The mass murder of babies should be important, but it gets ignored.
Check it out:
I have a piece on Obama’s speech last night. The magic word was “children.” We’ve got to do this for the children! “Children” was the magic word in Obama’s speech, and about 9:30 last night I was made aware of a post at LifeNews.com. This is going to offend some of you. President Obama was talking about chemical weapons being used on the children, how that just is unacceptable.
It’s okay if conventional weapons, apparently, are used on children, ’cause they are being used on the children now. Bashar’s back to using conventional bombs and bullets and everything else, but it’s okay because he’s not using the evil chemical weapons. We fixed that. No, I’m not making it up. The minute the Russians and Syria took Kerry’s gaffe as a deal, and said they would get rid of chemical weapons, the bombing began.
The renewed bombing began against the rebels, whoever they are, in Syria with conventional weapons. Bashar started kicking ’em again, which apparently that’s okay. It doesn’t matter. But you start using chemical weapons? Well, now, that’s another thing. But I got a post here. This from Katie McCann, LifeNews.com: “Thousands of Children Die in the US From Another Chemical Weapon: Abortion — RU-486 is a chemical abortion that restarts the menstrual process in a pregnant woman, shutting down the uterus and starving the baby to death.”
You can expect this from LifeNews.com. Obama’s talking about 429 children that were killed in a chemical weapons attack, and people say, “Yeah, well, that’s horrible.” There’s no question, but what about the 1.3 million children here every year? And let’s not forget, Barack Obama is the guy who voted, time and time again, as a state senator in Illinois for infanticide. You know that story. You know that drill.