Stupak: Democrats will never regain majority without pro-lifers
“We will never get to be a majority again unless we have pro-life Democrats,” argued former Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, who retired in 2010 and is on the board of Democrats for Life.
Thirty-five years ago when the Democrats enjoyed a 292-seat majority in the House, there were 125 anti-abortion Democrats – including a young Rep. Al Gore of Tennessee. Now there are only 17 anti-abortion Democrats and districts such as Gore’s are now represented by anti-abortion Republicans.
~ NBC News, “Anti-abortion Democrats struggle to be heard at Charlotte convention,” September 5
[Photo via NBC]
Sep.06, 2012 8:20 am |
Health care |
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.
Not gonna happen. In today Democrat party, it is politcal suicide to be pro-life. The message is clear: no room for you pro-lifers, and no room for those dam&%# babies.
Coming from Stupak, who had the opportunity to do the right thing, to stand on principle for life, this is complete nonsense.
He has proven, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. I acknowledge there are people who still struggle to resolve Pro-life issues with the Democrat majority, but I truly believe they would be better off switching parties, because pro-aborts are delusional.
I recently spoke with a RI Senate Democrat candidate who personally came to my door. I noticed, he didn’t visit my Democratic neighbors, so the visit was very targeted. He claimed he was “pro-life”, but when pushed, he countered he would never introduce pro-life legislation because his party would just shut it down, and ignore him thereafter.
Oh yes – that’s what I want, someone without the cajones to actually represent his constituents over the leanings of party leadership. Even with a pro-life district, he won’t represent them in committee, and only on the floor if he feels safe and secure. Wow – a jellyfish has a stronger spine.
I think Chris Christie got it right – Stupak and that candidate really don’t understand the differences between love and respect. People want to be loved, go along to get along. In the end, there’s absolutely no respect from others when you desire love, but don’t demand respect.
The sooner the Democrats for Life learn that lesson, the better for them.
The article says Stupak is going through major buyer’s remorse over the HHS mandate, claiming that it violates the EO and is essentially illegal. …Which is precisely what pro-lifers told him would happen when we warned him not to vote for Obamacare. I have no sympathy for this man whatsoever.
That being said, he is correct otherwise. If the Dems don’t get more pro-life candidates into their races, they’re going to keep getting flattened in elections. Not changing this plank is a guarantee of long, slow party suicide.
The Democrats for Life should switch political parties.
Mods, you gotta clean up in aisle 6 at 9:33.
Tyler, I registered Dem when I was younger and still haven’t made the switch. I don’t agree with the Republicans on a lot of things and I’m not joining them for a single issue. However, I often do vote for Republican candidates or issues I do agree with that they support. They stink on immigration, for example.
Tom, are you another personality inhabiting the body with Charles and Marvin? You should really have that Tourette Syndrome checked out, buddy. They make stuff you can take for it. (HINT: Crack only exacerbates the problem!)
Charles/Tom/Fay/Bobbi/Harry/Verna:
Please pick one name and stick with it. Thank you.
Here is a quote from the linked NBC article:
Jurgelski said she knows there are anti-abortion Democrats and wouldn’t mind an official acknowledgement of the diversity of views within the party. But “the problem with the very, very pro-life (movement) – especially the extreme of it – is that in some cases they will sacrifice the life of the mother for the fetus [emphasis is my own] and I think that’s wrong. And I’m glad there are limits over the term in which abortion can be performed.”
These people blatantly lie about the prolife position. I have never heard a prolife say they would sacrifice the life of the mother for the child.
Silly trolls, like we’re going to take anyone seriously when they can’t even figure out their own name.
ninek – what issues could be more pressing than life issues? If you had to choose between a pro-life republican vs. a pro-abort democrat who would you choose?
I don’t like the Democrats because they force their supporters to choose who they should help – the elderly, women, the sick, or the preborn? And since they place such an emphasis on the government doing the helping they completely mislead the American public by making the public feel that they have alleviated their requirement to help their neighbour as soon as they left the ballot box. The Democrats take credit for anything and everything good that happens in the economy and they never accept responsibility for anything that goes wrong. If you can find me a Democrat who has ever admitted to making a mistake on economic issues I would appreciate it.
Another, more subtle, problem with the positions of the Democrats is their lack of support for the principle of subsidiarity. To me, this principle is linked to the idea of liberty. If liberty and subsidiarity are too be valued we should also recognize that there may be some costs to our lives, in particular a loss of convenience. Just becuase the government can start/fund a good program doesn’t mean they should also run it. For example, why is the government forcing Catholic adoption agencies out of business? Answer: the Democratic government doesn’t agree with their values. The Democratic party has crossed the line, they have now decided being despotic is morally acceptable.
