Obama and Michelle Call to Arms Over Roe v. Wade
On April 21, 2022, Barack Obama spoke at a cyber symposium hosted by Stanford University. During that address, the former president attempted to redefine the meaning of free speech. Obama argued that in order to safeguard America from opinions he considers dangerous, government regulation of the First Amendment, via constitutional modification, was more than justified.
Fast forward two weeks, on May 3rd, after the news leaked that the U.S. Supreme Court is close to overturning the decision Justice Samuel Alito called “egregiously wrong from the start,” Barack, along with his wife Michelle, immediately responded by contradicting the argument he made at Stanford.
Barack Obama had just decreed that, among other things, questioning the 2020 election result threatens democratic ideals and must be silenced through a federal rule. Then when the Roe v. Wade information leaked, the former president did a 180-degree about-face and issued directives that if the highest court in the land decides Roe v. Wade is bad law and throws abortion back to the states, public rejection of the decision is necessary as well as exercising the First Amendment right to protest.
Simply put, depending on the ideological leaning of the topic, one week, the right to free speech should be restricted and the “flawed” Constitution adjusted, and the next week, the right to free speech exercised and the sacred Constitution protected.
The couple explained why that’s necessary for the following way:
Today, millions of Americans woke up fearing that their essential freedoms under the Constitution were at risk. If the Supreme Court ultimately decides to overturn the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, then it will not only reverse nearly 50 years of precedent – it will relegate the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues.
That rant should have begun by ‘relegating’ “intensely personal decisions” to the ‘before you participate in the procreative act’ column. Next, the statement could have explained to America why the precedent set by the First Amendment in 1791 is less of a pattern for freedom than a poorly thought-out decision made in 1973?
Please note, when addressing the need to oppose this controversy, both Biden and Obama coincidentally mentioned the word “whims.”
Nevertheless, what Barack and Michelle failed to acknowledge in their quickly released communiqué was that there are “millions of [other] Americans” who’ve also woken up every day for the last 50 years and who lament the 62 million lives snuffed out “under [the auspices of a] Constitution” established to protect both “life and liberty,” neither of which was meant to exclude one from the other. Those Americans are thankful that at least on the federal level, the “essential freedoms under the Constitution” will also apply to the 3,000 unborn Americans whose lives are “at-risk” every single day.
What Obama shared, as if it was settled truth, was that despite 98% of all abortions being solely for convenience’s sake, he and his wife believe the more than 60 million women who disposed of up 20% of the current U.S. population did not approach the decision “lightly.” How he knows that statistic is anyone’s guess.
Ironically, Obama's statement also argued that ceasing federal support for abortion "pose[s] grave risks" to the health, fertility, and life of – wait for it – schoolgirls without cars and poor working women who choose abortion over the lives of their children.
Wait! Isn’t the former president amongst those who insist federal control of gun ownership ensures the “grave risks” posed by guns would be eliminated? If that’s true, and government equals safety and the assurance that illegal firearms will be impossible to access if gun laws are enacted, why then doesn’t the same hold true when it comes to access to illegal abortion? If restricting guns saves American lives, so should restricting abortion.
Shelly and Barry reminded anyone who might disagree with whatever self-contradictory thing they think or says here:
A clear majority of Americans support Roe. Yet we recognize that while many are angry and frustrated by this report, some of those who support Roe may feel helpless and instinctively turn back to their work, or families, or daily tasks – telling themselves that because this outcome may have been predictable, there’s nothing any of us can do.
Is trust in a “clear majority” why Obama feels comfortable floating a subliminal suggestion that anarchist types not “turn back to their work” but instead participate in Alinsky-style chaos on behalf of those who make up less than 2% of the annual abortion statistics – namely rape victims, and women who require medically-necessary abortions?
Fostering outrage as potential fuel for another summer of pre-election violence, the community agitator then recommended every one, including women without transportation and money, exercise the freedom of speech he had called dangerous at Stanford, skip either school or work, and attend local pro-abortion protests and campaigns. And to "act," not just "think about these people," by "standing" with those like himself who have “sounded the alarm” for decades that the federally-funded butchery was in danger of being shut down.
In ‘Born Alive’ Barack’s sphere of influence, policy disagreement now translates into “fascism” and forced submission to subhuman government fiat is viewed as “democracy.” Thus, assured his convincing skills are sufficient, Obama must feel comfortable omitting data that explains who and why women have abortions and state as a fact that a “clear majority of Americans” consensus exists of people who without exception support the unfettered slaughter and incineration of living human beings.
Let’s face it, radicals like Barack and Michelle despise the type of democracy they claim they want to preserve. Not once in that strongly written statement did the couple appeal to the opposing side, or advocate for personal accountability, express respect for human life, or call for a calm, measured response until the court’s decision is finalized.
So, there you have it, the man who recently suggested the Supreme Court needs to revamp the Constitution and redefine the First Amendment is now contradicting his own convoluted argument by warning that the same court he hoped would revise the First Amendment, now be opposed with a heavy-handed outworking of “free speech.”
