As I wrote earlier, the Stupak amendment to prevent taxpayer
funding for abortion poses a dilemma for pro-life Republicans,
since supporting the pro-life amendment would help ensure that
the Pelosi bill moves forward. While the Republican leadership in
the House and many of the members have said they would support
the measure, Rep. John Shadegg has told
Politico that he will vote "present," and says at least 4 or
5 Republicans will join him:
“(Nancy) Pelosi is speaker and she’s pro abortion every minute of
every hour of every day as speaker,” Shadegg said in an interview
with POLITICO Saturday evening. “This is a vote to help her move
the bill forward.”
He added: “This is a gut-wrenching issue for a lot of
people...But I won't support Pelosi’s bill, which is not pro-life
at all.”
The item also notes that Shadegg has "has been bickering all day
via email with his Republican colleagues" about how to vote, and
disagrees with the pro-life groups who have announced they would
negatively rate a "present" vote on the measure.
So, will enough Republicans join Shadegg and help block passage
of the Stupak amendment? And if that language doesn't make it in
the bill, will Pelosi have enough votes to pass it? Right now,
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor's office counts 35 Democrats
opposed to the larger health care bill -- just five short of the
number needed to defeat it, if the GOP caucus stands together.
And that number doesn't include the pro-life Democratic members
who are currently undecided, awaiting the outcome of the vote on
the Stupak amendment.
Typical Liberal Chicanery.
Shadegg is, of course, right.
A "NO" vote will be used against him by his opponent to say that
Shadegg voted against Pro life and a "YES" vote would mean that
he voted to keep Abortion in the bill.
The whole point of this exercise is to keep the Bill from
advancing and not playing Liberal Reindeer games.
I think this might be a good strategic move. If the amendment
fails, Pelosi might not have enough votes to pass it.
victor| 11.7.09 @ 11:24PM
You lose!
The bill just passed and is on its way to the Current Occupant's
desk for his signature.
This is a day that will live in Infamy!
John| 11.7.09 @ 8:58PM
I wrestled with this too. And it's true that liberals have vowed
to remove the ammendment anyway in conference. It is just to give
the pro-life dems cover.
Still. I believe the pro-life Dems will vote for the bill anyway,
now that they've been able to voice their opposition on the floor
to cover themselves.
A house bill without federal funded abortion certainly won't gain
it in the senate. It's a dangerous game. Like when we cheered
that Obama did what we could not, defeat Hillary. The risk was
that we would get stuck with even worse, and we did.
…Full Text of Remarks Today Congresswoman Lois Capps (CA-23) will take to the House floor to speak in strong opposition to the Stupak amendment which would restrict women's … Shadegg to Vote "Present" on Stupak By Philip Klein on 11.7.09 @ 8:19PM As I wrote earlier, the Stupak amendment to prevent taxpayer funding for abortion poses a dilemma for pro-life … House Will Take Up-or-Down…
« Stupak Amendment Makes a Good Day Bad Home Could the GOP Stop the Stupak Amendment? Posted by Jeff Fecke | November 7th, 2009 At least one Republican, Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., says he’ll vote present on the amendment, and has four or five other members of the GOP who will join him. That may not be enough to scuttle the amendment, but it would make it close — Stupak has claimed…
O. B. Ron Quixote| 11.7.09 @ 9:16PM
Bottom line is that regardless of whether the Stupak Amendment
passes, it will be removed in committee. Pelosi's strategy is
only to allow pro-life democrats a public forum to formally voice
their opposition to that part of the overall health care bill.
That way, she gets all libs in line to pass the overall bill
which will then be trumpeted by the "mainstream" media as a big
victory for Obama/Pelosi.
By taking down the Stupak amendment, pro-life Republicans will
force pro-life dems to vote against their values in order to pass
the bill. By foiling the Pelosi-Stupak strategy, pro-life
Republicans will be able to vote their true conscience by voting
against the overall bill.
Pro-life groups who refuse to acknowledge Pelosi's overall
strategy to get the overall bill passed at the expense of writing
out the Stupak amendment in committee are simply naive.
Screw the Stupak amendment and oppose the overall bill at all
costs.
If not, pro-lifers will only be shooting themselves in the foot.
…blog. Topsy Plugin – WordPress Shortened Links Linking to the spectator.org page http://bit.ly/xneNy info http://bit.ly/1hIikU info 3 tweets retweet The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Shadegg to Vote "Present" on Stupak spectator.org/blog/2009/11/07/shadegg-to-vote-present-on-stu – view page – cached As I wrote earlier, the Stupak amendment to prevent taxpayer funding…
…doing it all alone, though … like a one-nation embargo against Cuba … oh … right … we’re doing that, too …) Apparently, Shadegg did think he’d have 4 or 5 cohorts, but in the end, they did that thing to him like when you were a kid, and a friend said you should both jump out of a tree “at the same time…?) Verdict: Shadegg fears the teabaggers more…
…T Buy It Now for only: US $9.56 Buy it now | Add to watch list
Cool, arent they? Possibly related posts: (automatically generated) Related posts on American The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Shadegg to Vote "Present" on … The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Government Takeover is a … The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Double-Digit Unemployment Related posts on Attractions…
…that he’d kill the anti-abortion Stupak Amendment (one that irritated most Democrats but gave some with heavilly Catholic districts room to vote for the final bill) by organizing enough Republicans to vote “present” on it. His theory, I think, was that a “present” vote wouldn’t be the same as a “no,” then he could kill the amendment and Democrats would fall away.…
…and very durable. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated) Related posts on American The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Pelosi's Pyrrhic Victory? The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Shadegg to Vote "Present" on … The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Government Takeover is a … */ Categories: Toys Tags: 54mm, American, army, british, dday, figures, german, piece,…
…it all three times. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated) Related posts on American The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Pelosi's Pyrrhic Victory? The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Shadegg to Vote "Present" on … The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Government Takeover is a … Related posts on quiet When Akram Khan Kept Quiet | Joe Farrar .:Loud & Quiet's…
jiji| 11.8.09 @ 9:15PM
The papers were conveyor
chain mixed together in a big box. The officials then began
forming machine to
remove the papers one at a time.
