Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Illinois Senate’

how could america fall for the kind of person ..obama really in fact is.fake written speeches–teleprompters..?

March 24th, 2010 4 comments

And….this is very scary!!

The lost and glazed eyes of the obamaphiles..
Don’t they even realize..he WILL take away your 2nd amendment right…and for what? Guess what city has the highest handgun related deaths?
Chicago!—-and it has a total ban on hand guns?
Outlaw guns..only outlaws have guns..so darn true..
These are facts:

Obama endorsed a ban on all handguns
Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, 9/9/96
Politico, 03/31/08.

Obama voted to allow the prosecution of people who use a firearm for self-defense ..even when people were defending themselves in their homes!!!
Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165, vote 20, 3/25/04

Obama supported increasing taxes on firearms and ammunition by 500 percent
Chicago Defender, 12/13/99

Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting
United States Senate, S. 397, vote 217, 7/29/05

On the Second Amendment, Don’t Believe Obama!
Senator Obama says “words matter.” But when it comes to your Second Amendment rights, he refuses to speak honestly about where he stands. In fact, Obama hides behind carefully chosen words and vague statements of support for sportsmen and gun rights to sidestep and camouflage the truth. But even he can’t hide from the truth forever…his voting record, political associations, and long standing positions make it clear that, if elected…
We face with him ..God only knows!!

he is a puppet, even his supporters know that. but most of the people who vote for him just want their chance to leech on the system clearly. you shouldnt try to argue with ignorant people about why they vote for nobama, there’s just no point.

Why did Obama vote NO to helping babies of botched abortions live?

March 16th, 2010 6 comments

Just how pro-abortion is Obama? Consider the following excerpt from a Sept. 1, 2004 column on IllinoisLeader.com by former nurse and noted pro-life activist Jill Stanek:

“For three years in a row I submitted the same testimony to Illinois Senate committees that were deciding whether to let the full Senate vote on the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.

“It was during those committee hearings that I first came face-to-face with state Senator Barack Obama, who functioned as either a member or the chairman, depending on the year and the committee.

“Each time I testified, I described to Obama and other members the death of a particular little girl who was aborted alive at Christ Hospital.

“The baby’s death haunts me, because she might have lived with help. Her abandonment by medical professionals clearly demonstrated that wanted and unwanted babies are treated differently at delivery….

“When Obama and his fellow Democrats voted against [the Born Alive Infants Protection Act] in committee that first year, I didn’t think they understood the magnitude of the 23-weeker’s death.

“So the next year along with my testimony I submitted a page from the neonatal textbook demonstrating the resuscitation of a baby about the same age as I described. I watched Obama look at those photos… before he voted no again….”

Besides his 100 percent pro-abortion voting record, Obama also opposes a Constitutional Amendment banning homosexual “marriage.” (He has, however, claimed that he is not in favor of homosexual “marriage.” Only “civil unions,” you see.)

Its sick isnt it, but thats the democrats for you. They allow want to abolish the death penalty but favor abortion on demand

Is Obama the weakest candidate on Crime ?

March 6th, 2010 7 comments

Of course McCain supports capital punishment. His record on Crime issues is near-perfect if we leave out the contentious illegal immigration issue. McCain is clearly the strongest on Crime. But what about Obama and Hillary?

When Hillary Rodham Clinton announced her campaign for the Senate in 2000, she declared – emphatically, according to an interviewer – that she supported the death penalty.

When Barack Obama first ran for the Illinois state Senate in 1996, he said in a campaign questionnaire that he opposed capital punishment.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v08/n155/a04.html?204

Obama also opposes federal minimum sentencing, concealed carry, and other anti-crime measures. An Obama presidency would be a huge gift to criminals everywhere

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Barack_Obama_Crime.htm

Obama is very soft on crime. This country will have a huge hike in criminals if he gets elected. Another gift to his brothers.

Could a Catholic in good conscience vote for a candidate who has supported infanticide?

February 26th, 2010 15 comments

Barack Obama is the only US senator on record for voting for infanticide. As an Illinois state senator, he led the opposition to the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA), which says, "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."

Why was such a law needed? Late-term abortions often use prostaglandin to induce contractions, forcing a premature birth. The labor contractions usually kill the baby, but not always. Sometimes preemies survive the procedure, fighting for air, nourishment, and a human touch. Standard practice has been to abandon the baby to die, lying in a pool of afterbirth and medical waste.

