E-Mail 'Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI): A principled pro-life Congressional Democrat' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI): A principled pro-life Congressional Democrat' to a friend

Loading ...

18 Responses to "Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI): A principled pro-life Congressional Democrat"

Great White Rat says:

March 12, 2010 at 7:55 pm

Many pro-abortionists often talk about the “financial burden” having a baby may put on the mother, but they also imply a financial burden to the state as well,

Yup, it’s about the money. Which is why Sarah Palin is exactly right when she talks about “death panels”.

If this monstrosity of a bill passes, how long do you think it will take before the left-wing statists start to use the argument that denying care to the elderly or the very sick will reduce costs? Look at Pelosi’s argument:

Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs.

Replace “family planning” with “palliative care” in that sentence and you have an argument for giving people pain pills instead of curing their diseases, and for denying care to the chronically ill.

And don’t let the liberals hand you the line that it couldn’t possibly happen. Hubert Humphrey once stood on the floor of the Senate and declared the the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not lead to affirmative action or quotas. We know how that turned out. Given power, statists will always expand it to whatever extremes they can manage.
NukeRidingCowboy says:

March 12, 2010 at 9:26 pm

I’m sympathetic to Allahpundit’s skepticism, but I don’t know. His skepticism is based on an analysis of what would be rational from the Democrats’ perspective. I’m not at all surprised they would think this way, but given their ambition to pass this thing, he’s right it wouldn’t make sense for them to try to use that point to persuade Stupak or even admit to him that’s how they think. Your point about liberals saying things like this all along is well taken, but given the current situation and their current goals, it’s pretty irrational. On the other hand, it’s probably unwise to attribute too much rationality to characters like Henry Waxman.
Kim Priestap’s Political Insights » Get ready. The Democrats are going to Slaughter Democracy says:

March 12, 2010 at 10:12 pm

[…] has to spend more money. If you refuse to believe that Democrats told Stupak this, check out Sister Toldjah’s post here. She provides example after example of liberals who have used cost savings for society and […]
Tex says:

March 13, 2010 at 12:55 am

Pelosi’s statement to Stephanopoulos:

Food stamps, unemployment insurance, some of the initiatives you just mentioned. what the economists have told us from right to left. There is more bang for the buck, a term they use, by investing in food stamps and in unemployment insurance than in any tax cut.

My God! The woman must have fried her brain on mushrooms AND/OR she slipped through to our universe from some alternate universe AND/OR she suffers from pathological liar syndrome!
Carlos says:

March 13, 2010 at 3:13 am

So, it’s the government’s responsibility to steal my money to pay for somebody’s abortion because they’re too stupid to know what causes babies to begin with, or to stupid to use precautions beforehand?

People have a right to be stupid, but that’s not a god-given, constitutional right that has to be forced upon the rest of us. Funding for their stupidity is theft, pure and simple, and the women who use my stolen money may not be crying all the way to the bank but I know the baby killers are laughing all the way.
"Stupak: Dems Told Me Funding Abortion Is Good, Because Kids Are Costly" and related posts says:

March 13, 2010 at 5:02 am

[…] Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI): A principled pro-life Congressional Democrat – Sister Toldjah […]
Bob G says:

March 13, 2010 at 9:03 am

This is all just political theater. Stupak’s vaunted scruples do not extend to being against paying off big campaign contributors (unions, public employees) by exempting them from taxes and making the rest of us pay their bills. His scruples don’t extend to the senatorial pay offs; letting some states pay for others under the bills; or the unconstitutional requirement to buy health insurance. I really believe that Stupak and the other honest pols realized that they should be included in the rewards for pretending to be against the bill. When his price is met, he will discover he really didn’t care that much about abortion after all.
Thank You Saturday Link Fest « The Daley Gator says:

March 13, 2010 at 11:07 am

[…] Sister Toldjah, who I have a gigantic crush on, recognizes a principled Democrat […]
Paul says:

March 13, 2010 at 2:43 pm

Spend, spend, spend until the golden goose dies of exhaustion! We are on the rate to becoing a second world nation if something doesn’t change. Our government is a voracious monolith that sucks the marrow from the people’s bones.
Paul says:

March 13, 2010 at 2:44 pm

Excuse typos-I am a terrible typist…
John Burton says:

March 13, 2010 at 8:53 pm

Stupak, and many others, seem deeply confused about the health care bills. There is no funding for abortions in the bills. Maybe this will give you a better understanding on how health care reform can actually reduce the number of abortions.

LINK
Tom the Redhunter says:

March 13, 2010 at 9:57 pm

Indeed the idea of justifying abortion on the basis that it somehow saves money is Orwellian, that or Brave New Worldish, choose your negative utopian analogy.

Unfortunately, I’ve also heard some conservatives justify the death penalty with the same logic; that it’s cheaper to execute someone than keep them in prison for another x number of years.

That said, you hear a lot of the former these days and not much of the latter. There were 1.37 million abortions in the U.S. each year, and 52 executions. The death penalty is on it’s way out, but the abortion industry grinds on.

Either way, it’s wrong.
Sister Toldjah says:

March 14, 2010 at 9:56 am

Um, no John – it’s you who are confused. Your opinion piece, which contains data that is highly suspect BTW, asserts that “universal health care” causes the abortion rate to go down, not that there is “no funding” in ObamaCare for abortion.

Nice try, though.
Carlos says:

March 14, 2010 at 10:34 am

The leftists so enamored of our man-child president have been complaining for months that we on the right have been “mischaracterizing” the “health care” bill (a misnomer if ever there was one), but that’s simply another case of projection.

Obviously, since the bill can’t stand on its own merits, the leftists (like Mr. Burton above) are mischaracterizing what the bill will and won’t do, when in fact the sole purpose of the entire piece of slime is for the government to take control of that entire segment of our economy.

They just don’t have the stones to stand up and tell the truth, so they obfuscate, pandering to the fears of the masses, and hope no one will notice their naked power grab.

Does the health care delivery system need an overhaul? of course it does. But having a government (whose track record of successfully running anything anywhere except into the ground and into horrendous debt) take over ANY business, large or small, just doesn’t make a lick of sense to anyone but the willingly blind or wickedly cunning.
Great White Rat says:

March 14, 2010 at 2:47 pm

John Burton bleats:

There is no funding for abortions in the bills.

Then you and Speaker Pelosi disagree. You might try re-reading her quote above, then get back to us.

Besides that, the opinion piece you cite does a miserable job of defending its thesis, which is that federal takeover of health care will reduce abortions. And the reason is – don’t laugh – that once the government is in charge of our health care, the costs will be controlled so much better:

One key reason seems to be that all those countries provide health care for everybody at a reasonable cost.

(Dammit Carlos, I asked you not to laugh!)

Sure. Because we all know the government does such a fantabulous job of controlling the costs of Medicare. And Social Security. And the subprime mortgage market. And every other scheme the left has foisted on us over the past decades.

If the author’s blind faith in efficient and benevolent bureaucracies were not warning signs enough of a mind disconnected from reality, he ignores several other factors that bear on the issue:

First, it is an economic axiom that if you give something away for free, demand for it grows. Having the Feds run the local Planned Parenthood clinic is not going to cause people to suddenly refrain from abortions. Look at last year’s Cash for Clunkers plan. Government subsidies for buying cars caused an massive uptick in purchases. Only a liberal would have been surprised. And predictably, they were.

Second, his comparison of abortion rates with other countries ignores demographic differences. For example, the abortion rate among African-Americans is extremely high and skews the statistics. Factors like that do not affect countries with less diverse populations.

There are other fallacies here, but you get my drift. Anyway, thanks for playing, and we have some lovely parting gifts for you on the way back to your own planet….
Carlos says:

March 14, 2010 at 7:55 pm

GWR, I would’ve replied half an hour ago but I couldn’t get up off the floor for laughing so hard. But thanks.

The one thing the government does best is the military, but even it is subject to massive wastes and massive screw-ups.

And government operation of ANYTHING goes downhill from there at lightspeed. If there wasn’t jail time involved I probably wouldn’t pay my taxes, not because I don’t like paying taxes but because I know 90% of what I pay goes to massive fraud, theft by deception and just pure theft, mostly by bureaucrats that feel their jobs are an entitlement and we regular citizens are more of a pain in the patootie than anything else (besides a cash cow).

The other 10%? Uhhh, who knows? But I do know the Ponzi schemes known as Social Security and Medicare are going to come crashing down on EVERYONE’S head in the not-too-distant future because no one in Congress has the stones to stand up and call previous congresses and bureaucrats thieves and liars.

And at that point, my fear isn’t that the country can’t recover, but that some smooth-talking sleezebucket, say from Chicago or somewhere, will sing siren songs into the ears of gullible voters incapable of figuring out they’re in the process of getting screwed again, and will take over the government lock, stock and fish-tail and make Duh-1 look like a piker. Fearful people do crazy things.
Carlos says:

March 15, 2010 at 12:21 am

Oh, a final comment here, GWR: a “reasonable cost” to me is probably not the same as “a reasonable cost” is to you, and I know darned good and well a “reasonable cost” to me ain’t even in the same universe as it is to the one who wishes to steal my money to pay for his pipe dream, let alone Mr. Burton.

Bottom line is, it’s always been easier to spend someone else’ money than one’s own, and our elected representatives in both houses of Congress are getting to be masters of it. After they steal it to begin with.
Bachbone says:

March 15, 2010 at 4:07 pm

Rep. Stupak assured me that he would not vote for the House Bill, too, but he found “reasons” to flip-flop and voted for it at the last moment. (I told him the Senate would screw him, or if it didn’t Obama & Co. would. I reminded him, once again, of my warning a few days ago.) Stupak has a 90% ADA voting record. His mailings to constituents are filled with references to complaints from “employers” who notify him they can’t afford higher health insurance bills. In the end, if Pelosi needs his vote, he will flip-flop again and support her, then claim he was lied to, brainwashed, hornswoggled or whatever he needs to say to justify the flip-flop. He’s a leftist first and foremost, not a pro-lifer first and foremost.

Comments are closed.