Thread: Hillary Clinton: I Admire Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger

Hillary Clinton: I Admire Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 9/23/14 6:02 PM

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, an abortion advocate, is expected to seriously consider her own presidential bid in 2016. For most Democrats, according to polls that have been taken throughout the year, Hillary is the number one choice to replace pro-abortion President Barack Obama.
Obama has a laundry list of actions he’s taken as president to promote abortion on demand paid for at taxpayer expense. Clinton would continue that pro-abortion legacy and the abortion advocacy of her husband, pro-abortion ex-President Bill Clinton.
Here’s one example of Clinton’s fondness for abortion and promotes of abortion: She says she admires Margaret Sanger, the racist founder of the Planned Parenthood abortion business:

In April 2009, Congressman Jeff Fortenberry dialogued with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on foreign policy At 4 minutes 25 seconds into this video, Hillary Clinton compares the eugenics advocate and racist Margaret Sanger to Thomas Jefferson. Clinton even seems to say that Sanger is superior to Jefferson.



And here is Hillary Clinton accepting Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger Award : Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepts the Margaret Sanger Award at the 2009 Planned Parenthood Honors Gala in Houston, Texas.
Hillary Clinton, ” I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision,” said Hillary Rodham Clinton, “I am really in awe of her, there are a lot of lessons we can learn from her life”

In her role as Secretary of State Clinton pressed for abortion on an international scale. As recently as June 2012, she was upset the document the United Nations adopted at its Rio+20 conference did not promote abortion by inserting terms like “reproductive rights” into he language of the text.



A diverse group of countries rallied together with the Holy See to successfully remove any mention of reproductive rights or population control from the final outcome document produced during the last round of UN negotiations at the Rio +20 conference. The UN Population Fund (UNFPA), along with Norway and Iceland, and Catholics for Choice and the International Planned Parenthood Federation, worked feverishly to take advantage of the Rio +20 conference on sustainable development in order to promote both an international right to abortion and population control.
However, nations like Nicaragua, Chile, Russia, Honduras, Syria, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica and Egypt all rejected the introduction of “reproductive rights” into the Rio +20 outcome document.
Responding to the resounding defeat, Clinton said she was disappointed, according to a CNS News report.
“While I am very pleased that this year’s outcome document endorses sexual and reproductive health and universal access to family planning, to reach our goals in sustainable development we also have to ensure women’s reproductive rights,” she said. “Women must be empowered to make decisions about whether and when to have children. And the United States will continue – the United States will continue to work to ensure that those rights are respected in international agreements.”
Clinton personally urged Obama to veto a State Department funding bill over cuts to groups that perform and promote abortions.
In 2010, she testified before a Congressional committee where two pro-life members of Congress presented her with a long lecture on abortion and how it hurts women.
Congressmen Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, and Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska Republican, both addressed pro-life issues during the hearing.
Smith, who had frequently led the fight against abortion on an international scale, made his full remarks with Clinton sitting as the lone witness at the witness table.
Like this pro-life news article? Please support LifeNews during our Fall 2014 fundraising campaign with a donation!
“Secretary Clinton, the most persecuted and at risk minority in the world today are unborn children,” Smith said. “Pregnancy is not a disease. The child in the womb is neither a tumor nor a parasite to be destroyed.”
Smith said he is troubled by President Barack Obama’s decision to overturn the Mexico City Policy and open the door forcing taxpayers to fund abortions in other nations.
“I am deeply concerned that with the elimination of the Mexico City Policy by executive order last year, NGO implementing partners may actively seek to integrate abortion with the many necessary and noble undertakings funded by the Global Health Initiative,” he said.
“I respectfully ask that the administration consider that for many of us, all abortion—legal or illegal—is violence against children and poses significant, often underappreciated risks to women and even to children later born to post-abortive women,” Smith added.

http://www.lifenews.com/2014/09/23/h...rgaret-sanger/

http://www.alipac.us/f19/black-genoc...1/#post1437546

The Townhall.com Presidential Straw Poll

We're surprised the percentage is even this high:




Leah Barkoukis - Only 25 Percent Think Hillary Would Be Better President Than Obama
Sorry, Hillary.
townhall.com

Only 25 Percent Think Hillary Would Be Better President Than Obama

Leah Barkoukis | Sep 25, 2014



While at this point it’s all but certain Hillary Clinton will run for president, a new poll doesn’t bode well for the former secretary of state.
According to a Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 likely voters, only 25 percent think she’d be doing a better job than President Obama, while half believe she’d be doing roughly the same, and 10 percent felt she’d be even worse.

Just 25% think Hillary Clinton who lost the 2008 Democratic nomination to Obama would be doing a better job today. But only 10% believe she'd be doing a worse job. Half (50%) think she’d be doing about the same.
Voters tend to think a Hillary Clinton presidency would be like the Obama presidency when it comes to the major issues and expect the president to endorse his former secretary of State. But they’re not so sure the two top Democrats like each other.

