Since my blog has moved, I can no longer use Bloggers "Follower" gadget. If you are a part of NetWorked blogs, which includes a Facebook page, you can follow through NetworkedBlogs, and I can follow you back. Please come to my new blog - MaggiesNotebook.com, see the NetworkedBlogs widget in the right sidebar and click follow. I will follow back.
"I learned that in extreme situations when human lives and dignity are at state, neutrality is a sin. It helps the killers, not the victims." Elie Wiesel, Holocaust Survivor who lost his family in the Holocaust - Nobel Prize Author
Socialism - Liberalism Quotation
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." – Norman Thomas
American Idol's America Gives Back is asking for our donations tonight. The show has sent millions to many organizations do many good things, but this year we learn that some of our money has been given to to pro-abortion charitable organizations in the past, and AI supported a fund-raiser for Planned Parenthood in Los Angeles recently.
Future American Idols?
What are these people thinking? Abortion is such an emotional subject. It concerns life or death - not the life of a salamander that can't cross a highway safely which needs the U.S. government to build passage for it. It's about the life of a baby. Why would American Idol, which has a plethora of grandmothers and very young little girls voting, send money, on behalf of donors, to end a life?
On his second day in office, President Obama rescinded the Mexico City Policy which kept American foreign aid from funding abortion. Obama said it was tops on his list, and he struck it down. Democrats have no shame, and their mission is domination.
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) and his 10 pro-life (not) co-horts put in their requests for $4.7 billion in earmarks the day after they switched their health care vote to 'yea.' Talk about buying the vote - but no surprise, ACORN's own attorney and teacher is sitting in the Oval Office:
Stupak's opponent - Republican Dr. Dan Benishek for Congress
A day after Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and ten other House members compromised on their pro-life position to deliver the necessary yes-votes to pass health care reform, the "Stupak 11" released their fiscal year 2011 earmark requests, which total more than $4.7 billion--an average of $429 million worth of earmark requests for each lawmaker.
Of the eight lawmakers whose 2010 requests were available for comparison, five requested more money this week than they did a year ago: Rep. Jerry Costello, D-Ill., Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper, D-Pa., Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind., Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, and Rep. Charles Wilson, D-Ohio.
The eleven members were the focus of high level pressure by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats because they threatened to vote against the health care reform bill, which passed the House on Sunday, March 21, by a seven vote margin. Granting earmark requests are one of the ways leadership can encourage members to vote their way.
Stupak requested more than $578 million in earmarks, including $125 million for a replacement lock on the Sault Ste. Marie, $25.6 million to build a federal courthouse in Marquette, Mich., $15 million to repaint the Mackinac Bridge and $800,000 to preserve the Quincy Mining Company smelter near Hancock in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.
The Stupak earmarks in the above paragraph apparently do not include the $726,409 he received for airports in his district two days before his vote supporting the health care legislation. Find Dr. Dan Benishek's, Stupak's Republican opponent in November elections, here, here and here. Mark Levin interviews Benishek here. Hot Air talks about Benishek here. More on Stupak at The Daily Caller.
Judge Napolitano makes it clear that the President's Executive Order, gifted to Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) in exchange for his 'yea' vote, and the 'yea' vote of others on the Senate health care legislation, cannot stop taxpayer monies from funding abortion. Here is a snippet from Napolitano
The legislation passed last night uses Federal dollars to pay for Federal insurance policies which provide abortion coverage for any reason under the state law where the abortion is to occur.
If Congressman Stupak thinks the President's Executive Order can stop that, he is sadly mistaken, because the performer of the abortion, and the payer of the abortion, is not the Federal government. It is a doctor employed by an insurance company, whose policy has been purchased by the Federal government.
So the President can't stop that with an Executive Order.
Judge Napolitano on Stapak's Executive Order (video
Most of us didn't question Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-MI) commitment to unfunded taxpayer abortions - especially after he talked about it for days, but shame on us. We should have known better. These are Democrats, and they know not of principled commitment. But it was not just Stupak who chased after a way to vote for the bill. In fact, in the end, Stupak was of no concern to Nancy Pelosi. She had cut bait and moved to more lucrative waters - a coalition of about 30 Democrats who late on March 19th worked a deal to support their regional areas - mainly the hospitals, and they didn't care about abortion. Neither did most Democrats, despite the lies Stupak boldly spoke to the Nation.
