-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Lawrence Auster is surprised that Bart Stupak seems to want Obamacare to pass as long as it contains his language barring taxpayer funding of abortion. He shouldn’t be. Stupak is a pro-life liberal. He has no major economic or constitutionalist objection to the Democratic approach to health care reform. He simply opposes abortion and wishes to keep the practice from being publicly funded.
Although Stupak himself as been a stalwart so far, that does make it risky to put too much faith in the “Stupak 12.” Already another pro-life liberal, Democratic Congressman Dale Kildee, told reporters last night that he’s satisfied with the Senate’s abortion language and said of the bill, “I’ll probably vote for it.”Kildee would be harder to convince if his objections to the health care bill were not confined to abortion.
But when you look at the much larger universe of Blue Dog Democrats who should object to the bill’s cost, its intrusion in private markets, its unconstitutionality, its tax and spending increases, its fiscal irresponsibility, and its public funding of abortion, they have been next to useless. The pro-life Democrats — including pro-life liberals who otherwise have no serious objection to the bill (and in some cases would probably prefer a public option) have so far been a bigger obstacle than the Blue Dogs. We’ll see.
UPDATE: Kildee’s office has told Catholic Vote Action that the congressman was misquoted and has not decided to vote for the Senate abortion language.
View all comments (9) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/03/10/put-not-thy-hope-in-pro-life-d
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Inside the Gates of Eden
- The End of the Castros?
- Consternated Conferences
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
zombyboy | 3.10.10 @ 12:12PM
Some time ago I had some conversations along these lines with some of my friends, especially in reference to Lieberman. The conservatives who are admiring these folks (and the progressive who vilify them) often seem to forget that they truly aren't Republicans in disguise; these are liberals with a different set of priorities and values.
That's not a bad or good thing in itself, it's merely recognizing a very different set of priorities. But having faith that these folks can't be wooed back to the other side is to have little understanding of the kind of arm twisting and deal-making that takes place with a big bill like this.
I appreciate them where they have helped, but long term plans can't be based on keeping the blue dogs and pro-life Democrats as allies in this fight. It ain't gonna happen.
PCC| 3.10.10 @ 1:43PM
Sadly for me, the subject of Blue Dog Democrats confirms that I have now officially reached the 'old geezer' stage of life; I've seen it all before.
For those yet to reach these lonely shores, please allow me to elaborate: so-called Blue Dog Democrats have been around since I was knee-high to a grasshopper, they love to preen before the cameras and hem and haw about their conservative 'principles', and then they ALWAYS cave in to their conressional leadership's pressure.
This time will be no different.
Becky| 3.10.10 @ 1:50PM
I agree with PCC. Where is the press holding these people to their threats, etc.
On Stupak, basically he wants the Senate to pass a law saying they will alter a law not yet passed to ban public funding for abortions.
Pingback| 3.10.10 @ 4:54PM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Put Not Thy Hope in Pro-Life … Information links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.10.10 @ 7:08PM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Put Not Thy Hope in Pro-Life … Terms links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Roy| 3.11.10 @ 4:03AM
Yeah. Well, I'm a pro-life conservative but strictly in that order, and I have not thought anything as positive about a Democrat for years and years and years as I currently do about Stupak. If he caves - well, it's what I expect from Democrats, but if he truly stands up to his party on behalf of the most vulnerable among us - well, I might even start believing in "pro-life Democrats" again.
And then of course I'd do my best to vote all Democrats out of office so they can't saddle us with any more trillion dollar monstrosities; but hey.