I turned on the Democratic convention this evening to catch Obama’s acceptance speech.
Hmmmm. I thought this man was supposed to be a great orator. He seemed like an angry man reading a laundry list of complaints.
After watching for awhile I understood why he is always shown with his head sideways, like he’s looking off into the distance. He is. He’s looking at the teleprompters stationed on either side of him, with only an occasional head-on glance. At that, he seemed to skip a line and shift topics in mid-thought at one point.
I think I made it about halfway through, then went into the kitchen to make cookies. I could take only so much of this angry man berating our country and promising to fix it by spending more of our money. He says he’s going to raise the money by increasing taxes on businesses, but guess who ends up paying for that tax increase? You got it – we do. The businesses just pass the added expense along to the consumers.
A friend sent me this video last week, and I did some research on it. You can find the documentation online, as in scanned documents of roll call votes, showing that the accusations made here are, in fact, true.
Obama claims he voted against the legislation because it wasn’t needed, that there was already legislation in place to prevent allowing babies born alive to die without care. If that is true, what would it have hurt to vote for it? You know, sort of just reinforcing the concept.
I am not a single issue voter, yet this hits close to home for me. Three of my grandchildren are adopted, all of them sons of single mothers who carried their babies to term and chose to put them up for adoption.
How did our society get to the place where it is more socially acceptable to abort a baby than to put it up for adoption?
How many other women would be adoptive mothers, if there were babies available to nurture?