UDPATE, 10:38a: Ed Morrissey at HotAir has a list of the Stupak 12 - which includes the lone Republican who voted for the House version when it contained the Stupak amendment. And here's a Hardball clip from last night wherein Stupak confirms the #12 to Chris Matthews that he reiterated this morning on GMA...
10:15a: All signs point to President Obama and Democrat congressional leaders attempting a process called reconciliation to pass a socialist healthcare bill that includes public funded abortion. This means only 51 votes would be required rather than 60. How times have changed....
But what else have we come to expect from Obama other than lies and Chicago style political coercion and thuggery? And he's quite imaginative. Yesterday the Weekly Standard reported Obama nominated the brother of a Democrat rep who previously voted against Obamacare to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
But I digress. The complicated reconciliation process means the House would have to pass the Senate's healthcare plan, which includes public funded abortions.
This morning on Good Morning America pro-life Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak said he has 12 votes against the Senate version as it currently stands, adding, "We're prepared to take the responsibility. I mean, I've been catching it ever since last fall. Let's face it, I want to see health care. But we're not going to bypass some principles and beliefs that we feel strongly about."
Here's what those 12 votes would mean, according to the ABC headline...
The 2nd video below is that GMA interview. Pro-abort DHHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius speaks 1st and proceeded to tell a whopper by claiming public funded abortion isn't in the Senate healthcare plan.
So I'm reposting the 1st video, from the White House website December 21, which shows Sebelius explaining how public funding of abortions will work under the Senate healthcare plan, equally paid by all. Read the transcript here. Sebelius appears to have a cold. People around her must not be coughing in their armpits.
The reconciliation attempt to pass healthcare is their last chance. Pro-lifers must pull out all stops now to urge their House representative to vote against this bill. Go here, type in your zip code, and make your call. You can also send an email by typing in your zip here.
It is really sad that the Democratic Party is now totally controlled by the abortionists. How do you have a political party controlled by people who kill children? It is just insane.
It is very obvious that we must do everything we can to inflict the biggest defeat imaginable on the Democratic Party in the November elections.
It is critically important that the Republican Party reach out aggressively to Black and Hispanic voters, not just on unborn human rights, but in all economic and social areas. If the Republicans will make a major effort in this area and if they can get a sizable percentage of the minority vote, we may be able to sweep large numbers of abortionist Democrats right out of there.
Defeating large numbers of Democratic politicians is a necessary first step in any strategy to stop the killing of unborn children.Posted by: Joe at March 4, 2010 10:37 AM
All I do is sit back and wait for more of Obama's deviousness, whether its another lie, another attempt at manipulation, or another bribe.
Its exactly what I expect. I said from day one what this man is and I expect no different then what we are getting. I only wonder what it will be this time.
He has spent almost a third of his presidency trying to ram legislation down the throats of the American people. Sociopaths/narcissists are not people who will ever gracefully take "no" for an answer so plan for a very long battle.
Look at this as a blessing in disguise. In my opinion he is destroying himself and his party in the process, hopefully they will self destruct before they can devastate this country any further.
So many people and groups trusted and idolized Obama as their savior, they were so taken in by his charisma and emptiness, and put him in office.
When the gods want to punish (wo)man, they answer their prayers.
May God bless the blue dogs with courage and strength.Posted by: truthseeker at March 4, 2010 10:51 AM
Stupak- a man with principles and in Washington DC Amazing!! May he stand strong. Pray for him.Posted by: Susie at March 4, 2010 11:19 AM
"How do you have a political party controlled by people who kill children? "
Easy as 1-2-3:
1) Liberal/left-leaning,morally relative, sex education
2) Person receiving said education running for public office
2) Planned Parenthood funding the campaign of said person
See..nothing to it.
mods: pls delete extra post...Thanks!Posted by: RSD at March 4, 2010 11:25 AM
Yes let's hope. Let's also remember who he, and all the other blue dogs are up against. Never underestimate the sociopath/narcissist that is our president.
