« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Indiana Right to Life Realizes No Such Thing As a Pro-Life Democrat

By: Lori Ziganto (Diary)  |  April 9th, 2010 at 06:32 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Indiana Right to Life PAC just announced that they are now barring the endorsement of Democratic candidates.

“Our leadership anguished over this decision,” notes IRTL-PAC chairman Mike Fichter. “Had Democrats like Brad Ellsworth held firm in opposing federal funding for abortion in the health care bill, we likely would have rewarded such action with a bipartisan endorsement policy. Ellsworth’s collapse under pressure from the White House and Speaker Pelosi, as well as the collapse of his colleagues Joe Donnelly and Baron Hill, leaves us with no alternative. Leadership matters, and the reality is that Democratic leaders are advancing an abortion agenda at an alarming rate that will only be checked by a Republican majority.” — CNW

That’s right, Democrats. You have your own members, in this case Brad Ellsworth, to blame. Brad Ellsworth, among others like Bart Stupak, let their masks slip a bit too far. It has now become abundantly clear that there is no such thing as a Pro-Life Democrat. Also, Democrats lie. Not only did they expose themselves, but they exposed all their fellow Democrats hiding under the “conservative Democrat” or “Pro-life Democrat” mantle.

For years, moderate Democrat candidates for the state legislature have been able to hang on in conservative districts because they have stuck to the pro-life talking points, using their Indiana Right to Life endorsement as a shield against GOP efforts to take back the majority.  Even though IRL was offering meaningful support to Democrats who needed it, their agenda was routinely flushed by House Democrat leadership year in and year out.

Yeah, that cover is totally gone now.

Bart Stupak saw the writing on the wall, being exposed as a blatant liar lacking in one ounce of integrity, and he oh-so-bravely decided to turn tail and run. He’s retiring now, natch. I wonder if there is such a thing as a retirement brothel, as that is where Stupak would feel most comfortable, I assume. If, of course, selling yourself for 30 pieces of silver counts.

Let’s help Rep. Brad Ellsworth, who is now running for Evan Bayh’s senate seat, bravely run away as well. Let’s force him into early retirement. Support the GOP candidate of your choice in that Senate race. Indiana needs to say Buh-Bayh to Ellsworth as well.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • nessa

    …and now it begins to come down around their ears!

  • 4life

    Global Warming, the Pro Life Democrat – Sinking Sand

    What’s next?

  • maggieblumenthal

    Another HUGE blow against the RATS and for the FACTS!

    My husband is a Rabbi and he and I had a lot of talks during the run up to the Maosist takeover of our healthcare system by the incompetent, always-fail, socialist RATS. We has some big decisions to make. With 9 kids, me out of work and a condition that forces me to stay in the house for the most part (I have a colon condition which requires me to be attached to cumbersome medical equipment) we would sometimes entertain the siren songs that the communists RATS would sing in our ears,

    Our medical bills are a burden, I won’t lie.

    But, in the end, I knew that this issue, which seems to always come to the fore and let me know where my heart is, would guide me. As much as would have liked to believe that this legislation was designed to ease some of the burden that we felt as a lower-middle income family with mdeical bills we can’t afford, I started to see, and after a while I KNEW that the ONLY thing that this legislation was trying to do, really, was to make it miles and miles easier for women to get abortions.

    And then I knew. I could never support it.

    Fact: This legislation makes it 10 – 20 times easier for women to get abortions.

    Fact: Under this legislation your premiums are guaranteed to fund abortions, planned parenthood and education and advertisement that supports abortions for teenagers and preteens.

    Fact: It was the always the stated intention of this legislation to increase abortions as its lone goal. Look at the facts.

    Fact: It is murder.

    So. Much as it pained my husband and I, difficult as its going to be for us, we have cancelled our insurance policies for ourselves and for our nine children and are looking into ways to manage our care that won’t fund murder. I encourage all of you to do the same.

    Painful as they are, these are the facts.

    They’re all we have.

    Boom.

    Fact:

    • Menlo

      I suppose you’ll be among those hit with the new medical device tax. I can from experience sympathize greatly with your health situation.

      We may be able to refuse to buy insurance that covers abortion, but I see little way around the other new taxes and increased funding for Banned Parenthood.

  • DirtyDave

    That is just recognizing the obvious, isn’t it? Pro life, democrat. Nothing in common. Power is all. Power is all they care about and if a lot of babies have to die because of it, oh well.

  • SunDogII

    “Democrats lie.”

    Now do you understand?

  • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

    certainly pays strange, inadvertent divididends, doesn’t it?

  • othniel

    I’m afraid I don’t really understand why it makes sense to focus on Stupak in particular. You may not agree with Stupak’s vote, but he clearly tried hard to extract pro-life concessions. The Senate voted on the Stupak language as an amendment and it failed. Why not focus on senators who voted against the Stupak language? Surely that would be a better use of our energy, pound for pound?

    • earlgrey

      one of the other 57 states.

      • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

        Name’s a reference to some recent ‘settler’ issues in Hebron.

        • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rehoboam rehoboam

          n/t

          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            …involving settlers in Hebron. Plus, a couple of tells that I have absolutely no intention of revealing.

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      Did you giggle and think that nobody would recognize the reference to the recent troubles in Israel?

      But don’t worry: we have plenty of time to defeat more Democrats than Stupak. A lot more, Sparky.

      Shalom.

      • ceili_dancer

        Thanks Moe for pointing it out.

