Showdown: 41 Senate Democrats vow to filibuster budget if it defunds Planned Parenthood

posted at 4:55 pm on April 4, 2011 by Allahpundit

Boehner could probably get away with dropping the PP rider from the House budget bill if Reid was prepared to agree to a number close to $61 billion in cuts. But to meet roughly only halfway, at or around $33 billion, and still drop some of the red meat like defunding PP that the base craved? He’s burning the candle of grassroots credibility at both ends. Risky business.

Forty-one senators have pledged to filibuster any bipartisan spending bill that includes an amendment to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood, threatening an impasse with House conservatives.

The group, led by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), includes thirty-nine Democratic senators and two Independents, Sens. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) and Bernie Sanders (Vt.)…

The group outlined their opposition in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and GOP leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), asking Reid and McConnell to “stand with us against extreme proposals by some members of the House to eliminate support for women’s health and family planning programs and providers that service millions of women and families.”…

Reid has already declared the Planned Parenthood rider would not be part of a final deal with the House on 2011 spending levels.

Remember, Brown, Collins, and Murkowski also oppose defunding Planned Parenthood and there are surely other Democrats who didn’t sign Boxer’s letter who’ll vote with her if it comes to that. So realistically, there’s no way this is getting through the Senate. And needless to say, if he and Reid can agree on a budget in all major particulars, Boehner isn’t going to endanger that by threatening to force a government shutdown over an issue as narrow and hot button as abortion. So he has four options here. (1) Trade one red meat provision for another. If the GOP drops the Planned Parenthood rider, Democrats agree to defund NPR. Easy peasy! (2) Drop all the red meat stuff in exchange for deeper cuts. Boehner’s already insisting that $33 billion isn’t enough, so maybe that’s already in the works. (3) Split the riders off from the main budget bill, pass them separately in the House, and have Reid give them a separate up-or-down vote in the Senate. That would be Boehner’s way of showing the base that he’s bringing their concerns to the floor, but since the only leverage he has in getting them passed is leaving them attached to the main budget bill, splitting them off would be tantamount to dropping them altogether. (4) Start frantically downplaying the significance of this year’s budget, which is after all small potatoes, and soothe the base with reassurances about how epic Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget is going to be. Maybe have Ryan hold a presser at which he repeats, over and over in dulcet tones, “Four trillion. Four trillion. Four trillion…”

Exit question: Failure to defund PP = nifty fundraising tool for the NRSC among social conservatives next year?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

41 Senate Democrats vow to filibuster budget if it defunds Planned Parenthood

Go ahead, do it. I dare you!

Failure to defund PP = nifty fundraising tool for the NRSC among social conservatives next year?

maybe.

upinak on April 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Exit question: Failure to defund PP = nifty fundraising tool for the NRSC among social conservatives next year?

Not for the NRCC, that’s for sure.

MadisonConservative on April 4, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Let them. Make them.

JellyToast on April 4, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Let them filibuster. After all, isn’t that considered obstructionist?

ButterflyDragon on April 4, 2011 at 5:00 PM

It is one thing to support killing children in the womb; it is another thing entirely to demand my tax dollars pay for it.

Vashta.Nerada on April 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Every supporter of Planned Parenthood needs to be reminded that their own parents apparently disagreed with them.

Constantly.

warbaby on April 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Go for it, scumbags.

Ward Cleaver on April 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM

This isn’t about abortion per-se. It’s about you and I paying for it.

It’s for the children! oh wait…

WitchDoctor on April 4, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Hostage Takers!!

tommer74 on April 4, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Exit question: Failure to defund PP = nifty fundraising tool for the NRSC among social conservatives next year?

Now and forever, in some way or another. No one is serious about stopping abortion politically. We need to stop marching and start praying. JMHO but the larger the marches, the more marginalized the pro-life movement becomes. It’s time for all of us prolifers, including myself, to evangelize. Not just send platitudes.

quiz1 on April 4, 2011 at 5:03 PM

they are bluffing

rob verdi on April 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM

This is the problem we have long-term. The chances of Republicans ever achieving a filibuster-proof Senate as the democratics did in 2009/10 are very slim, and we have the RINOs like Brown, Graham, and the Fair Ladies of Maine to contend with.

