Nancy Pelosi has taken hyperbolic statements to a new level today with this sound bite.
For Democrats, preventing federal funding from being used to pay for abortions, something specifically refuted as a possibility during the healthcare reform debates, will produce this result.
The House is scheduled to vote this week on a new bill that would allow federally-funded hospitals that oppose abortions to refuse to perform the procedure, even in cases where a woman would die without it.
This would be news to the sponsors of the amendment since it very clearly states that the opposite is true:
Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced last week that the Protect Life Act, H.R. 358, will be considered in the House of Representatives on Thursday. The measure would amend President Obama’s Affordable Care Act to reflect the Hyde amendment by prohibiting taxpayer dollars from funding any health plan that includes coverage of elective abortions. The measure retains Hyde’s exception for abortions performed due to the child’s conception in rape or incest or to save the mother’s life.
The pro-life measure also ensures that state laws “protecting conscience rights, restricting or prohibiting abortion or coverage or funding of abortion, or establishing procedural requirements on abortion” are not abrogated by Obamacare. It also makes it so any state or local governments receiving funding under Obamacare may not subject any health care entity to discrimination or require any health plan to subject any entity to discrimination on the basis that it refuses to undergo abortion training, refuses to require abortion training, refuses to perform or pay for abortions, or refuses to provide abortion referrals.
In the world of Democrats, having state rights remain intact despite Obamacare, and affording religious groups the right to not murder babies against their will, has become synonymous with leaving dying women on the floor.
And all this because of a provision that will force Obamacare to not do exactly what we were told over and over it wouldn’t do: provide federal assistance for abortions.
Have no fear liberals. In the great spirit of bi-partisanship and compromise, President Obama has already assured us that he will veto the bill.
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES All the major networks have called this primary for Donald Trump. With all the polls closed and 9% of the vote in, the race has been called for Trump. #Breaking: CNN projects Donald Trump will win the Indiana Republican primary https://t.co/DkPyle0Wrv pic.twitter.com/dbitjFLMjz — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) May 3, 2016 Here are the numbers: TRUMP: 54.2% CRUZ: 32.8% KASICH: 10% | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES I’ve about had it with Trump supporters. They’re happy to tell you Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina and others just “weren’t good enough to win” and that any of their losses is completely their fault. But when the talk shifts to the general election suddenly they’re all like, “We need to unite behind Trump | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES “What a day it has been,” Jake Tapper remarks at the beginning of CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper.” He ain’t kidding. He then goes on in his opening statement, “every time you think this race could not get any more ludicrous, it does.” And while other networks and anchors are making outrageous statements like, “is Ted Cruz becoming | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES CNN just reported some early numbers. Keep in mind, this is only 2% of precincts reporting, and in half the state the polls are still open (time zone split), but with those caveats, Trump has a big early lead. TRUMP: 54.8% (13,318) CRUZ: 31% (7,571) KASICH: 11.6% (2,836) We’ll keep our eye on it. Denver to Host 2016 RedState | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES CNN is reporting that Indiana exit polls show voters believe the primary has divided the party but, overall, it has been fair. This is the kind of news that is good for Ted Cruz since it has been the “rigging the primary” drumbeat of Trumpkins up to this point and it seems, by early indications anyway, that that line of thinking | Read More »