Friday, November 21, 2008

True Conservative Leadership

I encourage all who agree that we need true conservative leadership to sign a petition to this effect. You can find it here. (

The text of the petition follows here:


WE DECLARE that Republican leadership the past eight years has failed.

WE DECLARE that Republican politicians have compromised Conservative values in favor of "reaching across the aisle" in the name of "bipartisanship" to "get things done in Washington." In doing so, these very politicians have damaged this nation, weakened the Constitution, and done harm to individual freedoms.

WE ASSERT that the Republican National Committee has failed to advance and articulate Conservatism. We claim that by so doing, the RNC has done harm to the Conservative movement and thus to the party itself.



WE AS REAGAN CONSERVATIVES DEMAND that the Republican National Committee and the Republicans in both the House and the Senate begin acting as true Conservatives according to the principles listed below.

WE DEMAND that the elected officials stop compromising Conservatism. For by doing so they have failed to fulfill their oath of office to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States." We assert that getting less done in Washington is better than compromising our freedom and economic prosperity.

WE CALL FOR Republican politicians to effectively articulate and constantly teach Conservatism.

WE DEMAND that the House Republicans select a new minority leader who will lead the minority party in holding to Conservative values and who can find innovative Conservative solutions and effectively articulate them on the floor of the House and to the media.

WE CALL FOR an RNC chairman who is (1) a true Reagan Conservative (2) who can effectively and forthrightly articulate Conservative solutions.


--American Exceptionalism--
The United States is an exceptional nation. No other country in the history of the world has done more to secure liberty and honor God-given rights of individuals. Our government is uniquely of, by, and for the people, not the other way around.

--Secure Borders--
Legal immigrants have enriched this country. Illegal immigration undermines American sovereignty and weakens national security. The U.S. has a right and obligation to secure it's borders.

--Strong Military--
A strong military is a deterrent. The U.S. must maintain military superiority to ensure our security. The American military is made up of dedicated and patriotic individuals who deserve this nation's full support.

--Energy Independence--
For national security and economic reasons it is time that we as a nation become energy independent by exploiting all our natural resources responsibly while at the same time encouraging energy innovation.

--Individual Rights--
The subjugation of individual rights in favor of groups rights is unconstitutional and has always lead to the trampling of individual freedom.

--Individual Responsibility--
Individuals are responsible for their actions and the consequences. It is not government's place to save individuals from their mistakes. This kind of government intervention only encourages irresponsible behavior and impinges on others' rights.

--Limited Government--
Thoreau was correct when he wrote: "That government is best which governs least." Government should be limited to the powers delegated it by the Constitution. Beyond these powers, as government grows, individual freedom shrinks and the economy suffers.

--Low Taxes and Fiscal Constraint--
Government redistribution of income through taxation is not Constitutional. Individuals have a right to their income and are far better managers of their money than is the government. Free market solutions improve the economy while upholding individual freedoms.

--Supreme Court--
The purpose of the Supreme Court is to determine whether laws are in keeping with the Constitutionally limited powers delegated the government. The Supreme Court is not to rule based on any other standard than that of a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution.

--Religious Freedom--
Americans should be free to practice religion how they please. Christianity has been a positive force in our society. Government should not overreach its powers to discriminate against any religious group. Government has no right to suppress prayers nor expressions of faith in public schools.

--Respect for Life--
Life is sacred and is to be defended. This includes the most vulnerable among us, the unborn. Ronald Reagan was correct when he wrote: "Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life -- the unborn -- without diminishing the value of all human life."

--Right to Bear Arms--
The right to own a gun is recognized specifically in the Constitution, yet it is constantly under attack legislatively and legally. The right to own firearms is important to the safety and security of individuals and a nation.

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Obama’s Fight Against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act

My sister originally published this post on her own blog (Proud Reagan Conservative) after conducting extensive research. With the election just two days away, I'm reposting it here.




Nurse Jill Stanek was a registered nurse in the Labor & Delivery Department at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, when she discovered that babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in the soiled utility room.


Illinois State Attorney General and the Illinois Department of Public Health found no law was being broken by Christ Hospital.


Illinois State Senate Bill 1095, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
(This bill did not become law)
Obama voted NO in committee.
Obama voted PRESENT on the IL Senate floor.


Illinois State Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
(This bill did not become law)
Obama voted NO in committee.
Obama voted NO on the IL Senate floor.


Illinois State Senate Bill 1082, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
(This bill did not become law)
Obama voted in committee to add additional language specifically protecting abortion.
It was successfully added to the bill.
Obama then voted NO in committee to the updated bill.

