Posted on 01/11/2002 6:31:43 AM PST by truthandlife
I apologize, I shouldn't have called you ignorant, but here is your statement I itlaicized,
Didn't Congress (the Republican's) take away foreign funding for family planning just a few years ago? What is with Bush implementing this funding again!!!!
I should have stated that Tommy Daschle now controls the Senate. Daschle(or an ally) probably put increased funding and the Bush admin. since it can't line item veto the funding, probably came up to the conclusion that it was not worth spending political capital on and since Bush has already put through the Executive order(described in reply #27) that it would be no big deal.
But as you can see a reletively little known media outlet glommed on to it and forgot all about Bush's exectutive order and reported something that was erroneous.
Again I hope you will accept my apology for my impatience.
Thank you.
Yup, the beat goes on.......think the sheep will still believe the Polls?
If money (which, like it or not is going to the foreign nations anyway) goes to family planning but not to abortion, I don't mind it.
You don't mind almost half a billion of OUR tax dollars going overseas?
So you don't mind the meddling in the affairs of other countries at the most basic family level?
How about if another country were to "give" a bunch money to our gov. to plan YOUR family!
Two questions:
How does this bit of appropriations ($446,500,000 "family planning") fit with conservatism and it's ideals? and,
What is the bit of the Constitution that allows this?
Because he is a REPUBLICRAT and that means that in real terms there is not a whit's difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. They are just battling to see who gets to spend the money and wield the power. Neither of them support conservative principles.
yes indeed, a gw executive order will be respected by our overseas welfare recipients!
why doesn't he just sign an EO that forbids terrorism AND abortion.
there, that should do it!
now, lets cut federal spending.
You can argue that we could have voted for a real conservative but in the real world, that would have only succeeded in electing gwhore.
And let me quote from the bill:
That none of the funds made available under this heading may be used to pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions
read the text I just quoted above form the bill...
do you really believe this?
I thought I was gullable
It's like giving $446.5 million to McDonalds and telling it the money can only be used for shakes and fries. Somehow, I think its hamburger business will still benefit.
It is impossible to prevent some of this funding from being used for abortions, surgical or chemical. Furthermore, by providing all of the funding for the "non-abortifacient" methods of family planning, we make it all the easier for International Planned Parenthood and their monied allies to pick up where we left off.
We'll get the fries. International Planned Parenthood et alia will get the burgers.
I am not gullable at all, but the spin put on the posted article is 100% bullcrap.
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.