That kind of supermajority only happens a few times a century, and Republicans haven’t done it in my lifetime.

slickwillie2001 on April 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Just the right ‘case’ to showcase Obama’s skill at statesmanship, by bringing both sides to the table.

It is all c*&p sandwich, and swallowed up whole by political junkies.

Sir Napsalot on April 4, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Exit question: Failure to defund PP = nifty fundraising tool for the NRSC among social conservatives next year?

That along with those undercover videos exposing PP for the abortion racket it is. The next GOP President(God willing in 2013) will get it defunded. This is a battle for another day.

Doughboy on April 4, 2011 at 5:08 PM

The group outlined their opposition in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and GOP leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), asking Reid and McConnell to “stand with us against extreme proposals by some members of the House to eliminate support for women’s health and family planning programs and providers that service millions of women and families”…

Oh, no, not the “extreme proposals”!!!!

onlineanalyst on April 4, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Good, bring this sick operation to a total standstill you jackasses. Let’s see how long all your parasitic constituents can last without their government giveaway programs.

rplat on April 4, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Let them boycott the budget…they didn’t come up with one last year, they won’t have one this year.
We are cutting budgets, cutting programs, this is what you do…let them take the hit, no loss on the Republican side, we are the ones doing what the people want, cutting budget, the dems are doing what they do best, pandering.
I say this year, best among most any other year, pandering will not get the votes they think.
Stick with the cuts, and don’t cave…

right2bright on April 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Filibusters are evil when used against massive stimulus spending – Not so much when used to defend taxpayer funding of baby murder.

/democrat morals

Scrappy on April 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Fine. Let’s have a real national debate on what PP does with our money. Educating the people is our only hope.

David in ATL on April 4, 2011 at 5:11 PM

“stand with us against extreme proposals by some members of the House to eliminate support for women’s health….

I guess that support doesn’t include unborn women’s “health”, does it?

tgharris on April 4, 2011 at 5:11 PM

Standing up proudly to safeguard the killing of babies. American heroes, every one!

Mason on April 4, 2011 at 5:11 PM

Well with those 3 gop behind them what do they have to lose….they’ll call it bipartisan and the lsm will praise them

cmsinaz on April 4, 2011 at 5:11 PM

It’s for the children! oh wait…

WitchDoctor on April 4, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Someone in the Republican caucus please use this on television.

catmman on April 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM

It’s all academic.

Treasury Secretary Timmy Geithner released a letter today saying that the US debt ceiling will be breached no later than May 16th.

Emperor Norton on April 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM

They shoved Obamacare using their majority.

SHUT IT DOWN.

Don’t give and inch. Remember the Wisconsin Democrats? They were “heroic” by running away from their post.

It is set up perfectly. Don’t give an inch and let the government shut down. Then, go home and crack open a beer and watch ESPN.

Let the Dem hardliner scumbags squirm.

Opposite Day on April 4, 2011 at 5:17 PM

Are we going to have Dems running for the border….again?

Electrongod on April 4, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Party of no!!!!!!

Weight of Glory on April 4, 2011 at 5:19 PM

“extreme proposals”

Having women who want abortions pay for it themselves.

That’s what passes for “extreme” in the anti-God, anti-life, and anti-liberty party these days.

darwin on April 4, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Democrats would rather shut down the government than eliminate subsidies for Planned Parenthood? Then shut it down.

JohnJ on April 4, 2011 at 5:22 PM

Exit question: Failure to defund PP = nifty fundraising tool for the NRSC among social conservatives next year?

If that happens I won’t be donating. I don’t think taxpayers should fund PP, but it’s way at the bottom of my priorities list and I’m fed up with social issues interfering with fiscal issues (not to mention giving the Left a reason for them to remain Democrats). Let’s get our budget in order first, stand firm on a conservative foreign policy agenda, and then take on the social stuff once Independents have a reason to be happy they voted for the GOP in the Midterms.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM

Do it– go ahead, filibuster. PP is a vile organization and should be made to compete in the marketplace. Get private donations. I am sure there are plenty of donors out there who don’t mind supporting an organization that sucks babies out of their mothers’ wombs.