Apparently it was known by Steny Hoyer that Democrat Rep.Massa, who previously voted no on the health bill, was harassing this staffer. How convenient that Massa must now be forced to resign. You notice that Rangel isn't forced to resign. Was Ted Kennedy ever forced to resign?
Space and good taste wouldn't allow me to elaborate on his track record.
I just sent a copy of your post to Bart Stupak's House email address with some encouragement of my own.
Judicial appointments for family members? It will be interesting to see what other kinds of bribery and graft BO throws at the other Blue Dogs to try to get them to compromise their convictions.
"Lord, we pray for our President. Either change his heart, grant him repentence and make him a defender of Your children or remove him from office.
We pray for justice and protection for Your innocent, preborn children Oh God. Give our government officials the moral clarity, courage and backbone to do what is right and cherish these little lives like You do.
AmenPosted by: Ed at March 4, 2010 11:32 AM
Also remember, "blue dogs" are first and foremost Democrats.Posted by: Mary at March 4, 2010 11:47 AM
Yeah, I just read this here:
Boy, I am glad that a few are willing to stick to their guns when it comes to integrity especially in the face of such pressure!Posted by: Abortion Pros and Cons at March 4, 2010 11:50 AM
Mary, interesting thought on Massa. I wouldn't put any conspiracy theory past them.
Abortion Pros and Cons, thanks for the link. Using a quote from it for the Quote of the Day.Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 4, 2010 12:38 PM
Hi Ed, 11:32am
Everybody has their price.
Everybody has a past.
Never forget who sits in the WH.Posted by: Mary at March 4, 2010 12:39 PM
Thank you. We underestimate the forces against us at our own risk.
I understand that Massa will not run for reelection, not immediately resign. I wonder if this means he could change his vote to yes since he has nothing to lose at this point?Posted by: Mary at March 4, 2010 12:51 PM
Posted by: Mary at March 4, 2010 10:46 AM
"He has spent almost a third of his presidency trying to ram legislation down the throats of the American people."
Point of correction: B.O. has no known preference when it comes to which bodily orifice he will utilize in order to gain his end.
Americans can open wide or they can bend over, either way, they should brace themselves cuz what is headed their way will not be a pleasant experience and though B.O. and his fellow progressive/humanists know some of OUR lives and liberty will be lost in the process, that is a sacrifice THEY are willing to make.
Resistance may be futile, but fighting the rapist might at least afford you some solace should you NOT prevail and be forced to endure the indignities of the rapist.
yor bro kenPosted by: kbhvac at March 4, 2010 2:13 PM
Ken,I'm not giving up any liberty. Don't you worry. Land of the Free, forever!Posted by: Hal at March 4, 2010 2:44 PM
Gee I thought abortion on demand was a settled law, established constitutional precedent, 'stare decisis', perpetual motion and all things majik.
The 'dead babies r us' crowd is willing to let universal health care die and rot on the vine rather than give up a federal funding for this elective surgery.
Elective abortion is NOT health care.
No pregnant woman will die if federal funds cannot be used to subsidize this cosmetic surgery.
If a woman is in a life threatening condition as a result of her pregnancy then no hospital that receives federal funds can refuse to treat her without risking severe penalties from the federal government.
In most cases both the mother and her child can be saved, or at the very least the medical procedures most likely to produce a positive outcome for both mother and child will be implemented.
But the 'dead babies r us' folks are so intractable when it comes to this 'sacred golden cow' they will cut off their ever lengthening brown noses to spite both their faces.
You would stand a better chance of persuading an observant muslim to eat pork during ramadan than getting these sectarian humanists to give up their claimed federal entitlement to dead baby.
Progressive/liberal/humanist have a death grip their goddess, their dead babies and our money.
yor bro kenPosted by: kbhvac at March 4, 2010 5:45 PM
Posted by: Hal at March 4, 2010 2:44 PM
"Ken,I'm not giving up any liberty. Don't you worry. Land of the Free, forever!"
