Stupak, The Latest To Sell His Soul.

Congressman Bart Stupak who lead the group of brave persons who stood up against their own Party to stop tax money from being used to murder more infants, sells out over a phony promise from Obama.

He gave up his vote based on a promise by Obama, that even though abortion is funded with tax dollars in the Health Care Bill, Obama will then make a Presidential Order stating the opposite. The problem? A Presidential Order can never trump the contents of a Bill. Stupak knows this fully well. He also knows that Obama or any other President can rescind the Order at will. He knows the only thing that matters is what is in the Bill.

What did he cost to buy? I think I know.

STUPAK ANNOUNCES $726,409 FOR AIRPORTS IN
ALPENA, DELTA AND CHIPPEWA COUNTIES

For just $726,409.00 did Stupak force people who believe abortion is murder to help pay for the slaughter of the unborn? Did he place the value of a human being at under $1????

What else did he get? Keep your eye on his website. I'm sure more payoffs ares coming. His voters should know he is lying about being pro-LIFE and is actually pro-DEATH.

reply to post by Blaine91555

He gave up his vote based on a promise by Obama, that even though abortion is funded with tax dollars in the Health Care Bill, Obama will then make a Presidential Order stating the opposite. The problem? A Presidential Order can never trump the contents of a Bill.

Good thing he isn't just stating the opposite...he is going to be enforcing the current law that prohibits federal funding to abortion.

So it isn't going to just be Obama's words...it is current law that will trump whatever is in the bill about abortion.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Nice try, but the Senate Bill, which is what they are voting on, does pay for abortion. Reconciliation can not change that and they know that. What Reconciliation can do is very limited.

Stupak held out to the last minute to get all he could in the form of bribes. Call them what you want, but these are bribes.

I'm 100% for Health Care Reform. I just don't want my money to pay for murder, nor do I think the government has a right to mandate Insurance. The majority of voters agree with me.

Abortion:

The bill segregates private insurance premium funds from taxpayer funds. Individuals would have to pay for abortion coverage by making two separate payments, private funds would have to be kept in a separate account from federal and taxpayer funds.

No health care plan would be required to offer abortion coverage. States could pass legislation choosing to opt out of offering abortion coverage through the exchange.

But dont let the facts interfere with this thread...this is all about saying shocking stuff, not true stuff.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Not True

The Senate version expands the Hyde Amendment to allow community health services to be federally funded for abortions.

The Hamdam Vs. Rumsfeld decision included the opinion that a Presidential Order does not trump existing law. Even though it was about a different subject the fact remains. The Executive Branch can not legislate. The Democrats argued the same as I am at that time. Now they say the opposite?

"By offering an executive order as a so-called solution, President Obama is finally admitting there is a problem with a bill that would force taxpayers to pay for elective abortions for the first time in over three decades. However, there is no way that an executive order will protect the unborn or prevent the greatest expansion of elective abortion since Roe v. Wade.

"Pro-life lawmakers would be making a serious mistake to trust those who have repeatedly attempted to mislead the American people into believing that abortion is not in the bill.

President Obama and the Democratic leadership know that such a plan, due to legal precedent, would be worth little in the long run. Court rulings in cases such as Commerce of U.S. v Reich and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld make it very clear that such an executive order likely wouldn't survive.

Did you argue that the Democrats were wrong when they agreed with what I'm saying? It was wrong when Bush did it and it is wrong now.
[edit on 3/21/2010 by Blaine91555]

[edit on 3/21/2010 by Blaine91555]

I would like to add here that I am neither a Democrat or Republican. This is not a Partisan matter with me.

I too want Health Care Reform but I doubt either Party could fix anything due to Partisan Politics. We need new people in office before anything can be fixed.

I also share the opinion of most Americans that funding Abortion with tax money is wrong. No person should be forced by the government to participate in paying for what they consider murder.

reply to post by Blaine91555

WASHINGTON, DC – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement on a potential Executive Order from the White House on abortion:

“The law of the land trumps any Executive Order, which can be reversed or altered at the stroke of a pen by this or any subsequent President without any congressional approval or notice. Moreover, while an Executive Order can direct members of the executive branch, it cannot direct the private sector.

“Because of Roe v. Wade, courts have interpreted the decision as a statutory mandate that the government must provide federal funding for elective abortion in through federal programs. In other words, no Executive Order or regulation can override a statutory mandate unless Congress passes a law that prohibits federal funding from being used in this manner. Legal experts at the US Catholic Conference of Bishops, National Right to Life Committee, Americans United for Life, and Family Research Council have confirmed this view that if the Senate bill is signed into law, it is a statutory mandate for the new health plans to include federal funding of elective abortion. The need for an Executive Order is evidence that this is true, and Congressional Democrats know it. Make no mistake, a ‘yes’ vote on the Democrats’ health care bill is a vote for taxpayer-funded abortions.”

Because of Roe v. Wade, courts have interpreted the decision as a statutory mandate that the government must provide federal funding for elective abortion in through federal programs. In other words, no Executive Order or regulation can override a statutory mandate unless Congress passes a law that prohibits federal funding from being used in this manner.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Exactly right and due to the Hyde Amendment it is limited to cases of Rape, Incest or the Mothers Life being in danger.

The problem is that the Bill being voted on today, funds community medical centers without such a provision, leaving it up to the facilities. We all know where that will lead.

If they have nothing to hide, why all the lies and deception. Why is it so important to go against the wishes of the majority of Americans and trick us into paying for elective abortion which is murder.

What kind of a sick person would even be involved in this? Only the sick people we find in our government which is nothing more than an organized crime mob answering to whomever will pay them the most.

Today when they vote, they will all know that a majority of Americans are opposed to them voting yes. Do they care? NO!

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Congressman Bart Stupak who lead the group of brave persons who stood up against their own Party to stop tax money from being used to murder more infants, sells out over a phony promise from Obama.

Murder Infants???????

According to wiki:

It is typically applied to children between the ages of 1 month and 12 months

en.wikipedia.org...

Sorry Blaine a tad over the top. If I've told you once I've told you a MILLION times....stop exaggerating. I won't even address the "Sold his Soul" headline.

The bill will probably SAVE more infants than harm any. Did you mean unborn fetuses? Cause that is another story.

[edit on 21-3-2010 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by Blaine91555


Health Care Nullification Legislation
www.tenthamendmentcenter.com...

can I drop this here?

reply to post by Blaine91555

which is nothing more than an organized crime mob answering to whomever will pay them the most.

exactly

reply to post by kinda kurious


From the moment a sperm joins with an egg and the cell first divides, a unique human being exists, with the same rights as a one day old child. That is my belief. You ask me to therefore condone murder. It is you that is being irrational to demand I accept that a child does not have rights equal to that of it's Mother.

Would you ask me to likewise condone the killing of children in orphanages or those who have handicaps? There is no difference in my mind. If you and your soul can live with the murder of children for convenience, that is your choice. All I ask is you not force your belief on me and not force me to help pay for it.

Are you not saying you are for choice as long as it matches your opinion? That is exactly what you are saying. You are quite frankly opposed to choice.


[edit on 3/21/2010 by Blaine91555]

reply to post by Stormdancer777


I have been watching The House all day long. One thing mentioned that should be obvious is that opposition to the Bill is Bi-Partisan and approval of the Bill is Partisan by definition. Not all of the majority sold out their constituents.

The last polling numbers I saw showed that a full three quarters of voters are opposed to this specific legislation and government control of health care. Nearly all of us, including me want health care reform and being an Independent, I don't care which Party it comes from. This however is a travesty being passed by people who don't care that they are going against the wishes, of a super-majority of voters. Representative government; I THINK NOT!

How anyone can remain loyal to either party escapes me? I can only conclude most of us are asleep at the wheel and base our politics on sound bites and which person is the most charismatic or attractive.

Did any of you watch Stupak as he responded to the latest motion. He looked down and not at the camera while he tried to explain how a Presidential Order was enough for him to sell out. I went from a profound respect for him to a realization today, he is just another clown in a Representatives clothes, who lied about who he is to get elected.

As much as I despise Pelosi, I have more respect for her because she was up front about her beliefs. Stupak is most certainly another con-man.

Oh well, for those interested. Stupak ended up admitting that Pro-Life language is impossible in the Senate and that he would take the Presidential Order for now. He plans on pursuing other legislation at a later date. That will never happen. The vote is over and he sold out, now he is trying to save himself.

Obama votes 100% Pro-Abortion and is 100% for Late Term Abortion. Considering he has no remorse when he breaks promises, I don't hold much hope. Some of my money will go towards the slaughter of innocent lives.

Another evil forced upon me by people who don't give a damn about me or you. Another nail in our coffin and again my freedom of choice taken away.

Why can't the government get their damn nose out of these matters. Abortion is not a political topic. Is there nothing they won't try to control? It would seem not. Party of choice, my ass.

I picked Stupak because he is such a classic case of the con game they are pulling on us. Holding out to the last moment for some bribe that we will discover shortly. He pretended to care about innocent life to get elected and now all those who voted for him know he is a LIAR. Had he held his ground and kept his coalition together, the reconciliation bill would not have passed. It is now a given that if you are a Democrat, you must be Pro-Abortion. They took your choice away again.

On another board I was just on, their is actually a person there, obviously a Party Operative, who is now saying that Pro-Life people are not really Pro-Life. We are all liars. I won't bore you with the argument used beyond that. I see what method they are using now to cover up for the trick they just played on the Pro-Life people in their own party.

Once human life means nothing, how far can it be to things like the elimination of the less than perfect? The withholding of care from the Elderly? Millions are slaughtered annually and yet those who fully approve have the nerve to pretend it is any less evil than those killed in wars? They scream from the rooftops the sanctity of human life, until it means they may have to raise the child they conceived and then it is not even a life nor does their child have any right to live.

...and to my friend who said I sensationalize to much, can one truly sensationalize to much about a honestly held belief that abortion is murder? I hold each unborn child's life as being equal to your life. They both have the same value in my mind.

Think of me what you will, but I'm the genuine article. I'm a pacifist, a lover of life and a protector of life, which I hold dear above all else. I've been pronounced dead twice in my lifetime. Once in a wreck and once on an operating table and I assure you, life is dear to me. Every year is precious and every person is as valuable as any other, whether they be newly conceived or a 100 years old.



[edit on 3/21/2010 by Blaine91555]

[edit on 3/21/2010 by Blaine91555]

reply to post by Blaine91555


Blaine,

In your reply to my post you made many assumptions about me and put words in my mouth. Many quantum leaps of logic were suggested. Rather than a point by point rebuttal I will simply say that I am disappointed by your inferences. It is obvious you are passionate about this subject and that s your right. Inasmuch as we may disagree on when life begins, it saddens me that you have fallen from your usually high standards of logic and reasonabilty.

For the record, I DO NOT subscribe to killing babies as your OP erroneously suggests.
However, I DO feel that a woman has the right to do with her own body whatever she sees fit.

I did, in fact, watch the entire vote last evening. In your compelling depiction of Mr. Stupak's demeanor (which I disagree with, he was not acting shameful) you neglected to mention a member of the Republican Party shouted out "Baby Killer." Classy. I might expect such banter outside the hall of this hallowed institution, but not in chamber. A new low for the Party of No. (Funny how moras and value are often a one-way street for some.) It is obvious you turned on him (like the neocons) because he served you no further purpose in promoting your agenda.

We don't agree and I'm cool with that, but kindly refrain from putting words in my mouth. You know NOTHING of my personal or moral convictions.

Congratulations to America for passing this Landmark legislation.

EDIT TO ADD:

Randy Neugebauer (R-Tex.) identified himself as the member of congress who shouted "baby killer" during Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich.) speech on the floor of the House of Representatives Sunday night.

www.huffingtonpost.com...
Figures.........

[edit on 22-3-2010 by kinda kurious]