Well that was quick. You see, for a few hours today I believed in the existence of moderate Democrats. I really did. For years I thought of moderate Democrats as similar to Bigfoot and Chupacabra. Sure, other people said they saw them but I wasn’t so sure. I’d resisted believing in such a thing for a long time but I relented when I saw Michigan congressman Bart Stupak saying that he was prepared to “torpedo” the Democrat’s healthcare plan as long at it contained public funding of abortion.
Many pro-lifers including me were cheering Stupak. I even said that if he resisted we’d be referring to him as a profile in courage one day.
Do I feel stupid. Video footage of a town hall held in Cheboygan, Mich., on Saturday, shows Stupak saying that he’d vote for the Democrats’ healthcare reform even though it includes public funding for abortion.
If everything I want [is] in the final bill, I like everything in the bill except you have public funding for abortion, and we had a chance to run our amendment and we lost. OK, I voted my conscience, stayed true to my principles, stayed true to the beliefs of this district, could I vote for healthcare? Yes I still could.
So what he’s saying is that he’ll make some efforts to prevent abortion funding but he doesn’t think it’s all that important. Saving the lives of the unborn isn’t as important as pleasing President Obama, I guess. This is like saying that I am opposed to the death penalty, sure, but if I lost and there was no pardon – sure I ‘d pull the trigger.
Congressman Stupak, principles don’t have an expiration date.
HT The Foundry
October 28, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Interesting. Because just yesterday on 760 WJR radio (here in Detroit), he was interviewed and said that he and 39 other Dems will NOT vote for this health care plan if explicit language is not added to the bill that prohibits the use of tax-payer money for abortions. Basically said that the Hyde Amendment has to be in the bill. I listened to the entire interview, and I didn't hear anything like that quote from his townhall meeting.
Here's the url to the podcast of that interview:
http://www.wjr.net/Article.asp?id=%201564252&spid=6525
October 28, 2009 at 10:41 pm
So, let's examine his campaign coffers and see if he was bought off, or if Dem thugs came and "explained" things to him such that he was scared off.
October 29, 2009 at 12:51 am
Well we will have to see what he actually does.
But pro-life Democrats caving is what almost always happens. They talk the talk and then end up going along with the party way too often. They make some noise and then business as usual. They always work to keep the party of abortion in power.
October 29, 2009 at 2:24 am
How about we get behind the guy on his ammendment here folks. Lets concentrate on the immediate fight, realize that he is on the side of the angels on trying to change the bill and worry about what happens if he fails later.
If the good lord ignored our attempts at good and threatened us every time we contemplated evil we would all be miserable almost all of the time.
"Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong." Abraham Lincoln
I will be glad to stand with Bart Stupak while he is right. So fall in and don't complain about the company. If we have to part later, that will be a cause for sorrow, but we will do what we must do.
October 29, 2009 at 12:37 pm
There's a guy who really stands by his principles. Puh! It sounds like he's already planning to fail.
October 29, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Sounds like your typical John Kerry Commu-crat.."I voted against sucking the brains out of that child before I voted to pay for the vacuum."
This "politician" is postering to keep the votes and money while pleasing his communist abortion loving masters, Obama and Nancy Pelosi.
October 29, 2009 at 3:35 pm
The USCCB has put out bulletin inserts and pulpit announcements that it wants utilized ASAP. http://preview.tinyurl.com/ygcd2bd They explicitly state that if the bill doesn't exclude funding of abortion and doesn't provide for conscience protection, it must be opposed. There is no, "Well, we gave it our best shot" option.
October 29, 2009 at 6:57 pm
That's so disappointing.
October 30, 2009 at 1:09 am
I want to say I'm surprised, but I'm not. Too many politicians talk out of both sides of their mouths for this to surprise me.
To give the man the benefit of the doubt, is is possible that he was lying to this group? I mean, he's really being a thorn in the side of the other Dems, and it's surely hurting him within his party. I've heard he has a track record of opposing abortion and then caving, but has he been this much of a leader in those fights before?
October 30, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Yeah, it's bad on the surface, but note the conditionality:
"if we had a chance to run our amendment"…"still could" vote for it. Not exactly a promise to vote for Obamacare.
Look, the odds of Pelosi, Waxman and the Gang granting a vote on that amendment are nearly zero. So, according to his words, he won't vote for it if his amendment doesn't get a vote. However, if for some unexplained reason Pelosi brainlocks and lets Stupak's amendment come up for a vote, the amendment *will* pass. So, no problem from a prolife standpoint.
He's being cagier here than I think we are willing to credit him.
And Matt raises an excellent point: Stupak's leading the charge here. He's taking on the leader of his party, accusing the President of misleading people. This is a new role. The cost of caving essentially means immolating his credibility forever. On any issue, to boot, effectively transmitting "pushover" to all of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
If he still caves, I'll put on the fool's motley and confess my error. But he hasn't done that yet.