Tag Archives: amendment

Vote for MarriageNC Ad Filled with Misrepresentations, Falsehoods

http://www.youtube.com/v/1XrCFLumzhs

See original here:

Vote for MarriageNC has come out with another ad in an attempt to push that awful anti-marriage equality amendment, Amendment One, in North Carolina The ad makes these sound reasonable, especially the African-American pastor Patrick Wooden. But his real views are just homophobic and misrepresentations, as shown in previous videos and quotes. Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Firedoglake Discovery Date : 09/04/2012 19:40 Number of articles : 3

Vote for MarriageNC Ad Filled with Misrepresentations, Falsehoods

Reason.tv: Will the Ohio Healthcare Freedom Amendment End Obamacare?

http://www.youtube.com/v/0HGquBBVAxE

View original post here:

“If you’re going to take away liberty and property, there has to be some sort of due process involved,” says Chris Littleton, the head of Ohioans for Healthcare Freedom and a Tea Party leader in the Buckeye state. “In this case, as citizens, we feel that those things are fundamentally inhibited and we Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Big Government Discovery Date : 02/11/2011 14:09 Number of articles : 2

Reason.tv: Will the Ohio Healthcare Freedom Amendment End Obamacare?

Black Panther Supporter Warns Conservative Student: I Could ‘Exercise’ My 2nd Amendment Right on You

http://www.youtube.com/v/Rj-mSBipPqQ

Continued here:

Here’s the irony about the Constitution: it doesn’t matter if you believe in it or fully accept it, it still protects you. That’s the case with one Black Panther supporter at the University of Minnesota-Duluth. During an exchange with a Constitution-loving student on campus on Sept. 16, the Black Panther supporter said that he could “exercise” his 2nd Amendment right against his fellow student while… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : The Blaze Discovery Date : 26/09/2011 14:05 Number of articles : 2

Black Panther Supporter Warns Conservative Student: I Could ‘Exercise’ My 2nd Amendment Right on You

Ohio Healthcare Freedom Issue 3 Video

http://www.youtube.com/v/88NInjzUP58

Go here to see the original:

Nicely done: Ballot language: Issue 3 Proposed Constitutional Amendment Proposed by Initiative Petition To adopt Section 21 of Article I of the Constitution of the State of Ohio A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass. The proposed amendment would provide that: 1. In Ohio, no law or rule shall compel, directly Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : BizzyBlog Discovery Date : 18/08/2011 01:28 Number of articles : 2

Ohio Healthcare Freedom Issue 3 Video

House to vote on Pence Amendment to defund Planned Parenthood THIS MORNING

http://www.youtube.com/v/haWnTlE-Yek

View original post here:

This morning the House will vote on the amendment offered by pro-life hero Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) to deny all federal funds, through September 30, to Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its 102 affiliates. It is not too late for you as a pro-life citizen to take part in this historic vote by calling Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : jillstanek.com Discovery Date : 18/02/2011 16:12 Number of articles : 2

House to vote on Pence Amendment to defund Planned Parenthood THIS MORNING

Voter anger fuels support for “Repeal Amendment”

