Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The "People" that are lying is spelled O-B-A-M-A
A little more than a year ago, Rush Limbaugh had a caller who discussed Barack Obama’s votes to allow what most of the less-nuanced among us would call infanticide:
“CALLER: Thank you. I am so excited about talking to you, and I'm so nervous. I wanted to talk about a different aspect of Obama's candidacy. No one has touched on his very far left stance on social issues such as abortion, and there was an incident here in Illinois about seven years ago, at Christ Hospital -- a suburban hospital to Chicago -- where babies who were born alive after a botched abortion, were left to die in linen closets and a nurse exposed it, and she was of course fired, and there were demonstrations, and it led the Illinois legislature to formulate the Infants Born Alive Act, which stated that infants who were born alive as the result of a botched abortion, could not be left to die, and Barack Obama voted against it.”
Rush then predicted that this stuff would eventually come out but only after Senator Obama had become the nominee (or VP nominee).
So here we are. It’s out…and in a big way as an ever-growing dustup over some votes he cast as a state Senator (Unfortunately for him not all of them were “Present”). Apparently exasperated that all haven’t seen the light, the Senator has gone on the attack on this matter:
“Obama: Well and because they have not been telling the truth. And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying” Political Punch
But even nuance can’t seem to help him here as the facts seem fairly incontrovertible:
“But in 2003, in the health committee which he chaired, Obama voted against a version of the bill that contained the specific “neutrality” language — redundant language affirming that the bill only applied to infants already born and granted no rights to the unborn. You can visit the Illinois legislature’s website here to see the language of the “Senate Amendment 1,” which was added in a unanimous 10-0 vote in the committee before Obama helped kill it. This is the so-called “neutrality clause” on Roe that everyone is talking about.”
Barack Obama’s campaign website has a section entitled Fight the Smears where predictably unnamed and/or unsourced right-wing operatives are attacked for the so-called smears. Well, if the candidate accuses people of lying about his record, that would seem to be a pretty big “smear”…but I guess not an easy one to fight back on now.
Side Note I: One of the so-called smears: "SMEAR: Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim"
The Obama campaign thinks being called a Muslim is a smear??
Side Note II: Jerome Corsi’s “Obama Nation” is highlighted as a book they have to fight against. The more favorably reviewed David Freddoso’s The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate is not. Both are Top 20 sellers (as of 5:11 AM EST today) on Amazon.
“CALLER: Thank you. I am so excited about talking to you, and I'm so nervous. I wanted to talk about a different aspect of Obama's candidacy. No one has touched on his very far left stance on social issues such as abortion, and there was an incident here in Illinois about seven years ago, at Christ Hospital -- a suburban hospital to Chicago -- where babies who were born alive after a botched abortion, were left to die in linen closets and a nurse exposed it, and she was of course fired, and there were demonstrations, and it led the Illinois legislature to formulate the Infants Born Alive Act, which stated that infants who were born alive as the result of a botched abortion, could not be left to die, and Barack Obama voted against it.”
Rush then predicted that this stuff would eventually come out but only after Senator Obama had become the nominee (or VP nominee).
So here we are. It’s out…and in a big way as an ever-growing dustup over some votes he cast as a state Senator (Unfortunately for him not all of them were “Present”). Apparently exasperated that all haven’t seen the light, the Senator has gone on the attack on this matter:
“Obama: Well and because they have not been telling the truth. And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying” Political Punch
But even nuance can’t seem to help him here as the facts seem fairly incontrovertible:
“But in 2003, in the health committee which he chaired, Obama voted against a version of the bill that contained the specific “neutrality” language — redundant language affirming that the bill only applied to infants already born and granted no rights to the unborn. You can visit the Illinois legislature’s website here to see the language of the “Senate Amendment 1,” which was added in a unanimous 10-0 vote in the committee before Obama helped kill it. This is the so-called “neutrality clause” on Roe that everyone is talking about.”
Barack Obama’s campaign website has a section entitled Fight the Smears where predictably unnamed and/or unsourced right-wing operatives are attacked for the so-called smears. Well, if the candidate accuses people of lying about his record, that would seem to be a pretty big “smear”…but I guess not an easy one to fight back on now.
Side Note I: One of the so-called smears: "SMEAR: Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim"
The Obama campaign thinks being called a Muslim is a smear??
Side Note II: Jerome Corsi’s “Obama Nation” is highlighted as a book they have to fight against. The more favorably reviewed David Freddoso’s The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate is not. Both are Top 20 sellers (as of 5:11 AM EST today) on Amazon.
Comments:
<< Home
Re: Muslim - yes, it's a smear to state that a self-professed Christian is in fact defrauding the American public about his religious affiliation. He has repeatedly stated in multiple fora that he is a Christian, and has taken abuse for having a Christian pastor with a big opinionated mouth - an indulgence easily permitted to white conservatives.
There's nothing wrong with being a Duke fan but you would consider it a smear if I called you one. Okay, bad example, that one actually does show a moral defect...
It's that word "secretly", MC, that feeds into the active wingnut smear. There are plenty of fair hits to make on Obama without pretending that he's a Muslim. Most Irish-Americans have ancestors who were Druids and often have first names or surnames reflecting the Celtic myths predating the arrival of Christianity to the Emerald Isle.
But Obama has the misfortune to have a very common Arabic middle name, identical to the surname of Iraq's dictator (and many of the Shi'ite Arabs whom Saddam killed presumably were named Hussein also.) There's a reason why Saddam Hussein was known as Saddam more than as Hussein; it's about as common an Arabic name as Jones.
There's nothing wrong with being a Duke fan but you would consider it a smear if I called you one. Okay, bad example, that one actually does show a moral defect...
It's that word "secretly", MC, that feeds into the active wingnut smear. There are plenty of fair hits to make on Obama without pretending that he's a Muslim. Most Irish-Americans have ancestors who were Druids and often have first names or surnames reflecting the Celtic myths predating the arrival of Christianity to the Emerald Isle.
But Obama has the misfortune to have a very common Arabic middle name, identical to the surname of Iraq's dictator (and many of the Shi'ite Arabs whom Saddam killed presumably were named Hussein also.) There's a reason why Saddam Hussein was known as Saddam more than as Hussein; it's about as common an Arabic name as Jones.
# posted by 
: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:23:00 AM
: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:23:00 AM
Thanks Bruce - I just found it a strange way to combat the misconception. Were , say, the DNC describe me as Jewish, they would be wrong but I wouldn't consider that a smear...even though they obviously would have so intended.
Post a Comment
<< Home
