Kevin McCullough
Recommend this article

Edwards went so far as to say that the prevention of such violent massacres showed, "A hard right turn that is a stark reminder of why Democrats can not afford to lose the election of 2008."

They also very much oppose legislation that would seek to stem the tide of such violent killing. They all three side with the view that law abiding citizens should not have the right to carry firearms for their own protection, all the while knowing that criminals can, do, and will access guns through every imaginable illegal means. This week all three also spoke out in opposition to a federal law that would prevent massive, wide-scale violent assault upon children by means of other deadly weapons.

And when the nation's highest court found it unconstitutional for grown adults to kill children through the use of stab wounds to the head using scissors, knives, scalpels, and forks - Clinton, Obama, and Edwards couldn't get to a microphone fast enough to criticize the court's ruling, and personally give their stamp of approval to such procedures.

The way they justified these very public statements was to pawn it off on the mental state of the child's parents. Claiming that the parents should have the right to utilize such a murderous procedure because of the mental pain and anguish it would cause for the parents to continue to be parents of said child. But does this now mean that a child loses its right to live, just because their parents go insane? Mommy goes crazy - you die.

The candidates also attempted to use the laughable argument that such a decision should be allowed to be made between the parent of the child and a local doctor. Evidently the child can be denied constitutional protection to their life if a parent and doctor so agree. And for the record the American Medical Association has publicly stated that such a procedure is never medically necessary.

At one particular medical clinic where such decisions are made in the metro New York area (Englewood, New Jersey), it was estimated on the day of the court's decision that the law would save roughly 1500 children's lives in the next twelve months alone. By last count there are dozens of such clinics in the metro New York City area. At a minimum count that's 360,000 lives saved every twelve months in only one American city.

One thing the candidates did not do in embracing and even demanding for the continuing of such violent killing - was explain the details. The child is killed by the sharp stab wound to the brain, then just to really make sure that the kill has occurred the "doctors" use forceps or some other squeezing device to mash the cranial material (brains, skull, etc.) into mush. Then - to really, really, really make sure the child is really dead - they suction out the brains and toss the body, sometimes with its deflated head still attached into the dumpster.

This massacre does not happen to children at the tip of a Glock 19 or a 22 Caliber, but there is no medical doubt that the method used to butcher these children inflicts every bit as much pain. There are horrific stories of these children struggling violently as the cold steel penetrates the base of the skull.

In reality, this week should be a mixed week of emotions. Overwhelming sadness at the eternal loss of 33 innocent people at the hands of two suicidal killers on one hand, and a small bit of hope at the prospect of now ending the cruel and torture based method of killing unwanted children on the other.

It is a sad and tragic reality that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards do not want more citizens to be empowered to protect themselves from violent massacre, but the fact that they also have publicly opposed legislation that would protect even innocent children from such slaughter with open and avowed hostility is worse.

And worst of all they believe you will vote for them because of it...

Recommend this article