Sebelius to head HHS; Brownback/Roberts “congratulate”
UPDATE, 10:25p: Politico’s Ben Smith called Brownback/Roberts’ endorsement “a setback to the attempt to rally conservative Catholics against Kathleen Sebelius….”
_______________
UPDATE, 10p: Headline seen on Twitter: “Who broke Brownback?”
Also read Jenn Giroux’s op ed in Human Events.
_______________
UPDATE, 1:05p: Here’s an interesting headline, just posted by CNN:
More from the story…
Calling Sebelius an “enemy of the unborn,” Catholic League President Bill Donohue said the KS governor’s nomination is particularly disturbing because the health and human services secretary is one of the few members of the administration who can directly affect abortion policy.
“Sebelius’ support for abortion is so far off the charts that she has been publicly criticized by the last three archbishops of KS City,” Donohue said in a statement….
GOP Sens. Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts of KS seem willing to give her a pass on her stance on abortion.
Brownback… one of the leading anti-abortion voices in the Senate, recently released a statement with Roberts, congratulating Sebelius and expressing an eagerness to work with their fellow Kansan on health issues.
The senators said they expect to have several differences of opinion with the Obama administration… but they make no mention of the abortion issue.
David Brody [of]… the Christian Broadcasting Network, said the omission could pose a problem for anti-abortion advocates hoping to down Sebelius’ nomination.
“It’s a problem, and Sam Brownback has been in long step with them on the abortion issue. That’s a setback for them,” he said….
However, those who are predicting a tussle over her Cabinet nomination concede that her experience will not be the bone of contention when she goes before the Senate.
“The pro-life groups have an itchy trigger finger on this. The inbox was full before Sebelius was nominated. They’re ready for a fight.”….
The abortion fight, however, may be one that Obama’s team wants to avoid, he said Monday.
“Do they want to be sucked in, if you will, to a fight over abortion? Or do they want to leave that for a summer battle over a Supreme Court nominee potentially?” Brody asked. “That’s the danger here for the Obama administration, to be a distraction.”
[Photo courtesy of the Associated Press]
_______________
UPDATE, 12:45p: Great line from a piece in KansasCity.com today: “What’s next; Dr. George Tiller for Surgeon General?”
[HT: reader Susie A.]
_______________
It occurred to me the White House might be forced to nominate radically pro-abort KS Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as Department of Health and Human Services Secretary after news leaked it was pausing due to her loathsome reputation among pro-lifers.
(Pictured right are Sebelius and late-term Wichita abortionist GeorgeTiller together at a party she hosted for him at the mansion in 2007.)
Fear of pro-abortion recrimination, pride, whatever.
And so it did, but demonstrating it considered Sebelius a red-haired stepchild pick, the WH made the announcement early Saturday evening, just in time for no one to read or hear about it.
LifeNews.com reported liberal Obama-supporting group Catholics United immediately launched Catholics for Sebelius, which brings me to this blood-boiler…
I see the confusion on your faces. Yes, Brownback and Roberts are pro-life, although one couldn’t tell by their glowing endorsement of Friend of Tiller. No mention of the mother of all health care concerns – abortion – in their press release admitting they have “different viewpoints than the Administration on many issues….”
Brownback wants to run for KS governor in 2010, so he’s speeding to the mushy middle. This isn’t the 1st time Benedict Brownback has abandoned pro-life principles. Only last year he slunk away from Phill Kline (read here and here) and the fight against late-term abortions in KS.
I expect this oft-seen scenario: Brownback will spend the bulk of his campaign denying he’s a radical pro-lifer against a well-funded pro-abortion juggarnaut, which will vehemently fight his candidacy no matter what he does to erase his credentials. In the meantime he’ll get only soft support from pro-lifers, so he’ll ultimately lose to a Democrat.
Meanwhile, Brownback has made himself a tool for the Left. Catholics for Sebelius was all too happy to post Brownback’s glowing recommendation of Sebelius:
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Sammy done broke my heart.
Its funny how one person can influence another to act agaisnt their own beliefs.
