"How does his views on abortion sit with you?" I asked.
"Oh, as president, he really wouldn't have the power to affect that," he said.
Really. Aside from the obvious ability to nominate Federal judges to lifetime appointments, it didn't take Obama long to assert an unconstitutional abuse of power in the name of abortion.
Ah yes, the "Executive Order." One of Obama's first acts as president was to repeal a ban that prohibited federal funding for international groups that promote or perform abortions. My tax dollars are now going to perform abortions in far-off lands. My money! Wait a minute. What if that's not my "CHOICE." Freedom of choice? I don't think so.
Unlike the grandstanding and comically meaningless Executive Order to close Gitmo, Obama signed the Executive Order ending the ban on federal spending for foreign abortions at 4 p.m. on a Friday with no TV cameras present.
Wonder why? Could it be that most Americans believe we should have a representational say as to where and how our tax dollars are spent?
Congress (overwhelmingly) passed a law in 1973 prohibiting public funding for foreign abortions. Overseas agencies created a loophole by claiming their U.S. money did not fund abortions, instead freeing up other funds for abortions. President Reagan closed the loophole with an order freezing funds to any organization that promotes or performs abortions.
Take abortion out of the argument. It is unconstitutional for the United States to give tax dollars to international groups. There is no clause in the U.S. Constitution that permits the government to take money from me and give it to foreign organizations. Especially organizations engaged in activities which I may find morally and ethically objectionable.
Liberals like Obama do not respect the rule of law. They prefer to initiate policy through unelected activist judges and Executive Orders.
Change we can believe in? Keep it.