Republicans asked for a "motion to recommit,"...language similar to Stupak's, ensuring no public funded abortions, be added to the bill before voting. That was not going to happen, even though Stupak knew the President's Executive Order was worthless. See the roll call vote on the motion here. From the floor of the House, just before the vote on the Senate health care bill, Stupak called the Republican "motion to recommit," "disingenuous," and said this:
...it is the Democrats who have stood up for the principle of no public funding for abortion," he said on the House floor,
Only 64 Democrats voted for his amendment. All but one Republican voted for the amendment. It was only due to Republican votes that Stupak's amendment made it into the bill. Henry Hyde, the author of the Hyde amendment was a Republican. Talk about "disingenuous." The myth of Pro-Life Democrats exposed. See this in the first video below.
But Rep. Stupak never planned to vote against health care, regardless of taxpayer funded abortions. In the second video from last Fall, at 1:29 minutes in, he tells constituents that if he has to accept federally funded abortions to have Democrat health care, he will do so, and still stay true to his principles. Hear the audience's abhorrent reaction.
So, who do we believe? Is there language in the Senate bill that allows for taxpayer-funded abortions? Here is the explanation:
In this video, Stupak explained why the Hyde amendment did not apply to the Senate bill:
[Senate legislation] is not subject to the annual appropriations law and therefore is not subject to the Hyde provisions contained in the annual labor HHS bill. The only way to provide Hyde protection of no public funding for abortion in the health insurance option and subsidies in the form of affordability credit found in the bill is to insert the Hyde amendment into this legislation...
This from the United States conference of Catholic Bishops further clarifies: the key is that the new monies in the bill, are not appropriated by funds restricted by the Hyde amendment:
The Senate bill authorizes and appropriates billions of dollars in new funding -- outside the scope of the appropriations bill covered by the Hyde amendment...These funds are new, and over he next five years they will be provided without being appropriated in the Labor/HHS appropriations act; therefore they are not covered by the Hyde amendment, which says only funds "appropriated in the Act...may not be used for elective abortions.
Bart Stupak just before House Vote on Senate Health Care bill
Stupak Will Vote for Taxpayer Funded Abortion if it is the only way to get health care (video)
This morning there were reports that Senator Ben Nelson's Cornhusker Kickback for his state of Nebraska is still in the health care bill, then I heard that his bribe is on the cutting room floor, and now PowerLine says there is yet another deal for the Nebraska senator.
Now Rowan Scarborough reports that the Obama administration has delivered another budget plum to Nelson and the state of Nebraska, adding more than a half-billion dollars for a new veterans hospital in Omaha.
Scarborough notes that the move reverses a decision by Mr. Obama's own Veterans Administration of a year ago, which called for repairing an existing hospital. Nelson's spokesman rejects the idea the new hospital was awarded in exchange for the senator's health care vote.
Is the Cornhusker Kickback in or out? It depends on who you believe. This report says it has been cut and the Washington Post reports the same. So Nelson walks away with a half-a-billion dollars, and leaves his dignity and decency behind.
Senator Nelson has long been a pro-life senator. He sold his soul to the Obama administration when offered Medicare funds for his state, and in accepting the bribe, he sacrificed his constitutient's right not to be forced to pay for the abortions of others. What a terrible right to deny those you represent. What a huge fall-from-grace for this formerly pro-life senator.
Clearly, the senator's fall in public esteem is a direct reaction to his having voted for the health care bill as part of a deal in which Nebraska was exempted from the costs of new federal Medicaid mandates.
The ObamaCare bill was already unpopular enough in Nebraska but became even more so when state residents discovered they would be saddled with it anyway, plus exposed to national ridicule over Mr. Nelson's sweetheart deal.
I doubt the senator is sleeping well these days, but maybe he thinks the VA hospital will bear his name.
Democrat charm is on full display. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) says the fight for government health care has been 'a living hell.' The congressman says all of the phones are unplugged in his house. His wife has received threats, and obscenities and people say they will spit on "you." Mrs. Stupak will not watch television, obviously because the nation's Liberals are railing against her husband's principled decision to vote 'no' for government health care, and consequently vote against taxpayer funded abortions. See, that's the problem: Mrs. Stupak is obviously not watching FOXNews, where she would see some support for hubby, as well as real discussion on the issues.
