Yet when it comes time, he will cave and vote yes.
I’m tired of this guy and his games.
Basically, Rep. Stupak is coming to the same conclusion I came to a few years ago; the leftist moonbats within the Democratic party no longer need their more conservative counterparts. And that’s bad news. Particularly for conservatives. You see, the more conservative side of the Democratic party used to be able to keep the moonbats in check. Not any more.
There is an ebb and flow in American politics. One party will win for awhile, and then the other one will. We’ve now seen what happens when conservatives fail to cover their retreat, as they did in deserting the Democratic party en masse during the 80’s and 90’s.
Let me suggest something really radical here: conservatives should join the Democratic party and challenge the leftist moonbats in the primaries. Bring the fight to where the moonbats are.
Remember that most seats in legislatures and the House of Representatives change hands as the result of primary elections not general elections; gerrymandering has done a pretty job of making most seats “safe” for one party or the other.
Bela Pelosi is never going to lose her seat to a Republican. It just ain’t gonna happen. And if a Republican runs against her, she simply ignores the challenge, secure in the knowldege that in her district, there is little chance that a Republican will win.
The same cannot be said of a Democratic challenger. She would be forced to run something of an election challenge, depending on how formidable the challenge was. And here is the key point: it’s not so important that the conservative “Democrat” challenger win, it’s important that they run a just credible enough challenge to force her to spend significant resources to fight the challenge.
The Libertarians do a great job of running a reasonably credible campaign on a shoestring. And that’s all you really need to do: spend a little and make Nancy (or the leftist nutjob of choice) and their supporters spend lots more of *their* money. Just for example purposes, the cost of running a credible campaign for the House of Delegates here in VA is about $100K. It goes up exponentially for Congress. Make the moonbats spend the money to keep their “safe” seats.
The Dems wanted a big tent.
Well .. a lot of us have been praying for a breakthrough to the “real” democrats. More Catholics are democrats than repubs.
I surely hope Stupak will start a revolution within his party to reclaim it from the extreme left.
Well, if he is serious, then God bless him.
I am coming around to the following idea:
Everyone knew about Massa’s tickle wresting and gay antics.
The Democrat leadership held off on ethics charges, till these past few weeks, to send a message to Dems voting no on Healthcare
It is still even money whether Stupak caves or not..
DEMOCRATS, not Democratic. THERE’S NOTHING FAIR IN HOW THEY DO BUSINESS.
I really should just stay away from articles mentioning “democrats.”
Wow!
“If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak (a pro-Life Democrat opposing the bill) says.
“I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” Barack Obama speaking at a political rally in March 2008.
Fifty percent of Americans don't pay any federal taxes NOW.
Leni
So it is cheaper to import Hispanics?
check out Hugh Hewitt website. He has a email system to send letters to Blue Dogs.
http://hughhewitt.com
He also has a link to the Tim Burns, the Republican trying to take Murtha’s old seat.
Send him a contribution to send a message to the Democrats.
On the up side, many more Democrats have abortions than Republicans. As most people tend to vote the way their parents do (did), that means Democrats are eliminating future Rat voters. Since 1973, that’s been enough to make the difference in who was elected President in 2004. Or so the statisticians said.
A cynical observation, yes, but interesting, isn’t it?
He may be a socialist progressive liberal, but he is at least taking a moral stand on an issue that is, at least in my mind, primary. Let us hope his actions live up to the words he is speaking. I frankly have a lot more respect for an anti-abortion democrat than I have for any pro-Abortion Republican.
I would vote FOR a pro-life Democrat. I would NEVER vote for a pro-Abortion Republican. NEVER! If you have a pro-life Democrat running against a Pro-Abortion Republican, I am pushing the "D". Yes, this issue is THAT important to me.
Wow—Either Stupak is pulling a collosal stunt or he is taking a genuinely moral stand
It is telling that demrats, in their private discussions, consider population control their primary goal—not a so-called woman’s right to choose.
I always love that bit of BS anyway. What about a woman’s responsibility to not get pregnant if she doesn’t want to participate in the creation of a human baby?
As for population control, at what point will the Marxists decide that any defective unborn baby’s life will be terminated because it costs too much too fix and/or sustain? Remember how shrilly demrats condemned Palin for birthing her Down’s Syndrome child?
The left’s fixation on killing anything it doesn’t like is breathtaking.
Mao, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, among others, would be proud of the Dems and their jackassed reasonings.....
They have attempted to fool their followers into thinking the government will give them "free" health care. The truth is being exposed that sacrifices must be made for the good of the government. The first thing to be sacrificed will be the unborn. The beast will not be sated until all are consumed.