Beaglemom on April 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM

We just need to explain that it will save 1 million babies a year instead of the paltry 70,000 that the White House is claiming will be lost if we defund the mosquito program.

Tennman on April 4, 2011 at 5:24 PM

cmsinaz on April 4, 2011 at 5:11 PM

Good to see you!..I haven’t seen you last few days!..:)

Dire Straits on April 4, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Looks like DEMOCRATS are holding up the 2011 budget.

Not surprising, THEY HAD AN ENTIRE YEAR TO WRITE IT!

GarandFan on April 4, 2011 at 5:24 PM

If that happens I won’t be donating. I don’t think taxpayers should fund PP, but it’s way at the bottom of my priorities list and I’m fed up with social issues interfering with fiscal issues (not to mention giving the Left a reason for them to remain Democrats). Let’s get our budget in order first, stand firm on a conservative foreign policy agenda, and then take on the social stuff once Independents have a reason to be happy they voted for the GOP in the Midterms.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM

Ummm … social issues = fiscal issues.

Our biggest expenditures are social welfare programs. Subsidizing abortion is no different.

darwin on April 4, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Er… Charles Schumer… who are the extremists again?

TheRightMan on April 4, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Dems’s filibuster, Republicans will get tagged the obstructionists and extremists. Business as usual D.C. style.

Koa on April 4, 2011 at 5:27 PM

Correct me if I’m wrong here …

But if the GOP is going to go for only 33B in cuts – they have to at least cut PPP and NPR if they are going to have ANY credibility with the base.

Now – if Democratic Senators (and Scott Brown) want to FILIBUSTER that … then … who exactly would be shutting the government down then?

I would say Democrats.

HondaV65 on April 4, 2011 at 5:27 PM

I think it ought to be a stand alone issue, passed by the house. When it is voted down in the Senate, this issue can be used against democrat Senators to help us win a majority.

How many Senate dems would be vulnerable on this issue if it got the attention it should?

Vince on April 4, 2011 at 5:27 PM

If that happens I won’t be donating. I don’t think taxpayers should fund PP, but it’s way at the bottom of my priorities list and I’m fed up with social issues interfering with fiscal issues (not to mention giving the Left a reason for them to remain Democrats). Let’s get our budget in order first, stand firm on a conservative foreign policy agenda, and then take on the social stuff once Independents have a reason to be happy they voted for the GOP in the Midterms.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM

LOL – that’s the funniest and goofiest post I’ve ever seen. “Hey lets keep funding stupid stuff so we can get our fiscal house in order!”

That gave me a hilarious laugh!

HondaV65 on April 4, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Let them filibuster (though I thought you couldn’t do that.)

It just means no funding at all. Win – win!

rbj on April 4, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Democrats going to the mat over continuing subsidies for killing their constituents’ children. What a party!

cool breeze on April 4, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Defund it all! Stop spending money we don’t have.

Dandapani on April 4, 2011 at 5:31 PM

MadisonConservative on April 4, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Congressional Committee are just tickled about it. Anyone else tickled about it?

Come on MadCon, Newt wasn’t for Dede because she was going to get a Margaret Sanger award. He was for her because he knew she would beat the Democrat.

Disclaimer: This is not support of Margaret Sanger. I loathe that vile woman and wish more women knew about her despicable history. I spent a good part of last week educating people on Facebook about her history (in response to some moron who asked, “Where is Margaret Sanger when we need her?”).

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Attach it to the debt ceiling, along with every other cause dear to the hearts of progressives — and if it all goes down, let them find 40% of the spending to cut.

The time is now.

cthulhu on April 4, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Big-Time Bluff…
$1.6T deficit and they want to go to bat for PP???

mjbrooks3 on April 4, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Excuse me lick, but many of us do not find abortion “a small deal”.

flyoverland on April 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM

Our biggest expenditures are social welfare programs. Subsidizing abortion is no different.
darwin on April 4, 2011 at 5:25 PM

But performing abortions is not all they do. And there’s the rub. And yes, I know they don’t perform mammograms, and they enable statutory rape – all of it. They should cut PP’s funding to roughly reflect the portion that represents abortions, but not de-fund it altogether. Not now.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Wow. THAT’S what they’d go to the matresses over?

tree hugging sister on April 4, 2011 at 5:41 PM

Who cares?