Rapidly growing support for the “Repeal Amendment” – a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow a vote by two-thirds of the states to repeal an act of Congress — symbolizes the intense level of anger Americans have with Washington, according to observers. In September, Virginia stood alone as the only state where leaders in the state legislature had shown an interest in passing the amendment, but that number has now grown to nine states. State legislators in South Carolina, Florida, Utah, Indiana, Texas, New Jersey, Minnesota, and Georgia have since expressed interest in the amendment. Hits on the RepealAmendment.org website have mushroomed over the past month, and the amendment has garnered support from Republican Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, Republican Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, and soon-to-be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, according to “Repeal Amendment” executive director Marianne Moran. Moran also sees future opportunities for legislative support in states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Dakota, among others. “It just restores the balance of government between the states and the federal government as the founding fathers had originally intended,” Moran said. “The fact we have nine states already onboard shows the momentum, and I think the groundswell [of support] is the Tea Party.” Moran continued: “The reason we have the support from all of the people we do in all of these legislatures is that the people who have been groundswelling for the last two years want limited government, and this amendment is all about limited government.” Pollster Scott Rasmussen told The Daily Caller he would likely find overwhelming support from most Americans were he to conduct a poll on support for the “Repeal Amendment.” “It really reflects an electorate that is frustrated, and a lot of the people that have not been involved in the process before [are] not sure what needs to be done, and they’re pretty upset about [the health care] law,” Rasmussen said. Rasmussen believes Tea Party activists and most Americans have a shared desire for lower taxes and reduced spending in addition to a shared belief that politicians hold them in contempt. This sentiment, he said, has caused proposals like the “Repeal Amendment” to gain traction. “There is no trust in government, and until that is restored there is no way to move forward,” Rasmussen said. “This is tapping into that same mindset. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/24/voter-anger-fuels-support-for-80%9crepeal-… added by: JohnA

Ron Paul: Mosque opposition ‘all about hate and Islamaphobia’

While I’m no fan of Ron Paul’s politics, I confess I do admire the man’s willingness to speak truth to power, even on the many occasions when his version of the truth directly contradicts my own. On the proposed Manhattan mosque, he doesn’t disappoint: Is the controversy over building a mosque near Ground Zero a grand distraction or a grand opportunity? Or is it, once again, grandiose demagoguery? It has been said, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Are we not overly preoccupied with this controversy, now being used in various ways by grandstanding politicians? It looks to me like the politicians are “fiddling while the economy burns.” The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque. Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be “sensitive” requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from “ground zero.” Just think of what might (not) have happened if the whole issue had been ignored and the national debate stuck with war, peace, and prosperity. There certainly would have been a lot less emotionalism on both sides. The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate raises the question of just why and driven by whom? In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it. They never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars. A select quote from soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq expressing concern over the mosque is pure propaganda and an affront to their bravery and sacrifice. The claim that we are in the Middle East to protect our liberties is misleading. To continue this charade, millions of Muslims are indicted and we are obligated to rescue them from their religious and political leaders. And we’re supposed to believe that abusing our liberties here at home and pursuing unconstitutional wars overseas will solve our problems. The nineteen suicide bombers didn’t come from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran. Fifteen came from our ally Saudi Arabia, a country that harbors strong American resentment, yet we invade and occupy Iraq where no al Qaeda existed prior to 9/11. Many fellow conservatives say they understand the property rights and 1st Amendment issues and don’t want a legal ban on building the mosque. They just want everybody to be “sensitive” and force, through public pressure, cancellation of the mosque construction. This sentiment seems to confirm that Islam itself is to be made the issue, and radical religious Islamic views were the only reasons for 9/11. If it became known that 9/11 resulted in part from a desire to retaliate against what many Muslims saw as American aggression and occupation, the need to demonize Islam would be difficult if not impossible. There is no doubt that a small portion of radical, angry Islamists do want to kill us but the question remains, what exactly motivates this hatred? If Islam is further discredited by making the building of the mosque the issue, then the false justification for our wars in the Middle East will continue to be acceptable. The justification to ban the mosque is no more rational than banning a soccer field in the same place because all the suicide bombers loved to play soccer. Conservatives are once again, unfortunately, failing to defend private property rights, a policy we claim to cherish. In addition conservatives missed a chance to challenge the hypocrisy of the left which now claims they defend property rights of Muslims, yet rarely if ever, the property rights of American private businesses. Defending the controversial use of property should be no more difficult than defending the 1st Amendment principle of defending controversial speech. But many conservatives and liberals do not want to diminish the hatred for Islam, the driving emotion that keeps us in the wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. It is repeatedly said that 64% of the people, after listening to the political demagogues, don’t want the mosque to be built. What would we do if 75% of the people insist that no more Catholic churches be built in New York City? The point being is that majorities can become oppressors of minority rights as well as individual dictators. Statistics of support (are) irrelevant when it comes to the purpose of government in a free society — protecting liberty. The outcry over the building of the mosque, near ground zero, implies that Islam alone was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to those who are condemning the building of the mosque, the nineteen suicide terrorists on 9/11 spoke for all Muslims. This is like blaming all Christians for the wars of aggression and occupation because some Christians supported the neo-conservative’s aggressive wars. The House Speaker is now treading on a slippery slope by demanding a congressional investigation to find out just who is funding the mosque — a bold rejection of property rights, 1st Amendment rights, and the Rule of Law — in order to look tough against Islam. This is all about hate and Islamaphobia. We now have an epidemic of “sunshine patriots” on both the right and the left who are all for freedom, as long as there’s no controversy and nobody is offended. Political demagoguery rules when truth and liberty are ignored. http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/08/23/ron-paul-mosque-opposition-all-… added by: unimatrix0