…to write … Related posts on American The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Defending Cao The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Pelosi's Pyrrhic Victory? The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Shadegg to Vote "Present" on … Related posts on Anot Leistis į kelionę « Europos "Super Netto" Forex – Let Your Skin Glow This entry was posted on Monday, November 9th, 2009 at 2:19 pm…
…funding in the bill. Republicans would effectively be daring pro-life Democrats to vote for the abortion-friendly bill, having denied them their opportunity to scrub out the abortion funding. Shadegg summarized his argument: “(Nancy) Pelosi is speaker and she’s pro abortion every minute of every hour of every day as speaker,” Shadegg said in an interview with POLITICO Saturday evening. “This is a vote to help…
victor| 11.7.09 @ 8:49PM
Typical Liberal Chicanery.
Shadegg is, of course, right.
A "NO" vote will be used against him by his opponent to say that Shadegg voted against Pro life and a "YES" vote would mean that he voted to keep Abortion in the bill.
The whole point of this exercise is to keep the Bill from advancing and not playing Liberal Reindeer games.
Wesley| 11.7.09 @ 8:51PM
I think this might be a good strategic move. If the amendment fails, Pelosi might not have enough votes to pass it.
victor| 11.7.09 @ 11:24PM
You lose!
The bill just passed and is on its way to the Current Occupant's desk for his signature.
This is a day that will live in Infamy!
John| 11.7.09 @ 8:58PM
I wrestled with this too. And it's true that liberals have vowed to remove the ammendment anyway in conference. It is just to give the pro-life dems cover.
Still. I believe the pro-life Dems will vote for the bill anyway, now that they've been able to voice their opposition on the floor to cover themselves.
A house bill without federal funded abortion certainly won't gain it in the senate. It's a dangerous game. Like when we cheered that Obama did what we could not, defeat Hillary. The risk was that we would get stuck with even worse, and we did.
Pingback| 11.7.09 @ 9:06PM
Catholic bishops endorse Pelosi Plan with Stupak amendment? : Eye Opener News links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.7.09 @ 9:06PM
Could the GOP Stop the Stupak Amendment | Blog of the Moderate Left links to this page.
Pingback| 11.7.09 @ 9:10PM
Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Could the GOP Stop the Stupak Amendment? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
O. B. Ron Quixote| 11.7.09 @ 9:16PM
Bottom line is that regardless of whether the Stupak Amendment passes, it will be removed in committee. Pelosi's strategy is only to allow pro-life democrats a public forum to formally voice their opposition to that part of the overall health care bill.
That way, she gets all libs in line to pass the overall bill which will then be trumpeted by the "mainstream" media as a big victory for Obama/Pelosi.
By taking down the Stupak amendment, pro-life Republicans will force pro-life dems to vote against their values in order to pass the bill. By foiling the Pelosi-Stupak strategy, pro-life Republicans will be able to vote their true conscience by voting against the overall bill.
Pro-life groups who refuse to acknowledge Pelosi's overall strategy to get the overall bill passed at the expense of writing out the Stupak amendment in committee are simply naive.
Screw the Stupak amendment and oppose the overall bill at all costs.
If not, pro-lifers will only be shooting themselves in the foot.
JMHOAU
Pingback| 11.7.09 @ 10:25PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Shadegg to Vote "Presen links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.7.09 @ 10:30PM
Politico: Nancy has the votes on healthcare : The Reid Report links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.8.09 @ 2:10AM
North American Fabulous Travel Attractions | Vocabulation links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.8.09 @ 1:50PM
Rum, Romanism and Rebellion » Blog Archive » Our Own John Shadegg Further Elevates th links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.8.09 @ 6:00PM
BMC D-Day Plastic Army Men Set: 34 Piece Set of British, American, and German Soldier links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.8.09 @ 8:29PM
The Quiet American | eCheapPrice.com links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
jiji| 11.8.09 @ 9:15PM
The papers were conveyor chain mixed together in a big box. The officials then began forming machine to remove the papers one at a time.
Pingback| 11.9.09 @ 2:22AM
Fun Along The Road: American Tourist Attractions – Anot | Vocabulation links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.10.09 @ 7:28PM
Health Care Debate Proves Boehner Was the Right Choice for Leader « Marque’s Letters links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: