MEET A SURVIVOR OF OBAMA'S INFANTICIDE POLICY

So you support a woman's right to choose to murder a baby that survived an abortion. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

If I voted aganist a hate law because we already have laws aganist murder, that would not mean I am for Blacks killing whites or whites killing blacks or straight people killing gays or gays killing straight people. It would be because we already have laws aganist murder. It is dumb as fuck to have another law ...unless you are trying to spin some evil shit rumor. nobody would do that now would they?

WTF is wrong with you numbnuts? Originally Posted by WTF

Nobody has said anything about murdering a baby born alive....except you nuts. We just think there are already laws on the book concerning this. It is redundant or big government or gotcha politics. Which is it for you? My guess is gotcha politics.

Are you for trumped up hate laws too? More Big Government BS.

So you support a woman's right to choose to murder a baby that survived an abortion. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Do you have reading comprehension problems? I answered your question directly. I support a woman's right to choose. You don't. You, and the rest of the old white republican assholes who inhabit this board, support the proposition that if you knock up a hooker, or if you rape a woman, or if you fuck your 12 year old niece, and she gets pregnant as a result, she should be forced to bear and raise the child. Deal with it. That is the stated and memorialized policy platform of the GOP. We'll see in November how the female population of the US responds to that stated policy. I can only hope that your candidates make it a front-line issue in the same way that you do, you silly idiot.

Munchie updated his sig line! LOL! Still living rent free in his head! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I will admit you have raised the bar, possibly to a level where the competition gives up and acknowledges you as the undisputed world champ, for douche-baggery. This is the perfect example. You think you are in my head because of a signature I will change every few months. The only way your premise is possible is that you need to be unique in your behavior and attitudes. Other than your DNA, you couldn't be less unique. Most people have to deal with a cog on a regular basis. The meaning of the sig is that the people who say the most say the least, the more they say it the less it means, so when people don't respond to them they think they are right. But of course they are not.

The links to the videos and records of Obama votes are posted here....don't be a holocaust denier Munchmouth. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Stop and think. Try it, you might like it. You think you are arguing with me. I am just the person who delivers politifacts information. I can't remember you ever proving them wrong. Have you?

No one is disputing the votes and the only videos are edited youtube patch togethers. The politifact link has links to the full versions of the edited youtube videos.
Let's see. Do I believe a youtube special or a documented version from a source that has withstood attacks from Fox and other low-brows (whirly, cog, jd, jb, as well as bfd and xyz) and all legitimate sources? Since I have great respect for those who admit and correct their mistakes, you know where politifact and the low-brows stand with me. Funny how things change when you hear full sentences.

How ironic that whirly's one saving grace is that he thinks cog is a stupid douche bag.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/mar/10/rick-santorum/rick-santorum-said-obama-said-any-child-born-prema/
Illinois already had a law on its books from 1975 that said if a doctor suspected an abortion was scheduled for a viable fetus — meaning able to survive outside of the mother's body — then the child must receive medical care if it survives the abortion. The new laws didn't distinguish between viable and nonviable, meaning that an infant of any age that survived an abortion should receive care.

In 2002, Obama said that he thought Illinois already had laws sufficient to ensure that children that survived abortion received care. The proposed law would have required two doctors instead of one in the case of a live birth to ensure that care would be provided. "If these are children who are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in the room is going to make sure that they’re looked after," Obama said then.

Our ruling

To reiterate what’s not in dispute: Obama opposed "born alive" legislation in Illinois and gave several reasons for opposing the proposals. But at no time did he make the argument that infants who survived botched abortions should be killed.

Santorum may feel that abortion is tantamount to infanticide, but that does not give him the license to put words in Obama's mouth that he never uttered. Santorum said, "Any child born prematurely, according to the president, in his own words, can be killed." Obama didn’t say that. In fact, he said that abortion should be legal, but that children that are born should receive medical care. Obama never said that any child born prematurely can be killed or anything like that. Santorum crosses a line with his rhetoric in distinguishing the difference between his position and Obama’s. We rate Santorum’s statement Pants on Fire.

I read what Munchie linked to and it is about something that Santorum said. The point remains that a nurse testified that she had to stand by and allow an infant to die after a botched abortion. Criminal law says that any baby that draws a breath is "born" and "a person" except in Chicago. That is why the abomination of partial birth abortion was created. The baby is delivered to the point that it's skull can be penetrated before breath can be drawn. Sounds like a squirrely lawyer end around rather than an honest attempt. Anyone who supports this is an accessory to murder. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The link lead to something Santorum said because politifact doesn't check what whirly says.
In this case whirly basically repeated what Santorum said.
A teacher, huh?

