The Visual Fisking of the Liberal Viewer

Community Organizing Explained

If you’ve wondered what Community Organizers do.   

Three books explain ACORN and the Gameliel organization of leftist clergy that first hired Obama, and the Saul Alinsky guide on organizing.  I gleaned these from an important article by Stanley Kurtz at National Review On-Line.  Read the whole thing here http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjdjY2Y2YWU5YjQ1Y2Y5Mzg0MGRlNDQ4YTkwYmI2ZDE=

What follows is cut and pasted from the books’ Amazon websites, along with some commentary.  You can look inside all of these books yourself at Amazon at the links provided.

Organizing Urban

America

: Secular and Faith-based Progressive Movements (Social Movements, Protest and Contention) by Heidi Swarts 

http://www.amazon.com/Organizing-Urban-America-Faith-based-Progressive/dp/0816648395/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1225733185&sr=1-1

Product Description

Collective action through organized social movements has long expanded American citizens’ rights and liberties. Recently, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has helped win living wage initiatives in more than 130 cities across the country. Likewise, congregation-based groups have established countless health, education, and other social programs at city and state levels. Despite modest budgets, these organizations—different in their approach, but at the same time working for social change—have won billions of dollars in redistributive programs.

Looking closely at this phenomenon, Heidi J. Swarts explores activist groups’ cultural, organizational, and political strategies. Focusing on ACORN chapters and church federations in St. Louis, Missouri, and San Jose, California, Swarts demonstrates that congregation-based organizing has developed an innovative cultural strategy, combining democratic deliberation and leadership development to produce a “culture of commitment” among its cross-class, multiracial membership.  By contrast, ACORN’s more homogeneous low-income class base has a national structure that allows it to coordinate campaigns quickly, and its seasoned staff excels in tactical innovations. By making these often-invisible grassroots organizers evident, Swarts sheds light on factors that constrain or enable other social movements in the

United States

.

The Organizing  book by Heidi Swarts, published by the U of Minnesota Press, is searchable at Amazon.   

Reading

the “Excerpt” I found out that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) is a big financial supporter of ACORN. Swarts says CCHD follows a North American version of liberation theology which is heavily influenced by Alinsky.  [However, I recently read in the paper that CCHD decided to no longer support ACORN because a brother of the founder stole a few million bucks and ACORN won’t fire him.  Their decision has nothing to do with ideology or fraudulent voting registrations] 

The religious groups Swarts covers (she says) like to use the language of religion to promote justice and redistribution.  One of the favorites is to describe Jesus and his apostles as community organizers.  That sounds familiar.  Check it out.

Doing Justice: Congregations and Community Organizing (Paperback) by Dennis A. Jacobsen

http://www.amazon.com/Doing-Justice-Congregations-Community-Organizing/dp/0800632443/ref=reg_hu-wl_mrai-recs

Product Description
Doing Justice is an introductory theology of congregation-based community organizing rooted in the day-to-day struggles and hopes of urban ministry and in the author’s 14 years of personal experience in community organizing ministries.

Drawing from the organizing principles of Saul Alinsky, Jacobsen weaves the theological and biblical warrants for community organizing into concrete strategies for achieving justice in the public arena. Designed to be used by congregations and church leaders, as well as by ministerial students, Doing Justice opens new vistas for community action in support of the poor, the disadvantaged, and the disenfranchised of our society.

About the Author
Dennis A. Jacobsen is pastor of an ELCA congregation and the director of the Gamaliel National Clergy Caucus, a network of over 1,000 clergy that develops national and regional training events to ground the work of congregation-based community organizing in theology and scripture.   

It was 3 Catholic parishes on S Side of Chicago whose pastors were affiliated with Gameliel who first hired Obama to work in

Chicago

.

You can also search this book at Amazon: “The world as it is, is the enemy of God.”                               – That’s the first sentence of Doing Justice      

Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky

http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Saul-Alinsky/dp/0679721134/ref=reg_hu-wl_mrai-recs

From the Inside Flap
This primer tells the "have-nots" how they can organize to achieve real political power for the practice of true democracy.

You can also look inside the Alinsky book where you will find this in the first paragraph on page 1.

