RSS
Posts
Comments

Shocking, I’m sure, to Sen. Claire McCaskill, fresh from her appearance with the President in St. Louis last Wednesday, and shocking as well to Representative Russ Carnahan, who was a no-show at the event. Anyway, Rasmussen reports that 60% of Missourians oppose the healthcare bill, while 37% of Missourians approve of it.

That. Has. Got. To. Hurt.

Shocking and sad, simultaneously. There should be a word for that. Sen. Stupak’s quotes are from National Review Online:

“Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” The arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, he adds, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”What are Democratic leaders saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

Hans Brinker Madurodam: Source: Wiki Commons

Alas, a campaign is underway in The Netherlands to allow for the euthanasia of grandma and grandpa. Uber-bioethicist Wesley J. Smith notes,

Assisted suicide has been openly practiced since 1973, only being formally legalized in 2002. It has never been limited to the terminally ill, and the “guidelines” are not “stringent,” nor are they enforced with any vigor.  Indeed, Dutch doctors now openly engage in infanticide, nearly 1,000 people are euthanized each year who have not asked to die, and the country’s Supreme Court has made it legally available to the depressed.Those points aside, this story proves what I have stated repeatedly: The Culture of Death is never satiated. It is always hungry. It always wants more.

Photo: Hans Brinker Madurodam. Credit: Wikipedia Commons.

Those who strongly oppose the plan outnumber those who strongly favor it by 2 to 1.

WeeklyStandard.com reports that President Obama’s healthcare plan pays for abortions in three ways:

  1. Federally-subsidized insurance plans will cover abortions
  2. The National Right to Life Committee reports that $4 billion in extra spending added in Senator Reid’s Manager’s Mark are not restricted from being used for abortions in “community health centers”
  3. the Senate bill, which is being forced down the House’s collective throats, pays for abortions on American Indian reservations.

Having descended from the Cherokee, that last bit just makes me sick.

But then again, TheHill.com also reports her as saying that

A bill can be bipartisan without bipartisan votes.

Huh? That’s like saying a cake can be chocolate without any. . . chocolate.

Methinks that the “A” Madam Speaker is referring to is abortion. Says the National Right to Life Committee,

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.

Older Posts »