Several quick points.

Too bad the nurse did nothing. It wasn't a law that kept her from acting.
An honest attempt? At what? At saving the child? It's an honest attempt at an abortion.
Everything else in your post is opinion.

Twist, bend, and contort....bottom line is that Obama supports the right to kill babies that are viable in the womb and those that are born alive....a monsterous sub human policy position.

Quoting Poltifact as proof of fact is a joke......

Twist, bend, and contort....bottom line is that Obama supports the right to kill babies that are viable in the womb and those that are born alive....a monsterous sub human policy position. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Thank you for providing an example of twist, bend, and contort. No need for a link this time.

Quoting Poltifact as proof of fact is a joke...... Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Sorry. Can't take your word on this (or anything) without proof.

No proof, it's just deflect and project from you.

As usual.

I guess you can keep going. You don't have to worry about damaging your credibility.

You can't damage anyone's credibility unless you have some of your own, Munchie. Which, as is obvious to most on here, you don't.

In 2002, Obama said that he thought Illinois already had laws sufficient to ensure that children that survived abortion received care. The proposed law would have required two doctors instead of one in the case of a live birth to ensure that care would be provided. "If these are children who are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in the room is going to make sure that they’re looked after," Obama said then.

Our ruling

To reiterate what’s not in dispute: Obama opposed "born alive" legislation in Illinois and gave several reasons for opposing the proposals. But at no time did he make the argument that infants who survived botched abortions should be killed.

Santorum may feel that abortion is tantamount to infanticide, but that does not give him the license to put words in Obama's mouth that he never uttered. Santorum said, "Any child born prematurely, according to the president, in his own words, can be killed." Obama didn’t say that. In fact, he said that abortion should be legal, but that children that are born should receive medical care. Obama never said that any child born prematurely can be killed or anything like that. Santorum crosses a line with his rhetoric in distinguishing the difference between his position and Obama’s. We rate Santorum’s statement Pants on Fire.



. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

COG, Whirly and all you other liars about this fact....please understand this is why Santorum did not get the nomination. He can fire up the base with a lie like this but the GOP party chiefs knew that he would lose the middle with this flat out lie.

Do any of you think we need more hate laws? No you don't. And the reason you do not is the exact same reason Obama voted no on this redundant bill.

WDF, if you had a brain, which is apparent you don't, you'd know that I already said I accepted Obama's explanation for his vote on the bill. I also said I don't know why it's bad government to require a doctor to get a second opinion. It's not the government giving the opinion, it's a doctor. And the purpose is to preserve life already born.

That's not government interference, that's common sense medicine.

You can't damage anyone's credibility unless you have some of your own, Munchie. Which, as is obvious to most on here, you don't. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

A negative endorcement from you is the best non-peer recomendation I could get.
Thank you for showing me the time I spend on most posts is not wasted.

PS Save me some time and im me when you hit 13000 so I can change my number.

You are now free to blather once again.

Munchie, you diss all of my posts, you have wished me dead, you call me names, you say my posts are "blather", you keep track of my statistics in your sig line.

I'm starting to think you don't like me.

Munchie, you diss all of my posts I diss many of your posts, you have wished me dead only after testing "wishing" extensively on Power Ball, you call me names and you, I, you say my posts are "blather"a good, general term for your posts and unlike "smatter" it won't be confused with an inquery, you keep track of my statistics in your sig line within a thousand or so of the number under your sceen name.

I'm starting to think you don't like me.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I like you enough to correct you.

Talk to a provider if you need more than that.

Awww . . . He likes me after all!

WDF, if you had a brain, which is apparent you don't, you'd know that I already said I accepted Obama's explanation for his vote on the bill. I also said I don't know why it's bad government to require a doctor to get a second opinion. It's not the government giving the opinion, it's a doctor. And the purpose is to preserve life already born.

That's not government interference, that's common sense medicine. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I understand that you think our Tea Nuts are distorting on this issue but my point is that no self respecting Libertarian would be for a law that required another Doctor to consult with another Doctor. WTF do they go to school for if not to know when they need a second opinion or not. There needs not be a law for that.

Do you think a true liberal would be for a law where workers can not organize or a true Conservative for a law that says you can't have more than one kid? Of course not.

Well a true Libertarian would not be for this law. Talk about over regulations. We already have laws on the book. I ask you...how many doctors are enough? How many CPA's need to look at my taxes? Are you just trying to pass a law where more than one proctologist stick his finger up your ass? Is this what this is about? A cover story so nobody think you weird when you ask to call in a second proctologist?

I don't think you have any credentials to judge what a true Libertarian should or should not believe. Thank you for your input.