Obama: Accountability is Above His Pay Grade
On Saturday Barack Obama and John McCain took questions at the Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency at Saddleback Church near Los Angeles. This is the second in a series examining the candidates’ responses. Pastor Rick Warren asked…
At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?
Senator Obama’s answer is so stunning, one hardly knows how to begin the criticism. His defenders claim this was a humble expression of deference to God by a mere mortal, who believes that only God could answer such a question.
Maybe that is what Obama meant, maybe not. Either way, it was a world class cop-out. The answer to the question is important, obviously, because if a living human fetus has human rights then a civilized society would make killing a fetus against the law.
Obama went on to say that he “believes in” Roe Vs. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that denies the right to life to a human fetus by empowering its mother to engage a doctor to kill it and remove it. Therefore he cannot escape accountability for the his own determination that a human fetus does not have the right to life.
Barack Obama is a Senator who wants to be President. Senators write and vote difficult, moral judgments into law, even judgments that are known for sure only to God. To vote yes is to make a moral judgment. To vote no is to make a moral judgment. To vote Present is to make a moral judgment
The President must wrestle with immense moral judgments, including whether or not to initiate military action in a given situation. As we all know, the Left, Obama’s constituency, opposes virtually any military operation because the consequences inevitably include death, injury and destruction. But the left ignores the fact that failure to act also brings consequences which can be worse – much worse.
John McCain gave an unambiguous answer, knowing that millions of voters disagree. Barack Obama, hoping to avoid accountability, gave a cowardly answer.
.
.
Oh, boy, the abortion issue. This issue has always seemed fairly straight forward to me (NOT above my pay grade, I guess).
If you believe that life begins at conception, then you must come down on the side of pro-life. If you do not, you have effectively sanctioned murder, and who is to say when the cutoff point is? Tired of little Johhny pooping his pants at 12 months – abort him, after all, its a woman’s right to choose.
On the other hand, if your worldview is that the definition of “life” is at some later stage – say viability, or viability out of the womb, or some date certain after conception etc, then you can at least intellectually say that a woman’s rights trump those of the fetus, until that critical threshold is reached. After that point: uh-uh.
But the point is: a person who proposes to be the President of the United States MUST HAVE A POINT A VIEW, because the President holds the office that will be making judicial nominations central to this issue. YOU CANNOT PUNT…..unless you have not one leadership bone in your body. Its not like its an issue you’ve never heard of before.
Obama punted. Boomerjeff’s use of the word “cowardly” is apropos.
Obama’s pay grade appears to be well below that of the President.
Of course … Obama takes the “no answer” approach as to allow his sheeples to read into it what they want.
As a “leader” of anything, let alone the great responsibility of being the President of the United States (the most powerful man in the world), you have to make decisions … sometimes very unpopular decisions.
Obama has just shown us his inability to make a decision, thus, his inability (and/or lack of maturity) to be the President of the United States.