The bill Obama did sponsor

I listened to the debate last night. While Obama is much smoother, the content was awful. Let's see...

First, he lied right there that he and Ayers were connected. They are. He could just explain the connection, but he doesn't. He actually looked quite ruffled.

Second, he says he did not vote to let infants die in Illinois if they survived abortion, but he did. He says the Hippocratic Oath covered that, so a law is already in place. Normally I'd agree with that reasoning (who needs more laws!?), but then why were babies dying, if that is the case? He heard the testimony, but he still voted against further laws, ostensibly to avoid any infringement on Roe vs. Wade. However, I hear Clinton and NARAL did not agree with Obama, and that tells me he goes too far for sure, more than anyone else.

However, that is NOT the bill I'm referring to here. There is one bill he sponsored that completely counters what he said last night. He said we should stop sending so much money overseas, and spend our tax money on America. I heard him, that's what he said. Yet he is a key promoter of this bill, which sends LOTS of money overseas. Lots and lots. It also promotes many things most Americans don't agree on, and it promotes the "one world" idea that many people think is a great idea. Here it is:

http://www.heritage.org/research/foreignaid/wm1878.cfm

Here's the thing. It all sounds great in theory, but if you unite the whole world and the government you get out of it is awful, where do you go? Mars? Diversity is a good thing, including diversity of government.

If you haven't read "The Giver" by Lois Lowry, I suggest you do. It takes one day, and has lots to say about when everyone wants to be "fair". It sometimes takes away all that you were living for. It's a very short book, and is banned in some places because of some content that is "political". Ha. We don't want people to exercise their brains, now do we?