Congress mainly exists just to piss me off. At least The Hill properly refers to them as ‘anti-abortion rights.’ Regardless, I recall reading about JFK giving a speech in Houston where he assured us that Catholic politicians wouldn’t do shit like this:
The abortion compromise was turning into a contest of wills, with the U.S. Conference of Bishops on one side and Pelosi, a devout Catholic and a supporter of abortion rights, on the other.
[Rep. Brad] Ellsworth said at least three Democratic abortion-rights opponents have agreed to support his language, but many others won’t because the bishops don’t support it.
“Other members felt like they needed the … blessing of the Catholic bishops,” Ellsworth said.
I’m tired of putting up with this.
nalbar
I am surprised no one is pulling this out … as any history buff knows that Kennedy was repeatedly hit over the head with the “He’s just gonna be a Vatican stooge because he’s Catholic” thing … it just goes to show Democrats in DC don’t know how to frame issues … or to sell an issue the right way
The U.S. is a very loving, life-affirming society and country and that’s why no where else in the world might anyone have the great pleasure of reading a site as inspiring and edifying as namesofthedead.com. Isn’t that a true accomplishment of freedom-loving people? Pass Bachmann a teabag, please.
.
(CNS News) – Ellsworth called his idea a “contingency plan” for preventing federal funding of abortion.
“When you’re going into battle, it’s a good idea to have a contingency plan,” Ellsworth said in a Nov. 3 press release announcing his proposal. “The bottom line is we’re going to exhaust every avenue to ensure pro-life concerns are addressed in this legislation.”
But Ellsworth’s plan does not satisfy Stupak, other pro-life Democrats, House Republicans, the National Right to Life Committee and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, who do not want tax dollars flowing into the coffers of abortion providers regardless of the paper work by which the money is processed.
The Democratic leadership is currently planning to attach the Ellsworth amendment to the rule in such a way that if the rule passes, the Ellsworth language would automatically become part of the health care bill.
A Democratic congressional aide noted that Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), who must approve the language in the rule, is also co-chair of the House Pro-Choice Caucus.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Health care reform for anybody but women.
And how many tax dollars is the Catholic Church pouring into the US Treasury that they should be so concerned? pfft.
this is what your tired of?
The trade-offs involved in a governing coalition?
Properly? I suppose abolitionists were ‘anti-property rights’ as well…
Dirty little secret. These folks are Blue Dogs mostly, hiding behind the bishops’ skirts to distract from their opposition to the bill (and the industry support that they’ve gotten).
Stupak and company weren’t voting for the bill anyway.
And most of it is show. He’s a “C Street” type, but from years of interaction with him I’m not sure he really wants to analyze any issue from deep ethical perspectives. I’ve tried to write and interact with him about stem cell therapy for (my son’s) chronic condition; he doesn’t even want to talk about it.
In a recent conference call he was accused of association with “The Family” and lied, denied he lived where he did in DC.
He represents a district where there are huge anti-abortion billboards all around, and which is largely Republican, and I think he just has to make anti-abortion headlines once a year to keep his job.
What is the point of this turd having the D? Does he do a single thing which is useful? Is there ANY possibility of a primary challenge for Bart Stupid?
Yes, he can be beaten in a primary–by a candidate who digs out his very unholy ties to some of upper Michigan’s worst polluters, and goes big. I know the online community could jump start a primary challenge, but it would have to be the right candidate.