Everyone needs to march to their own beat and not follow in the footsteps of others just to get a gain in life, because following others will lead you nowhere.
So would it be safe to assume they will be 2 Republicans voting yes for her nomination?
Brownback is indeed much softer on abortion than he was a few years ago. Too bad, truly.
It will help Kansas, maybe now they’ll get a governor who’s anti abortion and/or can balance the budget.
It will hurt the US, although I don’t know how much influence the HHS person has. I can’t for the life of me think of who was Bush’s HHS secretary.
And to think I supported Brownback. Now I’m glad he dropped out of the race before my primary.
Archbishop tells Kansas governor not to take Communion…
Take this Catholics for Choice. Brownback was disappointed that he did not get more pro life support so he jumped the fence. He is a convert to Catholicism….so like others he is pro life when it suits his needs. Angry doesn’t begin to say it.
Andy, Michael Leavett was President Bush’s HHS secretary.
I could post a rather lengthy comment on the Brownback and Roberts glowing words on the Se belius appointment as Health and Human Service Secretary in the Obama administration. I will just say that I am disappointed in Roberts and Brownback, especially Brownback, who seems to me has diluted his pro-life credentials since dropping out of the Republican Presidential Primary in 2008.
I’m guessing this will come back to bite him in the rear. I don’t know what he thinks he’ll accomplish by doing this. The blood money is not going to flow his way because THEY don’t trust him, and pro-life support isn’t going to flow his way because now WE don’t trust him.
I think he’s in political trouble.
This is really a nonstory…. Brownback and Roberts understand that the nation’s loss is Kansas’ gain.
Obama will have a pro-abortion health secretary no matter what. So we may as well boot Sebelius out of Kansas and replace her with a pro-life goveror (Brownback) and replace Brownback not with Sebelius but someone pro-life.
It’s simply the silver lining of the Sebelius nomination, not praise for her views.
It’s like the Gregg situation where we would have lost a pro-life vote in the Senate. This way, we don’t have a Senator Sebelius. And if Obama is stupid enough to make it so we can make Kansas more pro-life, that’s his loss and Brownback and Roberts recognize it as their gain.
Thats actually what I thought initially. It will be interesting to see it play out.
Obama will have a pro-abortion health secretary no matter what. So we may as well boot Sebelius out of Kansas and replace her with a pro-life goveror (Brownback) and replace Brownback not with Sebelius but someone pro-life.
And if Obama is stupid enough to make it so we can make Kansas more pro-life, that’s his loss and Brownback and Roberts recognize it as their gain.
Posted by: Steven Ertelt at March 2, 2009 12:40 PM
*****************************************
Okay, but why such glowing praise for Sebelius? I’m not sure I understand the mentality going on here with Brownback lately.
It causes him to be viewed with an air of mistrust by some pro-lifers. I understand what you’re saying…it just seems like he’s playing both sides of the fence here when it’s not necessary.
Steven Ertelt,
Your post on March 2 at 12:40 p.m. does make some political sense from a Republican and perhaps even a pro-life point of view. In my prior post I thought about adding that Obama was going to have a strong pro-abortion director at Health and Human Services whether it was Sebelius or someone else. Still, I maintain, as do many other posters here, a disappointment with Brownback and Roberts. I don’t think that out of principle they should have gushed over the Sebelius appointment as they did. I think their actions dilutes the importance of the pro-life issue.
I think their actions dilutes the importance of the pro-life issue.
Posted by: Raymond V Banner at March 2, 2009 1:03 PM
Yes, it’s getting more and more diluted all the time.
Steve, I know you like Brownback, but a nation’s loss is no consolation for 1 state’s gain, if indeed there will be a gain, which is speculative.
Sebelius will appoint her pro-abortion (formerly GOP) lieutenant governor. Foot in the door for 2010, whether or not he says now he wants it. Whereas before there would have been 2 nonincumbents vying for the job, now there will be an incumbent, and we all know how hard those are to beat, especially in KS when the media is so in the tank for pro-aborts.