When BAIPA came before the Illinois Senate in 2001, Obama said it would establish that babies surviving abortion "are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a child, a nine-month old child that was delivered to term." Apparently, Obama thinks you have to be nine months old to be protected from abuse and neglect.

Three months later, the U.S. Senate passed the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act by a vote of 98-0. At the federal level, the bill included an explicit disclaimer about babies still in utero. Later, Obama claimed he would have supported the federal version.

That was a lie. When the federal language was included in an Illinois version in 2003, Chairman Obama bottled it up in the Health Committee, killing the bill.

Barack Obama is not just for abortion. Obama demands that every abortion result in a dead baby. My question is, can a Catholic in good conscience vote for a candidate who is not just pro-choice, but pro-death?

Oh, most definitely not. Our Bishop just sent out a letter to the entire diocese last week reminding is that not only must we vote our conscience, but we must remember that our foremost duty as Catholics is to protect life, from conception to natural death, and it would therefore be an unconscionable decision and a form of self excommunication to vote for a candidate that openly supports abortion, especially when there is an opposing candidate that will work to protect life.

Does Barack Obama support infanticide?

February 19th, 2010 12 comments

As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama twice opposed legislation to define as "persons" babies who survive late-term abortions.

He supports killing babies who survive late-term abortions? Isn’t this infanticide?

This article at the Wall Street Journal has the story of Gianna Jessen, a woman who survived late-term abortion. Gianna’s medical records state that she was "born during saline abortion."

The Audacity of Death
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121261107480446197.html

Do you view this as infanticide?
As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama twice opposed legislation to define as "persons" babies who survive late-term abortions. Babies like Gianna. Mr. Obama said in a speech on the Illinois Senate floor that he could not accept that babies wholly emerged from their mother’s wombs are "persons," and thus deserving of equal protection under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

A federal version on the same legislation passed the Senate unanimously and with the support of all but 15 members of the House. Gianna was present when President Bush signed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act in 2002.

When I asked Gianna to reflect on Mr. Obama’s candidacy, she paused, then said, "I really hope the American people will have their eyes wide open and choose to be discerning. . . . He is extreme, extreme, extreme."

Yes, I view it as infanticide. But then, I also view late-term abortions as murder and partial-birth abortion as heinous.
Barack Obama’s record shows he supports late-term abortion and opposed the surviving baby legislation, so it does appear he supports infanticide to a degree and that is unacceptable.

What are the FACTS when comparing experience: Obama/ Biden to McC/Palin?

January 18th, 2010 25 comments

Don’t be misled, look for yourself. Don’t just listen to the -hmm umm yahoos! :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#State_legislator.2C_1997.E2.80.932004

OBAMA
Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996, succeeding State Senator Alice Palmer as Senator from the 13th District, which then spanned Chicago South Side neighborhoods from Hyde Park-Kenwood south to South Shore and west to Chicago Lawn.[26] Once elected, Obama gained bipartisan support for legislation reforming ethics and health care laws.[27] He sponsored a law increasing tax credits for low-income workers, negotiated welfare reform, and promoted increased subsidies for childcare.[28] In 2001, as co-chairman of the bipartisan Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, Obama supported Republican Governor Ryan’s payday loan regulations and predatory mortgage lending regulations aimed at averting home foreclosures,[29] and in 2003, Obama sponsored and led unanimous, bipartisan passage of legislation to monitor racial profiling by requiring police to record the race of drivers they detained and legislation making Illinois the first state to mandate videotaping of homicide interrogations.[28][30]

Obama was reelected to the Illinois Senate in 1998, and again in 2002.[31] In 2000, he lost a Democratic primary run for the U.S. House of Representatives to four-term incumbent Bobby Rush by a margin of two to one.[32][33]

In January 2003, Obama became chairman of the Illinois Senate’s Health and Human Services Committee when Democrats, after a decade in the minority, regained a majority.[34] During his 2004 general election campaign for U.S. Senate, police representatives credited Obama for his active engagement with police organizations in enacting death penalty reforms.[35] Obama resigned from the Illinois Senate in November 2004 following his election to the US Senate.[36]

