I’ve been pretty happy lately. People are awake, having been clued into the game being played by our representatives, and even our college kids are slowly realizing they made a mistake. THEN, I see this video: Gendercide in America. Legislation came up for a House vote to make it a federal crime to carry out an abortion based on the gender of the fetus. The measure took aim at the aborting of female fetuses. (more on the outcome of this below). That’s the good news but I have to pause to get my head around this one. It’s okay to have an abortion but it’s not okay to have an abortion b/c you wanted a boy? Oh the irony of all this. The mainly Republican supporters of the federal bill characterized the vote as a sex-discrimination issue; Abortion rights advocates argued that the bill exploits the problem of selective abortion to further limit a woman’s right to choose.
Sit up and pay attention here Dems: The lunacy of all of this is that we can ban super sized drinks, ban tanning, ban oil for frying, ban salt, ban toys in happy meals, ban smoking, – apparently with NO PROBLEM telling US WHAT WE CAN and CANNOT DO – but we are going to have a problem with banning gender select abortions b/c of a woman’s right to choose? By this logic there is no rhyme or reason to ban any of the above b/c hey – it’s our bodies and we should be able to choose – right? The sheer idiocy of this is …. Never mind – you know. Here’s the video:
Obama, 168 House Members Defend Sex-Selection Abortion in Democrat War on Women
JUNE 1, 2012 04:05
NRLC says Obama and 168 U.S. mostly Dem House members “complied with the political demands of pro-abortion pressure groups, rather than defend the coerced women, and their unborn daughters, who are victimized by sex-selection abortions”
The U.S. House of Representatives conducted a roll call vote on the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (H.R. 3541), a bill to make it unlawful to perform or coerce a sex-selection abortion. The vote was 246-168 in favor of the bill — a strong majority, although short of the two-thirds vote required under the fast-track procedure utilized today. In a statement obtained exclusively by ABC News late May 30, the White House acknowledged that President Obama opposes the bill. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of state right-to-life organizations, issued the following statement after the roll call:
“We are heartened that a strong majority of House members voted to ban performing or coercing abortions for the purpose of eliminating unborn babies of an undesired sex — usually, girls,” said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. “Shamefully, President Obama, and a minority of 168 House members, complied with the political demands of pro-abortion pressure groups, rather than defend the coerced women, and their unborn daughters, who are victimized by sex-selection abortions.”
Among the organizations that warned House members not to vote for the bill was the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), the nation’s major abortion provider. PPFA sent an email memo to House members on May 29 warning of its “intent to score” a vote for the bill as a vote against “women’s health.” Also on May 29, the Huffington Post reported that “no Planned Parenthood clinic will deny a woman an abortion based on her reasons for wanting one, except in those states that explicitly prohibit sex-selective abortions (Arizona, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Illinois).” So, for PPFA, abortion for sex selection is just another menu option, except where it is illegal — and PPFA vehemently opposes making it illegal.
“We commend the House Republican leadership for bringing this bill to the floor today under the fast-track procedure,” Johnson said. “Today’s groundbreaking majority vote was a stepping stone to this bill ultimately becoming law — perhaps after the replacement of some of the lawmakers who today were unwilling to protect victimized women and their unborn daughters from sex-selection abortions, because they were more concerned with maintaining favor with the abortion industry, pro-abortion advocacy groups, and Hollywood donors.”
NRLC’s letter to House members in support of the bill, and links to academic studies demonstrating the prevalence of sex-selection abortions (often coerced) within certain immigrant communities in the United States are posted on this page: www.nrlc.org/Sex-SelectionAbortion/index.html
Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of 50 state right-to-life affiliates and more than 3,000 local chapters, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization.
—- YEAS 246 —
Lungren, Daniel E.
—- NAYS 168 —
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson, E. B.
Moran Murphy (CT)
Sánchez, Linda T.
—- NOT VOTING 17 —
Go through that list r e a l l y slow. Take a gander at who voted WITH Obama and Pelosi.
I am trying to be realistic – there are those that believe abortion is a right – I do not – however – if we are using the mentality of our president ‘women being punished with a child’ doesn’t this vote PROVE that isn’t the case – it’s about killing and nothing more? How does one with a conscience – believing in abortion or not, vote no on this? This vote was about selecting an abortion based on the sex of a child. Nan Hayworth – sorry but you have lost me for good with this vote.
Store shelves at supermarkets, pharmacies and supercenters across the USA are making room for sex toys once reserved for adults-only eyes. CVS, Walgreens, Kroger, Safeway, Target and Walmart are among major national chains that now include vibrators on store shelves. Yes, you read that right.
