Kind of an odd strategy for anti-abortionists to go after a fellow anti-abortionist for taking a principled stand against abortion. But when it comes to the Tea Baggers – failure is the new success. Perhaps 2 wrongs do make a right.
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bart Stupak: Retirement Decision Not Politically Motivated – Political Hotsheet – CBS News http://bit.ly/bA1ACa
#9 “…Pro-Abortionists are just as pissed off at Stupak and the Anti-abortionists.”
No one that I have ever heard about is Pro-Abortion. The correct term would have to be Pro-Choice.
#22 ramuno said, “No one that I have ever heard about is Pro-Abortion.”
Not true. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Euthanasia: “According to the church’s website, the one commandment is “Thou shalt not procreate”. The CoE further asserts four principal pillars: suicide, abortion, cannibalism (“strictly limited to consumption of the already dead”), and sodomy (“any sexual act not intended for procreation”).”
ramuno…didn’t you read the bill? on page 4,274 it says: “…abortions are mandatory for every female over age 17, they will be rammed down their throats.”
Don’t know about you, but I don’t want anything rammed down my throat. Frankly, I think the guys who say that most often think otherwise.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
#22. I am afraid I must disagree with your assessment. Their stated value of “pro-choice” is only valid so long as the woman chooses abortion. I can find no evidence that those who advocate “choice” are anything other than pro-abortion. If they were really “pro-choice,” they would have no objection to women being advised that the “tissue” being removed has a heartbeat.
#25 One would have thought that an Eagle Scout could develop better critical thinking skills than you have.
Pro-choice means that women can choose to have an abortion or (and here’s the part that escapes you) choose not to have an abortion.
Glad to help.
#25 What evidence are you looking for? I advocate choice but am not pro-abortion. Who in their right mind is pro-abortion? That’s a label you ding bats agreed to use for effect. I just roll my eyes.
#26 LOL. Help them eagle scouts.
beaglescout: And here I was thinking “choice” meant one had options from which to choose.
Phydeau…becoming an Eagle Scout ain’t what it used to be. The percentage of Scouts who achieve it has doubled while the number of total Scouts has fallen by more than half.
Marc Perkel said,
It’s called an original article. Someone has to write stuff that others point to.
Three sentences is an article? Wow that’s pretty impressive. I guess this is an article too then…
Not Perkel again! John – please revoke his posting authority from your blog.
Thanks.
Funny, the people who are so pro-choice on the subject of abortion are only too happy to see our choices limited by government intervention in so many other areas.
18 years in Congress is long enough for anybody, regardless of party affiliation. Time to get a real job, Mr. Stupid.
#29 I was thinking just that. However doesn’t an article have to be more than just an attention grabbing headline? Shouldn’t it have sources, and an actual story to back the headline up?
A shout out to Marc Perkel for this short and to the point article.
Some prefer article with word fluff, pointers and pronunciation tips. Not me. Like food, I don’t like fillers and empty calories.
Well done. Marc P
You should get more of an understanding of the Tea Party than what MSM spoon feeds you.
The Tea Party is against Big Government and More Taxes. Nothing less, nothing more.
It is NOT a political party that has anti-abortion as one of it’s planks. It has only one objective.
Members may lean to being social conservatives as well. But definitely not all.
# 35 EvilPoliticians said: “The Tea Party is against Big Government and More Taxes.”
Hmm… if one is for a smaller government, doesn’t it logically follow you’d want fewer regulations, less oversight and more privacy?
And wouldn’t that logically follow that the choice to carry a fetus to term falls on the individual and *not* on the government?
So why is it that apparently a lot of so-called “conservatives” or “tea partiers” are anti-choice? The real answer is there’s no logic, IMNSHO it’s a religious choice. The Christian Taliban trying to impose their values on others.
Personally, I’m against abortion, but I’m pro-choice and it has been proven, in court, that it is a constitutional right. You know, a little thing called Roe v. Wade.
I deeply respect activism, even if I don’t agree with some activist’s opinions. However, I have no respect for dishonest activism. Dishonest in terms of disguising religious dogma as something else; intellectually dishonest (as in being against something because Rush or Beck said so, not because one really thought through the issue or gathered comprehensive information); or dishonest in terms of pretending astroturfing is the same as grassroots.
#4: Let’s rephrase that:
“Obama wants him to stay, that alone means he’s more principled than most politicians.”
#36 Arpie has it right on abortion: he’s against abortion personally, but also respects the rights of others to disagree with him, and to make their own decisions about abortion. That’s a principled stand.
Priceless! It’s because of their propensity for making statements like this that the Tea Party groups don’t get any more respect than they do:
“There is a silent majority who are tired of their voices not being heard.”
Eh? Did someone say something? WHAT?
is there a story here or was this a Mad-Libs playback?
“Kind of a ________ strategy for __________s to go after a _________ ________ for taking a principled _________ against __________…”
Under extreme pressure Stupak sold out his “principled stand” for a meaningless piece of paper. The point of the post seems to be that “anti-abortionists” acted against their best interests. But I’m sure most “anti-abortionists” are conservatives and thus in disagreement with Stupak’s stands on many issues. His retirement may pave the way for a successor who is more in line with their views in an election year that promises to be good for Republicans.
The real lesson from Stupak’s sellout is that in trying to please everyone he ended up pleasing almost no one.