2004 U.S. Senate campaign

See also: United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004

In mid-2002, Obama began considering a run for the U.S. Senate, enlisting political strategist David Axelrod that fall and formally announcing his candidacy in January 2003.[37] Decisions by Republican incumbent Peter Fitzgerald and his Democratic predecessor Carol Moseley Braun not to contest the race launched wide-open Democratic and Republican primary contests involving fifteen candidates.[38] Obama’s candidacy was boosted by Axelrod’s advertising campaign featuring images of the late Chicago Mayor Harold Washington and an endorsement by the daughter of the late Paul Simon, former U.S. Senator for Illinois.[39] He received over 52% of the vote in the March 2004 primary, emerging 29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival.[40]

Obama’s expected opponent in the general election, Republican primary winner Jack Ryan, withdrew from the race in June 2004.[41]

In July 2004, Obama wrote and delivered the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, Massachusetts.[42] After describing his maternal grandfather’s experiences as a World War II veteran and a beneficiary of the New Deal’s FHA and G.I. Bill programs, Obama spoke about changing the U.S. government’s economic and social priorities. He questioned the Bush administration’s management of the Iraq War and highlighted America’s obligations to its soldiers. Drawing examples from U.S. history, he criticized heavily partisan views of the electorate and asked Americans to find unity in diversity, saying, "There is not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America."[43] Broadcasts of the speech by major news organizations launched Obama’s status as a national political figure and boosted his campaign for U.S. Senate.[44]

In August 2004, with less than three months to go before Election Day, Alan Keyes accepted the Illinois Republican Party’s nomination to replace Ryan.[45] A long-time resident of Maryland, Keyes established legal residency in Illinois with the nomination.[46] In the November 2004 general election, Obama received 70% of the vote to Keyes’s 27%, the largest victory margin for a statewide race in Illinois history.[47]

U.S. Senator, 2005–present

Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 4, 2005.[48] Obama was the fifth African American Senator in U.S. history, and the third to have been popularly elected.[49] He is the only Senate member of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Joe Biden has been in the service of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT in 1972

So 36 years and 12 years for O/B FORTY EIGHT YEARS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LEVELEXPERIENCE

John McCain since 1982 to present = 26 years FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL
Sarah Palin , uh, well 2days if you count since her being named by Senator McCain

TOTAL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL EXPERIENCE Mc/Pal = 26 years +//- 2 DAYS!

Who has the more experience to lead the country ????

Read the Question TOTAL FEDERAL EXPERIENCE boys and girls

Truth hurts?
Remember what I said about the SHOUTING Yahoo!’s
Oh and FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE BRANCH includes Senators but not Governors or Mayors.

Quit chatting

I was a Hillary supporter and I would vote for her any day! Sarah Palin????? What was McCain thinking!!! She has no experience at all….. How is she going to take on Obama/Biden? Obama looks very experienced compared to her! I was going to vote for McCain but I am not anymore….I cant even imagine if something happend and she took over…HIllary is RIGHT for president…NOT Palin!!!!!!

Thumbs down Obama?

January 15th, 2010 9 comments

Record Suggests Obama’s Views Have Changed A Bit
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) ?
If he wanted, the Barack Obama of today could have a pretty good debate with the Barack Obama of yesterday.

They could argue about whether the death penalty is ever appropriate. Whether it makes sense to ban handguns. They might explore their differences on the Patriot Act or parental notification of abortion.

And they could debate whether Obama has flip-flopped, changed some of his views as he learned more over the years or is simply answering questions with more detail and nuance now that he is running for president.

The Democratic senator from Illinois hasn’t made any fundamental policy shifts, such as changing his view on whether abortion should be legal. But his decade in public office and an Associated Press review of his answers to a questionnaire show positions changing in smaller ways.

Taken together, the shifts could suggest a liberal, inexperienced lawmaker gradually adjusting to the realities of what could be accomplished, first in the Illinois Legislature and then the U.S. Senate.

On the other hand, political rivals could accuse him of abandoning potentially unpopular views or of trying to disguise his real positions.

Take the death penalty.

In 1996, when he was running for a seat in the Illinois Senate, Obama’s campaign filled out a questionnaire flatly stating that he did not support capital punishment. By 2004, his position was that he supported the death penalty "in theory" but felt the system was so flawed that a national moratorium on executions was required.

Today, he doesn’t talk about a moratorium and says the death penalty is appropriate for "some crimes — mass murder, the rape and murder of a child — so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage."

Then there’s another crime-related issue, gun control.

That 1996 questionnaire asked whether he supported banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. The campaign’s answer was straightforward: "Yes." Eight years later, he said on another questionnaire that "a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable" but reasonable restrictions should be imposed.

His legislative record in Illinois shows strong support for gun restrictions, such as limiting handgun purchases to one a month, but no attempts to ban them. Today, he stands by his support for controls while trying to reassure hunters that he has no interest in interfering with their access to firearms.

Obama’s presidential campaign contends that voters can’t learn anything about his views from the 1996 questionnaire, which was for an Illinois good-government group known as the IVI-IPO. Aides say Obama did not fill out the questionnaire and instead it was handled by a staffer who misrepresented his views on gun control, the death penalty and more.

"Barack Obama has a consistent record on the key issues facing our country," said spokesman Ben LaBolt. "Even conservative columnists have said they’d scoured Obama’s record for inconsistencies and found there were virtually none."

IVI-IPO officials say it’s inconceivable that Obama would have let a staffer turn in a questionnaire with incorrect answers. The group interviewed Obama in person about his answers before endorsing him in that 1996 legislative race, and he didn’t suggest then, or anytime since, that the questionnaire needed to be corrected, they said.

Since he came to Washington, one piece of legislation that raises questions is the USA Patriot Act, the security measure approved after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

When he ran for the Senate, Obama called the act a "shoddy and dangerous law" that should be replaced. After he took office, the Senate considered an update that Obama criticized as only a modest improvement and one that was inferior to other alternatives.

Still, Obama ended up voting for that renewal and update of the Patriot Act.

Another disputed issue is health care.

Obama was asked in the 1996 questionnaire whether he supported a single-payer health plan, in which everyone gets health coverage through a single government program. The response was, "Yes in principle," and probably best to have the federal government set up such a program instead of the state.

Today, health care is a hot issue, and Obama does not support creating a single government program for everyone. In fact, rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards have criticized his health proposal for potentially leaving millions of people uninsured because they wouldn’t be forced to buy insurance.

Political analysts don’t see much danger for Obama in the changes. They aren’t major shifts akin to Republican Mitt Romney’s changes on abortion and gun control, so voters aren’t likely to see the senator as indecisive or calculating.

"I think they allow for some adjustment," said Dante Scala, a political science professor at the University of New Hampshire. "It depends on whether they’re changing the core of what they’re about."

In the general election, the Republican nominee would be more likely to go after the first-term senator on another front.

"If Obama is the Democratic candidate, I don’t think the Republicans will be attacking him on a particular issue," said Dianne Bystrom, director of the Center for Women and Politics at Iowa State University. "They’d be attacking him on his experience."

Obama’s Democratic opponents, concerned about turning off voters who dislike negative campaigning, haven’t been aggressively using his shifts against him. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign does quietly argue that they amount to a pattern that should concern the public.

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer noted Obama’s positions on handguns, health care and the Patriot Act. "Voters will ultimately decide whether these are significant shifts in his views or not," he said.

One area where Obama’s campaign acknowledges his views have changed is on the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages. In January 2004, Obama said he was opposed to repealing the law. By February, one month later, he supported a repeal.

His campaign says Obama always thought the Defense of Marriage Act was a bad law but didn’t believe it needed to be repealed. After hearing from gay friends how hurtful the law was, he decided it needed to be taken off the books.

(© 2008 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/barack.obama.democrats.2.616645.html

I stopped reading after the second sentence since he’s done nothing that other politicians haven’t done, and I quite frankly get annoyed by people who copy long questions from other sources. Politicians will say whatever they think will get them more votes. And if he really has changed his mind on some issues, who cares? Aren’t people entitled to changed their minds? I doubt if you have identical views to what you had several years ago. I know I’ve changed my mind on stuff a few times.

Thumbs down Obama?

January 15th, 2010 9 comments

Record Suggests Obama’s Views Have Changed A Bit
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) ?
If he wanted, the Barack Obama of today could have a pretty good debate with the Barack Obama of yesterday.

They could argue about whether the death penalty is ever appropriate. Whether it makes sense to ban handguns. They might explore their differences on the Patriot Act or parental notification of abortion.

And they could debate whether Obama has flip-flopped, changed some of his views as he learned more over the years or is simply answering questions with more detail and nuance now that he is running for president.

The Democratic senator from Illinois hasn’t made any fundamental policy shifts, such as changing his view on whether abortion should be legal. But his decade in public office and an Associated Press review of his answers to a questionnaire show positions changing in smaller ways.

Taken together, the shifts could suggest a liberal, inexperienced lawmaker gradually adjusting to the realities of what could be accomplished, first in the Illinois Legislature and then the U.S. Senate.