Funding for Planned Parenthood isn’t going to be eliminated and $61 billion is a pathetic joke.

Shutting the government down is the only way to actually cut anything, so lets do that.

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 5:41 PM

But performing abortions is not all they do.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Besides handing out condoms to kids and abortions what else do they do that is so vital the taxpayer should be funding it?

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 5:43 PM

Fine, so long as it’s true filibustering. Staying up all night, speaking for 72 hours straight, peeing on yourself because you’ll lose the floor if you go to the bathroom, etc. None of this painless filibuster-lite “I propose a filibuster/ The chair recognizes a filibuster from the Maine representative, and the proceeding s will continue as though a filibuster has occurred” crap we’ve been fed over the last few years.

rogerb on April 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Why do these people want to kill their future voters?

Cindy Munford on April 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM

If the GOP had any capability of “shaping the narrative” this would just be the Dems trying to prevent spending cuts. But The media is on the other side and GOP messaging sucks as much as most of their policies.

Stephen Macklin on April 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM

They should cut PP’s funding to roughly reflect the portion that represents abortions, but not de-fund it altogether. Not now.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Why? There is no service that PP provides that isn’t already provided by someone else. PP is not indispensible.

All we do when we fund it is kill babies and make PP rich.

darwin on April 4, 2011 at 5:45 PM

Translation: At least 41 U.S. Senators have accepted a racially cleansed version of eugenics. What more could we possibly learn about Planned Parenthood before enough is enough? The list now includes covering up: infanticide, statutory rape, and the forced prostitution of underage girls. Not too mention that defenders of Planned Parenthood now accuse pro-life advocates of being racist for being concerned about the high number of abortions in African-American communities. No, it is the Left who have adopted eugenics and now justify the murder of minority babies in terms of reproductive and economic justice. In their minds, poor lives are unworthy of life, and it is better to pre-emptively kill poor minority babies than to let them live.

Blue Collar Todd on April 4, 2011 at 5:47 PM

If the GOP drops the Planned Parenthood rider, Democrats agree to defund NPR. Easy peasy!

No, that was supposed to be for the “restore funding to feed the starving children in Africa bill”. That trades NPR for starving children funding and if the Democrats vote against it, they vote to kill the starving children in favor of cowboy poetry, big bird and marxist propaganda.

Since they demagogue it as a service for women, Republicans could bring up a bill to pay for it by taxing women’s products. You’ll create a bunch of new outraged tax protesters. The Republicans will vote against their new tax bill ( and the Democrats? ) and then you can easily drop planned parenthood because the bill to fund it was rejected.

Buddahpundit on April 4, 2011 at 5:48 PM

If Republicans would ditch the social conservative stuff and concentrate on fiscal responsibility instead they might actually build trust in the voters, get rewarded with another landslide victory in 2012, and be able to get some of the social changes pushed through that they want to.

Doing this crap now just delays fixing anything, pisses off the voters, and let’s everyone know that the same group of idiots is in charge of the GOP.

Benaiah on April 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Cindy Munford on April 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Hello Friend!..Good to see you!..:)

Dire Straits on April 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Bring it on … I’m sure America will understand that funding Planned Parenthood is important enough to shutdown the government.

J_Crater on April 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Why do these people want to kill their future voters?

Cindy Munford on April 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM

They can just replace them with even more dependent Mexicans.

slickwillie2001 on April 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

he repeats, over and over in dulcet tones, “Four trillion. Four trillion. Four trillion…”

“Balance the budget. Balance the budget. Balance the budget.”

FloatingRock on April 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

What if we just left Planned Parenthood open in blue states?

Ronnie on April 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Please, do it. I pray they do, so the American people can actually see that we ARE funding abortion with tax dollars. I guarantee you most American don’t even KNOW this.

And then these people can stand, arm in arm, like the fleebag political whores they are, feigning heroic courage.