“The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power.  Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away. . . . We are talking about a mass power organization that will change the world… “

It also says something like: ask for 100%, fall back to 80% and then settle for 50%.  Try again later for what you really want. Name of the game is compromise and stick with it.

On page 61:

“The ego of the organizer is stronger and more monumental than the ego of the leader.  The leader is driven by the desire for power, while the organizer is driven by the desire to create.  The organizer is in a real sense is reaching for the highest level for which man can reach – to create, to be a “great creator”, to play God.”  [sounds like a messiah]

Yikes.

Lawrence

Eagleburger, Secretary of State under the first President Bush, was just on TV saying that he is very, very concerned that Obama is not who people think he is.   He looked upset and said he’s afraid we are going to be very sorry a few years from now when we realize who we elected president. 

If Obama had had a real contest when he ran for Senator all of this would have come out then.   In case you don’t know, his democrat primary opponent was forced out because of leaked divorce papers & same thing happened to his Republican opponent who had a pretty good chance.  A last-minute fill in – Alan Keyes- ran a joke campaign.  So the presidency is the first time Obama has really had to run hard for something & along comes the economic melt-down to hand the election to him.  I hope it doesn’t happen, but I’m afraid it will 

Get out and vote – drag along your friends and family.

Julia 

The index shows quite a few references to Saul Alinsky, the Berrigan brothers & at least one reference to Che Guevera. In fact, Daniel Berrigan wrote a blurb on the back jacket.  The Berrigans were Catholic priests involved in anti-Viet Nam activities, including pouring blood on Selective Service office records.   

Makes me wonder about the “peace and justice” movement in the Catholic Church.   

Community Organizing Explained

If you’ve wondered what Community Organizers do.   

Three books explain ACORN and the Gameliel organization of leftist clergy that first hired Obama, and the Saul Alinsky guide on organizing.  I gleaned these from an important article by Stanley Kurtz at National Review On-Line.  Read the whole thing here http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjdjY2Y2YWU5YjQ1Y2Y5Mzg0MGRlNDQ4YTkwYmI2ZDE=

What follows is cut and pasted from the books’ Amazon websites, along with some commentary.  You can look inside all of these books yourself at Amazon at the links provided.

Organizing Urban

America

: Secular and Faith-based Progressive Movements (Social Movements, Protest and Contention) by Heidi Swarts 

http://www.amazon.com/Organizing-Urban-America-Faith-based-Progressive/dp/0816648395/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1225733185&sr=1-1

Product Description

Collective action through organized social movements has long expanded American citizens’ rights and liberties. Recently, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has helped win living wage initiatives in more than 130 cities across the country. Likewise, congregation-based groups have established countless health, education, and other social programs at city and state levels. Despite modest budgets, these organizations—different in their approach, but at the same time working for social change—have won billions of dollars in redistributive programs.

Looking closely at this phenomenon, Heidi J. Swarts explores activist groups’ cultural, organizational, and political strategies. Focusing on ACORN chapters and church federations in St. Louis, Missouri, and San Jose, California, Swarts demonstrates that congregation-based organizing has developed an innovative cultural strategy, combining democratic deliberation and leadership development to produce a “culture of commitment” among its cross-class, multiracial membership.  By contrast, ACORN’s more homogeneous low-income class base has a national structure that allows it to coordinate campaigns quickly, and its seasoned staff excels in tactical innovations. By making these often-invisible grassroots organizers evident, Swarts sheds light on factors that constrain or enable other social movements in the

United States

.

The Organizing  book by Heidi Swarts, published by the U of Minnesota Press, is searchable at Amazon.   

Reading

the “Excerpt” I found out that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) is a big financial supporter of ACORN. Swarts says CCHD follows a North American version of liberation theology which is heavily influenced by Alinsky.  [However, I recently read in the paper that CCHD decided to no longer support ACORN because a brother of the founder stole a few million bucks and ACORN won’t fire him.  Their decision has nothing to do with ideology or fraudulent voting registrations] 

The religious groups Swarts covers (she says) like to use the language of religion to promote justice and redistribution.  One of the favorites is to describe Jesus and his apostles as community organizers.  That sounds familiar.  Check it out.