Bend over, grab your ankles and prepare to enjoy the freedom to be robbed, raped and left for dead when your productive days are over and your assets are all gone.
Be sure and tell your children and your grandchildren that you did your best to see that they would not be overlooked when it came time to share their wealth with the have nots.
yor bro kenPosted by: kbhvac at March 4, 2010 5:57 PM
I hope no one is calling Stupak a Blue Dog, because he isn't. He's a true liberal, who also stands up for the right of life for the unborn, which is exactly what liberalism in this country needs.Posted by: Bijay at March 4, 2010 6:15 PM
I view this site occasionally just to see what the current hatemongering trend is.
"Ken-what is your excuse for this-"Point of correction: B.O. has no known preference when it comes to which bodily orifice he will utilize in order to gain his end."
Do you think you will persuade anyone to your point of view with this rhetoric? Politically or morally?
The only reason I can determine that this site exists is for hateful people to reinforce their hateful thoughts. No one with any intelligence would be swayed by this pigswill.
If you believe that you are doing anything besides reinforcing your own views, I sure would like an explanation.
Thanks.Posted by: SOA at March 4, 2010 7:24 PM
SOA, I love how you point out one quote meant as a joke an pretend that it represents the totality of our arguments. The fact is that almost every moderate pro-choicer who hangs around here long enough converts to the pro-life cause. Try again.Posted by: Lauren at March 4, 2010 8:14 PM
amazed at how people feel they should control me;as a woman women have the right to choose a(safe health care procedure)women deserve it rights;The Stupak thing is his next move to ban abortions even ScottBrown said he felt that it should be regulated;what is confusing is Republicans or pro-lifers what government out of your lives yet abortion is your issue,one you want to control,we already have the hyde amendment use that...no new lang especially if Stupak's name will be attachedPosted by: blkbird at March 4, 2010 9:05 PM
No confusion. I want government involved when there are people who harm others, be they bank robbers, rapists, abusive spouses or abortionists, to name a few. I weary of explaining that abortion has victims: living human beings are dismembered/tortured to death. THAT is why we speak up, blkbird.
Abortion is not safe. For women there are lasting effects physically, emotionally and spiritually, and for her child, abortion is deadly. If you can stomach it, please explain how restricting -or how about merely not having tax payers FUND- this "controls" YOU? http://www.abortioninstruments.com/abortion_videos.html
Funny how PC people want the gov't to stay out of the abortion decision until the time comes to foot the bill. Then watch what how PC people squawk when the gov't tries to stay out of it.Posted by: Mary at March 4, 2010 10:00 PM
That's because their view of right to choose is a lie. They don't believe in right to choose when it comes to out taxpayers on issue of abortion. They don't believe in right to choose for parents in regards to what values should be taught in sex education. They don't believe in right to choose in regards to our right to bear arms. They don't believe in right to choose when it comes to businesses doing things they say would hurt the environment.Posted by: Punisher at March 4, 2010 10:10 PM
"what is confusing is Republicans or pro-lifers what government out of your lives yet abortion is your issue,one you want to control,we already have the hyde amendment use that...no new lang especially if Stupak's name will be attached"
Strawman. We want lesser government to be sure, but we still want the government to do its job where it is supposed to: in guaranteeing our rights to life, liberty, and property, and not erecting laws that would be contrary to these freedoms. Mandating abortion, slavery, etc., by force of law run counter to these principles.Posted by: Punisher at March 4, 2010 10:13 PM
Stupak said there are eight laws already that include "Hyde like"language and any of them would due. Why do you suppose Obama is so against adding it to this bill? Cause he is a rabid pro-abort who envisions government health care being PP abortuaries in every town. And just how will these health "panels" reduce costs down the road? Denying the right to life to the sick and infirm and diseased and retarded and geneticly disadvantaged cause they cost so much to care for. Wake UP!!!!
