The American Spectator

Pete| 3.12.10 @ 4:24PM

But they would never consider rationing care.... What a pack of lying scumbags.

sharon harris| 3.12.10 @ 4:30PM

Just wonder what the bribes are. Better not catch my rep in a bribery vote. What am I saying they are all crooks.

Mary| 3.12.10 @ 6:00PM

"If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more."
Hello !!! Is anybody in there?
Not only do we outlaw murder, we want America to Thrive in abundance to 1 Billion US Citizens!

The Land Of The Free Others Want To See

DrTomVoter| 3.12.10 @ 6:31PM

"...will cost us more," implies that they have already decided that future generations will cost more than they are taxed. Perpetual deficit spending in the Land of Socialist Oz.

decemberfellow| 3.13.10 @ 12:03AM

Obama care will destroy the U S financially , everyone knows that , except the libs who could care less, but it would seem to me that if they are taking everyones tax money to pay for this, then you would think they need more working people . So why Kill the babies. These 'people " are totally nuts, and someday will reap what they sow.

PCC| 3.13.10 @ 12:43AM

You mean the pro-life and Blue Dog Democrats are caving into leadership pressure?

Gee, what a surprise!

historian| 3.13.10 @ 2:43AM

Let's not forget they're also dooming the old by cutting $500 billion from Medicare. Kill off the babies in the womb and the seniors once they're no longer useful as tax payers. This is eugenics in action.

Pete| 3.13.10 @ 9:08AM

Fewer people, less human impact on the climate, you know...gee, I am so glad we have these elitist asses to tell us what to do. Where would we be without them? Having babies, caring for seniors, eating food that tastes good...and all the while unknowingly we are just killing ourselves. I am so glad there is a better class of people out there to tell us what to do. I'd be so lost without them.

Susan Brei| 3.13.10 @ 3:08AM

Good, because the Health Care Bill does not make any changes to existing law on abortion funding. As always, a woman will not be able to use Federal money to fund her abortion.

Stupak was going too far. He wanted to change existing law, and deny a woman the right to an abortion when she BUYS PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE WITH HER OWN MONEY! Why? If she received so much as a tax credit (for attending college, or maybe upgrading her windows to save energy), Stupak's amendment would consider that money, sitting in her bank account, to be "federal funds".

Sheesh.

Stupak is passionate about abortion, and I empathize with that (taking a pro-life stance in my own private life), but from the beginning, Congress has sought to avoid integrating healthcare and abortion politics by respecting existing law and working around it. Stupak was in the wrong for making it about abortion, and he succeeded in bringing a lot of media attention to himself.

Now that his "supporters" are abandoning him, he looks increasingly silly for pulling this kind of political PR stunt.

Nick| 3.13.10 @ 8:15AM

Miss Brei,

Being Pro-Life is not a "private" act, it is public.

I infer from your comments that you are, in fact, a pro-abort. Or, pro-choice, as you, falsely, like to call yourselves.

Am I wrong?

ZerObama| 3.13.10 @ 2:03PM

Susan's either another delusional liberal or another lying liberal--what other kinds are there?

Waxman's version of ObamaCare will force ALL OF US to contribute to a "fund" that pays for abortions.

Only an idiot would claim otherwise.

I give Stupak credit for sticking to his guns, but how can he remain a democrat when he sees such disgusting corruption in his party?

Frank| 3.16.10 @ 10:55PM

The Hyde amendment (the one that's supposed to keep fed money away from paying for abortions) is absent from the current health bill. It's the same bill- pro abortion ,no conscience protection for those health workers that find murder evil. Some of congress has very much has tried to integrate politics and abortion in the past.. I give you 3 guesses as to who. And you are either ignorant of some facts or you are pro death.

Inge| 3.13.10 @ 7:20AM

I have issues with Stupack; if he's truly pro-life, and retains his 'd' after his name, he's no better then those who told him him that 'if more children are born, they cost us millions more'.
A statement such as that, plus him stating that it's difficult to be pro-life in the dem party, should be enough reason to leave that party, maybe be a neutral.
As far as the repulsing statement 'not to want more children born etc..., why stop at that? Our elders, mentally, and physically handicapped, and even maybe with the wrong 'r' behind the name would be also included.
When somebody crosses this line regarding unborn babies, there's no stopping, and it's pure evil!
What is the difference between Hitler's fanatisism, and socialist/communist democrats?

