Did She Really Want To Go There?
Apr 8, 2011 Political
Delegate Eleanor Holmes of DC is outraged at the way DC is being treated in the budget process. She is so upset that the federal government is telling DC what to do with its money in regard to paying for abortions.
It’s time that the District of Columbia told the Congress to go straight to hell, Norton continued after explaining how an attached rider to the latest bill prevented D.C. from spending its own money on abortions for low income women. My FOX
We don’t need to get into the whole DC is not a state and falls under the federal government. Explaining the Constitution to liberals is a waste of time.
But what we do need to ask is why Norton chose these words to describe the process:
We are absolutely outraged. This is the functional equivalent of bombing innocent civilians. [same source]
A budget process that stops funding the murder of innocent life is like carpet bombing innocent civilians. Is she serious about this? Did she intend to equate the budget process to the killing of innocent civilians in order to justify the murder of innocent life?
Delegate Moron, the murder of innocent life is the functional equivalent of bombing innocent civilians.
Perhaps those cutting funding should have made that argument. Imagine how Holmes would be reacting of some politician said that allowing tax dollars to pay for abortion is the functional equivalent of bombing innocent civilians.
I bet Holmes would be apoplectic.
Liberals, fighting for the murder of the unborn each and every day…
And yes, please, fund our abortions but don’t pay the troops.
I hate liberals.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: abortion, bombing, eleanor holmes, lies
This Is The Model For Obamacare
Jul 26, 2010 Political
Barack Obama and his Democrats lied, cheated and stole to get the health care takeover bill passed and signed into law. There were bribes to members of Congress which means that taxpayer money was used to bribe members of Congress to vote for something that a majority of Americans opposed. There were the lies about federal funding of abortion. Bart Stupak abandoned his principles and voted for the bill because Obama assured him federal funds would not be used for abortion. Obama even signed an Executive Order. That order has been promptly ignored as two states, Pennsylvania and Maryland, have already established the high risk pools required under Obamacare and those pools will pay for abortions with federal money. To make it clear, those states will pay for elective abortions. This is specifically what the EO was supposed to prevent. As an aside, New Mexico had the abortion option in place but it has been removed because of the fuss over the issue.
The Democrats, despite the folly of their health care plan, promise us it will be cost effective and will not result in rationed care. They promised us we would be able to keep our doctors and that we would have choices. They wanted us to look at the model of health care, the NHS in Britain. Obama’s head health care guy has praised this system. And what has this wonderful system done?
It has taken steps to begin rationing care. Even the most basic and routine services including hip replacements will be rationed. Terminally ill patients will have to fend for themselves should they have problems on nights and weekends. Like Obama said, just send granny home with pain pills.
Suck it up granny!
Here are a few items being reported about the NHS (the dream of the Obama regime):
- Restrictions on some of the most basic and common operations, including hip and knee replacements, cataract surgery and orthodontic procedures.
- Plans to cut hundreds of thousands of pounds from budgets for the terminally ill, with dying cancer patients to be told to manage their own symptoms if their condition worsens at evenings or weekends.
- The closure of nursing homes for the elderly.
- A reduction in acute hospital beds, including those for the mentally ill, with targets to discourage GPs from sending patients to hospitals and reduce the number of people using accident and emergency departments.
- Tighter rationing of NHS funding for IVF treatment, and for surgery for obesity.
- Thousands of job losses at NHS hospitals, including 500 staff to go at a trust where cancer patients recently suffered delays in diagnosis and treatment because of staff shortages.
- Cost-cutting programmes in paediatric and maternity services, care of the elderly and services that provide respite breaks to long-term carers.
Ironically, the cuts were found in obscure appendices of policy and strategy documents. It is ironic because there are tons of things hidden in the US health care takeover law. Hell, a lot of it does not even deal with health care as the bill addresses reporting the purchase or sale of silver and gold. That is not an isolated thing.
Yes, the Obamacare model in England is falling apart but Obama and his sock puppets are working feverishly to impose these things on us because they want to take control of our lives. It is not about health and it is not about care, it is about control. They want to control us and taking over the health care system is one thing that must be done to control us. They also need to take over the financial sector (which they have just done) and they need to take over the news media which they are working on.
Once the Socialists have taken over these things they will clamp down on us and our lives. They will tell us what to eat, how much to weigh, what we may abuse (alcohol, tobacco etc) and how much, and they will tell us whether or not we can get certain things done.
And millions more will become dependent on government thereby increasing the dependent class from the social welfare recipients to the social medicine recipients. Better be good little peons or Obama will not let your momma get a new hip…
They might think they are in charge but they should remember John Q.