ABC Pushes Taxpayer Funded Abortions with Misleading Incident, Mashed Terms and Only Pro-Abort "Experts”

MSM’s propaganda to keep taxpayer funded abortion in Obamacare has begun. But the article ABC posted yesterday entitled, “Immigrants lured to cheap, do-it-yourself abortion,” was 1) totally misleading; 2) misplaced blame; 3) seriously mashed terms; and 4) led with a fraudulent sob story. ABC reporter Susan Donaldson James wrote a truly shoddy piece and should be ashamed of herself, although I’m sure she’s not. About #s 1, 3, and 4, from the article: Kelly , a part-time hairdresser from Atlanta , took 5 little white pills at 7 a.m. and will take 5 more before her 6-week-old fetus is completely aborted . “I am going through this as we speak,” said Kelly, who did not want her last name used. “What I read about it was really scary. I didn’t sleep at all last night, I was so anxious.” At first, the cramping pain and bleeding was “like a bad period” – but later “it got worse” and even the painkiller hydrocodone didn’t help. But Kelly could deal with the emotional event in the privacy of her own home and at about half the cost of a surgical abortion . Kelly induced a miscarriage with misoprostol , sold under the brand name Cytotec , an FDA-approved drug for treating stomach ulcers…. Safe and effective, the drug is used globally to prevent women from post-partum hemorrhaging and is widely prescribed in combination with RU-486 in the US to induce miscarriage . But for some low-income women, misoprostol has become a do-it-yourself abortion tool . That wasn’t the case with Kelly. An ultrasound revealed her fetus had no heartbeat and she would eventually miscarry. But like many women, she elected a medical rather than a surgical procedure because it was cheaper and carried a lower out-of-pocket cost — about $20 for the prescription. Kelly is under the care of a doctor , but many women, particularly immigrants, are uninsured or don’t have access to health care, and end up in emergency rooms or without professional care when things go wrong. How confused and misleading! Kelly wasn’t undergoing an induced abortion, which is defined as such if the baby has a heartbeat when the procedure is initiated. Kelly was medically inducing a miscarriage (not mentioned until the 7th paragraph). Her baby had died naturally. Furthermore, Kelly was under a doctor’s care (not mentioned until the 8th paragraph). Donaldson James also engaged engaged in opposite-world terminology. The one time in her story to this point the term “abortion” would have been appropriate was when describing the use of Cytotec for the 2nd half of the RU-486 abortion cocktail. But then D-J called it “induc[ing] miscarriage.” And if Cytotec abortions are so “safe and effective,” why did D-J get so dramatic with descriptions of pain and fear and secrecy – of a mother given a prescription by her physician to complete a miscarriage? I’m confident that had D-J’s intended spin been to promote a legal RU-486 abortion obtained through Planned Parenthood she would have nixed any drama and conveyed only happiness and relief. Actually, I don’t understand the point of this story. In large part it was written to promote public funded abortions in healthcare: Health experts say illicit use of the drug underscores the barriers that many women face when trying to access reproductive care, particularly immigrants and women of color. They worry that the amendment in the passage of the new health care law to ban the use of federal funds in Medicaid and insurance exchanges for abortion could further marginalize women’s access to reproductive care. “What the amendment does is if you are poor, you cannot get an abortion,” said Jessica-Gonzalez-Rojas , deputy director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health . “Wealthy women can pay out of pocket and have access to clinics and services.” But that’s the way it has always been. Rich women have always had access to abortion. Legalizing abortion in 1973 was supposed to erase the access barrier between wealthy and poor.  Furthermore, most abortion mills are located in poor and minority areas. What more do they want? Oh yes, for us to pay for them. But why now the urgency? The federal government hasn’t subsidized elective abortions for 34 years, since the Hyde Amendment was enacted . But I digress. As I said, I don’t understand the point of this story, because it concludes with ominous concerns about making abortion illegal again: “There is a perception that Latinas are not pro choice, and many women we work with have different feelings about abortion, but we all agree about access,” said Jessica Gonzales-Roja. “It shouldn’t be restricted. We have all seen friends die in underground abortions. We know the reality of what happens when abortions are not legal.” What the heck? And another kicker? The mother whose baby tragically died of natural causes at the beginning of the story, Kelly, doesn’t support taxpayer funding of abortion: Kelly understands the prohibitive cost of abortion, but supports restrictions on federal funding. “A woman can choose to do what she wants, but it’s up to her to pay for it,” she said. “It’s not up to insurance or Obama care. It’s not the government’s responsibility. I stand 100% for choice, but not with my tax dollars.” D-J never mentions whether Kelly has insurance, but I’m betting she does. And about my #2 complaint about this article, “misplaced blame,” whose fault and responsibility is it when a woman gets pregnant? I thought comprehensive sex ed and wanton, free access to birth control was supposed to stop that? Finally, all those “experts” quoted in the story?  Every single one promotes or commits abortion. In order of appearance: National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health Guttmacher Institute Ibis Reproductive Health Gynuity Health Projects (including its spokesperson, Dr. Daniel Grossman ) National Center of Excellence in Women’s Health at U of IL How much different this article would have looked had it been fair and balanced. And had it crazily only included thoughts from life affirming organizations and spokespersons? I can already hear the accusations of right wing ideological spin.

