During the campaign, the president could just get away with claiming he said “act of terror,” since he did use those words — though not in the way he often claimed. It seemed like a bit of after-the-fact spin, but those were his actual words — to the surprise of Mitt Romney in the debate.
But the president’s claim that he said “act of terrorism” is taking revisionist history too far, given that he repeatedly refused to commit to that phrase when asked directly by reporters in the weeks after the attack. He appears to have gone out of his way to avoid saying it was a terrorist attack, so he has little standing to make that claim now.
Indeed, the initial unedited talking points did not call it an act of terrorism. Instead of pretending the right words were uttered, it would be far better to acknowledge that he was echoing what the intelligence community believed at the time–and that the administration’s phrasing could have been clearer and more forthright from the start.
I have written extensively on this topic of Margaret Sanger’s goals, which you see some well known pro-life people (like Alveda King, Martin Luther King’s niece) speaking against. And it is true that hair salons are more regulated than any, yes ANY, abortion clinic.
Here is CNN’s single report if you are not in the loop:
Here is the key ideas in the horrific case discussed on Special Report’s panel discussion, and one must note that when Obama was a Senator, he voted to make these actions legal!
Trial of abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell reveals ‘a house of horrors’
It was a scene the Philadelphia District Attorney called “a house of horrors.” A warning to readers, some of the details in this story are gruesome.
West Philadelphia doctor Kermit Gosnell is on trial for running an abortion clinic in which he allegedly killed babies who had survived illegal, late-term abortions, and where a woman allegedly died of a botched painkiller injection.
“The evidence is certainly compelling,” said The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Joseph Slobodzian. Slobodzian has been in the courtroom every day of the trial.
“There are any number of witnesses, most of them former employees of Dr. Gosnell’s clinic, who say they saw late-term abortions being done, they saw fetuses, babies, that were moving, breathing after the procedure, and those babies were killed,” said Slobodzian.
Gosnell is maintaining his innocence and says he was helping his community, despite the fact that his employees are coming out against him.
“Kermit Gosnell comes from a very well-established family in West Philadelphia,” said Slobodzian, adding that Gosnell went to the University of Pennsylvania, transferred to Dickenson College for his Bachelor’s degree, received his medical degree from Jefferson Medical School, and then came home to begin working in the community.
“He until these charges had what is considered a pretty good reputation in the community,” said Slobodzian. “Then in 1979 opened his Women’s Medical Society clinic at 38th and Lancaster … and then sometime during the ’70s he began doing abortions.”
District Attorney Seth Williams described the clinic and Gosnell at length in the grand jury testimony.
“This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy — and then murdered these newborns. … The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels — and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths,” reads the grand jury report.
A National Abortion Federation official who visited Gosnell’s office said, “It was the worst clinic she had ever seen,” but she never told the authorities about it. Patients were regularly misled, according to a documentary on the Gosnell case, “3801 Lancaster.”
“When I got pregnant again, I went to the clinic and I asked them, I said, ‘Is it okay that I get another abortion?’ ‘Fine, fine.’ They even, like, had this woman sit down with me and she told me women in Brazil have at least 21 abortions,” said one of the patients of the clinic in the documentary. “After she had coached me into believing that that was the norm, I would say within the next 14 years, like within that time I had eight abortions. Eight.”
The details about some of the late-term abortions performed at the clinic are shocking.
“It’s pretty grim, it’s pretty grim in the courtroom,” said Slobodzian, speaking about his personal reaction to covering the trial, adding that each day he tries to cover the human emotion on display at the trial, as well as the facts and the information.
“But I have to tell you, I certainly don’t hope I cover a trial like this again.”
….[Kirsten Powers] makes a good point in her op-ed today too: Why are liberals ignoring how badly Obama has treated Rice here? She had nothing to do with Benghazi, yet he plucked her from her post as ambassador to the UN, briefed her with defective intel, and then sent her out to do damage control as the face of the administration. Like I said yesterday, he could have sent Carney or Robert Gibbs or some other full-time flack but he chose Rice, I assume, because he wanted to leverage the extra gravitas of her position. She’s worked in diplomacy for years, yet now she’s famous chiefly for being the White House’s designated stooge in its biggest counterterrorism failure. Way to do right by a loyal deputy, champ. You’re a real feminist hero. Click the image to watch.
I came across some video of Kirsten Powers being rationally honest, a trait she exhibits well from time-to-time even though a liberal Democrat. (Posted by: Religio-Political Talk) The original video can be found at The Right Scoop, but I wanted more, and found it. So here is her full comment on the issue of Libya and how the administration tried to package the narrative a couple of weeks ago via Susan Rice, the United States Ambassador to the United Nations.
It is now widely known that the administration knew it was a terrorist planned attack within 24-hours, and for the full week afterwards the media (still — in actuality) seems to have covered for the administration as well. This is what Miss Powers is commenting on, honestly, and truthfully. It comes from Special Report Online… where the panel on Special Report continues frank discussion after the main show. Here is Right Scoop’s comments:
Kirsten Powers believes that media bias has gotten out of control on the issue of the Benghazi attack and the subsequent lies from the Obama administration on what happened. There are so many questions that need answering and she says that the media could possibly be complicit in another terrorist attack on America if they don’t get to the bottom of what is happening here. She cites the attacks on our embassies pre-9/11 as warnings back then, and says Al-Qaeda is not dead and the media should be asking what this really means.
Kirstin Powers actually has a great column on this topic as well:
SCHLAPP: And government itself, let me tell you, the language here right, the language is different. They made the language worse, instead of doing this once every five years, now the Obama administration is allowing this to happen every year and actually reimbursing doctors to do it every year. So, that’s quite a slight of hand. And doesn’t government — aren’t they a little conflicted here? They have to find this huge health care savings for seniors at the same time they’ve become the counselors to seniors in their end of care decisions?
POWERS: Where was your outrage in 2008 when the Bush administration said that Medicare would reimburse end of life counseling?
SCHLAPP: It was a veto that was overridden by the Democrats. So, I give President Bush credit for vetoing that bill.
POWERS: No, it was a 2008 law. I mean, I don’t know what are talking about.
SCHLAPP: Yes, that became law over the president’s veto.
Kirsten Powers says in this interview/debate that Bush made this law, GATEWAY PUNDIT has this correction:
Republican analyst Matt Schlapp corrected this latest lie [right around the 6:40 mark] by the Obama Administration. Bush vetoed the end of life provision that went into law in 2008.
What The Hill’s Jason Millman forgot to mention in his article was that President Bush VETOED the 2008 bill and the Democrats, along with some “good-willed” Republicans OVERRODE Bush’s veto forcing him to sign the legislation into law. The bill dealt with doctors’ reimbursements and more, but the Democrats slipped in the end-of-life planning by opening up the Social Security Act, which I have stated many times is dangerous, because once changed, it is difficult to amend again and allows for tinkering with the Medicare fee schedule and covered services definitions and requirements.
The fact that the Obama Administration claimed that the Bush Administration supported the end of life provision is a complete lie. And, they know it.