Bart Stupak
The threats, the obscenities, the promises of "spit" on your face are not coming from Republicans or Independents or even moderate Democrats. The threats are coming from Obama voters, which explains how the man was elected to the highest office in the world. The obscene phone calls and faxes are coming from outside Michigan, he said. Stupak is shocking Liberals across the map. They haven't encountered a principled politician in a very long time.
Linked by Memorandum which has more on Stupak's 'living hell.'
Rep. Bark Stupak interviewed with National Review Online's "the corner" and said one of the Democrat arguments in favor of abortion is the money saved if the children are not born. He also said some of his colleagues are threatening to make complaints to the Ethics Committee about him. He didn't say what the complaints are, and probably doesn't know. There is an all-out assault to bring people around to vote for the Senate health care bill. His fellow Dems are letting him know he will be sacrificed if they can find a way to do so.
[Stupak] "If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more."
Stupak is a pro-life Democrat who introduced his own amendment to guarantee abortions will not be federally-funded in health care legislation. Stupak and 11 other Democrats have agreed that they will not vote for health care if guarantees against federally-funded abortions are not in the bill. In this interview, Stupak says he has lost two of the the 11, the pressure was just too great for them.
"We'll probably have to wait until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this."
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) told The Weekly Standard anyone thinking he will cave to health care and vote for federally funded abortions, "obviously" doesn't know him.
The Weekly Standard has the interview: After comments at a Townhall meeting on March 8th, rumors were rife that Stupak had been persuaded to go along with the abortion funding plan. He is quoted saying:
I'm more optimistic than I was a week ago," [that federally funded abortions might be removed from the legislation].
But the Congressman told The Weekly Standard:
"If I didn't cave in November, why would I do it now after all the crap I've been through?"
Stupak seems to have laid down a gauntlet of sorts, after saying the "majority party" can fix the bill if they have the will:
If they say 'we'll give you a letter saying we'll take care of this later,' that's not acceptable."
...telling reporters she will not stand for health care legislation getting dragged
down in a battle over abortion. "This is not about abortion," said
Pelosi, D-Calif. "This is a bill about providing quality affordable
health care for all Americans."
Did you get that? The Speaker "won't stand for it."
We've never known Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to dodge a lie if she can help it. At last week's health care summit she objected to Rep. John Boehner's statement that the health care bill would end 30 years of prohibition against taxpayer funding of abortion. As members of her own Party insist abortion-funding is in legislation, and Catholic Bishops agree, Pelosi faced the Nation and told a whopper.
Nancy Pelosi
The Speaker said Boehner was "misleading" the country. It's time for a public smackdown between the two, because either Boehner or Pelosi are lying. The Catholic church points the finger directly at the Speaker:
[PELOSI] “I think it’s really important to note, though, and I want the record to show, because two statements were made here that were not factual in relationship to these bills,' Pelosi claimed.
"My colleague, Leader Boehner, the law of the land is there is no public funding of abortion and there is no public funding of abortion in these bills and I don't want our listeners or viewers to get the wrong impression from what you said," Pelosi asserted.
Just as The Speaker continues to insist that the CIA lied about her "interrogation briefings, she can't decide whether to tell the truth - the Church isn't important - or continue the lies. In December 2009, Pelosi spoke her truth, saying "the free will" of women wanting abortions outweighs pro-life Catholic teachings. I'm not Catholic and I have only a little knowledge about how the Church handles their high-profile wayward strays - but can't help wondering if Pelosi is still receiving Sacraments. From Hot Air:
Here’s Canon 915, withholding communion from those “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin.” The defense, presumably, is that participating in abortion might be a sin but merely supporting laws that legalize the practice doesn’t quite rise to that level.
In the original House bill the Stupak amendment removed any possibility of taxpayer-funded abortion, which allowed about 40 Democrats to support the bill. Their vote, contrary to the confidence the Speaker is showing, may not be there for her the next time around.
Another report from CNSNews quotes Pelosi, a Catholic, on Friday, February 23rd, saying she has spoken to "Catholic bishops" and she indicates that she has assured the Church there is no public funding for taking the life of a baby.
“Law prevents federal funding, and federal law prevents federal funding of abortion,” said Pelosi. “There is no federal funding of abortion in this bill. There’ll be no expansion or diminution of a woman’s right to choose and that does not happen in this bill, and we’re determined that we are going to pass health care reform.”
“This bill that passed the Senate does not have federal funding of abortion,” said Pelosi.
But the Church is not buying what the Speaker is pitching.
