Democrat Eugenicists Berate Stupak and his amendment

[AuH20]

So they have no regard for the innocent newborn, yet they say they're honestly committed to the health concerns of the elderly? Why don't I believe them? These ruthless eugenicists are out of control and I'm glad Stupak aired out their dirty laundry.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=


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.”

We are dealing with some real sickos. Many of you are aware of this, but I'll remind you anyhow.

[John Taylor]

So they have no regard for the innocent newborn, yet they say they're honestly committed to the health concerns of the elderly? Why don't I believe them? These ruthless eugenicists are out of control and I'm glad Stupak aired out their dirty laundry.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=



We are dealing with some real sickos. Many of you are aware of this, but I'll remind you anyhow.

I'm not surprised, not only do they not believe life begins at conception, they don't believe government even exists to protect life (even if imperfectly).

[TCE]

I've always said Neo-Cons have no room to talk about abortion. They kill more people in their pre-emptive wars than die from abortions.

[Pepsi]

Public funding for abortion is just another step towards the One-Child Policy they want.

[pcosmar]

Dog and Pony Show

This is a non-story. If Stupak hadn't pushed this amendment the bill would have died. He saved the bill and got it passed. It did not have support to pass as it was.

I figured that they would put the abortion language in later.
Unfortunately, I am proven right again. :mad:

[Stary Hickory]

We should kill more children...and America will be much safer and prosperous! The problem with Health Care is that there is too many people! If we can kill them off(especially the unhealthy ones) our problems will be solved!

Only dumbass leftist go for the shrinking pie routine.

[TCE]

We should kill more children...and America will be much safer and prosperous! The problem with Health Care is that there is too many people! If we can kill them off(especially the unhealthy ones) our problems will be solved!

Only dumbass leftist go for the shrinking pie routine.

Again, though, neo-cons have no room to talk because of all of the people who have died fighting their pointless wars. It's kind of like a professional hunter trying to protect wildlife because he loves nature and all animals, it's a cop out.

[AuH20]

What is the best interests of the state? This prime directive trumps all concerns in modern-day America. Population control is out in the open with abortion on demand funded by the state and the potential for chicanery with withheld end-of-life care. It's appears that John Holdren's dream is coming to fruition.

[TinCanToNA]

Again, though, neo-cons have no room to talk because of all of the people who have died fighting their pointless wars. It's kind of like a professional hunter trying to protect wildlife because he loves nature and all animals, it's a cop out.

It's nothing at all like a professional hunter trying to protect wildlife because he loves nature and all animals. Neo-Cons are strictly evil and base their decisions purely on greed and power. A professional hunter, in many cases, does hunt because he does care about the wildlife. If deer-hunting were permanently banned and strictly enforced, deer might go extinct from overconsumption of their food supply. Humans have driven out their predators, so they must take their place in a somewhat reserved manner.

Anyways, Neo-Cons have no room to talk, I agree. But use a better comparison.

[Working Poor]

Neo Cons are only against abortion so they can have more people to fight in their stupid wars..

[RedStripe]

The irony is that the world would probably be better off if neo-cons had more abortions.

[TCE]

It's nothing at all like a professional hunter trying to protect wildlife because he loves nature and all animals. Neo-Cons are strictly evil and base their decisions purely on greed and power. A professional hunter, in many cases, does hunt because he does care about the wildlife. If deer-hunting were permanently banned and strictly enforced, deer might go extinct from overconsumption of their food supply. Humans have driven out their predators, so they must take their place in a somewhat reserved manner.

Anyways, Neo-Cons have no room to talk, I agree. But use a better comparison.

Agreed. I wracked my brain and that was the best I could come up with. My first three examples included Matt Collins. Don't ask. Anyway:

Bottom line: Neo-Cons need to pick another battle, 'cause liberals should be able to pigeonhole them pretty easily. Unfortunately, they can't because they too support the wars.

[driege]

I've always said Neo-Cons have no room to talk about abortion. They kill more people in their pre-emptive wars than die from abortions.

This is factually incorrect, but I somewhat agree with your overall point.

Most estimates are that there are between 3,000 and 4,000 abortions per day just in the United States. I don't think nearly that many people die from the wars.

[johngr]

Here's my eugenics plan: you want charity? Get your tubes tied.

Welfare without such a requirement is a dysgenics plan.

[nate895]

Here's my eugenics plan: you want charity? Get your tubes tied.

Welfare without such a requirement is a dysgenics plan.

What about those of us who would be morally opposed to that as well? Isn't one of the greatest evils being forced to provide material aid to something you find morally reprehensible?

[pcosmar]

Neo Cons are only against abortion so they can have more people to fight in their stupid wars..

Not exactly. They pretend to be against it, to deceive and exploit the voters that are concerned.
Once they are elected it is no longer a concern.

Stupak only used this issue to SELL Health-care to others that were ready to vote against the whole thing. It would have died in the House otherwise.
Dirty Politics.
( I know,,, Redundant )
:(

[TCE]

Not exactly. They pretend to be against it, to deceive and exploit the voters that are concerned.
Once they are elected it is no longer a concern.

Stupak only used this issue to SELL Health-care to others that were ready to vote against the whole thing. It would have died in the House otherwise.
Dirty Politics.
( I know,,, Redundant )
:(

I'm not sure I agree that health care wouldn't have passed without the Stupak amendment. It could have passed through reconciliation a long time ago, but Obama and Reid, luckily, have no idea what they're doing, so this circus has been able to go on for 7 months or more now. I highly doubt Stupak would have voted "no" 7 months ago when it was more popular than it is now. Especially since Pelosi is so good at rounding up votes.

[pcosmar]

I'm not sure I agree that health care wouldn't have passed without the Stupak amendment. It could have passed through reconciliation a long time ago, but Obama and Reid, luckily, have no idea what they're doing, so this circus has been able to go on for 7 months or more now. I highly doubt Stupak would have voted "no" 7 months ago when it was more popular than it is now. Especially since Pelosi is so good at rounding up votes.

At the time it would NOT have passed. There were many that would NOT support it because of abortion. His amendment saved the Health care bill and it passed with ONE vote.
It would have died. or at least been rewritten.
I expected them to reinsert abortion later. quietly.
I expect them to be scumbags.

[TCE]

At the time it would NOT have passed. There were many that would NOT support it because of abortion. His amendment saved the Health care bill and it passed with ONE vote.
It would have died. or at least been rewritten.
I expected them to reinsert abortion later. quietly.
I expect them to be scumbags.

Again, I bet Pelosi would have found found the votes somewhere, she always does. Now that it only needs 216, it shouldn't be as difficult. You can thank Ben Nelson for that.

[TCE]

This is factually incorrect, but I somewhat agree with your overall point.

Most estimates are that there are between 3,000 and 4,000 abortions per day just in the United States. I don't think nearly that many people die from the wars.

I checked the numbers, and it appears you are correct and I am incorrect. I must have been counting all of the wars, including the Civil War, WWI and WWII, but the way I phrased it made my statement incorrect. Thank you for helping keep me in check :)

[RM918]

Neither the dems nor the reps have any right to talk about abortion, as both are happily complicit in the wars. Of course, they also have no right to talk about 'saving money'.

[pcosmar]

Again, I bet Pelosi would have found found the votes somewhere, she always does. Now that it only needs 216, it shouldn't be as difficult. You can thank Ben Nelson for that.

I was watching it the night it happened, and was on the phone that day trying to stop it.
I remember how it went down.

regardless, this is all for show.
They will have Socialized medicine, It has been the plan all along.
The only argument is over who gets the most profit.

that ain't us. :(

[TCE]

I was watching it the night it happened, and was on the phone that day trying to stop it.
I remember how it went down.

regardless, this is all for show.
They will have Socialized medicine, It has been the plan all along.
The only argument is over who gets the most profit.

that ain't us. :(

As was I. I also had been watching the debate all summer and into the fall. Pelosi had the votes counted out to have two votes to spare, 220 to 215, just in case someone flip-flopped. She allowed those Democrats in Republican districts to vote "no." As for a fun but slightly scary history fact, she used the same method Hastert used on Medicare Prescription Drug. The vote there was 220 to 215 the other way. Coincidence?

[pcosmar]

As was I. I also had been watching the debate all summer and into the fall. Pelosi had the votes counted out to have two votes to spare, 220 to 215, just in case someone flip-flopped. She allowed those Democrats in Republican districts to vote "no." As for a fun but slightly scary history fact, she used the same method Hastert used on Medicare Prescription Drug. The vote there was 220 to 215 the other way. Coincidence?

Medicare Prescription Drug.
Ah yes. the Republican socialized medicine plan. :(

As I said, dividing the profits. ;)

Abortion is the Red Herring

[TCE]

I was watching it the night it happened, and was on the phone that day trying to stop it.
I remember how it went down.

regardless, this is all for show.
They will have Socialized medicine, It has been the plan all along.
The only argument is over who gets the most profit.

that ain't us. :(

Let's say you're right and the Democrats didn't have the votes until that day, but they did have them on that day. What Obama should have done was go into reconciliation and pass the House version in the Senate, which would have only needed 50, which he had at that time. Obama would have signed it and it would have been all over. Because of their monkeying about, they have to use reconciliation 5 months later and they don't have much political capital left.