    • JSobieski

      so Stupak deserves every bit of scorn that he gets.

      He didn’t extract any concessions, and voted in favor anyway.

      I have more respect for the pro-aborts who stuck to their “principles” than the Stupak crowd.

      Two annectdotal observations about “moderate” politicians:

      A Republican who is liberal on social issues ends up being pretty gosh darn liberal on fiscal issues as well.

      A Democrat who is liberal on economic issues (see Stupak) ends up throwing social issues under the bus, and is going to end us as liberal on social issues as well.

      Relatively few people are liberal in one respect and conservative in another, and those folks tend not run for or win elected office.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    Your aggressive push for full socialism has exposed your agenda to a public that has been for too long minding its own business. Your radicalism has been unmasked, the public is awake, and you are doomed.

  • jcincy

    Steve Driehaus won District One of Ohio in 2008. He ran as a “pro-life” democrat. He lied. He’s still lying.

    God have mercy on this nation.

  • wilfranc

    I don’t know why the press seems to think it necessary to demonize priests and the pope when the current crop of Catholic Democrats are doing such a good job of destroying the faith.

    I don’t understand the church’s tolerance of those public faces of the church. You cannot seperate a person’s faith with his actions, especially political. If anything, the complexity and size of government moving into individual’s lives should mean that the politicians faith becomes a major campaign and governing issue.

    Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith was a huge issue last time around, and it is too bad that all politicians are not confident enough to be ready to defend their faiths. Even atheists have moral reasoning and values that they adhere to and are important.

  • frammis3001

    Something to think about…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/07/acorn-sting-tape-edited-r_n_528556.html

  • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

    as an honest democrat either. WELL, ok, maybe some are just stupid as rocks.

    • NoDoze

      that we avoid painting all Democrats as dishonest and unprincipled. There are Democrats who are becoming very active in the Tea Party movement, because they are not like other Democrats.

      I know it is hard to always use disclaimers in what we say, but we might use “Democrat leaders,” “Progressive Democrats,” or, “Leftist Democrats,” so as to not drive away some good people who are learning the errors inherent in the Democrat Party agenda.

      • JSobieski

        nt

        • mbecker908

          his construction is altogether too narrow. It absolutely applies to Ds up and down the line and ALL who support them.

          • JSobieski

            Do you really want to be to broadly insulting?

          • mbecker908

            The Party of Death, the Party of Evil, the Party of Surrender…

            then no, I have no problem with them. If they haven’t then they are fully a part of the problem not part of the solution.

      • peg_c

        but can’t or won’t give up the big D. One cannot remain a Democrat with the big D and side with tea partiers and conservatives. Not and be intellectually and ideologically honest.

        I say this as a conservative who was a big D Democrat for 26 years, until 1998.

        • NoDoze

          My interest is in converting more big D Democrats to the Conservative cause, not in compromising with Democrat ideology.

      • mbecker908

        1. Dishonest to their core.
        2. Liars on any and all subjects of substance.
        3. Card carrying members of the Party of Death.
        4. Absolutely un-American to their core.
        5. Racist.

        There are no exceptions. If they have a problem with reality then they need to leave the party and stop supporting the Democratic Marxist platform. If you think that somehow there are “errors” in the Democratic platform you’re a fool. That platform is a thoroughly well planned and constructed document. It’s their Mein Kampf.

        “Democrats” and “good people” is the ultimate oxymoron.

        • NoDoze
          • earlgrey

            What else does Obama have to do or say to make these people realize this is NOT a good thing (to misquote Martha Stewart). I still can’t believe some people drive around with their Obama bumper stickers on their cars. I would have tried to fix that by now.

          • mbecker908

            Supporting evil, supporting the surrender of fundamental American values, supporting the Party of Death is, in fact evil. Evil actions make the people who do them AND the people who support them evil.

            That does not mean that they need remain in that condition. In point of fact, the Republican Party and Conservatism are the points of hope and light for those who have indentured themselves to evil. They can walk away at any time and they will find themselves very welcome among many of us who have made the same long walk.

          • NoDoze

            Dr. Sanity: http://drsanity.blogspot.com/ makes an excellent case psychologically, that Leftist/Socialist/Democrats are psychotic. One must reconnect their thinking with reality before they can overcome their psychosis. It can be done, but it is rare, but if people who understand reality keep the pressure on — in a constructive way — those who don’t, there is a glimmer of hope for a few of them.

  • johnt

    What a joke. There are degrees of extremism, greed, and power lust, that’s it.
    Words enter the common discourse and you now have even conservatives referring to the above non-existent creatures. I guess people don’t reflect on the words they use, but it bothers coming from the Right.

  • Adjoran

    From the 1992 Democratic Convention, where Casey, Sr. wasn’t allowed to speak (the spin about him not having endorsed is a dodge, as is the example of other pro-life Democrats who were allowed to speak – just not about life issues). The Platform Committee hearings made clear that no dissent on abortion was to be tolerated, and from that day forward anyone who claimed to be pro-life and a Democrat was hedging at best.

    Leadership has always allowed members from competitive districts to vote against them on key issues when those votes did not affect the outcome, but never if it meant anything. The Stupak Amendment passed the House, but Pelosi would never have allowed a vote on it if she didn’t need its supporters to vote to pass ObamaCare.

    Pelosi has sealed the deal – no pro-life Democrat has a prayer of being heard. These days it is merely electoral puffery for a Democrat to claim even to favor some restrictions on abortion.