Doing Justice: Congregations and Community Organizing (Paperback) by Dennis A. Jacobsen

http://www.amazon.com/Doing-Justice-Congregations-Community-Organizing/dp/0800632443/ref=reg_hu-wl_mrai-recs

Product Description
Doing Justice is an introductory theology of congregation-based community organizing rooted in the day-to-day struggles and hopes of urban ministry and in the author’s 14 years of personal experience in community organizing ministries.

Drawing from the organizing principles of Saul Alinsky, Jacobsen weaves the theological and biblical warrants for community organizing into concrete strategies for achieving justice in the public arena. Designed to be used by congregations and church leaders, as well as by ministerial students, Doing Justice opens new vistas for community action in support of the poor, the disadvantaged, and the disenfranchised of our society.

About the Author
Dennis A. Jacobsen is pastor of an ELCA congregation and the director of the Gamaliel National Clergy Caucus, a network of over 1,000 clergy that develops national and regional training events to ground the work of congregation-based community organizing in theology and scripture.   

It was 3 Catholic parishes on S Side of Chicago whose pastors were affiliated with Gameliel who first hired Obama to work in

Chicago

.

You can also search this book at Amazon: “The world as it is, is the enemy of God.”                               – That’s the first sentence of Doing Justice      

Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky

http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Saul-Alinsky/dp/0679721134/ref=reg_hu-wl_mrai-recs

From the Inside Flap
This primer tells the "have-nots" how they can organize to achieve real political power for the practice of true democracy.

You can also look inside the Alinsky book where you will find this in the first paragraph on page 1.

“The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power.  Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away. . . . We are talking about a mass power organization that will change the world… “

It also says something like: ask for 100%, fall back to 80% and then settle for 50%.  Try again later for what you really want. Name of the game is compromise and stick with it.

On page 61:

“The ego of the organizer is stronger and more monumental than the ego of the leader.  The leader is driven by the desire for power, while the organizer is driven by the desire to create.  The organizer is in a real sense is reaching for the highest level for which man can reach – to create, to be a “great creator”, to play God.”  [sounds like a messiah]

Yikes.

Lawrence

Eagleburger, Secretary of State under the first President Bush, was just on TV saying that he is very, very concerned that Obama is not who people think he is.   He looked upset and said he’s afraid we are going to be very sorry a few years from now when we realize who we elected president. 

If Obama had had a real contest when he ran for Senator all of this would have come out then.   In case you don’t know, his democrat primary opponent was forced out because of leaked divorce papers & same thing happened to his Republican opponent who had a pretty good chance.  A last-minute fill in – Alan Keyes- ran a joke campaign.  So the presidency is the first time Obama has really had to run hard for something & along comes the economic melt-down to hand the election to him.  I hope it doesn’t happen, but I’m afraid it will 

Get out and vote – drag along your friends and family.

Julia 

The index shows quite a few references to Saul Alinsky, the Berrigan brothers & at least one reference to Che Guevera. In fact, Daniel Berrigan wrote a blurb on the back jacket.  The Berrigans were Catholic priests involved in anti-Viet Nam activities, including pouring blood on Selective Service office records.   

Makes me wonder about the “peace and justice” movement in the Catholic Church.   

Community Organizing Explained

If you’ve wondered what Community Organizers do.   

Three books explain ACORN and the Gameliel organization of leftist clergy that first hired Obama, and the Saul Alinsky guide on organizing.  I gleaned these from an important article by Stanley Kurtz at National Review On-Line.  Read the whole thing here http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjdjY2Y2YWU5YjQ1Y2Y5Mzg0MGRlNDQ4YTkwYmI2ZDE=

What follows is cut and pasted from the books’ Amazon websites, along with some commentary.  You can look inside all of these books yourself at Amazon at the links provided.

Organizing Urban

America

: Secular and Faith-based Progressive Movements (Social Movements, Protest and Contention) by Heidi Swarts 

http://www.amazon.com/Organizing-Urban-America-Faith-based-Progressive/dp/0816648395/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1225733185&sr=1-1

Product Description

Collective action through organized social movements has long expanded American citizens’ rights and liberties. Recently, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has helped win living wage initiatives in more than 130 cities across the country. Likewise, congregation-based groups have established countless health, education, and other social programs at city and state levels. Despite modest budgets, these organizations—different in their approach, but at the same time working for social change—have won billions of dollars in redistributive programs.