I apologize for ranting.
ninek, on the issue of immigration they don’t stink – they want to uphold the rule of law. Why is it okay for some immigrants to jump to the front of the citizenship line? To me, illegal immigrants are cheaters. I can’t approve of their actions. I would like to help immigrants but recognize that is not possible, so rules and laws are made so that every immigrant has a fair shot at becoming American citizens.
I find it hypocritical that Democrats recoil from the idea of deporting illegal immigrants, but are perfectly ok with deporting the preborn out of its womb – the only place the preborn child has ever known.
ninek,
I’m half-Mexican. My great grandmother had her green card. Her husband started out here illegally. They both eventually were able to do the right thing through hard work and a great deal of effort and become legal citizens of the United States. I assure you there is nothing wrong with wanting immigration reform.
Quote from the NBC article:
And Democratic anti-abortion activists contend that Mitt Romney would be a worse president on protecting unborn life than Obama has been.
Stephen Schneck of Catholic University in Washington told the gathering that “the number of abortions will skyrocket” if Medicaid spending is cut, which would be one likely outcome of adopting the budget plan of the GOP vice presidential candidate, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan.
“Can a pro-life voter vote for Romney if it means a 6 or 7 or, God forbid, an 8 percent increase in the number of abortions in America?” Schneck asked.
What a joke. But at least I now know how pro-lifers can stay with the Democrats. They’re delusional.
Revision:
I would like to help all immigrants but recognize that it is not possible, so rules and laws are made so that every immigrant has a fair shot at becoming American citizens.
Addendum:
I am pro-immigration just not pro-illegal immigration. The GOP is also pro-immigration.
Watching the D&C last night I couldn’t help but look at the crowd as two separate groups: 1) the generation born prior to Roe v. Wade, and 2) the generation born post Roe. When I saw people of the generation born prior to Roe I thought this is a group of unappreciative grownn zygotes. When I saw those of the second post Roe group I thought where are their friends? It was hard not to throw-up. Neither group understood how lucky and fortunate they were to be alive and at the D&C. Neither group understood that the Mom of today doesn’t force her religion or political views on her children anymore, rather she decides, on your behalf, if you will even continue to exist. And the radical feminists say men have control issues.
Hi JDC, 10:30am
….or their own gender either!
Well Bart, you made the decision to sit at the Devil’s table, expecting honorable behavior in return. You trusted a sociopath and paid. You were used and manipulated by Obama, who I assure you loses no sleep over your fate, or that of any other “blue dogs” who served his purpose and lost their seats. You were forced into retirement and disgrace. What a brutal life lesson. You were a man I once respected.
Maybe you can take some comfort Bart in knowing its a story as old as the human race.
Sorry Bart, but it ain’t 1976 anymore. The era of pro-life clout in the Democratic party is over. Claiming that the Democratic party needs pro-lifers is like preaching the virtues of VHS or floppy disks.
I watched Stupak’s cave live on the internet back in 2010. I watched as he huffily claimed that the Democratic party was better for unborn babies than the Republican party. Since that moment, I’ve known exactly what it looks like to see someone who has just lost his soul.
Jonathan Cohn pinpoints Clinton’s strongest arguments:
Hal – long way from home and way off topic…Mars maybe? (joining Chris Matthews?)
Perhaps too much adulation or maybe you become One with the Clinton organism last night?
Glad you enjoyed it, Hal. I thought it was a nice change from the “phr33 birth control pl0x” chick.
Don’t assume because it makes a you-know-what out of you and me. “Stinks” can be interpreted a lot of ways and I haven’t given you much to go on yet.
I resent the idea that there are only two to choose from, as if there was only one of two rooms I could stand in. That also stinks. Obviously the discontent within both parties is being ignored by.. both parties. The enemy of my enemy isn’t always my friend. The friend with whom I passionately disagree isn’t always my enemy. Both parties are wings of the same bird, and I don’t envision that bird as our national symbol, the eagle. I think that bird resembles more a greedy seagull that won’t let me eat my fries in peace!! We do the best we can at the voting booth, but I hate to break this to ya: Politicians aren’t going to save the world.
Hal: So Obama’s “coming back for more” with Boehner was somehow a Republican failure to compromise? They had an agreement (cue Tevye and Lazar Wolf). A huge, important one. And Obama blew it.
Laughter at Cohn’s assertion would be the only thing keeping folks from saying it with a straight face.
Wow, I got a few likes from that. Sometime, I’ll put my thoughts on immigration into a nice articulate statement. For now, suffice to say niether party matches my own ideas. My great great grandma’s name is on a plaque on Ellis Island. Grandpa came over as a boy with his dad and literally the clothes on their back. I get it.
But you know who doesn’t get it? Two political parties that think they can keep using and abusing their constituents. There was a time when “third party” was considered impossible. Today, maybe not so much. If I’m this dissatisfied with both wings, I know I can’t be alone.
I will never compromise on the backs of thrown away children. Never ever ever.
Maybe if we call these multi-named trolls “Rumplestiltskin” they’ll go away.
“I’m half-Mexican. My great grandmother had her green card. Her husband started out here illegally. They both eventually were able to do the right thing through hard work and a great deal of effort and become legal citizens of the United States. I assure you there is nothing wrong with wanting immigration reform.”
My mom’s family were all middle class refugees getting out of Cuba after Castro took over. I agree that there isn’t anything wrong with wanting immigration reform, but I strongly dislike most of what I see from the GOP on the issue. To be fair, the Dems aren’t all that much better.
Jack,
I don’t see anyone in the GOP sending anything but hearts and flowers to Marco Rubio and Susana Martinez.
Legal immigration, si. Illegal immigration, non (spelling?).
“no” is “no”, en ingles Y espanol. ;)
Espańol es una gran lengua!
Lol, oh Rubio. I’m not the biggest fan of him tbh. The thing that irritates me about some of my fellow Cuban Americans is that as a group we had a much, much easier time legally getting here compared to other Latin immigrants. For a few decades all a Cuban had to do was show up. ;) That’s what my family did in the sixties. But as a whole the Cuban Americans don’t acknowledge that we had it quite a bit easier.
My immigration views line up fairly well with Gary Johnson’s, if you’re curious Hans.
Bart Stupak’s prognostications are laughable. It’s not the Democratic Party that has been losing ground as a result of its stance on social issues. Not even two decades ago, Republicans were competitive on the west coast, the upper midwest, and the northeast. Today, it would be unthinkable for a Republican presidential candidate to win California, Minnesota, New York, New Jersey, etc.
Jack, what exactly do you see in the Republican ideas that you strongly dislike?
“Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak… is on the board of Democrats for Life.”
Thanks for the warning and whats the name of the other ‘democRAT for life’?
What do I despise? Laws like Arizona’s, for one. Deporting people who were brought here as children illegally is wrong, in my opinion. I support making legal immigration, especially from Latin America, easier. Gary Johnson’s views on immigration are good, I can’t find much to disagree with there.
Tyler says: September 6, 2012 at 10:06 am
‘The Democrats for Life should switch political parties.’
oh, no, no, no.
They should start a ‘democrats for life’ party.
Mary,
I love you and I respect you, but you are being too kind by at least half.
Stupak whored himself out.
You can’t be sleeping with rats without discovering very quickly they have no sense of honor and they eat their young.
Mexico’s immigration laws are tougher than the USA’s and enforced more aggressively.
They deport the undocumented immigrants who survive their stays in Mexican jails and prisons.
There are probably more undocumented/illegal Mexican nationals in the USA than from all the other countries combined.
I am sure there are a lot of legal/documented aliens and U.S. who would like to have the jobs the illegal/undocumented aliens are doing.
The single largest export from Mexico to the USA is illega/undocumented aliens.
The single largest export from the USA to Mexico is U.S. dollars.
That is trade imbalance that don’t make no dollars and cents/sense.
You just have to talk to the ‘legal’ immigrants from the other nations to understand how frustrating it is to them.
“I am sure there are a lot of legal/documented aliens and U.S. who would like to have the jobs the illegal/undocumented aliens are doing.”
Yeah, that’s why food rotted in Alabama’s fields last year and farmers are scaling back their planting this year.
washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/13/alabama-farmers-cut-crops/
x,
“no” is “no”, en ingles Y espanol.
Merci. And tack.
“….or their own gender either!”
Hi Mary. Look, we all knew that pro-choicers are bad at biology, but this is pretty extreme! Who cares about their opinions on when life begins if they can’t sort out the details of their own lives?
Here is an open question for any honest and brave prolife Democrat supporter:
What is the issue or what are the group of issues that would make someone vote for a pro-abortion Democrat over a pro-life Republican?
IMO, no issue, or group of issues, is more important than protecting the preborn.
I would truly like to understand the thought process that would allow a person to vote for a pro-abortion Democrat politician.