On the other hand, political rivals could accuse him of abandoning potentially unpopular views or of trying to disguise his real positions.

Take the death penalty.

In 1996, when he was running for a seat in the Illinois Senate, Obama’s campaign filled out a questionnaire flatly stating that he did not support capital punishment. By 2004, his position was that he supported the death penalty "in theory" but felt the system was so flawed that a national moratorium on executions was required.

Today, he doesn’t talk about a moratorium and says the death penalty is appropriate for "some crimes — mass murder, the rape and murder of a child — so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage."

Then there’s another crime-related issue, gun control.

That 1996 questionnaire asked whether he supported banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. The campaign’s answer was straightforward: "Yes." Eight years later, he said on another questionnaire that "a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable" but reasonable restrictions should be imposed.

His legislative record in Illinois shows strong support for gun restrictions, such as limiting handgun purchases to one a month, but no attempts to ban them. Today, he stands by his support for controls while trying to reassure hunters that he has no interest in interfering with their access to firearms.

Obama’s presidential campaign contends that voters can’t learn anything about his views from the 1996 questionnaire, which was for an Illinois good-government group known as the IVI-IPO. Aides say Obama did not fill out the questionnaire and instead it was handled by a staffer who misrepresented his views on gun control, the death penalty and more.

"Barack Obama has a consistent record on the key issues facing our country," said spokesman Ben LaBolt. "Even conservative columnists have said they’d scoured Obama’s record for inconsistencies and found there were virtually none."

IVI-IPO officials say it’s inconceivable that Obama would have let a staffer turn in a questionnaire with incorrect answers. The group interviewed Obama in person about his answers before endorsing him in that 1996 legislative race, and he didn’t suggest then, or anytime since, that the questionnaire needed to be corrected, they said.

Since he came to Washington, one piece of legislation that raises questions is the USA Patriot Act, the security measure approved after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

When he ran for the Senate, Obama called the act a "shoddy and dangerous law" that should be replaced. After he took office, the Senate considered an update that Obama criticized as only a modest improvement and one that was inferior to other alternatives.

Still, Obama ended up voting for that renewal and update of the Patriot Act.

Another disputed issue is health care.

Obama was asked in the 1996 questionnaire whether he supported a single-payer health plan, in which everyone gets health coverage through a single government program. The response was, "Yes in principle," and probably best to have the federal government set up such a program instead of the state.

Today, health care is a hot issue, and Obama does not support creating a single government program for everyone. In fact, rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards have criticized his health proposal for potentially leaving millions of people uninsured because they wouldn’t be forced to buy insurance.

Political analysts don’t see much danger for Obama in the changes. They aren’t major shifts akin to Republican Mitt Romney’s changes on abortion and gun control, so voters aren’t likely to see the senator as indecisive or calculating.

"I think they allow for some adjustment," said Dante Scala, a political science professor at the University of New Hampshire. "It depends on whether they’re changing the core of what they’re about."

In the general election, the Republican nominee would be more likely to go after the first-term senator on another front.

"If Obama is the Democratic candidate, I don’t think the Republicans will be attacking him on a particular issue," said Dianne Bystrom, director of the Center for Women and Politics at Iowa State University. "They’d be attacking him on his experience."

Obama’s Democratic opponents, concerned about turning off voters who dislike negative campaigning, haven’t been aggressively using his shifts against him. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign does quietly argue that they amount to a pattern that should concern the public.

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer noted Obama’s positions on handguns, health care and the Patriot Act. "Voters will ultimately decide whether these are significant shifts in his views or not," he said.

One area where Obama’s campaign acknowledges his views have changed is on the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages. In January 2004, Obama said he was opposed to repealing the law. By February, one month later, he supported a repeal.

His campaign says Obama always thought the Defense of Marriage Act was a bad law but didn’t believe it needed to be repealed. After hearing from gay friends how hurtful the law was, he decided it needed to be taken off the books.

(© 2008 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/barack.obama.democrats.2.616645.html

I stopped reading after the second sentence since he’s done nothing that other politicians haven’t done, and I quite frankly get annoyed by people who copy long questions from other sources. Politicians will say whatever they think will get them more votes. And if he really has changed his mind on some issues, who cares? Aren’t people entitled to changed their minds? I doubt if you have identical views to what you had several years ago. I know I’ve changed my mind on stuff a few times.