the critical issue of federal funding of abortion will have blood on their hands if the proposed healthcare reform passes. Tax dollars, federal funds, Treasury accounts, federal subsidies–whatever you want to call it–is blood money if it helps to kill the unborn.