Looking closely at this phenomenon, Heidi J. Swarts explores activist groups’ cultural, organizational, and political strategies. Focusing on ACORN chapters and church federations in St. Louis, Missouri, and San Jose, California, Swarts demonstrates that congregation-based organizing has developed an innovative cultural strategy, combining democratic deliberation and leadership development to produce a “culture of commitment” among its cross-class, multiracial membership.  By contrast, ACORN’s more homogeneous low-income class base has a national structure that allows it to coordinate campaigns quickly, and its seasoned staff excels in tactical innovations. By making these often-invisible grassroots organizers evident, Swarts sheds light on factors that constrain or enable other social movements in the

United States

.

The Organizing  book by Heidi Swarts, published by the U of Minnesota Press, is searchable at Amazon.   

Reading

the “Excerpt” I found out that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) is a big financial supporter of ACORN. Swarts says CCHD follows a North American version of liberation theology which is heavily influenced by Alinsky.  [However, I recently read in the paper that CCHD decided to no longer support ACORN because a brother of the founder stole a few million bucks and ACORN won’t fire him.  Their decision has nothing to do with ideology or fraudulent voting registrations] 

The religious groups Swarts covers (she says) like to use the language of religion to promote justice and redistribution.  One of the favorites is to describe Jesus and his apostles as community organizers.  That sounds familiar.  Check it out.

Doing Justice: Congregations and Community Organizing (Paperback) by Dennis A. Jacobsen

http://www.amazon.com/Doing-Justice-Congregations-Community-Organizing/dp/0800632443/ref=reg_hu-wl_mrai-recs

Product Description
Doing Justice is an introductory theology of congregation-based community organizing rooted in the day-to-day struggles and hopes of urban ministry and in the author’s 14 years of personal experience in community organizing ministries.

Drawing from the organizing principles of Saul Alinsky, Jacobsen weaves the theological and biblical warrants for community organizing into concrete strategies for achieving justice in the public arena. Designed to be used by congregations and church leaders, as well as by ministerial students, Doing Justice opens new vistas for community action in support of the poor, the disadvantaged, and the disenfranchised of our society.

About the Author
Dennis A. Jacobsen is pastor of an ELCA congregation and the director of the Gamaliel National Clergy Caucus, a network of over 1,000 clergy that develops national and regional training events to ground the work of congregation-based community organizing in theology and scripture.   

It was 3 Catholic parishes on S Side of Chicago whose pastors were affiliated with Gameliel who first hired Obama to work in

Chicago

.

You can also search this book at Amazon: “The world as it is, is the enemy of God.”                               – That’s the first sentence of Doing Justice      

Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky

http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Saul-Alinsky/dp/0679721134/ref=reg_hu-wl_mrai-recs

From the Inside Flap
This primer tells the "have-nots" how they can organize to achieve real political power for the practice of true democracy.

You can also look inside the Alinsky book where you will find this in the first paragraph on page 1.

“The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power.  Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away. . . . We are talking about a mass power organization that will change the world… “

It also says something like: ask for 100%, fall back to 80% and then settle for 50%.  Try again later for what you really want. Name of the game is compromise and stick with it.

On page 61:

“The ego of the organizer is stronger and more monumental than the ego of the leader.  The leader is driven by the desire for power, while the organizer is driven by the desire to create.  The organizer is in a real sense is reaching for the highest level for which man can reach – to create, to be a “great creator”, to play God.”  [sounds like a messiah]

Yikes.

Lawrence

Eagleburger, Secretary of State under the first President Bush, was just on TV saying that he is very, very concerned that Obama is not who people think he is.   He looked upset and said he’s afraid we are going to be very sorry a few years from now when we realize who we elected president. 

If Obama had had a real contest when he ran for Senator all of this would have come out then.   In case you don’t know, his democrat primary opponent was forced out because of leaked divorce papers & same thing happened to his Republican opponent who had a pretty good chance.  A last-minute fill in – Alan Keyes- ran a joke campaign.  So the presidency is the first time Obama has really had to run hard for something & along comes the economic melt-down to hand the election to him.  I hope it doesn’t happen, but I’m afraid it will 

Get out and vote – drag along your friends and family.

Julia 

The index shows quite a few references to Saul Alinsky, the Berrigan brothers & at least one reference to Che Guevera. In fact, Daniel Berrigan wrote a blurb on the back jacket.  The Berrigans were Catholic priests involved in anti-Viet Nam activities, including pouring blood on Selective Service office records.   