Steve, and read the CNN story. Brownback/Roberts’ support of Sebelius is viewed as a blow to beating her nomination, the chance of which is slim to begin with. This is not a nonissue.
I think their actions dilutes the importance of the pro-life issue.
Posted by: Raymond V Banner at March 2, 2009 1:03 PM
Yes, it’s getting more and more diluted all the time.
Posted by: Hal at March 2, 2009 1:19 PM
************************************
Well, Hal, if it gets too boring and diluted for you one day, I’m sure you’ll let us know by ceasing to post.
Brownback could have said nothing. Sorry, I am not buying it.
I wonder if my Catholic Radio station will have any talk about this today. I think I’ll tune in. I know they were talking about Sebulius, but this should be something else they are talking about.
I do have to wonder if they USED Brownback’s name….sort of how PP used Sarah Palin’s name to get donations during the Presidential Campaign. There has to be more to this story than meets the eye.
Jill, you really think Brownback’s comments will make it easier for Sebelius to be elected? Seriously. Anyone Obama picks, except those who have major league problems like tax issues, are shoo-ins. We’re outnumbered. If we had control of the Senate that might be something to consider but Sebelius will have little to worry about concerning her confirmation vote. Even with Brownback and Roberts voting against her, the Northeaster GOPers and the Deocrats have us beat 2-1 or more.
Brownback recognizes Sebelius is popular in Kansas and he knows he needs moderates to become governor.
His comments are nothing about policy and everything about strategy and we need to be able to discern the difference.
If Brownback ever does something policy-wise that isn’t pro-life, then call him on it. But you know he won’t. And, in the meantime, let’s not bash him for doing what he needs to do to get in office to actually save babies. Losing candidates do nothing for the cause.
Amen Steve! Great response.
Let us remember the sad story of the Senate seat from Pennsylvania when we bash good pro-lifers for no reason.
Andrew uses Santorum to prove his point? The same Santorum who supported a pro-abort and lost the support of the pro-life community and then his senate seat?
And Steve, you’re saying it is good pro-life strategy to give a helping hand to a radical pro-abort getting a national position of prominence to further abortion? This quite simply is illogical. I would go further to say Brownback is behaving immorally. He could have said nothing if he couldn’t bring himself to say the right thing. WWJD? Not this.
I am awaiting the announcement of Jack Kevorkian for White House physician!
I’m really sorry to see that Roberts and Brownback ‘congratulates’ Sebelius on the HHS nomination, especially Brownback. Makes we want to reconsider my vote for him in 2004.
This vote for Sebelius is a politically weak move that shows that he is in actuality a moderate on the issues, not someone who will lead the fight onto Kansas. Its not like he needed to approve Sebelius to the post to get the governorship. He needed it to get the approval of the conservative base, which I felt he lost.
If Brownback planned to earn my vote in Kansas, he will have to explain this terrible decision today.
Jill, regarding Pennsylvania….
Yes, the same Santorum that a few pro-lifers abandoned over one disagreement with him out of a thousand times he advanced the cause. What smart thinking that was to kill off one of our own because he had the temerity to do everything he could to save his Senate seat.
And his replacement? A guy (Casey) who repeatedly votes to make us pay for promoting and performing abortions in other countries? Casey had to be taken to task TWICE by his bishop because he doesn’t get it. Not to mention his support for Obama. Oh yes, that’s so much better than Santorum. Is your foot still hurting from shooting it?
And Jill, please don’t falsely accuse me of supposedly supporting a radical abortion advocate like Sebelius. That is so beneath you. Obviously I’m not even going to dignify that with a response.
Get back in the game and focus on the real pro-abortion enemies. Not Santorum, not Brownbck, not me.
“If Brownback planned to earn my vote in Kansas, he will have to explain this terrible decision today.”
This is why the pro-life movement is condemned to failure — the inability of pro-life people to disagree on strategy and the repeated equation of strategy to policy.
Brownback now isn’t pro-life anymore? The dozens of dozens of things he’s done to save babies are now worthless in your eyes because of one statement? Wow.
No wonder abortion never ends, we’re so obsessed with perfection we define away any pro-life groups or person that fails to meet our own Pharisee-like standards.
