Pro-life groups turn on pro-life Democrats

stupak and hiding pro-lifers.jpg

When it comes down to it, Bart Stupak retired today because his pro-abort House leaders and president wouldn't let him and his pro-life band vote their consciences....

To be sure, the 20 Dem pro-life turncoats are to blame for their own votes, but clearly their leaders badgered, pressured, and hounded them until they broke.

There was no way for the Stu-PAC to win, politically. Had the bloc caused the healthcare bill to fail, there would have been hell to pay from the power brokers. Now there is hell to pay from us.

Some Democrats may scoff at the title of this piece, saying pro-life groups never supported pro-life Democrats to begin with. Stupak said that very thing when lashing out after his cave.

But pro-life groups were getting there. They were trying. They indeed did endorse Democrats. Stupak could have cemented a pro-life caucus in the Democrat Party and solidified a relationship with pro-life groups, but he instead fractured both. Today, ironically, Stupak became his own 1st casualty.

Pro-life Democrat congresspersons still standing and candidates being wooed to run in conservative districts now know their party ultimately will not let them be pro-life.

And we know it, too. Hence, this grave April 7 press release, the likes of which I've never seen before...

The IN Right to Life Political Action Committee today announced that it has formally adopted a resolution denying endorsements to all Democratic candidates as a direct result of recent passage of the pro-abortion health care reform bill with support from IN congressmen Brad Ellsworth, Joe Donnelly, and Baron Hill....

The resolution to be applied in the 2010 election cycle reads:

"Whereas the Democratic Party officially endorses the right to unrestricted abortion on demand; and

Whereas Democratic leadership continues aggressively to advance federal policies that undermine the right to life of unborn children; and

Whereas Congressman Brad Ellsworth, Congressman Baron Hill, and Congressman Joe Donnelly betrayed the trust of pro-life Hoosiers by voting for the pro-abortion federal health care reform bill; and

Whereas the Democratic caucus in the Indiana House, under the leadership of Speaker Pat Bauer, continues to block all legislation aimed at limiting, restricting, and reducing abortions in the state of Indiana; and

Whereas candidates of the Democratic Party are responsible for the policies and actions of the party and its leadership;

Be it resolved that the IN Right to Life PAC will grant no endorsements to any Democratic candidates for any public office."...

"Our leadership anguished over this decision," notes IRTL-PAC chairman Mike Fichter. "Had Democrats like Brad Ellsworth held firm in opposing federal funding for abortion in the health care bill, we likely would have rewarded such action with a bipartisan endorsement policy. Ellsworth's collapse under pressure from the White House and Speaker Pelosi, as well as the collapse of his colleagues Joe Donnelly and Baron Hill, leaves us with no alternative. Leadership matters, and the reality is that Democratic leaders are advancing an abortion agenda at an alarming rate that will only be checked by a Republican majority."

Fichter adds that Democrats who wish to see a return of a bipartisan endorsement policy must work to change the party's platform on abortion and to change its party leadership. "The ball is in the Democratic Party's court," says Fichter. "As long as it continues to advance an abortion agenda, its candidates will not receive our support."

Read also Kathryn Lopez's piece at NRO today.

FRC in a press release about Stupak's retirement today had similar thoughts:

Rep. Stupak's fall lies directly at the feet of the Democratic congressional leadership and President Obama, who pushed their support of government funding of abortion over the principles of pro-life Members of their own party. Although Rep. Stupak certainly is responsible for the decision he made to endorse the Obama plan, the severe demands his President and Party placed on him were untoward and unremitting.

Yesterday the FRC PAC announced its "20 in '10" campaign, "to oust the 20 so-called "pro-life" Democrats who voted for the President's bill.... We plan to raise at least a half million dollars to spend in those congressional districts whose members turned their backs on their convictions - and their constituents.

It's so sad, because pro-life momentum could have been heading the opposite way had Stupak stood strong. The ramifications of his cave are enormous.

[Photo via The American Spectator]


Comments:

Jill,

You're very kind and conciliatory with the Stupak stooges. I'm not.

It would have been better to vote their good conscience and retire back to private life with honor.