Well, now that you’re awake I’ll share some more blood pressure rising news: Republican leaders have apparently decided to close down the Fast and Furious investigation and halt contempt proceedings against Eric Holder, because “they (the GOP leadership) don’t think that they will suffer for [that] failure to follow through. They’re scared of Holder’s race card. . . they’re scared of Trayvon. They think if they let Issa fail, that it will only be a story in the blogosphere for a day . . . that they can weather it. I promise you – they are wrong on that one!
THEN – After attacking the Affordable Care Act for three years, Republicans now say they’d like to keep its most popular provisions. HUH? Two weeks ago, John Boehner was insisting that “Obamacare” must be repealed lock, stock, and barrel. Some other Republicans wanted the slightly less radical approach of keeping some aspects of the law. A few days ago, some in the House warmed to this idea. Now, TPM is reporting that Senate Republicans are hopping on the piecemeal train. The idea is to preserve the language that requires insurers to cover people with preexisting conditions, to continue to permit young people up to age 26 to stay on their parents’ insurance, and to press forward with eliminating the Medicare prescription drug “donut hole,” whereby seniors have to pay 100 percent of medication costs within a certain price range. The thing that drives me crazy the most is that if these things are so important – why couldn’t they do this before we ‘passed it to see what was in it’?
According to Judicial Watch, Rep. Edolphous Towns (D-NY) has introduced the Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011. That bill would do with Obama’s presidential records what Obama has already done to his personal and collegiate records: Seal them up.
In an obvious effort to protect President Barack Obama, a group of congressional Democrats has introduced legislation to create an official process that will allow the commander-in-chief to keep presidential records secret after he leaves office.
One day soon, America could wake up to a dozen eggs costing $8 or more. And unless you are involved in some aspect of farming or agriculture, you would never know that egg prices are about to skyrocket or the reason why. With food prices already increasing due to high grain and fuel costs, extraneous so-called animal welfare regulations are being imposed on U.S. food producers, large and small, by the animal rights powerhouse known as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).
WASHINGTON — House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday defended her push to permanently extend “middle class” tax cuts to people making up to $1 million, saying that drawing the line at $250,000 hasn’t worked.
Pelosi has come under fire since she pressed House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) last week to hold a vote to extend “middle class” Bush tax cuts. The Washington Postripped her “interesting definition” of the middle class and said her proposal wouldactually benefit millionaires since they would end up paying lower marginal rates on their first $1 million of income. The left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) followed suit, warning Wednesday that lawmakers would have to come up with another $366 billion to pay for the revenue lost under Pelosi’s plan.
During her weekly briefing, Pelosi took aim at her critics and said that her proposal is the best way forward if people want to see any kind of permanent middle class tax cut extension in Congress.
While President Obama was busy lambasting Big Oil tax breaks on Thursday, yet another one of his environmental welfare recipients (the very kind he wants to redistribute oil subsidies to) was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Who needs to win the Mega Millions lottery? Start a pie-in-the-sky eco-boondoggle, and a half-billion-dollar jackpot ripe for squandering is all yours!
The Solyndra of the week is A123 Systems, an electric vehicle battery company based in Massachusetts. The firm also has battery plants in Michigan, where former Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm once heralded A123 as a federal stimulus “success story.” Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the company headquarters and hailed it as a “great example of how Recovery Act funding is helping American companies.” In addition to nearly $300 million in Obama Recovery Act funds, Granholm kicked in another $135 million in tax credits and subsidies to bribe the company to keep jobs in her state.
How’s the return on government investment? This green dud will have taxpayers seeing red. A123′s official company motto is “Power. Safety. Life.” But the firm’s reality is “Out of power. Endangering safety. Clinging to life.”
Speaking of bad returns on investments: “The president took a half a billion dollars in taxpayer money and devoted it to an enterprise that was owned in large measure by his campaign contributors. This is serious conflict of interest. This ought to be a big story. I think there are a number of people among the president’s team that don’t want that story to get out. We wanted to make sure it did.”
*In Boston the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.
*John Edwards was acquitted on one charge of campaign finance fraud and a mistrial was declared on five other counts Thursday when jurors said they couldn’t decide if he illegally used money to hide his pregnant mistress while he ran for president.
*A new movie opens tonight – For Greater Glory. It is being billed as a stunning historical attack on Christians.
*The “NEW JOBS-NY Job Creation Plan” was passed by the New York State Senate on May 30, 2012. There’s an awful lot of credits in this plan but I just have to wonder where we will recoup that money from:
Afterall, NYers are leaving by the millions:
TGIF – I’ve had enough. See ya Monday.