Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Apr 12, 2012 in Politics | 19 comments

Obama Fund Raising Email Frames the Election

Consider it now officially on. President Barack Obama has sent the following fundraising email which shows how the Dems will frames the election;

Friend —

We now know who our opponent is.

But what we’re really fighting against is what our opponent has pledged to do if elected.

He would shower billionaires with more huge tax breaks, oppose setting a timeline to bring our troops home from Afghanistan, starve investments in clean energy research, and make it harder for students to afford to go to college. He’d outlaw a woman’s right to choose and completely cut funding for Planned Parenthood.

We can’t afford an endless war in Afghanistan, a return to policies that hurt the middle class, and a social agenda from the 1950s.

The stakes and the differences are profound. The outcome of this election will determine the course of this country for decades to come.

I need you by my side.

Make a donation of $3 or more today:

https://donate.barackobama.com/Ready

Thank you,

Barack

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The Moderate Voice
  • dduck

    He’d outlaw a woman’s right to choose and completely cut funding for Planned Parenthood

    Is this true, can someone cite a link?

    What is that site that checks facts about politician’s ads, would this letter be there?

  • RP

    Why is it a politician can say anything about his opponent and not get in trouble. If you or I said some of the things about another person that politicians say, we would find ourselves in court defending ourselves and proving our facts.

  • slamfu

    I could probably research and find Romney quotes that clearly back up the content of the email from his speeches this primary season dduck, if you want. But Romney being Romney, I’m sure you could also go our and get links of him saying the exact opposite during this primary season.

  • dduck

    Slam, I will believe it when I see it. And, did we hold any prior candidate to his campaign BS?

  • Rcoutme

    The two most cited places for fact checking are politifact.com and factcheck.org. I expect that one or both will, in fact, do the letter. Do not expect immediate results. They do their homework before publishing the results. Maybe wait a week or so. It might come out sooner.

  • dduck

    Thanks, RC.

  • TimRHughes

    Romney definitely said he was going to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood a couple weeks ago:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/15/mitt-romney-planned-parenthood_n_1347383.html

    This was the “walk-back” for his original quote that “we will get rid of it”:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/13/mitt-romney-planned-parenthood_n_1343450.html

    On abortion, he has been all over the place depending on what election. First pro-choice, then favoring repeal of Roe to allow states to outlaw abortion.
    http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Abortion.php

    Here is what he says on his campaign site:
    Mitt Romney is pro-life. He believes it speaks well of the country that almost all Americans recognize that abortion is a problem. And in the quiet of conscience, people of both political parties know that more than a million abortions a year cannot be squared with the good heart of America.

    Mitt believes that life begins at conception and wishes that the laws of our nation reflected that view. But while the nation remains so divided, he believes that the right next step is for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade – a case of blatant judicial activism that took a decision that should be left to the people and placed it in the hands of unelected judges. With Roe overturned, states will be empowered through the democratic process to determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate.
    http://www.mittromney.com/issues/values

  • dduck

    Thank you Tim, that was an excellent roundup, and I am now officially against Mitt’s positions on abortion, and a total cut-off of Federal PP funding ( a modest cut back is OK).

    Although “outlaw a woman’s rights to choose” is over the top as a worst case it bounces back to state laws.

  • CStanley

    How exactly would a president outlaw abortion anyway?

  • dduck

    Mere detail, CS.

  • Rcoutme

    CS: shhhh, that’s a nasty secret that the GOP does not want its constituents to ask. The President can not outlaw abortion (and even an overturn of Roe v Wade would leave abortion legal in quite a few states). The only way that the GOP is going to keep the Christian vote is by convincing the Christians that they can overturn the abortion decision.

    Christianity is all about helping the poor, sick, downtrodden, lowly, etc. Since the GOP prevents the federal government (and most state governments) from doing any of that help when they get into office, they have to keep the abortion issue front and center. Otherwise, they would have to admit that they subvert the attempts of our society to formalize the helping of those that Jesus told us to help.

  • zephyr

    I think the fundraising email is right on the mark. CS and dd, as far as the “outlawing of abortion” goes, just think in terms of future supreme court appointments, look at how skewed the court is now and imagine it even more reactionary. Supreme court appointments alone are reason enough to vote for Obama.

  • roro80

    A president can’t outlaw same-sex marriage either, but Bush campaigned on doing just that, and was pretty darn successful in pushing for getting one-man-one-woman-only amendments in most state Constitutions.

    In other words: he could throw his full weight behind a repeal of Roe via Constitutional amendment, and could also work hard with states to continue to do the same sort of things the states have been doing the last few years.

    Let’s not pretend the president has no influence over domestic policy.

  • dduck

    The only ones “pretending” are the politicians who think we don’t know they BS all the time, yes Ds & Rs.

    Z, the states still have their own laws, no RW, back to the states. What does outlaw mean to you?

    If anyone thinks a president is going to waste the first two years of his administration on some almost impossible cause, must be full of hope and change; that’s not Romney.

  • DaGoat

    Obama has no room to talk of Afghanistan with his doubling down on the troops and trying to turn that mess into a great society. Problem is I don’t like the way Romney would handle it either.

  • dduck

    Come on DG, he saw that the Iraq surge (remember Gen. Betrayus and the general opposition) had worked, so he figured why not try it in Afg, which after all he named a just war.
    I don’t blame him for trying, he couldn’t know Afg, is the graveyard of empires.

  • StockBoyLA

    “A president can’t outlaw same-sex marriage either, but Bush campaigned on doing just that, and was pretty darn successful in pushing for getting one-man-one-woman-only amendments in most state Constitutions.”

    And the Defense of Marriage Act passed under the Republicans. This means that if a straight man marries a straight woman immigrant, then she cannot be deported. However if two men (one an immigrant) legally marry in a state that allows for same-sex marriage, then immigration law allows the US to deport the man once the time on his visa is “up”. Even though a state recognizes their legal marriage the federal government, which sets immigration policy, does not under DOMA.

  • dduck

    Stock, “A president can’t outlaw same-sex marriage either, but Bush campaigned on doing just that, and was pretty darn successful in pushing for getting one-man-one-woman-only amendments in most state Constitutions.”

    Really, a campaign promise (take that to the bank), and he got “most states” to amend their constitutions. What a guy, who knew he was so effective.

  • dduck

    Sorry, stock, I just realized you were just quoting roro.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com