See the article here:
ABC Pushes Taxpayer Funded Abortions with Misleading Incident, Mashed Terms and Only Pro-Abort "Experts”

MSNBC’s Harris-Lacewell: 14th Amendment Debate about Eugenics, Xenophobia

Whenever Fox News host Glenn Beck raises the history of progressives and eugenics, or the possibility that eugenics is part of the motivation of a legitimate policy debate, the left-wing has a hissy fit . But when the left introduces it, we’re supposed to accept it as high-minded and scholarly, especially in the case Princeton University’s Melissa Harris-Lacewell.  On MSNBC’s Aug. 12 “Countdown,” liberal blowhard Keith Olbermann asked Harris-Lacewell, an MSNBC contributor, what the motivation was behind the proposition the 14th Amendment of the Constitution should be altered to close a loophole for illegal immigrants to achieve legal status in the United States. As expected, Harris-Lacewell suggested it was motivated racism, but took it even further to say there was some sort of desire for genetic purity pushing it. “It certainly is xenophobia, but it’s got a little eugenics mixed in with it,” Harris-Lacewell said. “Part of what I see going on here is, first, a deep misunderstanding about the 14th Amendment, and for whom the 14th Amendment provided citizenship. And although certainly part of it was about newly freed persons after the Civil War, it was also about all Americans.” Back in March, Harris-Lacewell demonstrated her ability to play the race card in a unique way – by likening the individual backlash to ObamaCare to the causes of the Civil War . This time she proposed this harebrained theory that altering the 14th Amendment would lead to a genetic purity test used to prove American citizenship. “In other words, I want Americans to pause for a moment and ask themselves on what basis would you determine citizenship, if not based on where a child is born?” Harris-Lacewell said. “So are we willing to go to a kind of genetic grandfather clause for American citizenship? Do you have to have two parents who are citizens? How about grandparents? How about great- grandparents? The notion becomes very quickly a racialized one, where the idea of who will count as American becomes genetic rather than location.” The latest left-wing meme has been that the anchor baby issue really isn’t a significant one based on data from the Pew Hispanic Center , so why worry about it? But the a closer look at the Pew study shows it’s based on U.S. Census data , which has historically been fuzzy on its numbers with undocumented immigrants. And rather than scrutinize the report, left-wingers have accepted it as indisputable fact since Pew, as Olbermann put it, is “nonpartisan.” And that’s allowed liberals like Harris-Lacewell to suggest there is a malicious intent to alter the 14th Amendment and try to de-legitimize a component of the illegal immigration. “And I think all of us, white Americans, black Americans, Latinos who are in the country as citizens, and people who are here illegally and without documentation, should all be worried about such a notion,” Harris-Lacewell said.

