Pro-Lifers Greet Pro-Abortion Presidential Candidate Barack Obama (Pictures)

  • Thread starter Thread starter PLAL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PLAL

Guest
Pro-Lifers Picket in Pro-Abortion Candidate Barack Obama in Springfield, IL.

At several times during Obama’s speech we began shouting, “Abortion no, Obama no!” This not only consternated the pro-abortion crowd around us but must also have had an impact near the man. An agitated Obama official appeared soon into Obama’s speech, approached the police who were watching us, and simply ordered, “Remove them.”

The police complied, telling us to move to a designated protesters’ area a couple blocks away, but Joe Scheidler simply said no, we had **First Amendment **rights. Joe was right, of course. There was nothing the police could do but watch us.

More…

jillstanek.com/archives/2007/02/post_13.html

Pictures…

prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2007/02/prolifers_greet.php

O, Mama – Not Obama

generationsforlife.org/2007/0212/obama/#comments
 
Here’s an interesting post I found on the blogs…

Obama is really just a media creation. Everyone who likes him claims they like him because either he’s good looking, wants change (whatever he means by this?) or a new face (OK but why him?). I really don’t understand why so many people like him as a presidential candidate but cannot give good reasons why they like him.

The media gives Obama a free pass. Anyone who regularly visits Jill Stanek’s website knows while in the IL Congress Obama voted against the Illinois Children’s Protection Act. This Act made it illegal to kill babies born outside their mothers womb. Why doesn’t the media talk about this vote? Why do we only get this information from only a select few websites on the internet.

It’s a disgrace for one thing not standing up for babies in the womb but now its getting to a point politicians will not stand up for babies living outside of the womb. How can we expect Obama to protect us from harm when he merely cannot vote to protect born babies from harm outside the womb? Sorry but Obama in my book should not even be considered to run for any office.

Another thing I cannot stand are politicians who are afraid to go on talk shows which ask tough questions (like O’Reilly and Hannity and Colmes). These are my thoughts!

jillstanek.com/archives/2006/07/new_stanek_colu_5.html#comments
 
PLAL said:
Pro-Lifers Picket in Pro-Abortion Candidate Barack Obama in Springfield, IL.

At several times during Obama’s speech we began shouting, “Abortion no, Obama no!” This not only consternated the pro-abortion crowd around us but must also have had an impact near the man. An agitated Obama official appeared soon into Obama’s speech, approached the police who were watching us, and simply ordered, “Remove them.”

The police complied, telling us to move to a designated protesters’ area a couple blocks away, but Joe Scheidler simply said no, we had **First Amendment **rights. Joe was right, of course. There was nothing the police could do but watch us.

More…

jillstanek.com/archives/2007/02/post_13.html

Pictures…

prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2007/02/prolifers_greet.php

O, Mama – Not Obama

generationsforlife.org/2007/0212/obama/#comments
Click to expand...
“Lemmings for Obama” :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: Too true! 😦
 
Awesome!!! Trust me…Barrack is not a good canidate!!! I think we should have a demonstration waiting at all his stops on the campaign trail!!!
 
I asked a few people at work what they thought of Obama. OVERWHELMINGLY they all said they would vote for him 'cause he is a “good speaker” and he is “hip”. I then asked what he stands for on the issues? They had NO IDEA!!! One 20 something grad-student said she was going to vote for him 'cause he is “candid” and admitted to doing cocaine!
 
marvi43 said:
I asked a few people at work what they thought of Obama. OVERWHELMINGLY they all said they would vote for him 'cause he is a “good speaker” and he is “hip”. I then asked what he stands for on the issues? They had NO IDEA!!! One 20 something grad-student said she was going to vote for him 'cause he is “candid” and admitted to doing cocaine!
Click to expand...
Ummm… I notice your thing says you are in California… unfortunately, this doesn’t surprize me considering Pelosi and Boxer are from your state… So sorry! Come move to the midwest where more folks actually have morals… not saying you don’t but I fear you are in the minority.
 
BlestOne said:
Ummm… I notice your thing says you are in California… unfortunately, this doesn’t surprize me considering Pelosi and Boxer are from your state… So sorry! Come move to the midwest where more folks actually have morals… not saying you don’t but I fear you are in the minority.
Click to expand...
Now that’s not really fair. There are a lot of good moral people in California.

California is not all Hollywood & San Francisco & Berkeley. And in those places too, there are a lot of good, decent people. They are just lower profile.

And I wouldn’t necessarily describe your Illinois politicians like Dick Durbin or Rod Blagojevich as models of midwestern morality!

(sorry for the digression from the thread topic!)
 
PLAL said:
Here’s an interesting post I found on the blogs…

Obama is really just a media creation. Everyone who likes him claims they like him because either he’s good looking, wants change (whatever he means by this?) or a new face (OK but why him?). I really don’t understand why so many people like him as a presidential candidate but cannot give good reasons why they like him.