My family will never do without proper health care because of rationing as long as I can be there. Should any member of my family die or suffer harm because of denial of care (of course in my absence) then the world will lose the health care provider who decided not to render treatment . Any bureaucrat involved in the decision will likely never make such a decision again. Obamacare will ration care to the detriment of those involved including those who voted for him. People will not tolerate this.
Obama once said he was the only one standing between the bankers and the people with pitchforks. Once his health care takeover begins I doubt there will be anyone to stand between Obama and the people with pitchforks.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
No True Pro-Life Democrats And None With Principles
Mar 22, 2010 Political
Bart Stupak and his cohorts who claimed to be pro-life are nothing more than typical Democrats who put party before principle. Stupak pushed for anti abortion language in the original House bill and he vowed not to vote for the Senate Bill unless language was added that would take away the funding for abortion. By mid-afternoon today he had changed his mind and decided to vote yes.
Did he do it because language had been added to the “fix-it” bill? Did he do it because one of his eight proposals was adopted?
No, he did it because Barack Obama promised to sign an Executive Order spelling out what is and what is not allowed. Stupak gave his yes vote for a promise that Obama would sign a piece of paper that cannot change a law (if there is a court battle the law will win) and that can be rescinded at any time by Obama or future presidents. Stupak became a Dupe-Hack. And he demonstrated that there is no way for one to actually be pro-life and be a Democrat. When push came to shove the Democrat shined through and the so called principled position took a back seat. As Phyllis Schlafly wrote:
“It is naive for any elected official, especially one who describes himself as ‘pro-life,’ to expect that a promise to issue an Executive Order that reasserts the intentions of the Hyde Amendment will be fulfilled by the most pro-abortion president to ever sit in the White House. Perhaps Mr. Stupak and his fellow pro-life Democrats forget that President Obama’s first Executive Order was the repeal of the Mexico City Policy to allow for international funding of abortion.”
“Not only would an Executive Order be rendered meaningless in the face of Congress passing legislation which actively provides for the massive expansion and funding of abortion services, but anyone who doubts the abortion tsunami which awaits this bill becoming law lives in a fantasy world.”
~snip~
“Mr. Stupak and his Democrat followers have now clarified that you cannot be pro-life and be a Democrat. If abortion was truly their biggest issue, they wouldn’t willfully align themselves with the Party of Death.”
“This vote will expose the myth of the ‘pro-life Democrat.’ With this single vote, the Democratic Party will divide our nation into the Party of Death and the Party of Life, and future elections will never be the same.” Yahoo News
There is no doubt, barring a miracle like a sink hole swallowing the Capitol, that this will pass in the House. I have a feeling that the Senate version of the bill will not only be signed into law but will remain the law minus the so called “reconciliation fixes” because many items in the bill are not budget items and will be struck down. Democrats do not have the votes to over rule the motion to remove the items in question. In fact, the entire reconciliation bill might end up being tossed because it contains items dealing with Social Security and reconciliation bills cannot contain any SS items in them.
Republicans have been trying to discuss this with Senate Democrats but they are all out of reach. Republicans claim that the Senate Democrats are slow walking in order to have the House vote on the Senate bill first so that their bill will become the law of the land.
I do not like this entire mess and I know it will further divide our country while bankrupting us despite what liberals claim. They do not know what they are talking about and see things through the intoxication of Kool Aid and some really good weed.
I do think though, that it would be absolutely hysterical if the Senate bill passes and they cannot deliver on reconciliation like Reid promised. Many Democrats will be unhappy and left hanging in the wind.
Now that will be funny. At least we can all laugh while on the road to ruin.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Obama Can’t Blame It On Congress
Feb 23, 2010 Political
Barack Obama told America that his health care plan will not pay for abortions. He specifically said ““no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.” His words on this and illegal immigrants prompted Joe Wilson to shout “you lie.”
When Obama said this it was a lie. The House bill allowed federal dollars to be used for abortion but when asked about this later, Obama’s people said that Obama did not have control over what Congress was writing. In other words, he did not write it in, Congress did. If it had passed, Obama would have signed it regardless of what he said about federal dollars being used.
Obama has released his own plan ahead of the faux summit he will have with Republicans this week. Obama wants bipartisan support but he has written what he wants. His idea of bipartisan is when the Republicans give in to what he wants.
Interestingly, the bill Obama has put together, a clever move to take away the claim that deals were made in back rooms, will allow federal dollars to pay for abortion. Obama cannot run and hide from this one because, despite what he said about not using federal dollars for abortions, he has included them and federal dollars will pay for them. Obama an his lackeys cannot claim it was Congress because the sainted one himself included the provision in the bill he put together, one that is very close to the Senate bill.
“If all of the President’s changes were made, the resulting legislation would allow direct federal funding of abortion-on-demand through community health centers, would institute federal subsidies for private health plans that cover abortion-on-demand, including some federally administered plans, and would authorize federal mandates that would require even non-subsidized private plans to cover elective abortion,” Douglas said.
~snip~
“Every time President Obama’s spokesmen are asked about the Senate health care bill that authorizes federal funds for abortion, they reply that none of the bills put forth are the president’s own,” Donohue said. “Moreover, the president has said that he would never sign a health care bill that funds abortion.”
“While it is true that the pro-abortion camp will not be happy with the president for not striking some restrictions it deplores, the fact remains that President Obama could have adopted the pro-life friendly language of the House bill,” Donohue said. “The fact that he didn’t is what matters most.” CNS News
Obama is a liar and he will do whatever it takes to get his agenda through. Reconciliation is next where only 51 Senators are needed to pass a bill. This is an end around and designed to thwart the will of the people and the procedures of the Senate.
I predict that Obama will lose the votes he needs in the House because the Democrats who voted against it the first time will not support this plan and many more Democrats who are worried about their reelection bids in November will likely not support it out of the desire for self preservation.
If by chance it passes through the reconciliation process then the Democrats will lose control of the House and Senate and will likely not regain it for the next decade.
Americans do not like to be screwed and the Obama administration and his sock puppets in Congress are bending us over.
On the issue of abortion and federal funding it looks like the only person who told the truth is Joe Wilson who hit the nail on the head when he called out the liar in chief.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: abortion, federal dollars, joe wilson, lies, Obama, you lie
A Woman’s Right To Choose
Jan 27, 2010 Political
Stay out of my uterus is one of the slogans the pro murder crowd likes to use. A woman’s body is her own and she can do with it what she wants. She has a right to privacy. Teen aged girls should be allowed to get abortions without their parents knowing about it. It is a woman’s right to choose.
Should she choose life like Sarah Palin did then she is excoriated.
But there are conflicting messages coming from the groups that advocate the right to choose and the status of a fetus. To the pro death crowd a fetus is not a life so aborting it is not murder and is no one’s business. Unless of course a pregnant woman is murdered. In that case, the court will go after the criminal for two counts of murder. How can you murder something that is not a life? If killing a pregnant woman is murdering her and her baby then how is abortion not murder of the baby?
A Florida woman had her right to choose taken away from her by a judge and her doctor. Samantha Burton, a cigarette smoker, was admitted to the hospital in what was thought to be premature labor. It turned out to be a false alarm. She wanted to leave but her doctor had other ideas. He told her that her smoking was placing her baby at risk and that she needed to be on bed rest or she risked a miscarriage.
Burton wanted to leave but her doctor went to court to keep her in the hospital where she could not smoke and would get her bed rest. A judge agreed and ordered her kept in the hospital because of the risk to her unborn child. Three days later she gave birth to a still born child.
Burton is appealing the judge’s order so that precedent is not set where judges can decide what is in the best interest of the woman or her baby. Before anyone brings up Terry Schiavo (not about a pregnant woman but about a judge deciding her fate), that was a dispute between family members where a judge had to decide between what each side presented as the patient’s wishes. This issue was very clear because Ms. Burton was able to take her own decisions.
Imagine if a judge ordered a woman not to have an abortion because it is a danger to the child. How many in the pro murder crowd would agree with that decision?
As far as Ms. Burton goes, she is free to take her own medical decisions. All patients have the right to refuse any and all treatment. If Ms. Burton wanted to not be on bed rest (she said she could be on bed rest at home, which is true) and wanted to continue smoking, no matter how distasteful or stupid that is, she is free to do just that.
How is it that no judge would consider taking away a woman’s right to choose an abortion but this judge felt it was OK to take away this woman’s right to choose not to follow the doctor’s advice?
It is important to reemphasize, patients have the right to refuse any and all treatment and the courts have no authority to override any such decision. As long as you are capable of making your own decisions then you have the last word. The ACLU, an agency I hardly ever agree with, is on the right side of this issue and Dr. Michael Grodin, a physician and professor of health law, bioethics and human rights at Boston University, had this to say:
…doctors should never resort to court orders.
“People have the absolute right to refuse treatment …,” Grodin said. “It’s unconscionable. … It’s an affront to women.”
Where are the pro choice people on this issue?
Source:
Breitbart
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: abortion, court order, doctors, judges, refused treatment