Makes me wonder about the “peace and justice” movement in the Catholic Church.   

What Exactly is the Bush Doctrine?

While watching the ABC grilling of Sarah Palin by Charlie Gibson, I, too, was wondering what the heck the Bush Doctrine is.  I’m a politics junkie and don’t remember ever reading a definitive statement by the White House of THE "Bush Doctrine".  It seems Charlie Gibson picked out one particular White House statement on foreign policy and labels it THE "Bush Doctrine".  Here’s how  Greg Pollowitz in the Corner blog at National Review On-Line  traced the many differing statements in the media over the years about "THE Bush Doctrine":

Defining the Bush Doctrine  [Greg Pollowitz]

The left is going bananas over Governor Palin’s answer to Gibson’s "Bush Doctrine" question.  Andy McCarthy has a good post on it over in the Corner, but I thought I’d add a little history of the "Bush Doctrine" using the search function at NYTimes.com.  The term "Bush Doctrine" looks to have been used for the first time, post 9/11, in mid-November:

A senior administration official said Mr. Bush’s speech would be a fleshing out of what the White House calls the Bush Doctrine — the assertion that nations that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves.

In January 2002,  the editors of the Times wrote:

Mr. Bush appears to be developing an assertive new military doctrine that includes the threat of armed intervention against nations that are developing weapons that may put the United States in peril. The evolving Bush Doctrine implies a preemptive use of conventional force to take out missile launchers, industrial enterprises and facilities that appear to be involved in the fabrication of unconventional weapons. This is a radical departure from what went before. Traditionally, the United States has employed its military forces in retaliation for an attack rather than striking first itself. That should not preclude other options when there is a clear and present danger of attack, but firing first is not a step to be taken lightly.

By March, the "Bush Doctrine" had expanded yet again to include regime change:

In the tug of war between the go-get-’em, nuke-brandishing civilians of the Pentagon and the coalition-minded pragmatists of the State Department, conservatives are now convinced Mr. Bush’s sympathies are gung-ho. The Weekly Standard, which has overcome personal strains with Mr. Bush to become something like the president’s conservative superego, has taken to calling this ”The Bush Doctrine.”

”On tactics, he may be listening to Colin Powell,” said Norman Podhoretz, the influential conservative editor and author. ”But he’s very clear as to his strategic objectives — not just to clean up Al Qaeda cells but to effect regime changes in six or seven countries and to create conditions which would lead to internal reform and modernization in the Islamic world.”

In September, the Times had an editorial titled, "Bush Doctrine," based on the National Security Strategy paper submitted to Congress.  An excerpt:

The tension between idealism and realism in foreign policy runs through America history, and the fault lines are evident in Mr. Bush’s policy statement. The paper — a policy summation that every president is required to submit to Congress — seems in some sections to be animated by the most enlightened and constructive impulses of the land of Jefferson, Lincoln and the Marshall Plan. It dedicates the nation to extending the benefits of freedom, democracy, prosperity and the rule of law to struggling countries around the globe. Mr. Bush speaks eloquently in an introductory letter about working with other nations to combat disease and alleviate poverty, and he reaffirms his determination to increase American foreign aid.

At other points, the paper sounds more like a pronouncement that the Roman Empire or Napoleon might have produced. Given Mr. Bush’s lone-wolf record on matters like global warming, and the nature of the issues he now faces, including a looming confrontation with Iraq, it is clear these combative attitudes will be driving Washington policy in the months ahead. The boys in Lubbock may want to pause before signing on for the overly aggressive stance Mr. Bush has outlined.

This, I believe, is the September 2002 that Charlie Gibson refers to in his interview.  Gibson only referred to the preemption aspect of it, but the human rights and regime changes aspects are as important.  Gibson never mentioned this in his little snarky lecture to Gov. Palin.

For the rest of Pollowitz’ examples, I’m just going to give you a flavor of what he found.  You can read them in full at the link at the end of this post.

By April, 2003, we have President Bush admitting he’s not quite sure what the "Bush Doctrine" actually is:

. . . Mr. Bush acknowledged that he had yet to fully form the ”Bush doctrine,” or to think through how the American victory in Iraq would affect his vow to deal with weapons of mass destruction on a global basis.