While the blood of the unborn is on their hands and on their heads.

somewhatconcerned on April 4, 2011 at 5:52 PM

I don’t want any of my tax dollars going to any organization that promotes the murder of the unborn.

Kini on April 4, 2011 at 5:54 PM

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 5:43 PM
darwin on April 4, 2011 at 5:45 PM

I thought the issue was abortion, not birth control.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:54 PM

Question:

What rate of inflation will Democrats consider acceptable
when the printing presses really get cranked up ??

10%, 20, 50, 100 per year, per month ?
-
Get ready for the 100 million dollar bill.
-
Eventually paper money always fails.
Politicians just can’t help themselves.

esblowfeld on April 4, 2011 at 5:55 PM

I don’t want any of my tax dollars going to any organization that promotes the murder of the unborn.

Kini

Neither do I but perhaps the GOP should have thought of this back when they had control of all three branches of the government a few short years ago. Kind of strange that you never even heard the word abortion mentioned during that time, eh? Yet here we are in another situation where the Republicans know for a fact that they’ll never push this through and they bring it up again. Why? Because they are using it as a wedge issue to try and drum up votes.

It’s too bad that that’s how Republican politicians view the issue of abortion instead of being against it for the obvious reason.

Benaiah on April 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I thought the issue was abortion, not birth control.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:54 PM

I thought the issue was overspending on bloody nonsense.

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Dire Straits on April 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Hey! How are you?

Cindy Munford on April 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

What if we just left Planned Parenthood open in blue states?

Ronnie on April 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

I don’t think there’s anything preventing blue states from funding their local PP’s, but the blue states want to force the red states to have them too, of course.

FloatingRock on April 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Neither do I but perhaps the GOP should have thought of this back when they had control of all three branches of the government a few short years ago
Benaiah on April 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

They will argue there was no Lila Rose then.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Democrats would rather shut down the government than eliminate subsidies for Planned Parenthood? Then shut it down.

JohnJ on April 4, 2011 at 5:22 PM

+1

Khun Joe on April 4, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Why does this article feature a photo of Harry Reid in drag?

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on April 4, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Seriously?

They really place PP funding above whether this country has a hope of continuing to be a going-concern?

Guess what – if we don’t cut PP *and* a s@#$load more stuff that the government isn’t supposed to be funding – AND a s@#$load of stuff it *is* supposed to be funding – then PP and the rest of it are going to be non-existent in a couple of years or less anyway.

We are watching the backstory to the post-apocalyptic America movie unfold right in front of us, except this time it’s not going to be on cable – it’s going to be in ultra-realistic 3D.

Midas on April 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM

They should cut PP’s funding to roughly reflect the portion that represents abortions, but not de-fund it altogether. Not now.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:40 PM

I am sure that Planned Parenthood would just “cook the books” to show that no government funding is going toward abortions.

I sometimes wonder why you bother posting on a conservative website. Sometimes = every time you post.

bw222 on April 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM

I think the American people feel the same way about Planned Parent hood…

… as they do union goons.

Suck on it Democrats…

… Filibuster away!

Seven Percent Solution on April 4, 2011 at 6:07 PM

I would force the Democrats to filibuster on defunding Planned Parenthood.

I’m not sure how far I’d push it – it’s not the issue to shut the government over.

CatoRenasci on April 4, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Shut down government over a tiny fraction of a percent of all funding that goes out?

Sure enough! Go for it Democrats! Defend PP to the hilt! Shut down the government for the rest of the FY!

Please do this!!!

ajacksonian on April 4, 2011 at 6:08 PM

If Republicans would ditch the social conservative stuff and concentrate on fiscal responsibility instead they might actually build trust in the voters
Benaiah on April 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

You want them to concentrate on fiscal responsibility by forcing me to fund abortions? Exactly which voters would that build trust with?

Buddahpundit on April 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Cindy Munford on April 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

I’m good!..Hope everyhing is going good for you!..:)

Dire Straits on April 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Since when did Planned Parenthood become a federal agency? Isn’t this federally funded abortion? What’s more, with Sanger’s history of wanting to wipe out black babies, shouldn’t some Republican throw that in the Dem’s faces?

