Last week, the House passed with bipartisan support the Protect Life Act, which amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) to assure that no taxpayer dollars will be used to fund abortion.
It also assures that health care providers who do not wish to provide abortions are not forced to by government.
The bill’s sponsor, Joe Pitts, R-Pa, had co-sponsored essentially the same amendment along with then-Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., when Obamacare was in the making in 2009.
Because a similar provision was not in the Senate version of the bill, and had no prospect of making it through the Senate, Stupak stood as a major obstacle to the passage of Obamacare.
In the end, the ways of Washington prevailed, and Stupak caved to pressure from the White House. He agreed to support the health care bill without his anti-abortion provision, in exchange for President Obama issuing an executive order prohibiting the use of taxpayer dollars for abortions in health care provided in the framework of Obamacare.
An executive order is a flimsy substitute for law, thus Pitts found another pro-life Democrat, Dan Lipinski, of Illinois, to co-sponsor his amendment, which has now passed the House 251-172.
However Pitts’ new bill faces the same prospects as the amendment that he co-sponsored with Stupak in 2009. Its chances of passage in the Senate are remote.
So why bother?
After the bill passed, I was asked on a PBS talk show, “To the Contrary,” if Republicans were being frivolous in taking up congressional floor time to deal with abortion when what Americans want today is congressional action on the economy.
My response was “No, we can walk and chew gum at the same time, and actually in light of Obamacare, it is critical for lawmakers to protect health care workers and hospitals with a conscience clause.”
In fact, the attention that the bill has gotten in the short time since it passed the House indicates that the level of interest in abortion, and the potential use of taxpayer funds for it, remains high.
Two high-post Democrats — former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, of California, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, of Florida and Democratic National Committee chairwoman — issued statements criticizing the bill shortly after it passed.
Read more here.
Tea Party groups roundly condemned Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa after he called on union supporters unhappy with congressional Republicans to “take these son-of-a-bitches out.”
The Tea Party Express called the comments “inexcusable,” saying they amounted to “a call for violence on peaceful Tea Party members.”
The national group, along with Tea Party Nation, urged President Obama to condemn the remarks delivered by Hoffa while warming up the crowd Monday before a Labor Day speech by the president. The White House so far has not commented on Hoffa’s strong language.
Teamsters Leader Attacks Tea Party Before Obama’s Speech
President talks jobs and economy at union rally in Detroit
“Lying attacks on the tea party movement have disturbingly increased in recent days. It is high time that elected leaders like President Obama were held accountable when their key supporters engage in harmful and divisive rhetoric,” Tea Party Express Chairwoman Amy Kremer said in a statement. “We at Tea Party Express demand an immediate apology from Teamster President Jimmy Hoffa. We further urge President Obama to strongly rebuke Hoffa for his dangerous comments.”
Hoffa is standing by his comment, telling the blog Talking Points Memo that he’d say it again because “they declared war on us. We’re fighting back.”
Hoffa used the war analogy during his warm-up talk for the president in Detroit.
“President Obama, this is your army, we are ready to march,” Hoffa said. “But everybody here’s got to vote. If we go back, and keep the eye on the prize, let’s take these son-of-a-bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong.”
The president did not reference the remarks during his speech Monday afternoon. Asked about Hoffa’s comments Tuesday, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz declined to condemn them.
Read more here.
The progs are in full swing when it comes to marginalizing the Tea Party. Let’s take a look at what the left has had to say about the Tea Party just over the last few days, shall we?
* Chief dogwasher David Axelrod is already writing off any future Republican nominee saying, “it doesn’t really matter who the Republican nominee is because every single one of them have now embraced the dogma of the tea party right.”
* MSNBC featured a liberal religious expert by the name of Frank Schaeffer: “Barack Obama is going to be reelected and reelected with a big margin, because I think that people understand, a lot of ordinary Americans who aren’t on the religious right understand something and that is as the first African-American president, he has been up against a racist white bloc in the Republican Party that has come dressed as the tea party, the religious right, all sorts of excuses.”
* Over the weekend, Harry Reid tried to downplay the tea party’s influence: “The tea party was the result of a terrible economy … I’ve said that many times, and I believe that .. That [the tea party] will pass. They will lose a number of seats next year.”
* In the wake of the Iowa straw poll on Saturday, Debbie Wasserman Shultz did her best to demonize the tea party: “All of the Republican candidates have made clear their allegiance to the tea party, supporting extreme policies that would hurt the middle class, seniors, and students. The only winner tonight was the tea party.”
Do you know what all of this means? Of course you do. The Democrats are scared to death of the tea parties. Say “tea party” to a prog and stand back while they look for a piece of furniture to hide under.
It’s been a while since we’ve heard from Democrat National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. I can understand why. She is ripe with over-the-top quotes that do nothing to further an intellectual debate. In short .. she’s the perfect person to have running the DNC. She’s a loon, and you can only imagine the type of people who vote in her district. Before we continue, let us recount a few of her recent quotes, shall we?
“Seniors would pay more and more each year for their health insurance. No longer would Medicare be a guarantee of health insurance coverage. Instead Medicare would become little more than a discount card. This plan would literally be a death trap for seniors.”