When we stop shooting our friends, we’ll have enough troops to win the abortion war.
when did pro-lifers bash Santorem? who did Santorem support? I must have missed something.
Jasper, Santorum supported fellow Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter in the contested GOP primary. In turn, Specter went to bat for Santorum in his own race, which he lost to Casey.
Obviously lots of us pro-life people disagreed with Santorum for doing so, but the difference was that some pro-life people no longer regarded Santorum as pro-life for his actions while the rest of us knew better.
Some people went as far as to not support Santorum, and a pro-abortion funding senator (Casey) beat him as a result.
The conclusion is that attacking a good pro-life senator like Santorum for something he did to save his own Senate seat came back to bite the pro-life movement as a much weaker senator on pro-life issues ultimately defeated him, setting back the pro-life cause.
Steve wrote: And Jill, please don’t falsely accuse me of supposedly supporting a radical abortion advocate like Sebelius. That is so beneath you. Obviously I’m not even going to dignify that with a response.
Get back in the game and focus on the real pro-abortion enemies. Not Santorum, not Brownbck, not me.
Steve, you’re right. It’s beneath me because I didn’t do it. I wrote – about Brownback:
And Steve, you’re saying it is good pro-life strategy to give a helping hand to a radical pro-abort getting a national position of prominence to further abortion? This quite simply is illogical. I would go further to say Brownback is behaving immorally. He could have said nothing if he couldn’t bring himself to say the right thing. WWJD? Not this.
Back on topic, Steve, you and I are going to disagree it is ok for a politician to abandon pro-life principles to advance. And Brownback did that by issuing the press release.
And I’m not saying it was right to vote against Santorum. I wrote a couple columns asking pro-lifers not to. But they were mad. Santorum briefly put party over principle, and that’s where it got him. Something for Brownback to consider, as I wrote in my post.
Steve, Ok, thanks for explaining what happened…
Jill, one last comment. In case you were not implying that I support Sebelius or Brownback’s support for her (which is how I read your comment) I do not.
While I strongly disagree with Brownback’s decision to support Sebelius, I’m not willing to condemn everything he’s ever done either and say he is no longer pro-life or not worthy of support over a pro-abortion candidate for governor.
Brownback is making a mistake. I understand why he is doing it and it doesn’t make him pro-abortion all of a sudden, but it is a mistake nonetheless. I just wanted to make that clear.
And Steve, please don’t come on my blog to insult me that my post is a “nonstory” because “Brownback and Roberts understand that the nation’s loss is Kansas’ gain,” which in itself is false since Sebelius will replace herself with a Dem pro-abort who will now be positioned as the incumbent, and then further insult/patronize me to “get back in the game and focus on the real pro-abortion enemies. Not Santorum, not Brownbck, not me.”
PS – You need to also alert CNN and David Brody that Brownback/Roberts’ support of Sebelius is a “nonstory.”
And Steve, please don’t exaggerate my post to say I am “condemn[ing] everything he’s ever done either and say he is no longer pro-life or not worthy of support over a pro-abortion candidate for governor.”
I have not EVER condemned Brownback’s good works.
I have not EVER said Brownback is no longer pro-life.
I have not EVER said to support a pro-abort over Brownback for governor.
Give me a break!
Jill, I’m not insulting or patronizing you. Please don’t turn this into a personal battle or attack. We don’t need this.
But we also don’t need these public attacks on our friends either. If you’re going to make public comments attacking others in the pro-life movement, then expect some heat in return from people who disagree with you or at least think this sort of thing should stay in house and not become fodder for the other side. (And surely your skin is thick enough for some ribbing from little ole me).
You could have easily contacted Brownback or his top staffers, who I’m sure would give someone of your stature the time of day, to either air your criticisms or gently nudge in the right direction on this. Instead, we have the airing of dirty laundry against pro-life friends and further divisions within the pro-life movement. What would Jesus do, indeed!
