The difference between the U.S. House and U.S. Senate debate on the Stupak amendment is stark.

The pro-abortion Members of Congress in the House, and pro-abortion groups like NARAL and Planned Parenthood, rolled over and did not threaten to derail the bill because Speaker Pelosi asked them to. So they played dead.

Senator McCaskill (D-MO), who is pro-abortion, publicly said she could live with the Stupak amendment. (This link also shows the deep net-roots anger against NARAL and Emily’s List for playing dead and letting Stupak pass at the request of the Speaker.)

Senator McCaskill is not the Speaker of the House, and she was not so lucky — she did not get a free pass.

She was instantly pounded by pro-abortion forces. Senator McCaskill has now changed her tune — she will not support Stupak in the Senate — all in the same day.

Pro-Abortion Forces on the Defensive

The precedent set by the Stupak amendment in the House has put the pro-abortion forces on the defensive. They lost a major battle and are now reacting very aggressively.

They cannot allow a Stupak type amendment to pass the Senate. It will make their position in Conference extremely weak, untenably weak. It will lock-in the pro-life victory in the House.

If the Senate also passes an amendment, close to or like the Stupak amendment, then the bill coming out of Conference would force the pro-abortion groups to oppose the Conference report, and they would have to join with the Republicans to kill ObamaCare.

Like wolves on a fresh killed deer, the liberals keep tearing up Democrats over Representative Stupak’s amendment, which forces pro-abortion Dems to vote for pro-life protections for the innocents.

This has sites like FireDogLake completely bent:

“Is there anyone who did not see this coming, besides the over hundred Democrats in the House who call themselves pro-choice? Ben Nelson (D-NE) is now demanding the Senate also include the Stupak amendment language. Did anyone really think the Senate’s conservative Democrats would let any part of the House bill be to the right of the Senate? If Nelson gets his way (and when hasn’t Nelson gotten his way this year?), so much for “don’t worry, Obama will fix it in conference.”

From Politico,

“Senator Nelson is strongly pro-life and was pleased the Stupak amendment passed with such strong support,” Thompson said in a statement. “He believes that no federal money—including subsidies or tax credits–should be used to buy insurance coverage for abortion. This is a very important issue to Senator Nelson and it is highly unlikely he would support a bill that doesn’t clearly prohibit federal dollars from going to abortion.”

“It is a good thing NARAL and Planned Parenthood did not put up a fight before the Stupak amendment was added to the House bill. It is always so much easier to push things to the left in the Senate. . . .

But NARAL and Planned Parenthood got rolled by Speaker Pelosi, and now pro-abortion Senators will be forced to make the same choice pro-abortion House Dems did, but this time, the NARALs and Planned Parenthoods of the world can’t just roll over and play dead, like they did for their pal the Speaker.

Read More →

First, let me apologize to RedState readers for taking so long to write and post this overdue piece, the time I allocated to write this was the same time the site was down for maintenance over the weekend.

Regardless, my predictions of winning the House floor vote were wrong.

Simply put, the pro-lfe amendment by Rep. Stupak moved enough Dems into the yes category — but the price paid by Speaker Pelosi was to throw the pro-abortion groups under the bus — and there is a new, titanium strong pro-life baseline consensus on public funding or facilitating the killing of innocent babies: the US House is at a !@#&!$&# NO on that.

Had Rep. Stupak’s amendment failed, the House bill would have failed.

No doubt, and the shock of seeing 64 Dem votes for Rep. Stupak’s don’t use public money to kill the innocents was a Maxell moment for both the Democratic and Republican House Leadership. No one predicted that high a Yes Dem vote.

The desperate position the Speaker must have been in to have to accept the Stupak amendment should not be understated. She and her pro-abortion pals understand that Stupak was a huge step down the path of America becoming a pro-life nation. They have imposed upon themselves and their ilk a negative precedent which cannot be undone.

Dropping the Stupak amendment in conference, should the bill pass the Senate, which I doubt — will mean the conference report will fail on the House floor.

Just think of the desperation of the Speaker, to be FORCED to accept this political price. She pivoted on abortion, and decided the Stupak amendment was worth the price to pass the bill.

For the Jamestown Kool-aid brigade of Dems who voted with the Speaker who are from Red States — you will die a hard and agonizing political death of your own making. Whatever rationale you used to vote for this politically and fiscally toxic bill $3 Trillion spending ObamaCare bill — you are wrong and you are TOAST. (Here is the Congressional Budget Office letter on the $3 Trillion in spending number.)

Most Accurate RedStater

One RedStater who was consistent and accurate on the House vote outcome in their comments on my blogs should be “called-out,” to use the President’s term:

Most accurate: bk. I really appreciate (just for the record) those who disagree with my posts and predictions, and am recognizing bk here for his or her insight and accuracy.

In fact, bk, when I wrote the Today’s House Vote, by the Numbers, the implications of the Stupak amendment and deal were simply not part of that post’s calculation, as you immediately both understood and pointed out.

Thank you for all the dissident commentators, as one myself, I appreciate disagreement with my posts.

The Obama Administration will announce next week that President Obama has decided to scrap regulations put in place by President Bush designed to protect health care workers from being forced to participate in abortions, sterilizations, and contraceptive procedures on moral grounds.  The rules were intended as an enforcement mechanism.  They expanded on existing federal law protecting conscientious doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and other health care workers by requiring hospitals to certify that they comply with the law in order to continue to be eligible for federal funding.  In other words, the rules did nothing new, they simply ensured that the existing law was not ignored.

There can be no doubt now that Barack Obama is the most radically pro-abortion president in history, except among the most brain-addled and delusional fever swamps of the left.  This move, together with Obama’s history and two other abortion related decisions in his young Administration proves it.  I used the term “pro-abortion” in my story on the abortion rules at AOL’s Political Machine and drew the ire of one liberal commenter, who called it, “symantics gymnastics.”  But why?  Liberals believe abortion is a good thing.  If Obama is pro-abortion, that just means he is on their side.

Furthermore, the left likes to have its positions characterized in a positive light and conservative ones cast negatively.  Hence the labels “pro-choice” and “anti-choice.”  Since we all know choice equals abortion – it’s the only choice the left supports – let’s have truth in labeling.  President Obama is pro-abortion while his conservative opponents are anti-abortion. Works for me.

Read More →