Meet Bart Stupak's replacement: Dr Dan Benishek

You can go to know him on facebook here.

UPDATE: I corrected my previous misspelling of Dr Benishek's name. Sorry Doc!

---

Hey Bart Stupak: Planned Parenthood Sends Their Thanks

Hi, Bart. I thought you might want to see this.

I received an email from the Planned Parenthood mailing list this morning, and it contained this paragraph:

We were able to keep the Stupak abortion ban out of the final legislation, and President Obama did not include the Stupak language in his Executive Order. Unfortunately, the bill does include the Nelson amendment, which will impose new and severe restrictions on private health insurance coverage for abortion for millions of women. And no doubt we will have to beat back more attacks on women's health as the Senate considers the final health care reform package. We'll let you know when we'll need your help in the days and weeks ahead.

Yes, you heard right, Bart. Ben Nelson's Cornhusker Kickback did more for the pro-life cause than you did. At least he got his thirty pieces of silver.

And note that Planned Parenthood's President, Cecile Richards, highlights the fact that the legislation is unaltered first; that's no doubt because she knows that the Executive Order that you asked for doesn't alter the law as passed -- there's this little thing called "the separation of powers" that prevents the executive branch from overriding the legislative branch.

I would think that a long-time Congressman like you would know that. After all, you weren't subject to the decay of education that's happened since the unconsitutional Department of Education was born under our second-most-awful President, Jimmy Carter. (I know it's too early to see the effect of the Healthcare bill, but I think we're safe granting the top title to Obama already.)

Of course, I think this whole executive order thing is a fig leaf anyway. This video shows how insincere you were all along, and I only wish it were around earlier so the pretense could have been dropped:

So, you were never sincere about your pro-life stance, and you showed that either you're stupid (by believing that the EO is worth something) or conniving (because you're using it as an excuse). Before that, you were never one of us conservatives, but at least you looked like you had a spine. You appeared to have something rare in a politician: a spine. Now you're despised by both right and left, and a hollow man to the center. Is it any wonder that the world is noting the similarity between "Stupid" and "Stupak"?

Sincerely,
Jake Freivald

P.S. By the way, "Sincerely" means "I mean what I say."

---

Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards Convinces Jake That He's Pro-Choice

Cecile Richards article at the Huffington Post shocked me. I agree with her so much.

She's talking about the abortion-related compromise made with Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska:

Under this new language, anyone -- men and women of all ages -- who participates in an insurance plan that includes abortion coverage is required to write two separate premium checks each month: one for abortion care and one for everything else. I'm just trying to picture my son writing out his health insurance payment, and then writing another check for his part of the "abortion coverage."

Damned right! Why on earth is your son being forced to pay for coverage he doesn't need?

This new "extra" payment for abortion coverage is akin to an abortion rider -- as if women would take these extra steps to pay for insurance, with a separate check, that included abortion coverage. Women don't plan an unplanned or problem pregnancy any more than they plan for a heart attack. But they expect that they have coverage nonetheless.

Also right! This is coverage that many women wouldn't take, including my mother, my mother-in-law, my wife, my sisters-in-law, and, I hope and pray for the future, my daughters. Not just because the term "insurance" doesn't apply -- Do you buy "insurance" for something that's physically impossible? Do you buy insurance the only purpose of which is to destroy something that you want? -- but because they find it morally reprehensible. So yes, it's a rider, for women who want this kind of coverage.

But that's not all: Cecile and I also agree that people need insurance coverage for things that aren't planned. My health insurance covers unplanned heart attacks. My life insurance covers unplanned death. My homeowner's insurance covers unplanned fires and theft. People should buy insurance for things that they don't plan to have happen.

I guess Cecile and I differ a little bit. I mean, I can choose the amount of my life insurance, or even have none; I can choose the deductible on my homeowner's insurance. I don't understand why Cecile says that I can't choose to not have abortion coverage. That even her son can't choose not to have abortion coverage.

I'm not even sure I can explain it to my husband. He's pro-choice, but I'm not sure he's going to get why he's supposed to write a check each month to pay for abortion coverage.

Cecile, according to Wikipedia, you graduated from Brown in 1980. That puts you something north of fifty years old. Why should he write a check each month to pay for abortion coverage?

Yeah, I'd have to say that I'm pro-choice with respect to abortion insurance.

---

Mathews, Bishop Tobin, Abortion and Kennedy

An interesting brouhaha has broken out over the issue of abortion in recent days in regard to Democrat House of Representative's Patrick Kennedy and the alleged "communion" scandal. And while I would love to link to an absolutely appalling Chris Matthews "interview" of the Bishop, I won't. And the reason I won't is that Matthews was offensive and didn't even bother to address the issue. Just the fact that the Bishop has the audacity to challenge a liberal in public is apparently a problem.

Here is my take. Many of you are aware that I do not believe in abortion. However, that is not the point of our blog so it is something I (and Jake) comment on when timely but do not dwell upon. But when Kennedy and others while campaigning are proud to be Catholic and then when voting in the congress, become zeolots for the abortion culture, I believe it is time for the Church to speak publically.

For too long, the Catholic hierarchy has tolerated the murder for convenience of millions of unborn children. And it has tolerated politicians who claim to be Catholic when convenient for votes but go beyond pure dissent into the world of apostasy when promoting the culture of abortion.

Thank God Bishop Tobin has made the statement he has. And even when Chris Matthews chooses to trash this man who has nothing bad to say about Representative Kennedy and has even said he is praying for him, we should all recognize that the church isn't trying to make policy. It is FINALLY making a statement. And the statement is long overdue.

---

Cartoon: John Francis Borra on the Democrats' Health Care Reform

This is a good one:



Find the original here.

---

It's about time - Catholics stand up!

For the purpose of our readers, I am a Roman Catholic. I didn't ask his permission but Jake is as well. One of the issues that has always troubled me in the Catholic community are elected politicians who are practicing Catholics and promote abortion. I am not talking about someone who balances belief in the tenets of a politicians philosophy with a passive agreement with abortion. I am talking about someone who promotes abortion as a talking point to make them unique in New Jersey or the US.

Our Catholic Bishops are late in dealing with this issue. They have too often watched idly as politicians like Kerry or Biden or Pelosi mis-state Catholic doctrine. The also seem to tacitly agree to shut up while accepting some alleged benefit for their congregation but in doing so become a part of the practice themselves. But apparently now, Catholic Priests are standing up.

Check out this site. My wife and I know a lady who is far more agressive than we are at challenging people to explain their support for liberals and abortion. Her heart is most definitely in the right place and maybe she doesn't go far enough. You can't support life while supporting people who promote abortion for convenience. Period.

It isn't about the inflexibility about the girl who was raped. It is about retaining the right to kill a child born alive through a botched abortion. Only one hypothetical is discussed but the facts don't match up. I am not a radical in this regard. But I also don't believe that deciding to match a lack of attention to birth control enables someone to abort an "inconvenience" on demand. I call that a child and frankly, if the liberal community is honest, the only real systematic hollacaust in this country is the mass abortion of black children for convenience and promoted by the Democratic party. Period.

---