Barack Obama has put forth several lies about his repeated votes against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA).


OBAMA’S CLAIM: There was no need for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) because there were already laws on the books to protect these infants.

FACT: The Illinois State Attorney General and the Illinois Department of Public Health investigated and found that Christ Hospital violated no current law when they left born-alive aborted babies to die in closets. It was for this reason that law makers wrote the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

At the request of Jill Stanek and Karen Hayes (the Illinois state director for Concerned Women of America) the office of Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan conducted an investigation of the practices at Christ Hospital. In a July 17, 2000 letter to Hayes, Chief Deputy Attorney General Carole Doris wrote, "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."
The office of Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan sent a letter to Mrs. Hayes in July 2000, responding to her request for investigation of Christ Hospital. Since the issue addressed medical practice, the attorney general referred it to the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH). The IDPH sent investigators to the hospital in late September 1999, soon after Mrs. Hayes’ original correspondence (attorney general letter, 7/17/00).

On December 6, IDPH gave its report to the attorney general office. IDPH indicated that it found no “violation of the Hospital Licensing Act or the Vital Records Act.” Further, “no other allegations or medical evidence to support any statutory violation (including the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act about which [Mrs. Hayes] inquired) were referred to our office by the Department for prosecution” (attorney general letter, 7/17/00).

FACT: Obama (1) heard Nurse Jill Stanek’s testimony that babies were being left to die at Christ Hospital; (2) He was presented the investigation results showing other abortion providers in the state were leaving born-alive aborted babies to die; and (3) Obama was given the Attorney General’s findings showing these hospitals were doing nothing wrong legally under current law.

FACT: Obama refused to concede this was happening, despite the testimony presented to him of infants being left to die after failed abortions. Instead, he said this on the floor of the Senate (pages 32-34 of the April 4, 2002 session transcript):

[T]he only plausible rationale, to my mind, for this legislation would be if you had a suspicion that a doctor, the attending physician, who has made the assessment that this is a nonviable fetus and that, let’s say for the purposes of the mother’s health, is being — that — that labor is being induced, that that physician (a) is going to make the wrong assessment and (b) if the physician discovered, after the labor had been induced, that, in fact, he made an error, and in fact this was not a nonviable fetus but, in fact, a live child, that the physician, of his own accord or her own accord, would not try to exercise the sort of medical procedures and practices that would be involved in saving that child.

Now, if — if you think that there are possibilities that doctors would not do that, then maybe this bill makes sense, but I — I suspect and my impression is, is that the Medical Society suspects that doctors feel that they would already be under that obligation, that they would already be making these determinations, and that essentially adding a — an additional doctor who the has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.

Now, if that’s the case –and — and I know some of us feel very strongly one way or the other on that issue — that’s fine, but I think it’s important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births. Because if these children are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure they’re looked after.
During the third presidential debate, Barack Obama again told the lie that there was no need for this law so he voted against it. He’s blatantly lying.


OBAMA’S CLAIM: Obama has claimed many times that he voted against this bill because it did not contain the kind of protections to abortion that an earlier national bill contained.

FACT: There was specific language in the bill which limited the scope of the bill to born-alive infants. In fact, for the 2003 bill, Obama in committee voted to include additional language which specifically protected abortion, but once the new language was in there, he then voted against the entire bill anyway.

This is the specific language that Obama voted to include in the 2003 bill, but
which apparently still wasn’t enough for him:
"Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this section."

Barack Obama is so intent on protecting abortion, he doesn’t want infants born alive during botched abortions to be protected under the law.

On March 30, 2001, Obama spoke against the Born Alive Infant legislation: (page 86)
“Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – a child, a nine-month-old – child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute.”
Here is April 2002 audio of Obama defending his position against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act:

“I suspect that doctors feel that they would be under that obligation, that they would already be making these determinations, and that essentially adding an additional doctor, who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come
in and make these assessments, is really designed simply to burden the original
decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an
Obama didn’t want the original decision by the mother to abort her baby second-guessed to the point where if the baby were born alive, he wanted the original decision to have the baby terminated honored.

This man, Barack Obama, is so extreme in his pro-abortion activism, that even when an aborted baby is born living outside the mother, he does not want this new life to get equal protection under the law, but he does want the original decision to terminate the life respected and carried out.

I pray we are not the kind of country that would elect this kind of man as our leader.


For the best overview on this issue, see:

Must-See Video:
September 29 2000 O'Reilly Factor interview with Nurse Jill Stanek: