Comments on: No more Safe Stimulation: Contraception removed from bill

By: Pelosi Removes Contraception From Stimulus Bill « The Salty Pundit

Pelosi Removes Contraception From Stimulus Bill « The Salty Pundit — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 05:47:34 +0000

[...] Pelosi Removes Contraception From Stimulus Bill January 27, 2009 at 9:45 pm | In Uncategorized | Tags: economy, Nancy Pelosi, stimulus Pelosi Removes Contraception From Stimulus Bill: “Despite Pelosi’s argument, Democrats and the Obama White House appear eager to deprive Republicans of what’s become a key attack line against the stimulus bill.” [...]

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: White House pretty sure re-sodding the Mall will create jobs or something

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:20:52 +0000

[...] million out of what’s now approaching $900 billion — but, just like they did with the contraception stuff, the GOP’s seized on it as a particularly media-friendly illustration of how much [...]

By: Obama Won’t Compromise on “Tax Cuts” « Nice Deb

Obama Won’t Compromise on “Tax Cuts” « Nice Deb — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:26:47 +0000

[...] may have had the family planning pork removed from the stimulus bill, but he’s adamant that the welfare spending is non-negotiable. The “tax cuts” in [...]

By: adagioforstrings

adagioforstrings — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:11:42 +0000

Not to be too terribly unkind, but Pelosi & Reid do look like perfect poster children for contraception….

By: Tuning Spork

Tuning Spork — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:38:46 +0000

Jeeze. Didn’t this just happen two years ago when the Dems took over saying they were gonna put a stop to pork and, instead, loaded up a troop funding bill with earmarks galore?

And why is George Stephanopolous noticing this? Where’s McCain?

By: herself

herself — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:44:51 +0000

A sometimes trick to get budget approval for a whopper is to hide it well and put in another more obvious but smaller whopper. Once that obvious one is found the hunt stops. What is the contraception whopper hiding?

By: Esthier

Esthier — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:43:30 +0000

How would they help? Seriously, I’m not getting that one. I’ve mentioned stats, such as the fact that as abortion and birth control have become more readily available unwed mothers are actually more common, not less.

You haven’t done anything further to explain why they would help other than to assume irresponsible people would suddenly be responsible when it comes to free birth control.

I’m not trying to be argumentative, but I just don’t see how that makes any sense.

By: Pelosi pulls out… « DPGI - the aftermath

Pelosi pulls out… « DPGI - the aftermath — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:38:20 +0000

[...] January 27, 2009 · No Comments Hot Air: No more Safe Stimulation: Contraception removed from bill. [...]

By: jeanie

jeanie — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:31:08 +0000

I did not say money wouldn’t fix this, I did say money would fix some of it. Would like to see that cash stay. And the LACK of money and attention to this problem certainly won’t fix the smallest part of anything. However, no matter what I say, you will be convinced it should come out and I will not. And…there would certainly be more to it than handing out condoms or the pill(though either or both of those might help).

By: Dark-Star

Dark-Star — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:24:51 +0000

Inaccurate headline. Klanned Parenthoood is not truly about contraception – only abortion. They preach the doctrine of Thou Mayst Screw Like Rabbits, make half-@$$de gestures toward contraception for looks, and then profit off of the thousands of frightened/misinformed/selfish women who want a “get out of pregnancy free card”.

By: Esthier

Esthier — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:20:50 +0000

There are plenty of others who don’t even think about the results of their actions and if these were pointed out it might make a difference to some at least.

High school sex ed didn’t make it clear enough? I don’t get what you’re proposing here. Handing out condoms or the pill won’t get them to think. You still have to put it on or take it regularly.

Many unplanned pregnancies come about because the girl was on the pill and skipped a day. Which is where the false hope comes from that I mentioned earlier. Were she not on the pill, maybe she would have used a condom.

Would like to see the contraception money stay.

jeanie on January 27, 2009 at 1:11 PM

But you just said money won’t fix this.

By: jcila

jcila — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:12:03 +0000

Aww then how is pelozi going to protect all of the government owned banks from
Being infected with AIDS by Barney franks and todd
and the rest of the virus infected congressmen who infest the
honorable halls of our great nation..

I sincerly believe all of the politicians are now equal to
lying cheating cockroaches,..
and pelozi she is the dirty queen

By: jeanie

jeanie — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:11:28 +0000

No, not just talking about those who ‘want’–little can be done about those I agree. There are plenty of others who don’t even think about the results of their actions and if these were pointed out it might make a difference to some at least. I repeat, this money cannot remedy most of this problem, but even a few less would be welcome. Funding to inform and educate would be lost on many but not on all. It’s certainly more useful than the ‘neighborhood stabilization’ portion which amounts to locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen. Would like to see that controlled, limited or reomved. Would like to see the contraception money stay.

