Rebuttal of opinion on eagle opinion line

http://www.kansas.com/opinion/opinion-line/story/691322.html
quote from wichita eagle opinion line: “Obama never said he favored abortion. He said he favored a woman’s right to choose. There’s a big difference.”
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4573.html
article that i found that rebutts the quote:

Let’s break down the words and examine what they mean. “Pro” obviously means that you are in support of something. Pro-gun, pro-gay rights, pro-life, pro-union; these are all terms that describe something you support. Why is it then that the term pro-abortion is not used proudly? The term “pro-choice” should really embody all of the “pro” stances on every issue; it shouldn’t just define one issue. When someone refers to themselves as pro-choice, what choice are they referring to? Abortion. So what they are saying is that they believe it is fine for someone to obtain an abortion, which makes them pro-abortion. If you believe people have the right to form and join unions even if you would never join one, you are pro-union. Would you be angry that someone referred to you as pro-union? Would you say I just believe in the choice to join a union, but I am not pro-union? Of course not. The use of the word choice shows that it is all about the stigma of being called pro-abortion; is there a stigma if there is nothing wrong with abortion? Why would people be so opposed to being referred to as pro-abortion if abortion is perfectly acceptable?

Logic 101

A fetus is a human being. Killing a human being is wrong. Abortion is killing a human being. Abortion is wrong.

To say you are pro-choice but not pro-abortion, is simply illogical.

Global socialists toast victory over America

The American people may be losing their jobs and savings, but on Friday night, on the eve of the international financial summit, they provided President Bush and other G20 leaders a lavish banquet that included $300-a-bottle wine, Vermont Brie, eggplant fondue, and rack of lamb.

…..

In other words, America has been cut down to size and the beneficiaries are those who were always jealous of her wealth and power. The result will not only be less U.S economic power but the diminution of American military power. One will inevitably follow the other, especially if more U.S. manufacturing industries go bankrupt.

This isn’t “international capitalism.” It’s the victory of global socialism. The stage is perfectly set for the U.S. presidency to be occupied by a revolutionary Marxist.

“We are the world” is coming true.

http://www.smallgovtimes.com/2008/11/global-socialists-toast-victory-over-america/

Obama’s Communist Mentor

 http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/

In his biography of Barack Obama, David Mendell writes about Obama’s life as a “secret smoker” and how he “went to great lengths to conceal the habit.” But what about Obama’s secret political life? It turns out that Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.

In his books, Obama admits attending “socialist conferences” and coming into contact with Marxist literature. But he ridicules the charge of being a “hard-core academic Marxist,” which was made by his colorful and outspoken 2004 U.S. Senate opponent, Republican Alan Keyes.

However, through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his “poetry” and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just “Frank.”

The reason is apparent: Davis was a known communist who belonged to a party subservient to the Soviet Union.

Obama’s Global Tax Proposal

1. http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-global-tax-proposal-up-for-senate-vote/ 

“Global Poverty Act,” sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday(Feb. 14, 2008) and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States.

2. http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/02/20/does-obama-want-a-trillion-dollar-global-tax.html

“In the end, this economic agenda won’t just require new money. It will require a new spirit of cooperation and innovation on behalf of the American people. We will have to learn more, and study more, and work harder. We’ll be called upon to take part in shared sacrifice and shared prosperity.” Obama

Let’s stick with that “new money” part for a moment. For starters, that “new” money is, of course, “your” money, your tax dollars. And it’s a lot of money. Obama has proposed a couple of hundred billion buckaroos in new government spending along with new tax increases. But Obama may have just been getting started… James Pethokoukis

3. http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11569042/

The effort is an attempt to slow down the progress of a bill (S. 2433) that conservative analysts say could eventually force the U.S. to increase its foreign aid by hundreds of billions of dollars.