NNtrancer on April 4, 2011 at 6:13 PM

Lets all go to a happy place in which there are Republican senators form California, Delaware, Connecticut and Nevada.

tjexcite on April 4, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Let them do it. I think the majority of Americans are sick of seeing hard earned tax dollars spent on PP when they are making a profit.

ldbgcoleman on April 4, 2011 at 6:25 PM

Funny how it’s exactly the number needed. Funny dat. You wonder who was on the bubble, and what kind of deal was struck to be number 41

curved space on April 4, 2011 at 6:31 PM

For every demrat claim the reps “hate women”, the reps should run those PP clinic videos.

csdeven on April 4, 2011 at 6:32 PM

Dems will do anything to shut down government.

ctmom on April 4, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Dire Straits on April 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Except for not winning the lottery, couldn’t be better.

Cindy Munford on April 4, 2011 at 6:42 PM

But performing abortions is not all they do.

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Besides handing out defective condoms to kids and abortions what else do they do that is so vital the taxpayer should be funding it?

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 5:43 PM

Fixed it.

Slowburn on April 4, 2011 at 6:45 PM

During The Clinton government shutdown both houses of congress were Republican. They should pass whatever they can through the house and if the Senate filibusters leading to a shutdown just point out the Republican house already did pass a budget.

Resolute on April 4, 2011 at 6:48 PM

bw222 on April 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM

I am sure that Planned Parenthood would just “cook the books” to show that no government funding is going toward abortions.

They already do that. It’s against the law to spend federal dollars on abortion. We all know that it’s a shell game, so we say we’ll defund what we know and you know you spend on abortion but let them still have some funds to other “women’s health” issues.

I sometimes wonder why you bother posting on a conservative website. Sometimes = every time you post.

A disagreement on strategy means I’m not a conservative?

Buy Danish on April 4, 2011 at 6:49 PM

Abortion uber alles ….

BD57 on April 4, 2011 at 6:51 PM

Here is the stand, let’s see the people that were elected to fight these hacks and cronies do their job.

Hening on April 4, 2011 at 6:52 PM

This is a subject on which to make a stand.

PP is not a federal agency and should be able to suck up enough Soros money to stand on it’s own.

All “non-profits” that are essentially Democratic Party subsidiaries should be axed from the budget.

The fact that they are still receiving Federal tax dollars is a testament to the flaccid member the Stupid Party has been sporting over the last 30 years.

rickyricardo on April 4, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Every time a liberal friend of mine brings up this whole mess about “Well PP doens’t just do abortions”, I say “Well how about if another non-profit, one that does all the stuff except abortions, got federal fundign instead”. Always crickets.

Also, I”m realizing more the the “rare” part of “safe, legal, and rare” is bs. Because the same liberal friend is always bitching that there are bills being made that require all abortion clinics to give counseling (and the option to then reject said counseling, like when you pick up a prescription) before getting an abortion. She also bitches about the 3-day waiting period being proposed in one fo the states. Wanting it to be “rare”, my ass.

DethMetalCookieMonst on April 4, 2011 at 6:58 PM

You want them to concentrate on fiscal responsibility by forcing me to fund abortions? Exactly which voters would that build trust with?

Buddahpundit

You missed my point entirely. They aren’t taking this stand because they think they’ll pass the budget with the cuts to Planned Parenthood in it. They won’t and they know they won’t. They are taking the stand now because they know it won’t pass and it’s going to get people like you all worked up into a frenzy about abortion again. If they wanted to take funding away from abortion clinics or start taking steps to stop abortion then all this would have come up a few years ago when they had the power to make these changes.

My preference is no tax funding for abortion but I also see what’s really going on here and I refuse to be used by the Republican party.

Benaiah on April 4, 2011 at 6:59 PM

then all this would have come up a few years ago when they had the power to make these changes.

Benaiah on April 4, 2011 at 6:59 PM

Wow so once a party makes a decision they are stuck forever? Really? What if the makeup of the group in Congress changes are they beholding to those who held their jobs prior? Your thinking is lame.

CWforFreedom on April 4, 2011 at 7:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2