Although Mitt Romney has repeatedly said he will not run a third time, he told "Fox News Sunday" in an interview earlier this month that there's 'no question' he'd be a better president than Hillary.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbar...campaign=straw

Freedom Outpost

Obamacare Architect Says Society Would Be Better Off If People Only Lived To Age 75 - Freedom Outpost http://ow.ly/C2RVV




Obamacare Architect Says Society Would Be Better Off If People Only Lived To Age 75

Michael SnyderSeptember 23, 2014
13 Comments

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm Emanuel, says that society would be far better off if people quit trying to live past age 75. His new article entitled “Why I Hope To Die At 75” has the following very creepy subtitle: “An argument that society and families—and you—will be better off if nature takes its course swiftly and promptly”. In the article, Emanuel forcefully argues that the quality of life for most people is significantly diminished past the age of 75 and that once we get to that age we should refuse any more medical care that will extend our lifespans. This is quite chilling to read, considering the fact that this is coming from one of the key architects of Obamacare. Of course he never uses the term “death panels” in his article, but that is obviously what Emanuel would want in a perfect world. To Emanuel, it is inefficient to waste medical resources on those that do not have a high “quality of life”. So he says that “75 is a pretty good age to aim to stop”.
Emanuel believes in this philosophy so much that he says that he would like to die at age 75. Of course he has no intention of committing suicide, but if he happened to drop dead once he hits his 75th birthday he would be very happy about that. The following is an excerpt from his new article…

I am talking about how long I want to live and the kind and amount of health care I will consent to after 75. Americans seem to be obsessed with exercising, doing mental puzzles, consuming various juice and protein concoctions, sticking to strict diets, and popping vitamins and supplements, all in a valiant effort to cheat death and prolong life as long as possible. This has become so pervasive that it now defines a cultural type: what I call the American immortal.
I reject this aspiration. I think this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive. For many reasons, 75 is a pretty good age to aim to stop.

And so Emanuel plans to start rejecting pretty much all medical tests and treatments that will prolong his life once he reaches that age…

At 75 and beyond, I will need a good reason to even visit the doctor and take any medical test or treatment, no matter how routine and painless. And that good reason is not “It will prolong your life.” I will stop getting any regular preventive tests, screenings, or interventions. I will accept only palliative—not curative—treatments if I am suffering pain or other disability.
This means colonoscopies and other cancer-screening tests are out—and before 75. If I were diagnosed with cancer now, at 57, I would probably be treated, unless the prognosis was very poor. But 65 will be my last colonoscopy. No screening for prostate cancer at any age. (When a urologist gave me a PSA test even after I said I wasn’t interested and called me with the results, I hung up before he could tell me. He ordered the test for himself, I told him, not for me.) After 75, if I develop cancer, I will refuse treatment. Similarly, no cardiac stress test. No pacemaker and certainly no implantable defibrillator. No heart-valve replacement or bypass surgery. If I develop emphysema or some similar disease that involves frequent exacerbations that would, normally, land me in the hospital, I will accept treatment to ameliorate the discomfort caused by the feeling of suffocation, but will refuse to be hauled off.

A couple of decades ago, an article like this would have sparked mass public outrage.
But today, this article hardly even gets any attention.
That is because this kind of philosophy has spread everywhere. It is being taught at colleges and universities across the United States and it is even represented throughout the ranks of the Obama administration.
For example, Barack Obama’s top science adviser John P. Holdren believes that implanting sterilization capsules under the skin of women could be a way to reduce the size of the population and increase the quality of life for everyone…

A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.
The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.

Yes, this guy is a total nutjob.
But he also has the ear of the man occupying the White House.
And we are not just talking about a few isolated crazies like Holdren. This agenda have been fully embraced by our politicians in Washington.
For instance, did you know that the federal government actually has an “Office of Population Affairs“?

On the website of the Office of Population Affairs, you can find information about abortion, female sterilization, male sterilization and a vast array of contraceptive choices.
U.S. taxpayers are paying for all of this, but most people don’t even know that it exists.
Of course this agenda has been moved forward by both Democrats and Republicans for decades.
And the woman that is very likely to be our next president is also a very strong proponent of this philosophy.
When Hillary Clinton accepted Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger Award back in 2009, she spoke glowingly of Sanger…

In a speech to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Awards Gala, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that she admires “Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision.” Secretary Clinton said she is “really in awe of” Sanger for Sanger’s early work in Brooklyn, New York, “taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions.”

But the truth is that Sanger was deeply racist and was determined to do whatever she could to help control the population growth of the poor. The following is one of her most famous statements…

“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

Source

Hillary Clinton is also a huge supporter of the United Nations Population Fund. If you are not familiar with the United Nations Population Fund, it is an organization that funds abortion, forced sterilization and brutal eugenics programs throughout the developing world.
Population control advocates such as Emanuel, Holdren and Clinton are fully convinced that they are doing the right thing.
They actually believe that the world will be a better place if less people are born and if the elderly do not live as long.
So what do you think? Please share your thoughts by posting a comment below…

Source

Take a look at the future of America: The Beginning of the End.
Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/09/ob...-lived-age-75/

http://www.alipac.us/f19/hillary-cli...0/#post1438130