I think Wesley Smith at Secondhand Smoke articulated well how damaging Representative Bart Stupak’s (D-MI) decision yesterday to betray the prolife cause was. It wasn’t so much the vote that was the problem, as it was the charade that led up to the vote.
It was wrong to let tens of million pro life believers hang their deepest hopes on his solemn word that he wouldn’t compromise their most cherished principles–when he knew very well that if it really became necessary he would do precisely that. Stupak’s gamesmanship thus toyed with the deepest emotions of the very people he claimed to champion, adding immensely to their anguish when because of his vote–bringing the Stupak 12 (or whatever number) with him–Obamacare passed without the total ban on government financial involvement in abortion. That was needlessly cruel and marks one of the lowest points in this entire appalling and sorry spectacle.
He deserves to have his “defender of life” award stripped, and deserves to lose the confidence of any pro-life constituent in his district.
Additional thought: If you are tempted to mention the executive order… Constitution 101, executive orders don’t negate law. People on both sides of the issue say it won’t change the law.
Shane Vander Hart
Latest posts by Shane Vander Hart (see all)
- Boulton Should Drop Out of Iowa Governor’s Race and Resign form Iowa Senate - May 24, 2018
- Jim Mowrer’s Illegal Endorsement of Himself - May 23, 2018
- Video: Iowa Democrat Gubernatorial Candidates on Gun Control - May 23, 2018
The bill would have passed without Stupak, he wasn’t the deciding vote and he’s somehow getting all this heat. He was brave to vote the way he did, considering the sort of histrionics he’s facing now. He knew he was going to be the sacrificial lamb here, but he still voted for a very important bill, and perhaps set and example for other cowardly politicians not to be bullied into voting with an eye toward reelection. Sounds like we need more men like Stupak in the Congress who will vote with their conscience.
.-= Guy Incognito´s last blog ..Wolf At the Door =-.
And by the way, how can anybody call Obama the most pro abortion president in history when he just wrote an executive order that is the biggest rollback to abortion in history? Absurd!
Nobody likes abortion, but with the combination of the healthcare bill and the executive order, everything is fine, really. You can relax!
.-= Guy Incognito´s last blog ..Wolf At the Door =-.
@Guy Incognito, Executive Orders can be rescinded at any time, including the very minute after signing them. They’re not like constitutionally provided laws. And when Obama was in the Illinois Senate, he voted to keep the practice of putting live babies on the shelf to die legal. Do check out the records. Obama is so pro-abortion, he voted to allow abortions to take place after the children were born!
.-= John Hitchcock´s last blog ..ObamaCare Roll Call Vote And Call To Action =-.
@John Hitchcock, I’m not sure what you mean by “constitutionally provided laws,” but an executive order is still very much a law. Can it be rescinded by the executive? Well sure, but it’s just not going to happen. Why would Obama waste precious political capital on doing such a thing, when it only does him harm? I think it’s telling that NOW and other pro-abortion groups are so strongly opposed to this executive order, and if you think Obama’s just going to repeal it you are being highly unrealistic.
.-= Guy Incognito´s last blog ..Wolf At the Door =-.
@Guy Incognito, An executive order can’t trump a law Guy, Constitution 101, so in effect it’s meaningless – http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/?p=5501.
Guy, you need to go study the Constitution and law. Your ignorance is stunning. As for Stupak, there is nothing brave or honorable about caving on your so-called fundamental principles for a kiss on the cheek from the One We Have Been Waiting For!
@Tim, and @Shane, I totally understand your confusion guys, executive orders are very complicated subject. While an executive order is not technically legislation, it is a de facto law. While an executive order cannot change existing law, it can certainly modify the implementation of existing law, or create new law.
I don’t blame you for misunderstanding, the Constitution is very complicated and the 101 class really isn’t going to be enough to understand it. Schultz is technically right when she says it won’t “change any law” but this does not mean the executive order will have no effect.
.-= Guy Incognito´s last blog ..Wolf At the Door =-.
I am really suprised that the Stupak MI video did not come out sooner. The real Damage that Stupak did besides throwing millions of babies under the bus, is that he upped the “Cynical Factor”. Every True Pro- Life Canidate will have to say that they DO NOT have a “Smoking Gun” Video that shows thier true intent. Nothing can dishearten someone more than participants (me included) to pray for someone or a politician, for God to protect them, and then to find out it’s all a sham!!!
I don’t know John Mccain’s true intentions, but when He and George Bush and Alan Keyes were in a Presidential debate, Abortion was the subject. Keyes called Mccain on the carpet for his answer. Mccain said it would be a family decision to abort or not abort a grandchild from Megan(Progressive Republican) Mccain.
In this toxic ru for real pro-life enviroment, someone(elected offical) almost has to publicly confess thier sins, ” I almost aborted Tommy or Jane, but gosh darn it, I changed my mind and now thier worth it!!” Or has to truly live thier Pro-life Convictions off the Chart like a Sarah Palin.
If she never become impregnated with Trig, there would be in the back of my mind not necessarily doubting Sarah, just wondering if she was Pro-Life and never had to really struggle with the issues so she would have been Generic pro-life like her running mate in 08′.
One of my favorite sections in the Indiana Pro-life speech was were Sarah compared herself to the Sarah of Old and Sarah telling god that Todd was not Abraham!