Richard Doerflinger, associate director for the U.S. Conference of Catholic bishops (USCCB) told CNSNews that the Senate bill and the President's proposal does allow taxpayers to pay for health care coverage that covers abortion. The Catholic church is supportive of health care, up to the inclusion of abortion funding. Read the Conference of Bishops 13-page document stating that the Senate bill does allow for government-funded abortion.
Douglas Johnson, the National Right to Life Committee said Pelosi has "just repeated the same deceptive claptrap...denial and deception."
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) said the "Senate language is a departure from current law and is unacceptable."
Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, says Obama's bill lacks anti-abortion language, and the bill does nothing to cut costs.
Echoing the Republican voices at the health care summit, some fiscally conservative Democrats are asking for smaller measures - a less ambitious bill, "take two or three or four issues on which everyone agrees and build on it," said Frank Kratovil (D-MD). Rep. Altmire asks the question all of us are asking: why is Obama bothering?
Others, like Representative Jason Altmire, a Pennsylvania Democrat who also voted against the House bill, seem to wonder aloud why Mr. Obama is bothering. With so many Democrats feeling nervous about their past votes in favor of the health bill, Mr. Altmire said, he can imagine vote-switching in only one direction: from yes to no.
...And I know of a handful of yes votes who regret it and would relish the opportunity to put a no vote on the board so they could go back home and talk about that.”
Since these are not easy issues to explain, and since the President acknowledged the Nation's dismay at a 2400-page piece of legislation, which he likely knows no one can understand, Richard Foerflinger explains how we know that abortion is a part of the bill and proposal. Here are the important talking points:
While the Senate bill includes some language limiting the direct use of tax credits to subsidize abortion coverage, it still violates longstanding federal precedent on abortion funding in two ways.”
”First, the Senate’s abortion language limits only the use of tax credits for abortion in qualified health plans, not other funding in the bill,” he said.
...the Senate bill will indirectly fund abortion through community health centers, adding that the President Obama’s identical proposal on abortion funding will add more money to that cause.
“For example, the bill authorizes and appropriates $7 billion for services at community health centers (increased to $11 billion in the President’s new proposal),” said Doerflinger. “The Hyde amendment does not prevent direct use of these billions of dollars for elective abortions (because the funds are not provided through the appropriations bill governed by Hyde), nor does any provision in the Senate bill.”
“Second, the Senate’s language on tax credits still allows subsidies for overall health plans that cover elective abortions, against the policy of the Hyde amendment and other longstanding federal laws,” said Doerflinger.
“The bill requires each American purchasing such a plan to make a separate payment to the insurer every month, solely to pay for other people’s abortions,” he said. “This is an enormous imposition on the consciences of the millions of Americans who oppose abortion.”
We have not heard Barack Obama try to set the record straight for Nancy. He obviously has not called her to the White House and admonished her for lying to the people he leads. It's disgraceful, considering he clearly knows what these bills do and do not do - and he is the President, and he knows the deep emotion attached to taxpayer-funded abortion. How about admitting what is in the bill, and then taking the vote - and it is, what it is? The Democrat leadership is lying directly to the Nation.
Nancy Pelosi on Abortion and the Health Care Bill (video)
Barack Obama - the one with two pre-teen daughters living in the White House...the daughters he did not "want punished with a baby," has added taxpayer funded abortions back into the health care bill that will be passed by a reconciliation vote, if it passes at all. On this most sensitive of all issues, an issue of life and death, you and I will be forced to help fund the taking of a child's life. This is an unforgivable position.
Graphic by Jack Higgins - Chicago Sun Times
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.
One of Obama's first acts as President was the dissolution of the Mexico City policy, instituted...yet again by G.W. Bush. The Mexico City policy prohibited federal funds sent abroad from paying for, or promoting abortion. You and I are already funding abortions, and the promoting of abortion outside the U.S.
Under the hotly debated "Mexico City Policy," the U.S. government could not provide funding for family planning services to clinics or groups that offered abortion-related services overseas, even if funding for those activities came from non-government sources. It essentially barred recipients of U.S. foreign aid from promoting abortion as a method of family planning.
Reagan put the Mexico City policy in place. Bill Clinton rescinded it. G.W. Bush reinstated it. Obama rescinded it on January 23rd, two days after his inauguration.
Since that time, our tax money, sent abroad as aid, is available to pay for abortions and to promote abortions. What a sad time for America, that a sitting president would write this legislation himself. It is an unforgivable position.