In December, we have yet another version of the "Bush Doctrine" as described in the book America Unbound:

. . . Mr. Bush is not the puppet of the vice president or the Defense Department hawks. . . His preferred approach is to seek ad hoc ”coalitions of the willing,” what Richard Haas, a former adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell, has called ”à la carte multilateralism.”

After John Kerry’s defeat in 2005, the "Bush Doctrine" became defined by the left with the buzzwords "preemptive" and "unilateral."  Paul Krugman for example:

. . . the "Bush doctrine" of pre-emption and unilateralism sounded very impressive at first. . . His administration sought global dominance on the cheap . . .

In December 2006, Gary Hart wrote this in defense of Barack Obama:

. . . the United States “still lacks a coherent national security policy,” rightly finding the Bush doctrine of pre-emption and defeat of evil in the world wanting.

In January 2007, there’s this description:

. . . the Bush doctrine that democratization of the Middle East starts with the defeat of terrorism.

September 2007:

. . . the Bush doctrine of forcibly spreading democracy has been widely deemed a failure, even by a sizable chunk of Republicans.

From the Times review of Norman Podhoretz’s World War IV:

. . . the Bush doctrine of unilateral action, pre-emptive war and the exportation of democracy to the Middle East.

So, it’s easy to see why there might be a little confusion on what exactly Charlie Gibson was getting at when he asked about the "Bush Doctrine."  Except for the Times, of course.  It’s crystal clear for them.  Here’s how they wrote up the Palin interview:

In the interview Thursday, Palin:

—Appeared unsure of the Bush doctrine — essentially that the United States must help spread democracy to stop terrorism and that the nation will act pre-emptively to stop potential foes.

Asked whether she agreed with that, Palin said: ”In what respect, Charlie?” Gibson pressed her for an interpretation of it. She said: ”His world view.” That prompted Gibson to say ”no, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war” and describe it to her.

Here’s what Gibson actually said, however: 

The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self defense.  That we have the right to a premptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us.

Not only was Charlie Gibson wrong about what was enunciated in September 2002, Gov. Palin was 100% correct in asking what the heck he was babbling about as well as 100% correct in what she said.

Read the whole thing at  09/11 10:28 PM

There were 2 other sticky parts of the interview, as shown on Thursday night:

1) The bit about NATO and defending Georgia from Russia:  Both Biden and Obama are on record as wanting Georgia and the Ukraine to join NATO.  Shouldn’t they also be grilled about the military consequences of their positions?  Sarah looked smarter than Gibson.

2) The bit about Iraq being God’s war is rediculous to the extreme:  Most of the chaplains in the Senate and House pray all the time that the congressmen will be doing God’s will.  Palin’s references to Lincoln were exactly right.  John Kennedy, too, said something about doing God’s work on earth. And I’m pretty sure Obama has said something similar in order to liken himself to Kennedy and appear religious.  If I find it, I’ll post it.

My formerly benign opinion of Charlie Gibson has whithered.  He’s in the tank, too.

Julia

No Illinois Law in Place to Protect “Born Alive” Infants

From National Review On-Line.  In case you were wondering about Obama’s repeated statement that there were already laws on the books in Illinois that protected infants born alive althought doctors had intended an abortion. 

Were there "already" laws protecting premature infants, as Senator Obama has at various times stated in defending his vote against the born-alive bill?   [David Freddoso]

The answer is that no law was protecting them. We know this for certain because the Illinois attorney general at the time, Jim Ryan — the man charged with enforcing state laws — wrote a letter on July 17, 2000, expressing his finding that Christ Hospital was breaking no laws in leaving premature babies to die after they survived abortions.

Ryan wrote:

While we are deeply respectful of your serious concerns about the practices and methods of abortions at this hospital, we have concluded that there is no basis for legal action by this office against the Hospital or its employees, agents or staff at this time.

So again: according to the state’s chief enforcer of the law, Christ Hospital was doing nothing illegal when they left premature babies to die after they had survived abortions. Note that this is this is the very reason legislators were trying to pass the born-alive bill in the first place.

08/19 07:26 PM

By the way, I think that’s the same Ryan who had been Obama’s original Senate race opponent. 