The media gives Obama a free pass. Anyone who regularly visits Jill Stanek’s website knows while in the IL Congress Obama voted against the Illinois Children’s Protection Act. This Act made it illegal to kill babies born outside their mothers womb. Why doesn’t the media talk about this vote? Why do we only get this information from only a select few websites on the internet.

It’s a disgrace for one thing not standing up for babies in the womb but now its getting to a point politicians will not stand up for babies living outside of the womb. How can we expect Obama to protect us from harm when he merely cannot vote to protect born babies from harm outside the womb? Sorry but Obama in my book should not even be considered to run for any office.

Another thing I cannot stand are politicians who are afraid to go on talk shows which ask tough questions (like O’Reilly and Hannity and Colmes). These are my thoughts!

jillstanek.com/archives/2006/07/new_stanek_colu_5.html#comments
Click to expand...
Many good thoughts here. If you will notice, quite a few of the Dems running for office decline to appear on Fox. Hillary, especially, does not appear where the audience is not carefully chosen. That’s unfortunate because if hard questions are not asked, we have no way of knowing what they stand for (at election time).

Obama is, indeed, a good speaker. He is charismatic, I guess. But he is not ready for prime time. He is much too inexperienced. I admit I do not like his positions on anything I have heard him state so take that into consideration when evaluating what I have said. But do note ,as I have said often on this forum, you cannot overestimate the ignorance of the American electorate. Example, those you gave above of the vaccuous answers of those asked why they support Obama.
 
there was a different but similar thread elsewhere concerning this subject of Sen. Obama’s stance on abortion.

I tend to agree with MaryBobo. He perhaps is not ready yet. but I will say I have spoken to him on an occassion and he does have some great ideas for America and is deeper than the media is pointing out. He is one of the few Presidential candidates that is really concerned about being inclusive to all Americans instead of focusing on just one or the other.

WIth that said I think his biggest problem outside of being new to the national scene is abortion voting record. His voting record is obviously with the mainstream of Democrats. Sad but true.

He was questioned pretty heavly by pro-life Democrats on this issue. In one case about his vote against prohibiting people taking minors across state borders for abortion. He voted no on this resolution. He said his reason for voting no was that the law was imperfect and that although he agreed with it in principle it left what to do in case of incest or rape. He worried that these (although few but tragic none the less) are left out.

We pointed out that point is understood but we asked why not go further then. Speak out for the bill but you want to improve it. But this is also typical for politicians to vote against a bill because of one issue or another instead of stopping from getting to vote and trying to improve the bill where everyone wins. So in end his voting record show his incesitivity against the child in the womb.

Do not be suprised if this is one who switches position and goes against the Democrat mainstream on this issue. He really does wrestle with this issue. But sadly his record is horrible in this situation.

Fortunately in Illinois the Attorney General is trying to force the courts to allow the law to take place here. Currently being held up in the courts and can not be enforced at this moment. the AG is trying to force this to get moving.

I think you will see more and more Democrats who are truely pro-life “come out” against the people who have hijacked the party and be more open and secure about their pro-life stance.

We can thank 16 Democrats who voted against embryonic stem cell bill to keep it from having enough majority to overide the President’s veto.

Things look encouraging but we do nothold our breath and do not be suprised if there becomes a 3rd party where pro-life Dems form their own party.
 
mary_bobo said:
Many good thoughts here. If you will notice, quite a few of the Dems running for office decline to appear on Fox. Hillary, especially, does not appear where the audience is not carefully chosen. That’s unfortunate because if hard questions are not asked, we have no way of knowing what they stand for (at election time).
.
Click to expand...
Rangle is on Fox quite often actually. However most decline the majority of the shows on Fox is those at Fox tend to give commentary more than asking questions. Or worse yet do not give equal time.

However one exception is Chris Wallace who Democrats are on his Sunday show pretty much every week. I like watching that show because he asks questions that is truly fair and balanced. He does not ask “soft ball” questions to eithe parties on that show. I am sorry but if you watch closely to the evening programs they ask such “softball” questions to conservative Republicans.
 
Bobby_Jim said:
Now that’s not really fair. There are a lot of good moral people in California.

California is not all Hollywood & San Francisco & Berkeley. And in those places too, there are a lot of good, decent people. They are just lower profile.

And I wouldn’t necessarily describe your Illinois politicians like Dick Durbin or Rod Blagojevich as models of midwestern morality!

(sorry for the digression from the thread topic!)
Click to expand...
I conceed to the Barack and Dick and Rod not being models. For those of us Illinoisans that live downstate from Chicago, they are the bane of our existence. With the exception of Chicago and University of Illinois, it is a pretty conservative state. Unfortunately, we can’t get rid of our corrupt politicians without overwhelming Chicago support… and well, Chicago is our Hollywood & San Francisco & Berkeley all wrapped up in one. To my credit, I believe I said something like not all… I did not mean all by any stretch and I am sorry if I offended you. To an outsider it looks like there is a line that seperates north and south parts of your state and north seems ok, while the south seems very liberal.
 
josephdavid said:
Rangle is on Fox quite often actually. However most decline the majority of the shows on Fox is those at Fox tend to give commentary more than asking questions. Or worse yet do not give equal time.

However one exception is Chris Wallace who Democrats are on his Sunday show pretty much every week. I like watching that show because he asks questions that is truly fair and balanced. He does not ask “soft ball” questions to eithe parties on that show. I am sorry but if you watch closely to the evening programs they ask such “softball” questions to conservative Republicans.
Click to expand...
I’d be happy if you would point out these programs that give Republicans softball questions. Yes, Rangel is on FOX often as are other Dems. There are many liberal people on FOX. The conservative ones are mostly as news analysts or on editorial programs which do not proport to be news. Perhaps you have never watched Wolf Blitzer or Alan Colmes who give a liberal tutorial before they ever get to a question. I think there is plenty of blame to do around. And I don’t think I am willing to give the liberal folks in the media a pass as you seem to be willing to do.
 
mary_bobo said:
Perhaps you have never watched Wolf Blitzer or Alan Colmes who give a liberal tutorial before they ever get to a question. I think there is plenty of blame to do around. And I don’t think I am willing to give the liberal folks in the media a pass as you seem to be willing to do.
Click to expand...
Yes I have hahaha and they also drive me nuts. One thing I realize is that good journalism on TV is almost dead. You do not find 60 minute reporters or Tim Russert and Mike Wallace type TV journalists who ask questions to get to the root of the situation instead of just redundant commentary.

But I will watch some Fox programs to give you some information.
 
Make sure you add Hillary and all of the other pro-murder candidates.
BlestOne said:
Awesome!!! Trust me…Barrack is not a good canidate!!! I think we should have a demonstration waiting at all his stops on the campaign trail!!!
Click to expand...
 
I just am confused as to why anyone thinks Obama is qualified in any way to be President. :confused: Let’s face it, if a white guy with Obama’s scant political experience even tried to run as a serious candidate it would be ridiculous. Let’s not forget how Sen. Quayle was viciously treated because of his “good looks”, people actually thought he wasn’t qualified to even be vice-president, despite the fact that he was an accomplished politician as a congressman AND senator!

I think I know the real reason why people are supporting Obama and I think it’s patronizing and pathetic. 😦 Just my opinion.
 
Barack Obama has belonged to a church for 20 years which professes the following on it’s website…


  1. *]Commitment to God
    *]Commitment to the Black Community
    *]Commitment to the Black Family
    *]Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
    *]Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
    *]Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
    *]Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
    *]Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
    *]Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
    *]Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
    *]Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
    *]Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.
    If you substituted the word “White” instead of “Black” would you think this is a church of “White Supremacy”?

    Why then would Barack Obama belong to a church with these precepts?

    tucc.org/about.htm
    For more, read Erik Rush’s article written on 2-21-07 titled “Obamination”…

    renewamerica.us/columns/rush/070221

    “Obama’s affiliation with this church, if I must call it that, should be as alarming to the American voter as a Republican candidate for president belonging to the Aryan Brethren Church of Christ. Any argument against this assertion is politically-correct delusion, reverse discrimination and a hypocrisy — a very dangerous one.”

    –Erik Rush
 
Jennifer123 said:
I just am confused as to why anyone thinks Obama is qualified in any way to be President. :confused: Let’s face it, if a white guy with Obama’s scant political experience even tried to run as a serious candidate it would be ridiculous. Let’s not forget how Sen. Quayle was viciously treated because of his “good looks”, people actually thought he wasn’t qualified to even be vice-president, despite the fact that he was an accomplished politician as a congressman AND senator!

I think I know the real reason why people are supporting Obama and I think it’s patronizing and pathetic. 😦 Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Leave it to the MSM to jump on the bandwagon and anoint their choice for president. This whole thing is media driven.
 
WoW… he does sound racist.
PLAL said:
Barack Obama has belonged to a church for 20 years which professes the following on it’s website…


  1. *]Commitment to God
    *]Commitment to the Black Community
    *]Commitment to the Black Family
    *]Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
    *]Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
    *]Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
    *]Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
    *]Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
    *]Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
    *]Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
    *]Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
    *]Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.
    If you substituted the word “White” instead of “Black” would you think this is a church of “White Supremacy”?

    Why then would Barack Obama belong to a church with these precepts?

    tucc.org/about.htm
    For more, read Erik Rush’s article written on 2-21-07 titled “Obamination”…

    renewamerica.us/columns/rush/070221

    “Obama’s affiliation with this church, if I must call it that, should be as alarming to the American voter as a Republican candidate for president belonging to the Aryan Brethren Church of Christ. Any argument against this assertion is politically-correct delusion, reverse discrimination and a hypocrisy — a very dangerous one.”

    –Erik Rush
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top