The second video below is nurse, Jill Stanek. Stanek has testified that Barack Obama was the sole Illinois Senator to speak out against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois. The act was to protect a baby born alive after an induced abortion. The bill would have guaranteed that the child would be treated as a "person," and would be cared for, humanely given comfort, and given sustenance if it lived long enough - rather than...being wrapped in a hospital towel or sheet and placed in the hospital "soiled linen" closet until it died.
Who Could Become President? (video)
Obama and the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act
Elizabeth Trisler, a 19-year-old Ohio woman, won a National Oratory Contest for her delivery of a pro-life speech. Ohio Rep. John Adams asked to present Ms. Trisler with a "Resolution" from the floor of State House of Representatives. At least one Democrat found that idea offensive.
According to Bill O'Reilly's Factor this evening, he began investigating Speaker Armond Budish who effectively said this "resolution" was not appropriate for this House floor. The O'Reilly investigation changed Budish's mind.
Elizabeth Trisler and her mother appeared on O'Reilly tonight. Hear her story in the first video below. Ms. Trisler is cool, calm and collected. God bless her for standing up for life.
The day Trisler should have received her "Resolution," Budish presented Taylor Wayne, a young girl, with a Resolution for her Martin Luther King, Jr. oratory. See that in the second video. Do you think Taylor is using a teleprompter?
O'Reilly and Elizabeth Trisler (video)
Taylor Wayne Receives Resolution from Budhish (video)
Women's groups are attacking Tim Tebow for a pro-life ad to air during the Super Bowl. The ad was purchased by Focus on the Family, with the theme Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life. Tim will appear with his mother Pam, who made the decision not to abort her baby, Tim, during a difficult pregnancy...and that baby grew up to be a great Florida Gator quarterback. See a video below with interviews of Tim's fellow Florida University students.
NOW (National Organization for Women) has also voiced their objections. The following quote is from Jehmu Greene, president of the New York-based Women's Media Center.
“An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in
the biggest national sports event of the year - an event designed to
bring Americans together,”
The pressure is on CBS to refuse to air the ad. So much for free speech. You have a healthy young man, standing beside his mother, talking about (maybe - haven't seen it) how much it means to him that his mother gave him life - and the ad isn't worthy to be seen? Much of the disdain for the ad is pointed toward Focus on the Family, a "Christian" group that is a magnet for Liberal abuse.
The point is, every woman has a choice by law, but when life is the choice, the sharks come out to feed. Tim Tebow has choices, and one of those choices is to make his own decisions about the morality of aborting a baby. He has the right to make the ad, and when it airs, it will speak the mind of millions of men and women. This young man refuses to be quieted. It is a strange day when we have to defend saving a human life.
Florida University Students on Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad (video)
Abby Johnson, a Planned Parenthood director at a Bryan, Texas facility, watched an ultrasound and handed in her resignation.
Ms. Johnson had worked at the clinic for 8 years and served as the director for 2 years. According to Johnson, the Bryan Planned Parenthood moved its focus away from family planning and preventing pregnancy to encouraging abortion because that is where the money is.
Planned Parenthood has been a
part of Abby Johnson's life for the past eight years; that is until
last month, when Abby resigned. Johnson said she realized she wanted to
leave, after watching an ultrasound of an abortion procedure.
"I just thought I can't do this anymore, and it was just like a flash that hit me and I thought that's it," said Johnson...
Johnson said she was told to
bring in more women who wanted abortions, something the Episcopalian
church goer recently became convicted about.
Why would ultrasounds of abortion procedures be done? I'm surprised any Planned Parenthood would allow it. Undoubtedly, such a procedure would be a "teaching" moment.
Abby Johnson - Watching Abortion Ultrasound (video)
FAIR USE: This blog may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner or may be authorized or licensed for publication at this site only. Permission to copy, republish or reproduce such material must be obtained from the original copyright owner.
Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Important Notice
Patrons of this Blog are advised that they will be held responsible for any unlawful, harassing, libelous, abusive, threatening, or harmful material of any kind or nature posted by their respective ISP. Patrons are cautioned not to transmit via comments, including links to any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, national or international law or regulation. Comments here are typically unmoderated and unedited. The fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes the site owner's endorsement of commenters' views.
![Twitter](<a href="http://www.twitter.com/maggiesnotebook"><img src="http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/follow_me-b.png" alt="Follow maggiesnotebook on Twitter"/></a>){kind=small}