And that you and I are spending so much time on this totally makes my point about how the focus needs to get back to the real enemy. We both could be posting more news today instead of engaging in this back and forth. No? You can’t tell me you don’t have anything better to do than go back and forth with me.
And unless there is a compelling reason to respond again, I’ll take the initiative to stop this discussion with this post.
I’ll close with this… Don’t throw the baby or Brownback out with the bathwater. He’s not handling this the way either of us would, but he’s still part of the pro-life family. Reserve your hottest flaming arrows for the other side.
P.S. If Sebelius, who would be considered a shoo-in for Brownback’s Senate seat, doesn’t run because she is in DC, then it IS a win for Kansas because it gives us a better chance to keep the seat. With her as a candidate, it’s her race to lose. Now Obama has taken her out of the equation for us (dumb move on his part).
P.P.S. A pro-abortion replacement to Sebelius is no worse than we have now (how could it be!) and, if anything, whatever he does to hurt the pro-life cause is fair game for us to use against him in 2010. Better to have a pro-abortion candidate with a record to attack than someone who can claim he has a clean slate. We have no chance to replace Sebelius with a pro-lifer until 2010 anyway so why not pass some pro-life laws, send them to the new guy and let him be held accountable by the voters for vetoing them. Not to mention the stain of the Sebelius endorsement. Better the devil you know, right? The incumbency isn’t all good….
Sounds like bad strategery to me.
Steve, you forget my place in the movement. I’m a blogger – an opinion writer, a reporter. Brownback went public with his endorsement of Sebelius. I went public with my displeasure about Brownback’s endorsement of Sebelius.
And this wasn’t the first time Brownback did something like this, if you’ll recall. This wasn’t an anomaly. This wasn’t something that needed clarifying by a phone call. Brownback ISSUED A PRESS RELEASE, for heaven sakes.
Please don’t patronize me by telling me what to write and not write about. As you know, most of my fire is reserved for pro-aborts, but when a pro-lifer goes off the reservation, I talk about it.
Again Steve, Amen! Thanks for speaking up. Your points are well written.
The end result of the rejection of Santorum was and is a horrific nightmare, regardless of who might have been correct at the time.
Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past.
Jill, I am with you on this. Brownback’s support of Tiller’s BFF is a complete betrayal to the pro-life movement and simply a move of political expediency.
Steve, Brownback’s move is unfortunately indefensible, and I am afraid Brownback’s true colors must be shown.
Sebelius isn’t just any pro-abortion politician — she isn’t ignorant like most of them. She has been educated and lobbied by her Bishops on abortion; she defies them.
Brownback should know Sebelius and how plain evil she is better than anybody, and his move is simply inexcusable.
It wasn’t just congratulatory; it wasn’t just an endorsement, it was a GLOWING endorsement.
Unfortunately, when Brownback leaves Washington for Kansas, he won’t be remembered as a hero of the pro-life movement… rather a sell-out.
Dan, I’m not defending Brownback’s endorsement of Sebelius. I’ve clearly said that was wrong. But it dismisses everything he’s ever done as a pro-life man and senator and now he’s not really pro-life? That’s the conclusion I disagree with. And if Brownback runs for governor against Sebelius 2,who would you support?
To defend the accuracy of my comments, you have clearly questioned whether Brownbck is pro-life.
* “Brownback and Roberts are pro-life, although one couldn’t tell by their glowing endorsement”
* “Brownback wants to run for KS governor in 2010, so he’s speeding to the mushy middle. This isn’t the 1st time Benedict Brownback has abandoned pro-life principles.”
* “I expect this oft-seen scenario: Brownback will spend the bulk of his campaign denying he’s a radical pro-lifer”
* Brownback will “erase his credentials”
* He will “only soft support from pro-lifers”
* “Brownback has made himself a tool for the Left”
Had you not beat up Brownback so badly I never would have commented in the first place!
You may not have specifically said Brownback is no longer pro-life you’ve taken so much air out of his sails that I worry pro-life support for his candidacy may sag as a result. And that hurts the cause. That’s the only reason I defended Brownback on your blog.