“It’s just so hard for me to grasp how [Republicans] could be so anti-women as they are. The pushback and the guttural reaction from women against the Republican’s agenda out of the gate, the war on women that the Republicans have been waging since they took over the House, I think is going to not only restore but possibly helps us exceed the president’s margin of victory in the next election.”
“[Spending cuts] will hurt people who have cancer and kids who are trying to get Pell grants to go to college. We really have to remember, we’re not just spending on, you know, big government bloated programs, the spending we appropriate helps real people.”
“[I]f you go back to the year 2000, when we had an obvious disaster and – and saw that our voting process needed refinement, and we did that in the America Votes Act and made sure that we could iron out those kinks, now you have the Republicans, who want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws and literally – and very transparently – block access to the polls to voters who are more likely to vote Democratic candidates than Republican candidates. And it’s nothing short of that blatant.”
On that last bit – about blocking access to the polls – you do know what she was talking about, don’t you? She’s talking about the Republicans actually wanting people to show a picture ID to vote – so they can prove that they are the people they say they are when they show up at the polls. That’s dragging us back to Jim Crow.
So now that we have some of those out of the way … yesterday, Debbie Wasserman Schultz chimed in on the issue of raising the debt ceiling. This woman actually had the audacity to accuse the Republicans of “reckless rhetoric.” Seriously! Wasserman-Schultz accuses Republicans of reckless rhetoric?
Debbie does Democrats is upset that her counterpart in the GOP said that not raising the debt ceiling would “not the end of the world,” Schultz says, “This sort of reckless rhetoric is detrimental to the efforts of President Obama and Congressional leaders to find a responsible solution to getting our fiscal house in order…” It’s amazing that this woman thinks that she can lecture Republicans about their “reckless rhetoric” while being known for her own hyperbolized yakking. While she is in the business of lambasting “reckless rhetoric,” why doesn’t she have anything to say about her Dear Ruler?
Obviously, high unemployment, slow growth, housing crash, and other manifestations of a bad economy are the fault of GOP. Republicans failed to vote with Democrats in spending those extra couple of trillion dollars that would have made things right as rain:
In a Capitol press conference Wednesday, the Senate’s top Democrats argued that Republicans don’t want to pass measures like a temporary payroll tax holiday for employers because they’ll improve President Obama’s re-election chances.
“Our Republican colleagues in the House and Senate are driven by putting one man out of work: President Obama,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL).
The harshest denunciation came from Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the man who crafted the Dems’ new “jobs first” message.
“We are also open to hiring incentives, perhaps in the form of a payroll tax cut for employers that was floated by the administration…. [T]hat might not be our first choice, that shows how willing we are to work with the Republicans to create jobs. It’s pro-business, it’s a tax cut, and many Republicans have been for it in the past. But now all of a sudden they’re coming out against it,” Schumer said.
As DNC chair Wasserman-Schultz said recently, Democrats now “own” the economy. That’s not really true as long as they continue to eschew responsibility for how bad it is.
Holy Howard Dean! Did Debbie Wasserman-Schultz actually say that? Did she really hand Republicans all across the country the hammer with which to pound home the message that the Democratic Party , “Owns the economy?” Apparently she did. That a Google news search doesn’t turn up any coverage of her claim on the so-called major networks or in the mainstream press tells you that her fellow travelers know she has stepped in it big time. You can’t put a dollar value on that kind of colossal dumbness. Imagine the Clinton Administration proclaiming, “We own all those bimbos.”
Just when we thought the Democrats couldn’t cough up a goofier hair ball than Howard Dean, they disgorge Little Debbie Dumbcakes. I love this woman, as should all you good conservatives and Republicans out there. If her office will send me a stamped, self-addressed envelope, I’ll send her a campaign contribution. We really, really need to keep this liberal genius in Washington, fighting for our side.
I hate to cadge a tag line, MasterCard, but this is truly, truly priceless…
Democratic leaders are now calling on Rep. Anthony Weiner to resign after the New York lawmaker embroiled in a Twitter scandal admitted he had online contact with a Delaware teenager.
National party chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz says Weiner’s behavior is “indefensible” and his role in Congress is “untenable.”
The Florida congresswoman says “this sordid affair has become an unacceptable distraction” for everyone.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California says Weiner “needs help” and he should get some “without the pressures of being a member of Congress.”
Weiner has now requested a leave of absence to get “treatment.” Read about that, as well as how others have called for his resignation.
The loose cannon DNC Chair is at it again, mouthing stupidities. Via JournOlister Ben Smith of Politico:
…now you have the Republicans, who want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws and literally – and very transparently – block access to the polls to voters who are more likely to vote Democratic candidates than Republican candidates. And it’s nothing short of that blatant.
It is old hat for Democrats to accuse Republicans of racism. But where are the GOP proposals to actually pass new Jim Crow laws, enforcing legal segregation in schools, restaurants, transit, drinking fountains, and the like. That is exactly what DWS accuses them of doing.
She also accuses Republicans of wanting to be obvious about blocking access to polls.
Obviously Dim Bulb Debbie does not understand the difference between “figuratively” and “literally.” Peter Wehner of Commentary noticed this last week, but even this helpful reminder failed to make an impression on the DNC chair or anyone with access to her. As Peter put it: “For some of us Wasserman Schultz’s answers are figuratively, if not literally, like fingernails scratching a chalkboard.”