When Neville Chamberlain returned to England after selling out the Czechs, Winston Churchill denounced him saying:

You had a choice between dishonor and war. You chose the former and will inherit the latter as a consequence.

Let the "pro-life Dems inherit war as a consequence. We know all too well the number of pro-life leaders who live with death threats, most notably Fr. Pavone. Have WE sold out?

I don't pity these sell-outs. The pressures brought to bear by the Dem leadership revolved around career advancement and social acceptance. No lives were threatened.

Millions of babies will pay the price with their own lives so Congressmen and Congresswomen live a little better.

I hope they find their advancement worth the trade.Future votes from these vipers will only be to assuage our anger.

More career advancement.

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at April 9, 2010 1:51 PM


We agree, Gerard. I don't pity them either.

Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at April 9, 2010 1:57 PM


Professor, how do you figure "millions" of babies will die from anything Congressman Stupak did?

Posted by: Hal at April 9, 2010 2:31 PM


Professor, how do you figure "millions" of babies will die from anything Congressman Stupak did?

Posted by: Hal at April 9, 2010 2:31 PM

Are you saying or wishing that estimate is far too low?

The leftists are very decieptful and dishonest

1 They say it is not a baby
2 They say that abortion is not in the bill but fight an amendment that spells it out
3 It is called "Womens health car" Abortin is defiend as a part of that.

Why would anyone living the moral depravity of endorsing the death of the unborn have even the slightest problems with lying? Do you know Hal?????

Posted by: xppc at April 9, 2010 2:49 PM


Hal,

There are 1.5 to 1.6 million of abortions done every year in this country alone. Now, with additional federal funding of this horrible practice to PP and the resof it's cabal (thanks to you-know-who caving in)...guess which way those numbers will go?

It doesn't take much imagination, Hal.

**There is NO Middle ground on abortion, either you are for it or against it...Stupak tried it and see where he ended up ***

Posted by: RSD at April 9, 2010 3:27 PM


The question had to do with Congressman Stupak. What did he do, or could he have done, to change the number of abortions significantly? There is no more federal funding for abortions now than there was a year ago.

Posted by: Hal at April 9, 2010 4:02 PM


"There is no more federal funding for abortions now than there was a year ago."


Keep believing that, Hal and hopefully it will come true.

Posted by: RSD at April 9, 2010 5:16 PM


A patient who would have to pay their own money for something non-essential would think twice about dipping into their own pockets to pay.

We see it all the time at the University of Illinois, where abortion is on the student insurance.

Women who would not think of that as an option, think harder and take it, since it does not cost them anything to get an abortion. It skews the results because 'free money' talks.

But if a woman has to pay $ 400 on her own - especially where a parent would see the charge on the credit statement, they think twice.

Making something 'free' increases the purchase of an item. It's marketing, pure and simple.

And we know that $$ talks - remember what Stupak said was being said?

" What are Democratic leaders saying? "If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That's one of the arguments I've been hearing," Stupak says. "Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue - come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we're talking about." "

So in the end, instead of helping women have their children and helping them with what they need, they will pay for abortions, which in the end 'saves them money.'

evil. Utterly evil.

And what ever happened to 'reducing the need for abortions and reconciliation?'

double-speak.

Posted by: joyfromIllinois at April 9, 2010 5:26 PM


I don't feel a bit sorry for Stupak. Granted, was in a no win situation, because Dems were going to primary him if he didn't vote for Obamacare, but he would have been a hero to millions by doing the right thing. Instead, he caved just like almost every other politician does.

By backing Obamacare in the end, he forever lost the support of the pro life community, and the Dems didn't care because he was doing what was expected of all of them.

I'm quite sure that district will be represented by a Republican in Janary.

Posted by: Joanne at April 9, 2010 7:26 PM


Keep believing that, Hal and hopefully it will come true.
Posted by: RSD at April 9, 2010 5:16 PM

I don't really care, one way or another.

Posted by: Hal at April 9, 2010 8:19 PM


I don't really care, one way or another.
Posted by: Hal at April 9, 2010 8:19 PM

You could well spare us your innane commments then, Hal. I really don't think we would miss them. If not even you cares about what you say, why on earth ought we?

Posted by: Toqueville at April 9, 2010 8:33 PM


"When it comes down to it, Bart Stupak retired today because his pro-abort House leaders and president wouldn't let him and his pro-life band vote their consciences...."

--------------------------------------------------

Stupak, not the democRAT leadership, is soley responsible for the votes he casts, unless the democRAT leadership criminally extorted, coerced and/or blackmailed his compliance.

I am not buying Stupak's reasons for retiring any more than I am taking seriously all the speculation from other folks.

The more likely scenario is the same folks who extorted his vote forced him to retire because even before his vote his re-election chances were slim to none and they wanted to make an example of him to any other democRATs that EVEN weak kneed submissive pro-lifers will no longer be tolerated in the party of the dead babies are us folks.

Tyrants will not brook dissent, and a woman/man with a clean conscience is a threat to them because they cannot rely on that man/woman to toe the party line when it conflicts with their conscience.

This recent health care vote exposed who the few committed democRAT pro-lifers are and now
the progressive/liberal/humanists are taking advantage of the opportunity to purge their ranks of all but the socialist purists who can be controlled by the leadership.

The democRAT cirus big top has become the midway tent that houses the freak show.

Stupak has some bones in his closet and the democRAT leadership got to him and his more afraid of them than he is GOD or pro-lifers.

Stupak is slinking away in shame hoping his dirty secret will remain that way but the democRATs will stil out him when it serves their vindictive purposes.

Stupak is a thoroughly defeated human being. He might be close to the point where he can actually surrender to Jesus and be saved.

I would encourage enthusiastic prayer for Stupak.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at April 10, 2010 9:59 AM


Posted by: Hal at April 9, 2010 4:02 PM

"The question had to do with Congressman Stupak. What did he do, or could he have done, to change the number of abortions significantly? There is no more federal funding for abortions now than there was a year ago."

HAL,

Please allow me to take a stab at predicting the effect of the B.O. hellth scare scheme will result in more abortion and by extension more federal tax dollars being used to fund said abortions.

Anytime an existying good or service is offerred for free or at a reduced price, then the more that good or service will be accessed.

Can you think of a single time in history where this was not true?

By extension the B.O. hellth scare scam will result in more abortions if nothing else changed.

But the hellth scare scam did not happen in a vaccum. The economy was already in the tank and women and families have only seen the economimc pressure increase that would leverage them toward a 'choice' to kill their prenatal child rather than incur the increased expense and responsiblity of a live birth.

Then there is the additional expenditure of federal funds necesssary to fund the proliferation of government beuracacies necessary to administrate the life sucking leeches.

This will result in increased pressure on an already anemic economy and less jobs will be created and there will be less sources of revenue for the federal government to fund the expanding federal budget.

Then there is the coming hyper inflation that will devalue the dollar faster than families can compensate by working more hours or finding an additional job.

When I was a child in 1962 my father bought gasoline for sixteen cents a gallon.

By the 1970's during the 'engergy crisis', gas rose to over one dollar and seventy cents a gallon. Much of the increased price of gasoline was due not to a shortage of gasoline but to the decreased value of a dollar due to inflation.

In real dollars the price of a dollar of gas had not changed all that much.

Inflation is one way governments reduce the burden of public debt in real dollars.

None of the policies B.O. has promoted will work to reverse any of these trends. In fact they will only make them worse.

Therefore public funding of abortions will result in both an immediate and future increase in the total number of abortions and the total number of federal tax dollars used to pay for them.

At the risk of sounding like one of those unmarked black helicopter folks I will assert this is not by accident but by design on the part of the progressive/liberal/humanist loons, the least of whom is B.O., mad damn nanny peelousy, and that toe sucking eunuch, hairy reed.

I meam it is not like we haven't been kicked by this same jackass stuff before in recent history.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at April 10, 2010 11:36 AM


"Pro-life Groups Turn On Pro-life DemocRATS"

----------------------------------------------------

The 'lead in' would have been more correct if it read,

Purportedly 'pro-life' democRATS' betray pre-natal children' and, as a direct result, experience adverse consequences from former supporters and voters.

I have to give credit to the progressive/liberal/humanist who rule the 'dead babies r us' party for the shrewd, even masterful, manner in which they have manipulated their members to identify those whom they identify as the 'enemy' among them.

They will soon set themselves to the task of purging the offending members from their body politic. They will not stop at cutting off the noses of both their faces to spite themselves, or amputating both their left hands that feed them and both their left feet that move them ever further leftward in pursuit of ideological purity.

Members merely accused of making counter revolutionary statements will be forced to submit to a glossectomy of their bi-furcated tongues.

The democRATS, like their concubine and whore planned parenthood, believe the family that 'preys together, slays together'.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at April 10, 2010 1:01 PM


Hal,

In countries where the government decides to pay for abortions, the numbers of abortions increase between 15-25%.

Do the math.

When the government decides to pay for a service, it brings that practice into the mainstream, normalizing it in the minds of the public. When immoral or noxious behaviors lose their opprobrium, they increase in frequency. A few examples:

Tatoos were once considered to be low class, something done by drunken sailors on shore leave. As more people began sporting them, they have become mainstream, although still considered low class in many quarters, and still considered the sin of mutilation in my Church. (Tatooed readers, enjoy 'em. Just an example of normalization of what was once looked down on).

Another example, this one dealing with sex, has to do withy young people and oral sex. During President Clinton's Lewinsky travails, oral sex increased dramatically in junior high school students, with a spike in oral gonorrhea in this population. Many claimed in all earnestness that the President said that oral sex is not sex.

We could list dozens of examples. However, the widespread practice of abortion and the government's imprimatur will do much to further destigmatise this barbarity. However, like the legalization of drugs, government's embrace can only facilitate the practice, but not attenuate or ameliorate the physical, psychological, sociological damage wrought by indulgence.

Yes Hal, millions more will die as a result of this legislation and the sell-out 'pro-life' Democrats. Count on it.

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at April 10, 2010 5:16 PM


From the article:

Fichter adds that Democrats who wish to see a return of a bipartisan endorsement policy must work to change the party's platform on abortion and to change its party leadership. "The ball is in the Democratic Party's court," says Fichter. "As long as it continues to advance an abortion agenda, its candidates will not receive our support."


Really? You mean that Democrats won't receive support from people who are primarily Republicans until they adopt the Republican platform? Shocking.

Posted by: Penny Dreadful at April 11, 2010 11:12 AM


Isn't "Pro Life Democrat" an oxymoron (emphasis on "moron")?

Posted by: abortion pros and cons at April 11, 2010 3:39 PM


Hal,

In countries where the government decides to pay for abortions, the numbers of abortions increase between 15-25%.
Do the math.
Posted by: Gerard Nadal at April 10, 2010 5:16 PM

I was under the impression that the Government is not paying for abortion in the Health Care Bill.

Posted by: Hal at April 11, 2010 8:46 PM


Actually Hal, the government IS paying for abortions in the bill. Obama cut an illegal Executive Order to the contrary. Such an EO is utterly ineffective. It cannot reverse legislation, as any 12th grader knows. That was the energy behind the drama.

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at April 11, 2010 9:17 PM


I think what they done is called strong arm tactics. Another word is bully. I think Obama is a puppet. I had a feeling in my gut that he was lying about not including payment for abortions in his health care package. Wow this is my prayer that their evilness will abide with them and the harm that it would do to the innocent will affect them and no one else. This is providing that my understanding is correct, that abortion will be funded by the tax payers. It's almost like they want the democratic party to fail.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 11, 2010 10:39 PM


Wow it's almost like they want the democratic party to fail. I don't play cards but I think this is called overplaying their hand. I'm hoping we can get pro-life democrats to Washington if not the Republicans should be doing very well as they should if they have the courage to stand for the unborn.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 11, 2010 10:43 PM


Wow it's almost like they want the democratic party to fail. I think this is called overplaying their hand. I'm hoping we can get pro-life democrats to Washington if not the Republicans should be doing very well as they should if they have the courage to stand for the unborn.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 11, 2010 10:44 PM


Wow, is anyone really surprised? I'm not. I had a feeling in my gut that they were lying. They're assuming that people will agree with their decision. I think they will be very surprised when elections roll around. Hopefully the depth of betrayal that they have participated in will be made clear to the American people. I'm hoping the democrat they really betrayed writes a nice book.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 11, 2010 10:53 PM


Here's what I read. Hard to call this a major setback for pro lifers, or a major change in anything:


On the abortion issue, the new health care law tries to maintain a strict separation between taxpayer funds and private premiums that would pay for abortion coverage. No health plan will be required to offer coverage for the procedure. In plans that do cover abortion, beneficiaries will have to pay for it separately, and those funds would have to be kept in a separate account from taxpayer money.

Moreover, individual states would be able to prohibit abortion coverage in plans offered through a new purchasing exchange. Exceptions would be made for cases of rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother.

Abortion foes contend that the separation of funds is an accounting gimmick, and in reality taxpayers would be paying for abortion because health plans that cover abortion would be getting federal money.

Obama's executive order, the product of frenzied 11th-hour negotiations involving Stupak's group and members of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, orders federal officials to develop guidelines to carry out the segregation of private and public funds. The order also sets out a mechanism aiming to ensure that community health centers cannot use federal funds for abortions, another concern for the Stupak group.

The executive order did not win over anti-abortion activists or the powerful Catholic bishops, who said it would have no real effect, and it also drew criticism from abortion-rights groups.

Posted by: Hal at April 11, 2010 11:41 PM


Pro Life has had a fantastic year and a half since Obama got elected. Now it looks like we are drunk on success - and shooting ourselves in the feet because we didn't get everything we wanted. Wake up, folks. We lost the last national election. There are only about 35 truly pro life senators out of 100. Stupak & company got what they could. And while they may not deserve our praise, they certainly deserve our respect for trying as hard as they did. NONE of the anti abortion funding language would have appeared without them. We did NOT have the votes in EITHER chamber. Are you all this bad at math?
FOCA is DEAD because of people like Bart Stupak.

If you want to amputate one of our two legs, go ahead. We'll hop to another 40% of the vote. Go ahead and send pro life down into the depths of the extreme right wing of the republican party, aligning pro life with pro war and pro death penalty. Forget changing voter's minds in the middle. Forget the philosophical invasion of the democratic party and splitting them to our advantage. Forget the second front that Bart and his people opened up for us and withdraw from the beach head and leave them there alone on it for the other side to devour. You're even going to leave Dan Lipinski there, aren't you? And he voted 100% our way - as a democrat.

The Barbara Boxer's of the world hate Bart Stupak more than anyone. Join her if you wish. You are doing pro life a great disservice.

Posted by: Sean at April 12, 2010 3:43 PM


That's why it's good to know all the facts before one comments. I'm still praying Obama comes to his senses and becomes pro-life. If not I hope our next President is pro-life and pro-environment. I'm completely pro-life and the only time I feel a little sympathy for any of their arguments is when the life of the mom is at risk. And my solution is that if the life of the mom is truly at risk and this would be decided by a physician and the parents of the baby why not allow the baby to stay in the womb as long as it's safe and when it is no longer safe deliver the baby and try to save it's life. I think eventually there will be something that will be very close to the mom's womb. Which is just another sign of the disconnect we are going through as humans.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 12, 2010 6:53 PM


Sorry about the multiple posts. I'm a little challenged when it comes to computers!

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 12, 2010 7:43 PM


Myrtle, it's the site, not you :) I submit & then open another tab to check to see if it went through.

Posted by: klynn73 at April 12, 2010 7:53 PM


Thanks.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 12, 2010 9:05 PM


Pro-choice people like to play the sympathy card so why not pass legislation that abortionist would incur criminal and civil damages when they compromise the health of the mom through medical neglect. If pro-lifers really decided to work on some type of documentary interviewing people who have gone through abourtions this would let women know what abortion really consists of and it would raise public awareness. That would be real sympathy extended to moms who might not have the resources to fight for themselves.

Posted by: myrtle miller at April 13, 2010 5:41 PM


Just in case anyone doubts my or any independents dedication to the cause, here is the new web page that I uploaded today and designed myself. After a lot of help from some members of my group, naturally..

http://uvalies.org/peerdeath.html

Posted by: Sean at April 13, 2010 6:14 PM



Post a comment:




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Please enter the letter "j" in the field below: