Kirsten Powers touting new abortion platform...despite the most radical pro abortion candidate in history
By Rizzuto

Thu Aug 14, 2008 - Kirsten Powers plays pro-lifers for saps in her op-ed piece in today's New York Post:
IT took 16 years, but an anti-abortion Bob Casey will get to speak at the Democratic convention.

In 1992, then-Pennsylvania Gov. Robert Casey Sr., a devout Catholic, was barred from speaking at the Democratic National Convention. Party leaders claimed it was because he'd refused to endorse candidate Bill Clinton. But Casey maintained it was because of his anti-abortion views.

Yesterday, Barack Obama offered Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D-Pa.) - also anti-abortion - a speaking slot at this year's convention.
A speaking slot...wow, bold move. I guess the old maxim "actions speak louder than words" is meaningless to people like Powers. Her party did not field a single credible pro-life candidate this presidential election cycle (by credible I mean a candidate whose chances of winning were better than a snowballs chance in hell). How can an anti-abortion Democrat be so swayed by this obvious obfuscation of Obama's radically pro-abortion position with "just words"? When a man with Obama's history is elected as the de-facto head of the party, and women like Nancy Pelosi fronting House Dem's, we know where the Democratic Party is shifting. Both Pelosi and Obama have consistently received 100% ratings from NARAL.

In addition to his glowing reviews from NARAL, Obama opposed the Illinois state version of the Born Alive Protection Act, being instrumental in the defeat of the bill in 2002. Obama's website explains his position :
The website claims that Obama did not support the state legislation because it lacked language "clarifying that the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade." The website cites Obama's assertion that he would have supported the similar federal born-alive bill, which included language clarifying that it would not undermine Roe v. Wade when it unanimously passed the Senate in 2001.
With someone so dedicated to the integrity of Roe v. Wade that they would defeat a bill which would require care to children who survive chemically induced abortion (protecting them from infanticide, in essence), how can Ms. Powers with a straight face claim pro-life progress in the Democratic party?

All we can expect from this gang is a Cuban like situation where universal healthcare will include access to free, on demand abortions, leading to a sky rocketing rate of pregnancy termination. All we have to go on is their record, and their record is clear as day.

I'm not going to throw down some moral gauntlet on the abortion issue here, that's not my place, but I see gullibility on the part of Powers; well either gullibility, or her loyalty to the party outweighs her moral objection to abortion. Considering that Obama's "outreach" to anti-abortion advocates is so transparent it leads me to believe that Powers puts party above principals.

This party has no intention of honoring any promises or overtures it makes to the anti-abortion crowd. They’ll be cast aside like every other special interest group that the left panders to, once this election is over.

And if Ms. Powers is genuine in her enthusiasm, I've got a bridge to sell her.





RELATED TOPICS: Obama | Nancy Pelosi | Abortion | ALL TOPICS

Add to Mixx! del.icio.us

Comments : 0 Comments