Margie| 3.14.10 @ 3:46PM

I wondered the same thing about Lieberman. My conclusion was that he's a Democrat at heart, so how could he or why would he want to join the Republican party?

My opinion about Stupack is that perhaps he is just trying to get the bill passed by claiming to be pro-life, and as long as abortion is removed, it gets the Socialst Health care bill passed, doesn't it?

JP| 3.13.10 @ 1:44PM

Stupak is at least attempting to remain a Catholic in good standing. The US Bishop's Conference has been up front on concerning the House passing the Senate version - they are strongly against it (It remains to be seen whether they will extract ecclesial punishment for those Catholic politicians who passed this. Remember how they hung Bishop D'Arcy out to dry).

Joe Donnelly (D) Indiana voted for the November House version, but said yesterday he would not vote for the Senate version. In the end, the politics do not matter. God will judge us all, and I have a feeling very few of us will consider politics at that time.

Pelosi probably will get her 216 votes next week. Obama will sign the bill, and the the Dems and the President will hope to "put this all behind them". But you and I cannot. It will be difficult to forget it when your premiums will sky rocket to $6000/year, and your Medicare benefits get withheld. Or, if you are a doctor, you cannot earn enough money to remain in practice. No, this is only the beginning -one way or another.

PCC| 3.13.10 @ 3:06PM

Few politicians' position on abortion, pro- or anti-abortion, is based on principle or strongly-held beliefs.

Most politicians' position on abortion is based solely on political expediency: whatever they need to say in order to get elected in their district or state.

It should come as no surprise that, when short-term political expediency, or party leadership, demands that they soften or abandon their position on abortion, they do so.

Angela| 3.13.10 @ 6:13PM

Let me see if I got this right. The leftists, the statists, the Democrats, the Progressives - the party that represents the people wants to promote abortion in order to save millions of dollars?
Think about that statement. On so many levels - it is disturbing. 1. The Press - outside of this website - is not concerned with that statement. 2. How do these Democrats know these children would cost the country millions - what if they were placed for adoption and reared by parents that teach that child about the American Way? 3. Does that not sound like Communist China in a weird kinda way - they outlawed the number of children you can have. We are just going to promote the number of children you never have. And that is now the American Way? 4. And final point - although I could go on forever - What does that have to say about Health Care Reform. I hereby recall it DEATH CARE REFORM.
Cause - pure and simple - that is what it is.

Jennifer Weber| 3.13.10 @ 7:01PM

Why should this be surprising? Liberals are dedicated to all ways of life that tend to gross immorality and, therefore, death. The little babies are only part of the fallout but, God help us, they are the fallout that hurts the most. Not only are their murders sick, twisted, and unconscionable, but the more of them we murder, the less of a conscience we have as a nation. Our current "leadership" are a bunch of immoral, licentious, bloodthirsty barbarians ... and what does it say about the American people when we realize that they got where they are via elections? WAKE UP, America.

SoCon| 3.13.10 @ 10:39PM

Jennifer, your words are heart-breaking, harsh and true. We Americans will reap the whirlwind that is surely coming our way.

God help us.

Thomas Paine| 3.13.10 @ 7:23PM

What if ... one or two yes-vote Congressmen go missing the day of the vote?

Maybe someone could gift them the same thing Michael Douglas got in "The Game" ...?

martin j smith| 3.14.10 @ 10:16AM

Here is what is needed to "sway" wavering Democrat Party members.
You need something on the, yeah it amounts a campaign just like the Dems to expose the if they vote for bill.
Even better, there is a need for snitchers in the Democrat Party, willing to spill the beans about what deals are being made.
Even better tha that there is need for more info on Pelosi,Reid and of course BHO--especially BHO that could really blow up in their faces. I strongly suspect it is out there. Someone has to dig for it. And, since there are so many involved in this administration on multiple levels there are more people who know things. Example, Massa on Rahm Emmanuel. Example, Sustak on promise of appointments for votes. There are even bigger things out there I am convinced. Some needs to juggle the jar and get some one to talk. Perhaps some one is doing this right now. I really hope so. Hurry time is short and we need you whoever \you are. The important that should be made to wavering Democrat members is this: Your party is currupt. Do you want to get caught up the web of investigations when the s hits the f. ?