Julia

No Illinois Law in Place to Protect “Born Alive” Infants

From National Review On-Line.  In case you were wondering about Obama’s repeated statement that there were already laws on the books in Illinois that protected infants born alive althought doctors had intended an abortion. 

Were there "already" laws protecting premature infants, as Senator Obama has at various times stated in defending his vote against the born-alive bill?   [David Freddoso]

The answer is that no law was protecting them. We know this for certain because the Illinois attorney general at the time, Jim Ryan — the man charged with enforcing state laws — wrote a letter on July 17, 2000, expressing his finding that Christ Hospital was breaking no laws in leaving premature babies to die after they survived abortions.

Ryan wrote:

While we are deeply respectful of your serious concerns about the practices and methods of abortions at this hospital, we have concluded that there is no basis for legal action by this office against the Hospital or its employees, agents or staff at this time.

So again: according to the state’s chief enforcer of the law, Christ Hospital was doing nothing illegal when they left premature babies to die after they had survived abortions. Note that this is this is the very reason legislators were trying to pass the born-alive bill in the first place.

08/19 07:26 PM

By the way, I think that’s the same Ryan who had been Obama’s original Senate race opponent. 

Julia

Another Fisking by Copious Dissent

This one is of Moron.org’s new video.
Copious Dissent

Moveon Sends New Message to Members

Nas is an Idiot!

A good fisking of the new Nas song critisizing Fox News.

Thanks to Copious Dissent

Nas is an Idiot

Obama Misrepresenting Illinois Legislation He Killed

Via National Review’s The Corner On-Line:

Barack Obama’s Campaign Responds to Charge He Lied About Abortion

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 14, 2008

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — The campaign of pro-abortion presidential candidate Barack Obama has responded to charges that he misrepresented his views on an abortion bill that protected babies who survive abortions. The Obama camp essentially repeated the claims that Obama opposed the bill for legitimate reasons.

At issue are Obama’s votes during his tenure in the Illinois legislature.

Obama chaired a committee that oversaw a bill requiring appropriate medical care for babies who survive abortions or were left to die after a purposeful premature birth.

He ultimately voted against the bill claiming it would somehow interfere the so-called right to abortion under Roe v. Wade and said he would have voted for a federal bill doing the same thing but with language added making it irrelevant to Roe.

However, new documents released by the National Right to Life Committee from the Illinois legislature show the same language found in the federal bill was added as an amendment to the Illinois legislation and that Obama voted for it but ultimately voted down the anti-infanticide bill.

The Obama camp responded to the charges saying, "In recent days the right wing blogosphere and rumor mongers have falsely accused Senator Obama of misrepresenting his position on ‘Born Alive’ legislation."

The Obama campaign claimed, "Senator Obama supported such legislation when it did not threaten the Constitutional rights embodied in Roe v Wade."

Obama staffers issued a factsheet recycling old newspaper stories and documents with Obama’s old claims on the subject and didn’t offer much new evidence

"The state and federal born alive infant protection acts did not include exactly the same language," Obama’s camp claimed and it complained the Illinois bill said "a live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.”

However, Douglas Johnson, the legislative director for National Right to Life, says Obama’s campaign is still misrepresenting the truth.

"It is rather astonishing that, in light of the new documents that came to light this week, the Obama campaign here continues to brazenly misrepresent the content of the state Born-Alive Infants Protection Act that Obama killed in 2003," he told LifeNews.com.

Johnson said the language of the abortion-neutrality clause Obama supported was the exact same language as the federal version and Obama is wrong to say he opposed the bill because it didn’t have the language in place.

He also said the Obama campaign is falsely saying that neutrality amendment was not included in the final language of the bill Obama voted against and pointed to official documents saying that’s not the case.

"The claimed differences cited simply did not exist at the time that Obama and his colleagues voted down the bill on March 13, 2003," Johnson said.

Johnson also said the House of Representatives in Congress voted for the anti-infanticide bill in 2000 — long before the neutrality clause was added. That bipartisan vote of 380-15 approved the bill and put Obama out of step with even pro-abortion lawmakers who supported it.

Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/state3448.html

In other words – Obama put the kabosh on legislation in Illinois that was perfectly acceptible to even pro-abortion legislators in Illinois and at the Federal level. 

Julia