HUH?? Which do you think is more EVIL?

OK, so here it is. Pretender-in-chief Obama on Jan 22nd, 2009 executed several Executive Orders. Basically, he limited how and were prisoners of war or terrorists could be held and questioned. He thinks we are being to hard on people that would in a moments notice pick up a gun and kill any citizen of the US they could. We need to be nice to them, and make their stay in our prisons nicer than their own homes. So he made three executive orders.

  1. Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities
  2. Review of Detention Policy Options
  3. Ensuring Lawful Interrogations

And on Jan 23rd, 2009 he did a presidential memorandum that revoked the limitations placed by President Reagan, President Bush, and President George W Bush. These limitations made it so that federal monies and grants could not be used to fund “advice, counseling, or information regarding abortion or lobbying a foreign government to legalize or make abortion available.” [Source:]

This is my question.

Is it more important to protect the rights of a person who is willing to kill any American citizen if they can, or is more important to protect the rights of a defenseless baby that could help make American a better country?

I just don’t get the logic. Lets make abortion (murder) easier, but also make it better for people that fight against America. I am baffled.

You take the pick… As for me, I would want to see the Anti-American suffer, and the helpless baby live to its potential and increase the value of America.


Comments are closed