Read more:
MSNBC’s Harris-Lacewell: 14th Amendment Debate about Eugenics, Xenophobia

Friends rally to get deported student back home in the states

Written by Johnathan Silver, The Shorthorn Saad Nabeel could be back home by February 2011, if friends and friends of friends have something to say about it. Nabeel, a former UTA electrical engineering student, was deported to his home country of Bangladesh November 2009. His friends and supporters congregated on campus Friday to come up with a plan for his return to the states. Now, they’re eying U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to remove a 10-year ban Nabeel has from the U.S. His family lived in the United States illegally after petitions to stay failed, even though they entered the country with the government’s knowledge more than 15 years ago. When deported, the family’s green cards were in the process of being delivered. Nabeel and his mother pursued political asylum in Canada last year, but following misunderstandings, they were subjected to interrogations and eventually separated and imprisoned. Many people became aware of Nabeel’s story through national and international media. The stories may not have come to light though, if it weren’t for the existence of a Facebook page dedicated to getting Nabeel home. But don’t call the group of people a group, said organizer and UTA political science senior Priscylla Bento. Putting a name on these “individuals” would implement unnecessary protocol that groups endure, she said. “We’re just individuals, with different opinions, coming together to help Saad,” she said. Toward the end of the meeting, attendees contacted Nabeel via text message, and asked him to log on to Skype. Once he was online, meeting attendees asked Nabeel questions concerning his health. He said at first he was sick, but now he’s fine. His only challenge, he said, is dealing with not being able to leave his home since he’s unaccustomed to the foreign culture of his homeland. Beside Nabeel himself, Shawna McNary, a former classmate of Nabeel, has much institutional knowledge of Nabeel’s case. She said Nabeel is American at heart. “His favorite singer is Taylor Swift,” she said. “That says it all.” McNary, who jumped on board Nabeel’s case in the early stages, thought it was unfair for Nabeel to be put in the situation he’s in. Most people don’t think everything in their life could change one day, she said. But that will change soon, she said. “I want them to think your name when they go to sleep,” McNary told Nabeel. While the students are focusing on the U.S. Department of Justice, Nabeel’s immigration adviser Ralph Isenberg is linking Nabeel to the controversial DREAM Act. The DREAM Act is a piece of legislation under review by Congress that would create a path to legal residency for undocumented students. The amendment Isenberg suggested to senior members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, would grant the same path to students who were deported three years prior to the signing of the act. Isenberg said he considered helping Nabeel tackle the 10-year ban, but thought it just would be lost in the court system. “Is there anything that could work that could get this kid here earlier,” he said. “That’s when I thought about the DREAM Act.” Isenberg said Nabeel meets the other requirements for the benefits of the DREAM Act, but the amendment, which he’s considering having named “The Saad Amendment,” would serve Nabeel well. “I thought 'this guy [Nabeel] is a shoo-in,'” he said. “But it’s not just for Saad.” http://www.theshorthorn.com/content/view/19868/265/ added by: Jdharden