It is good to see that even 12 Democrats are willing to stand up to Obamanation.Posted by: Why does Abortion exist? at March 4, 2010 11:15 PM
Thanks for pointing that out. Not all blue dogs are pro-life and Congressman Stupak isn't a blue dog. Of the twelve congressman on the list Matthews had; only four are blue dogs. The blue dog platform is based upon bringing the deficit under control, not pro-life. It just so happens that the four blue dogs on Chris Matthews' list are openly pro-life; as Democrats!! They must really be amazing people to win election as a Democrat. The pro-lifers seem to come from all sides of the political spectrum. It is heartening to see us coming together for this cause that the pro-aborts have always tried to project as a non-issue. Here is a list of the four blue dogs who have been openly taking a stand for life.
Dahlkemper, Kathy (PA-03)
Donnelly, Joe (IN-02)
Ellsworth, Brad (IN-08)
Wilson, Charles (OH-06)
I would like to share your enthusiasm but keep one fact in mind at all times. These are Democrats, first and foremost. They are in office because Nancy Pelosi needed lapdogs to promote Obama's agenda and Republicans had failed miserably to hold to conservative principles. They won running as conservatives while Republicans ran as everyone's friends, i.e. "moderates".
They are up against the Pelosi and the Obama Chicago thug administration. We have an out of control narcissist in the WH. These "blue dogs" all share two characteristics of the human condition:
1. They all have a price
2. They all have a past
You can bet Obama and his henchmen are looking into both.Posted by: Mary at March 5, 2010 8:35 AM
3 of the 4 recently voted against an embryonic stem cell research bill....not what I would call Pelosi "lap dogs".
Believe me, I want to share your enthusiasm. Take my word for it, they are Democrats first and foremost. Didn't Obama issue an executive order allowing for ESC research right after his inaugaration?
They are in place to do one thing, Nancy's bidding. She is a loyal lapdog to Obama. That is why the "blue dog" election efforts were helped, not because the Democrats were so willing to tolerate their "conservative" values. Once this bidding is done, Nancy is only too ready to send them packing in November.
What I suspect will happen is that Congressman/woman X will be called into the Queen's chamber and told, "I understand we are all human and you can always depend on my discretion concerning your relationship with so and so 10 years ago just as I can count on your support for a certain bill". It was a very effective tactic used by J.Edgar Hoover to make political figures tow the line in his favor.
Don't underestimate these people for a second ts. Sociopath/narcissist PDs like what we have in the WH will never take "no" for an answer and Obama will destroy whoever he has to for what he wants.Posted by: Mary at March 5, 2010 10:35 AM
I understand your hesitation. My enthusiasm comes from a realization that pro-life is not just a Repulican thing. People in all parts of the political spectrum are pro-life; thus the pro-life majority in all the polls. If Pelosi and Obama had the votes then the Stupak amendment never would have made it into the House bill.
Yes I am happy as well about PL Democrats as well as Republicans. I also understand political realities.
Did you hear Obama is now looking at immigration "reform"? Never mind the 9.7% plus unemployment rate. These would all be Democrat voters, guaranteeing Democrats, and Obama, maintain power.
These are the people we are up against ts, those determined to manage the decline of our country.
Whatever good intentions the PL Democrats may have, they may be no match for this evil that occupies our WH.
I just heard the Stupak would NOT vote to defund PP. What better way to curb abortion?
It is apparent to me that the WH will not be able to "turn" Congressman Stupak to the dark side on this issue. Obama knows this and I am certain his minions wil be attacking Stupak as fiercly as possible for making his stand. I think the fact that he was surrounded by Catholic bishops when he crafted the language to his amendment has given him the grace and fortitude to stand up to pro-aborts on the issue.
But I do agree that Obama will pay any price and do any deed to get to the other House Democrats outside of the pro-life coalition and without a principle like life to stand for; it may be impossible for them to resist the bribes. I have no doublt that the WH is bringing each one behind closed doors and asking them "what would it take" and "what do you want for your vote?"
But I have faith that this will fail one way or the other. The American people have spoken and we will not stand for a government takeover of our health care. If the pro-choicers were savvy they would see that a government takeover means less choice in the future; up to and including Family Planning that limits the number of children a woman can have or forced abortion of "imperfect" high-cost children. Picture Robert Berger (who posts on this site) on the government health panel that makes decisions for your care. Scary...Posted by: truthseeker at March 5, 2010 10:43 PM
I can only hope you are right about Stupak. Personally and in all honesty, I don't care if he surrounds himself with celestial choirs. He is first and foremost a Democrat.
I understand that the brother of Rahm Emmanual, Obama's chief thug, has spoken of obesity and what an expense obesity is in health costs, fuel usage on planes, cars, etc. I wonder if the obese will be the next target of the government, especially if Obamacare passes. Will we have government control on how much weight we can gain or restrictions on activities and health care the obese can take adavantage of? Everything starts as just talk, that maybe this group of people or that group impose a burden.....Posted by: Mary at March 5, 2010 11:07 PM
Were you hurt by a Democrat as a child?
Keep a stiff upper lip. It all comes out in the wash.Posted by: truthseeker at March 6, 2010 12:04 AM
Hardly. I'm just a realist who isn't inclined to entertain too many fantasies about courageous politicians of either party standing firm on principles. As I said,
1. Everyone has a price
2. Everyone has a past
Obama and his minions from hell will find both.Posted by: Mary at March 6, 2010 8:13 AM
Every time Obama or Pelosi are asked about the Stupak amendment they redirect the conversation and say "this health care bill is not abortion". But they continue to refuse to add the language that would take government funding of abortion out of the health care bill. They are soooo deceitful. And they would 'almost' rather have no
health care reform then leave governemnt funding of abortion outlawed. My guess is they are searching for a way to pass this without caving in on abortion. I doubt they have that many votes. They may not even have the votes to pass the Senate version of the bill even if they restrict government funding of abortion. Government funding of abortion is just one of the things wong with this bill.
I have read that Obama is trying hard to push a bill on Americans weary of this whole issue, Democrats who are wavering, and Republicans who insist on starting from scratch. Can you believe its been 14 months already and we are still at square one? Also, for a year, Obama had majorities in both houses and a worshipful media and still couldn't get this passed, but of course Republicans are to blame for that, even though Republicans couldn't do squat to stop it.
If Obama and Pelosi have to shake hands with the devil in hell to get this passed they will. I think too much is going against them, mainly the American public is just fed up with it. I understand Obama is moving on to legalizing illegal immigrants. One can imagine how this will fly with unemployed Americans. This guy's got a great gift for timing.
Before I'm accused of being racist, I will say I have absolutely no issue with the race, religion or ethnicity of a LEGAL immigrant. I have every issue with an ILLEGAL immigrant, whatever their race, religion, or ethnicity.Posted by: Mary at March 6, 2010 6:00 PM
If Obama and Pelosi have to break a deal with the devil in hell (remove government funding of abortion) to get this passed they will.
Obama is such a liar. See him here promising to sign FOCA into law
Obama knows abortion funding is in this bill...it couldn't be any clearer. Part of this bill is a dollar a month from every person in the health plan that goes to fund other peoples abortions. They lie so often that that it almost wears me down listening to them BS. I think that the constant lying is what Obama calls staying on the offense. Never stopping to defend any single lie, just redirect and keep telling bigger lies the next day. Ugh!
You may be right about them going after the obese. I can see them taxing foods that they deem to be unhealthy.
Mary, me either. You'd be surprised how much I, a half-Mexican, am accused of being racist against Mexicans for being tough on immigration reform (someone once called me an "Uncle Tom", even!).Posted by: xalisae at March 9, 2010 8:28 AM
I hate to say I told you so but it looks like Stupak is caving. Check out Jill's latest post.Posted by: Mary at March 9, 2010 2:35 PM