I also just think these kinds of things are best left in house and not displayed on he Internet for the world to see. Sure, Brownback is making a mistake, sure we would do things differently in his place, but he’s still one of us and us battering and bruising him like this doesn’t help defeat whoever will replace Sebelius (which Brownback has no control over — either her apt by Obama or who will replace her).
But go back and look at what you wrote. Replace Brownback with Stanek in what you wrote and think about your own reaction to someone who wrote what you wrote about Brownback about you if they had a beef with something you did.
“Stanek is a tool for the other side, will deny she is pro-life, will erase her pro-life credentials, abandoned her pro-life principles, is selling out the cause, Stanek won’t get support from the pro-life movement as a result, etc.”
I’m not really exaggerating that much, don’t you think? You were pretty harsh on Brownback. If he becomes the 2010 gubernatorial nominee against Sebelius 2, I hope you’ll give him a full endorsement.
Steve, if I ever endorse a pro-abort for anything, feel free to call me a tool of the Left and to question my pro-life bonafides.
According to some in the pro-life world, you have because you support pro-life legislation that doesn’t ban all abortions immediately and candidates who aren’t against all abortions. They consider that a pro-abortion action. They question your pro-life bona fides and they question mine.
The point I’m trying to make is that just as those who might say you’re not fully pro-life are off their rockers, one mistake doesn’t undo everything Brownback has ever done that is pro-life. Or does it?
Answer me this: Is Sam Brownback pro-life? And if he runs against Sebelius 2, would you endorse him?
Oh, Steve. Give it a rest. Not that Brownback would ever seek my endorsement, I am sure I would give it if he ran against a pro-abort.
No I won’t give it a rest, because this is the main debate when it comes to the whole of the pro-life movement. These are important questions and what these people do is important enough to blog on, right?
Was Bush too flawed to support or should we support him anyway. McCain? Santorum? Now Brownback.
You went after Brownback regarding Sebelius, now I’m asking a fair question about what you intend to do and what the pro-life movement should do given that. Isn’t that the logical followup to this post?
I am sharing a copy of a letter that I have composed and plan on mailing to Senator Brownback by postal service. I am not doing this with a desire to call undo attention to myself or to expect that everyone on this site will agree completely with the content of the letter.
But I am trying–and hope that other pro-lifers will keep trying–to communicate with both the friends, hopefully friends, and even enemies of the pro-life/pro-family cause. We are going to continue to be under heavy attack. May we have the wisdom, fortitude, courage and perseverance to engage in private and public forums for what is right. And may be have the grace of God and His gracious providence.
______________
Senator Sam Brownback
Senate Office Building
Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Senator Brownback,
I realize that a strong pro-abortion person was going to get the job as Director at
Health and Human Service. But frankly I was disappointed that you and Senator Roberts
of Kansas were so complimentary toward Governor Sebelius getting the appointment
without stating any disagreement with her pro-abortion policies.
We are under a massive juggernaut of leftist policies, regulations and legislation
ensuing from the Obama administration and the very liberal Democrat Senate and House
of Representatives. These include policies in the moral/cultural realm that will force
pro-life people to either participate in evil against their conscience or marginalize and
penalize them if they don’t participate.
Please take and maintain a stand for principle Senator Brownback.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Raymond V. Banner
Steve, next time I see you, I will buy you a beer.
Raymond, I’d like to virtually co-sign that letter.
Raymond, sign me up as well. And Andrew, can I have a mixed drink instead? Vodka tonic works. :)
Raymond, I’d like to sign that letter.
Steven E,
Turns out that you are wrong. OReilly covered this and they’re saying “oh well, Brownback supported her, she must be ok”…
giving her legitimacy.
How about just standing on principles and not politics.
The more I think about this, the more I realize the damage Brownback and Roberts have done.
This could have been an oppurnity to expose Obama even more as the sociopath he is. Nominating a friend of Tiller the Killer. Now the story will die.
Jasper, one problem in your theory. I never said Brownback’s support for Sebelius wouldn’t make our job of defeating her more difficult. That was never my thesis.
What I said is that Brownback is using the nomination as a springboard for his gubernatorial aspirations and that Brownbck as Kansas governor is a good thing and he is head and shoulders better than Sebelius.
What I said is that Sebelius being yanked out of Kansas is a good thing for the pro-life movement because she can eventually be replaced (in 2010) with a pro-life advocate (likely Brownback). I also said that not haivng Sebelius as a likely shoo-in for Brownback’s seat (by virtue of her being in DC thanks to Obama) is a good thing.
What I said is that eviscerating our pro-life friends if they make one or two mistakes or do someting we disagree with to the point that we mke them appear not pro-life is wrong.
What I’ve said is that tearing down pro-life people like Brownback to the point of hurting their chances to defeat a pro-abortion candidate is not helpful.
What I said is that Brownback is wrong to support Sebelius (although I know why he is doing it) but he is still pro-life and has a laundry list of pro-life accomplishment he, and we, should be proud of.
Those points have nothing to do with whether the Sebelius confirmation is harder or not.
But on that point, I said above that Sebelius will be confirmed regardless of whether Brownback supports her or not. That’s just the sad reality of the situation we’re in now with a pro-abortion Congress.
Brownback may have given her more cover on the abortion attacks we can make but she will be confirmed regardless. At the end of the day it changes nothing.
Yes, let’s stand on principles, but not tearing down our friends is one of the principles we should stand on. Attacking Brownback makes it harder for him to become governor, and that’s more realistic an effect of all this protracted debate than stopping Sebelius.
Well Muslim Obama got an anti life candidate. she is not very experienced. A 1 issue clown. But she always has tillerman. Now tiollerman will have to find another to invest millions in. The investment in her is down the toilet.
Steve,
I don’t think Jill really bashed Brownback, she just called him out on the letter.
Btw: I really like your website, you do some great pro-life work with all the stories you cover…
Jasper,thanks for the kind words! I don’t think the story will die. Let’s get back to the battle….
I watched O’reilly tonight and he and his panelists all agreed that Brownback and Robert’s letter gave Sebelius legitamacy.
Its nauseous to see the radical pro-abort wing of politics lining the capital. Not to mention the stereotypical pay-to-play politician who happens to have been raised in Illinois under the wings of Planned Parenthood and the pro-abort wing of the Democratic party. Any Democrat with an ounce of concern for the rights of the unborn and who voted for Obama should be grieving.
“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”
Luke 23:34a
Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.
Luke 23:34a
Obama and Sebelius are cut from the same mold. They can both live a Christian facade and get away with. Sebelius is as good or better than Obama at it because she gets away with it in complete contradiction to the stated beliefs of her purported Catholic faith.
From the catechism:
2258 “Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.”56
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,”77 “by the very commission of the offense,”78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
“The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.”80
“The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights.”81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.
Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, “if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.”82
2275 “One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival.”83
“It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material.”84
“Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity”85 which are unique and unrepeatable.
Looks like I’m right after all….
Kicking Sebelius outof Kansas makes it easier to keep the Senate, the LtG isn’t running for governor in 2010 so no worries there, Brownback is the guy for governor and two good pro-lifers for Senate have an easier shot. Sebelius would be confirmed anyway, so it’s a net win for us: Likely fresh new pro-lifer in the Senate and pro-life governor who will hopefully sign a bunch of pro-life laws and hold Tiller and the abortion industry accountable. What a difference it will be having Brownback in place of Sebelius as governor! Brownback is wrong to support Sebelius but in the end we can come out smelling like a rose.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003064195
I’m not so sure, Steven @ 8:58 AM, Rick Santorum compromised with regard to Arlen Spector, and look what happened to him. Sen. Brownback is giving scandal by supporting Sebelius. The more people stand for the truth without compromise, the stronger we will become in the long run.
So, Eileen, you’re happy that someone worse is in office instead of Santorum? Someone who endorsed Obama and has repeatedly voted to send your money to other nations to do abortions? It’s rhetorical obviously because I doubt you feel that way, but the pro-life attacks on Santorum helped pave the way for a new senator who sometimes votes pro-abortion. Where the truth and principle in that?