Obama Signs Executive Order On Abortion–With A Catch

On March 25, 2010, in Health Care, by Trenton Hansen

Well, Barack Obama did it.

He succeeded in making Bart Stupak look like a complete idiot. I’m not too sure that would be hard to do. As Moe Lane at Red State put it,

“Now, it’s like this. It’s one thing to be a prostitute. It’s another thing to be a cheap prostitute. It’s yet a third thing to be a cheap prostitute who accepts Monopoly money. But to be a cheap prostitute who gets stiffed on your Monopoly money? That takes skill.”

Almost ruined my keyboard with a mouthful of water when I read that.

So what I am getting to? The AP has released this story about Obama’s fulfillment of his promise to Bart Stupak that he would sign an Executive Order that would prohibit the use of federal funds for abortions in return for Stupak’s vote for the health care reform bill.

AP Special Correspondent David Espo writes,

WASHINGTON – Anything but jubilant, President Barack Obama awkwardly kept a promise Wednesday he made to ensure passage of historic health care legislation, pledging the administration would not allow federal funds to pay for elective abortions covered by private insurance.

Where’s the catch? It covers only those elective abortions covered by private insurance. According to the Guttmacher Institute, only 13% of all abortions in 2001 were billed to private insurance. Additionally, the vast majority of abortions are obtained by single women, living below the poverty line. The women in this demographic are the same group that are most likely to not have private insurance, but are on some kind of government assistance. They cannot pay for abortions through Medicaid, but they can use state funds in several states. In other words, the women most likely to have elective abortions are the very people that ObamaCare was designed to cover (that is, when those provisions finally do actually kick in, four years from now), because of a lack of private insurance.

Barack Obama’s magnanimous promise to Bart Stupak will likely prevent federal funds from being used for only about 15% of all abortions. And that might still be a generous percentage.

Tagged with: • • • •
 
6 Comments
Leave A Response

Progressives Want Control–How To Take It Back

On March 24, 2010, in Health Care, Socialism, by Trenton Hansen

Not according to Rep. John Dingle (D-MI):

“Let me remind you this [Americans allegedly dying because of lack of universal health care] has been going on for years. We are bringing it to a halt. The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 [million] American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”

If the Left were ever honest about their aims, they wouldn’t be enjoying the “success” they now are. The way to successfully deal with them is to stop giving them the benefit of the doubt. Wise Conservatives will be best served by thinking the worst of their Liberal and Progressive opponents–they always want control, they always will renege on deals, they always will be dishonest, they always will not care what Conservatives think, and they will never allow themselves to be constrained by laws, rules or agreements. Don’t believe me? Read “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky. If you have read it and you still don’t believe me, you haven’t been paying attention.

If Conservatives will consistently deal with Progressives with these assumptions in mind, they will be better able to proactively counter Progressive weaseling and prevent the damage caused by Progressive policies.

Sunday’s socialist uprising was only possible because of 100 years of steady Progressive plotting and conspiring. If the Republicans and Conservatives had recognized the truth about their opponents and acted on Reagan’s instincts 20 years ago, we would not now be looking at 10 years of repeal attempts just to get back 40 percent of what was lost on Sunday.

h/t Peter Barry Chowka at AmericanThinker

Tagged with: • • •
 
5 Comments
Leave A Response

The Slaughter House Rules

On March 12, 2010, in Government & Law, Health Care, by Trenton Hansen

How far is too far for the Democrats?

Louise Slaughter, a Pelosi minion and Chair of the powerful House Rules Committee, is considering a rule that would allow the House Democrats to pass a corrections bill that would automatically assume a majority vote on the Senate version of the health care reform bill, thus ensuring that ObamaCare becomes the law of the land without anyone in the House actually having voted on it!

Dave Schnittger, aide to House Minority Leader John Boehner, said:

“The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill. You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply ‘deeming’ the Senate bill passed in the House — without an actual vote by members of the House.”

The Progressives are really showing their true colors now. They proved they could pass legislation without reading it. Now they are working on passing legislation without even voting on the actual bill. If this passes, what is to stop them from unilaterally declaring bills passed without ever even considering them? What will prevent them from passing raw ideas as legislation? Only their fear of the American Public. And, at the moment, that doesn’t seem to give them even a moment’s pause.

National Review’s Jim Geraghty wrote in Thursday’s Morning Jolt newsletter,

“Are they out of their minds? What, the town hall meetings of last summer were too genteel and conciliatory for House Democrats’ tastes? Trying some sort of stunt like this in order to pass a bill without actually making members vote for it — that’s the sort of thing that takes “armed insurrection” talk out of the realm of chat rooms. We’ve long suspected that the Constitution means nothing to our counterparts on the left, but the idea of working around the requirement that bills be passed by the House strikes a new and disturbing we’ve-lost-democracy note.”

This maneuver doesn’t just violate the Rule of Law. It goes way beyond that. This is an attack on the fundamental principles of our form of government. This is so foreign to our Constitution, the only word that truly fits is Sedition.

If the Progressives pull this off, you’ll find me at the nearest Militia recruiting station.

Tagged with: • • • • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response

Go To Top »
Blog:
The Conservative Front
Topics:
politics, conservative, Utah