Posted on 11/15/2009 2:51:46 PM PST by mmanager
Axelrod Signals Obama Will Try to Strip Abortion Language From Health Care Bill by FOXNews.com
The amendment, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., went beyond preventing the proposed government-run plan from covering abortion to restrict federal subsidies from going toward private plans that offer abortion coverage. David Axelrod says the amendment changes the 'status quo,' something the president cannot abide.
White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod suggested Sunday that President Obama will intervene to make sure a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion coverage is stripped from final health care reform legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Simply put, the abortion language will get pulled, the masses will go back to sleep, the Obamacare bill will pass the Sinate.....and then, lo and behold, later an undetected loophole will be found to enable taxpayer-funded abortions in the future.
Is there ONE freeper who believes in the sincerity of this sudden announcement by O'Lucifer himself.....or who believes the Dims will give up 'abortion', the mothers' milk of the radical liberal agenda?
Rush will analyze and expose this ruse tomorrow, I have no doubt.
Leni
He must not want it to pass. I wonder why?
I thought they were called ‘signing orders’...
Obama’s into the game because he prefers government financed forced post-partem abortions.
Ouch. Tell us how you really feel:)
Connecting the dots:
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/read/3275/who-is-david-axelrod—obamas-political-advisor/
okay, so let me put this in writing.
Here’s the Repub spin....let’s see if they get a clue.
Do NOT argue, not for one second, that a child is a child at conception. Don’t even go there.
Just suggest that pregnancy is very preventable nowadays. So why should the taxpayer pay for an abortion that could have been prevented?
Believe me, across the fruited plains ordinary Americans who carry this country on their backs will buy this argument in a minute. Keeps out the vitriol on the subject of when life begins....which would give the Dems a chance to point fingers at the pubs who would keep females pregnant and barefoot for their entire lives.
If things really get bad, the pubs could mention, just throwing it out there, that very few private plans pay for abortion either.
I mean hey, an abortion at a clinic costs maybe five or six hundred bucks, not much more. I know that’s not chump change but it’s do-able for most folks if desperate enough. All this arguing over such a silly thing.
The pubs got a sure thing on this one. Let’s see how it goes.
I would have paid for his mother to have an abortion....
If they take abortion funding out of the bill, then it is acceptable? I am as pro-life as anyone on this forum, but I don’t want any healthcare bill whether or not it has abortion funding in it. It’s causing a red herring for the blue dogs to vote for the bill if the funding is not in the bill.
It already has passed the House.
++++++++++++++++++++
It’ll have to pass at least once more. The dims are gunna have to battle this out - as most Americans are basically against abortion, and the vast majorty against forcing the taxpayer to fund abortion.
Not sure. I’m as prolife as they come, and I would have voted against it. Nancy used this one to have the right provide cover for the blue dogs. The repubs went right along with it and although they won the amendment, they went down on the big vote as a result. Can you say played like a fiddle?
Ooooh! Yul Brynner shirtless! Be still my heart!!! :)
I always thought of Conservatives as having a bit in common with some Ukrainians under Stalin who didn’t follow the ideals of communism..most were hard-working farmers who just wanted to feed their family and be left alone by the govt.
I am bewildered by what I see as inanely illogical arguments such as this. None of us have absolute control over what we do with our bodies. For instance, if there is a history of prostate cancer in a man's family, will a reputable surgeon accommodate his wish to have his healthy prostate gland removed to ensure he never gets this disease?
If there is a history of breast cancer in a woman's family, would a creditable physician remove her healthy breasts at her request?
Though pro-abortionists know very well that a baby developing in the womb is an entirely separate entity, therefore not the "woman's body" in any sense, their mantra about a woman's rights is completely false.
Through their own actions, women conceive; the baby doesn't miraculously attach itself to her body.
Their silly reasoning is full of holes.
GOOD POINT !
Abortion is not the main issue here but a meaningfull point showing that obamaobots want to rule US society via Public “Health CARE”.
They could withdraw abortion from the bill in order to get the votes in the Senate...After that they will do EVERYTHING THEY WANT with their new Public Health CARE SSocialist weapon.
CROOCKS ARE CROOCKS all the time
Did Zero say this ...or is Axelrod telling the Puppet in Chief WHAT he will do.
Abortion is just an excuse to save face.
Not only that, but I think the RINO Republicans are in on it. Had they not voted at all for the abortion bill (present), it would have forced the democrats to do it alone, and they wouldn't have taken that chance. The bill would have been defeated rather than passed.
They will probably change the language so that it sounds like ir prohibits abortion funding, but it really doesn't.
So when did “they” pass the line item veto? I mssed that one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.