By: Testing GOP “Leadership” « The Forum

Testing GOP “Leadership” « The Forum — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:09:51 +0000

[...] I’m not buying any of this. It was John Boehner not too long ago who urged conservative Republicans to toss their “ideological purity” aside and vote for the $700 billion TARP disaster–with all of its reckless spending, government expansion and misplaced priorities. That was about 6 weeks before a national election and when it seemed that the earth was going to explode. Now, safely in the opposition, Boehner is lambasting the stimulus as wasteful spending–we could have used that rhetoric and principled stance over the last 8 years. Nevertheless, I give Boehner points for essentially isolating House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from the fracas right now–her disgraceful attempt to cram billions of abortion funding ”family planning” initiatives into the bailout was quickly thrown under the bus under the President’s orders–funding for contraception was removed from the bill. [...]

By: Esthier

Esthier — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:02:38 +0000

The chances of welfare being cut are less than zero in the real world. But here is money in a bill before the House, favored by her nibs, and it’s the closest we’re going to come, for the moment to limiting the crime of State supported child abuse–which is how I see the child welfare system.

jeanie on January 27, 2009 at 12:39 PM

But again, the people you’re talking about are people who want to have babies. Contraceptives don’t help in that instance.

By: jeanie

jeanie — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:39:19 +0000

The chances of welfare being cut are less than zero in the real world. But here is money in a bill before the House, favored by her nibs, and it’s the closest we’re going to come, for the moment to limiting the crime of State supported child abuse–which is how I see the child welfare system.

By: Mason

Mason — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:38:23 +0000

Abortion, contraception, Pelosi…that’s an excommunicatin’

By: PastorJon

PastorJon — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:37:20 +0000

Can we stop calling it a “stimulus bill”? Someone needs to think up a catchy name that serves as a more apt description, since the libs are, once again, twisting language in an attempt to secretly implement their full agenda.

Something like the “exploitation bill”? The Trojan Horse? The Nightime Raiding of the Treasury? The Giveaway Bonanza?

We need a name for it. We can’t let them get away with this like they get away with the “tax cuts” and negative brackets. That’s just insane, and quite un-Constitutional.

How about “Poke a Stick in McCarthy’s Eye Bill”. Or “Socialize America Bill.”

Or my favorite: “Democratic Voter Purchasing Plan.”

By: PJ Emeritus

PJ Emeritus — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:35:19 +0000

MM has a link to Think Progress blog on her site for the report on this subject.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/26/obama-family-palnning/

I find the first comment both dripping with irony and informative as to their mindset,

Quote:

Bobwurst Says:
scr3w the conservatives! They lost. They caused the problem in the first place. Tell em to sit down and shut up and watch the grown ups fix the stuff they broke. Just like when i had to watch dad fix the window I broke. Was I allowed to kibitz, tell him he was doing it wrong? These repubs are lucky corporal punishment was outlawed…

January 26th, 2009 at 9:32 pm

Sorry, “Bobwurst,” the grown-ups left D.C. last week and now every single childish, moronic thing is being pushed as policy.

By: sheebe

sheebe — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:33:30 +0000

Is it just me? Or does Harry Reid’s expression remind you of the farmer with the pitchfork in that classic painting, American Gothic by Grant Wood? Someone photoshop these two into that scene.

kingsjester on January 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM

The Evil Green acre twin…….I don’t trust them. They will find a way to fund Planned Parent Hood. They have other pork in it as well. Also, they are giving themselves more money for travel, office goodies……..What else?

By: jeanie

jeanie — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:28:55 +0000

Limey: Many, if not most, still wouldn’t, I agree. But even the few who might would make a difference. To me, it would be money well spent if even a few less could be saved from the well meaning but failed institution of foster care and group homes and abusive and neglectful parent/s, lifes of crime, gangs, lack of bonding skills and the hosts of ills our welfare system unwittingly promotes.. As I see it, this ounce of prevention however small, would be money well spent. Sheesh!! It’s the one useful thing in this dismal bill from my point of view.

By: Chuck Schick

Chuck Schick — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:22:30 +0000

Those are two of the most boner-killing faces in Washington. You can save the half-billion on rubbers.

By: Esthier

Esthier — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:22:07 +0000

Other things should be cut, but not contraception.

jeanie on January 27, 2009 at 12:10 PM

Why not cut welfare? Who says we have to pay for babies?

And reading above, it seems we’ve created an incentive to make babies, specifically ones that are not productive members of society. How will birth control fix that?

You seem to understand that here:

jeanie on January 27, 2009 at 11:45 AM

I don’t get this subsequent post.

By: LimeyGeek

LimeyGeek — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:13:35 +0000

Other things should be cut, but not contraception.

jeanie on January 27, 2009 at 12:10 PM

Why would they use contraception now, when they never bothered before?

Cut off all welfare funding and let the parasites starve at the teat. They’ll soon close their legs.

By: jeanie

jeanie — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:10:25 +0000

I’m willing to bet that the cost of welfare babies will far out strip the cost of all the unemployment in this country sooner or later. Even a reduction of a third would make a big difference over the long term economically, socially and from a humanitarian point of view. Yes, of course, add a few thousand more sad, neglected and abused kids to the rolls to save what amounts to a tiny portion of a bad bill. Other things should be cut, but not contraception.