*****
Abortion and the Evils of the Modern Left
For decades, the American left has furthered its agenda via leftists on U.S. courts. Thus, in order to get their way on a wide array of issues — abortion, marriage, LGBT issues, immigration, and the like — Democrats have not had to win elections. They merely needed control of the courts. With right-minded originalists replacing authoritarian leftists on courts throughout America, the left's hold on state and federal courts (much credit to President Trump!) has waned. This is especially true with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).
Given their obsession with sex, among leftists no issues are held in higher regard than abortion and anything related to the perverse LGBTQMYNAMEISLEGION agenda. Sexual perversion has become a sacrament among the modern left, and tens of millions of the most helpless and defenseless among us have literally been sacrificed in the name of "Do as Thou Wilt" in the sexual realm. Because they've been unable to get it done legislatively, much of the American left's agenda accomplishments on these matters have happened via U.S. courts.
Thus, the American left's vitriolic reaction upon the egregious leak of a supposed SCOTUS majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson — which would overturn Roe v. Wade — should surprise no one. The leak was almost certainly a political stunt intended to intimidate pro-life justices, politicians, and citizens alike. This is what those who have made a god of government do. The left should take note: what the government giveth, the government can take away.
When one makes a god of government, virtually everything gets politicized. When most everything is politicized, much gets perverted. To keep their evil agenda alive, the left must constantly distort, deceive, and demonize. This was on clear display after the Dobbs opinion leak.
After the leak was announced, Hillary Clinton tweeted that reversing Roe "will kill and subjugate women." President Biden wondered if the next move for conservatives (i.e., the "MAGA crowd") would be to make laws that prevent "children who are LGBT" from being in "classrooms with other children."
Vice President Kamala Harris used the tired argument that "opponents of Roe want to punish women and take away their rights to make decisions about their own bodies." Democrat representative Hakeem Jeffries added that the Dobbs opinion happened because the "radical right stole two seats on the Supreme Court." References to The Handmaid's Tale and the Dark Ages were rampant (thanks, Libs of TikTok!).
The idea that reversing Roe would end "access to abortion" in the U.S. was a common refrain among the hyperbolic left. As many on the right side of this issue have long pointed out, this is nowhere close to the truth. Even if Roe is finally overturned — because such a decision would merely return the matter to individual states — tragically, throughout much of America, abortion will remain as legal as it is today. Many Democrat-dominated states have been expanding their abortion laws in anticipation of the fall of Roe.
The anger on display by leftists after the Dobbs leak is revealing and scary. A recent Mollie Hemingway encounter at the Supreme Court was sadly not that uncommon:
The calls for violence after the Dobbs leak were not hard to find. This was well chronicled by Jordan Boyd at The Federalist. Shortly after the leak surfaced, Ian Millhiser, a senior correspondent at Vox, tweeted, "Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said 'f--- it! Let's burn this place down.'"
Ms. Boyd also notes:
Other blue checkmarks on Twitter called for the nation, its institutions, and the highest court in the land to literally and figuratively burn to the ground.
Journalists were among the greatest offenders who publicly endorsed violence against justices who vote in favor of returning the abortion lawmaking back to the states.When conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey noted that "conservative justices will have their lives and the lives of their families threatened," The Nation's Washington D.C. Correspondent Aída Chávez replied "good."
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Laurie Garrett directly threatened Justice Samuel Alito, who reportedly authored the majority opinion, according to Politico.
"OK, Alito, I'll call your 'enflamed debate' & 'deepened division' and raise you with millions of angry women in the streets. You #GOP folks want to play poker? Show your hand and watch what happens," she wrote.
Given the wicked Summer of Rage that we witnessed in 2020, none of this should be taken lightly. Additionally, the left is now directly threatening conservative Supreme Court justices. As Breitbart reports,
Justices John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch are all targets by an organization called, "Ruth Sent Us." The organization has published the justices' supposed home addresses online for the radical protestors to locate[.] ...
The website also asked protestors to "rise up May 8-15 and beyond[.] ... At the homes of the six extremist justices, three in Virginia and three in Maryland." The site says the main protest is scheduled for May 11.
Again, none of this should be taken lightly. We've seen the awful consequences of leftist policies on plain display for years now in the Democrat-dominated cities across America. Arson, thefts, assaults, murders, and the like have exploded where leftism rules and leftists abound. If given enough cover by their allies in the drive-by media and the Democrat party, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see violence visited upon conservative justices.
However — and let this be a lesson to you, John Roberts — this is not a time for weakness! The left cannot be appeased. It must be defeated — politically, spiritually, and so on. The best defense against leftists' rampant evil is the light of the truth, whatever consequences it brings.
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato (429-347 BC)
THE PATRIOT
Knowledge Is Power And Information is Liberating: The FRIENDS OF LIBERTY BLOG GROUPS are non-profit blogs dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.
GUEST POSTING: WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE PUBLISHED ... DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING ON YOUR MIND?
Knowledge Is Power - Information Is Liberating: The Patriot Welcome is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.
Big Tech has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share with your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you
Keep on seeking the truth, rally your friends and family and expose as much corruption as you can… every little bit helps add pressure on the powers that are no more.
No comments:
Post a Comment