printThe abortion fetish is just one of the distractions that damages the cause of freedom in the attempt to halt the hulking H.R.4872 Reconciliation Act of 2010.
FoxNews: “Pro-life Democrats have reached a deal with President Obama to ensure that no taxpayer money goes to abortion services, Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., who led Democratic lawmakers opposed to the Senate bill, said Sunday.”
Stupak made the announcement surrounded by a handful of Democratic lawmakers who had held out their “yes” votes on a massive health insurance overhaul set for a vote on Sunday over abortion. The swing appeared to give Democratic leaders enough votes to pass the 10-year, nearly $1 trillion legislation.
Only the brainless quibble about the correct constitutional position: abortion is to be regulated by states and individuals, not federales.
But conservadems and their Republican pals have managed to muddy the voice of freedom with their constant pules for fetuses (not their own), instead of standing on a refusal to raid coffers not theirs. Abortion is a side-issue, a mere distraction in the fight against the further bureaucratization of health care.
The Ann Coulter cohort continually instruct tea party goers to get behind this or the other Republican if he or she is for “prayer in schools, against abortion and gay marriage.”
Polls confirm what you and I know: freedom-minded individuals don’t give a tinker’s toss about these conservative fetishes.
Conservadems and damn Republicans still don’t get what the opposition to this Bill—and the Tea Party groundswell—is all about.
Incidentally, Bachmann is everything Palin is not.
Update (March 21): PELOSI PALOOZA. Pelosi says that a welfare program resembling Social Security and Medicare in size and significance further brings american society closer to the values espoused by the Founding Fathers and framers of the Constitution.
Not even historians to the regime will deny that the likes of John Locke (b. 1632, d. 1704), with his natural rights doctrine, were the inspiration for the American Founders. That bitch is such a colossal ignoramus.
The vote is in process. It has passed: 219 yeas to 212 nays.
Evidently Obama the Magnificent has issued an executive order preventing federal funding for abortions in his quest for votes. Given the man’s penchant for lying, what’s preventing him from rescinding his own order? His successors could also rescind it with a stroke of the pen. It has no force of law and is little more than the exercise of despotic power.
As you’ve said, the abortion issue is mere window dressing. The real outrage is Leviathan’s power grab. Dictating to every person what plan they may purchase, at what price, and under what conditions, has no constitutional backing.
One can only hope that the fallout from this outrage will be a serious reshuffling of Congress in November. There are hundreds of politicians that desperately need to get pink slips, Pelosi and Reid among them.
Ilana, Ilana, Ilana
But conservadems and their Republican pals have managed to muddy the voice of freedom with their constant pules for fetuses (not their own), ????
I’ve read comments from numerous sources where girls are chatting about how many abortions they’ve had. There are abortion clinics in just about every community, and that tells me that there’s a deep pocket somewhere. And there’s only one deep, deep pocket we all know about. I don’t have the power to find out what government program pays for abortion but I’m sure it exists and this whole thing is a farce. “Oh but I insured the ‘right to life.’ so all you ‘right to lifers’ vote for me.” Which translates to “Sure I shut the door and turned on the gas, but I was just following orders.” Well, there are a few states that are pushing nullification and the tenth amendment, maybe…
So, our Congress and President are “pro-life”, eh? Well, my boss’ half-kidney is going kaput and since it is ILLEGAL for even to even sell the kidney of a deceased person, there is a shortage. (Simple economics means: no price = no kidney). So if my boss dies from a lack of an available kidney, how is that pro-life?
And what about people who have treatments denied or delayed by a government that has to manage costs? What about physician shortages that usually occur when prices are rationed as in the UK and Canada? What about drugs and medical procedures that are disallowed by bureaucrats – and the victims of those decisions?
This bill simultaneously (1) increases the American subjects’ (citizen is a term referring to free people – subjects are more appropriate these days) reliance on the government AND (2) increases the perilous financial state of that same provider-government. These effects will likely result in a greater health catastrophe.
However, our Republican “allies” (with a few exceptions) have no principles except the acquisition of power. They are merely positioning themselves politically to gain from any political fallout over the next few years.
I have no words. I simply have a feeling not of disgust, but of great loss and a revocation of hope.
Amnesty’s next, folks.
If you haven’t already, now’s a good time to make sure your household has a good musket, 60 rounds powder and ball, hatchet, and all that.
Pro-Lifers concerns on matters of life/abortion are hardly a fetish. It’s true pro-lifers seem sometimes too willing to acquiesce to any manner of mischief (or worse) so long as that mischief doesn’t include abortion, the present case a case in point. Yet voting for or against any bill depending on its provisions for moral conscience in the matter of abortion is not a small thing, let alone a fetish.
Ron Paul states that in addition to being unconstitutional, it will add thousands more to the federal payroll and kill approximately five million private sector jobs; just what we need in what looks to be a long term recession.
http://www.house.gov/htbin/blog_inc?BLOG,tx14_paul,blog,999,All,Item%20not%20found,ID=100322_3678,TEMPLATE=postingdetail.shtml
Thanks once again for operating one of the few web sites that publishes Congressional bill numbers. Brainless is indeed a good description of people more fearful of federally funded abortion than of the federal government’s unlimited power and scope.
A “tinker’s toss” about abortion?? I’m troubled that you could be so glib about an innocent life. While I would prefer if abortion was a state issue (it would reduce the number and force politicans to show their cards), the reason is not ultimately some paean to “liberty” or “reason” but God’s Law. Even ultra-intelligent classical liberals need their sins forgiven!
George Pal Writes:
“Pro-Lifers concerns on matters of life/abortion are hardly a fetish. It’s true pro-lifers seem sometimes too willing to acquiesce to any manner of mischief (or worse) so long as that mischief doesn’t include abortion, the present case a case in point.”
Yes, I would agree entirely. The difficulty for me was that they were suspicious of federal funding of the practice and using this as a smoke screen for the entire over-haul — talk about missing the forest for the tree. I suspect Ilana was mildly irritated and was not really condemning her own reader’s fetish against the practice.