First Tax-Funded Abortions Approved

Pennsylvania has been approved by the Obama Administration to receive $160 million for a new “high-risk” insurance program under the heath care bill that was passed in March.

This is the first instance of taxpayer funded abortions under Obama’s health care program and it has pro-life activists enraged.

LifeNews is reporting that under the program any abortion that is legal in Pennsylvania will be covered.

Douglas Johnson from National Rights to Life commented that “President Obama successfully opposed including language in the bill to prevent federal subsidies for abortions, and now the Administration is quietly advancing its abortion-expanding agenda through administrative decisions such as this, which they hope will escape broad public attention.”

So much for Obama’s executive order promise that “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”

It seems that the White House is keeping quite on this issue. House Republican Leader John Boehner stated:

"Just last month at the White House, I asked President Obama to provide the American people with a progress report on the implementation of his Executive Order, which purports to ban taxpayer-funding of abortions. Unfortunately, the President provided no information, and the American people are still waiting for answers."

Nancy Pelosi was right. We would certainly find out what is in the bill once it was passed. I wonder what other goodies can be expected. Oh and Bart Stupak, how is your conscience feeling about this?

“If Free Republic did not want excerpts posted, they would not allow them, and they would not have the box to check to indicate an excerpt.”

Excerpting is a REQUIREMENT for some sources:

abqjournal.com
adn.com
afp.com
aim.org
atimes.com
associatedcontent.com
awsj.com
baltimoresun.com
barrons.com
barronsmag.com
bayarea.com
bendbulletin.com
boston.com (www.boston.com The Boston Globe)
boxofficemojo.com
bsudailynews.com
businessweek.com
californian.com
canadafreepress.com
Capetimes.co.za
careerjournal.com
cavalierdaily.com
chicagotribune.com
chron.com
cnn.com
collegejournal.com
crainsnewyork.com
csmonitor.com
ctnow.com
daily-chronicle.com
dailypress.com
dallasnews.com
dj.com
dowjonesnews.com
djnewswires.com
dowjones.com
feer.com (Far Eastern Economic Review)
fresnobee.com
foxnews.com
gallup.com
The Guardian (UK)
gazette.net
GCN.com
goerie.com
greenwichtime.com
gwpi.net
heraldnet.com
holahoy.com
ibdeditorials.com
idahostatesman.com
iht.com
investors.com
jacksonville.com (Florida-Times Union)
janes.com
jewishobserver-la.com
jewishworldreview.com
kansascity.com
laopinion.com
latimes.com
livemint.com
marketwatch.com
mcall.com
mercextra.com
mercurynews.com
modbee.com
msn.com
msnbc.com
nasdaq.com
nationalweekly.com
nctimes.com
newhavenregister.com
news.com.au
newsday.com
newsweek.com
nhregister.com
nj.com
nola.com
nynewsday.com
nypost.com
nypostonline.com
nysun.com
nytimes.com
ocregister.com
opinionjournal.com
oregonmag.com
orlandosentinel.com
pcworld.com
pnj.com
post-dispatch.com
post-gazette.com
postwritersgroup.com
readexpress.com
realclearpolitics.com
realestatejournal.com
rockymountainnews.com
sacbee.com
sacunion.com
seattletimes.nwsource.com
sfgate.com
sitepoint.com
sjmercury.com
spectator.org
spokesman-recorder.com
sportsillustrated.com
sportsillustrated.cnn.com
si.com
stamfordadvocate.com
startribune.com
startupjournal.com
statesmanjournal.com
sun-sentinel.com
sunspot.net
theatlantic.com
thewbalchannel.com
time.com
timesdispatch.com
toledoblade.com
tribune.com
tribune-review.com
trivalleyherald.com
todaysthv.com
victorhanson.com
washingtondispatch.com
washingtonpost.com
washingtontechnology.com
washingtontimes.com
washtimes.com
washpostco.com
wnd.com
worldnetdaily.com
worldpress.org
wral.com
wsj.com
wsjbooks.com
wsjclassroomedition.com

A blogger excerpting his own work (or stolen videos) is
nothing more than pimping for blog hits. What’s worse,
the scummy blogger is using FR as free advertising for
his blog. You’re fine with that? I’m not.

Oh, I see, humblegunner. Anyone who posts his own work in excerpt form is “scummy” and a “blog pimp.” How very mature of you. That makes me “scummy,” and I’m going to be “scummy” again in the morning when my piece about Michael Savage goes up on one of the websites that carries my work. Perhaps you can check in and call me a “blog pimp.”

Thanks for your opinion and the stupidly long post of sources that must be excerpted. Since excerpts are not “required” for opinion pieces from all sites, that MUST mean they shouldn’t be excerpted at all.

Enjoy being trivial, humblegunner.

Anyone who posts his own work in excerpt form is “scummy” and a “blog pimp.”

We are in agreement.

That makes me “scummy,”

It's easily fixed.

I’m going to be “scummy” again in the morning

No doubt.

my piece about Michael Savage goes up on one of the websites that carries my work.

Will you be pimping it here?

Perhaps you can check in and call me a “blog pimp.”

We shall see.

Thanks for your opinion and the stupidly long post of sources that must be excerpted

Yeah, it's my fault there are so many. Sorry about that.

Since excerpts are not “required” for opinion pieces from all sites

We used to get a better class of n00bs around here who had some comprehension skills.

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.