Sometimes One Picture Is Truly Worth A Thousand Words

Advertisements

19 Responses to Sometimes One Picture Is Truly Worth A Thousand Words

  1. daledog says:

    Chump would also describe anyone who voted for a ‘pro-life’ Democrat.

    The Democratic party is owned by the abortion industry. Get that through your thick skull.

  2. daledog says:

    Chump would also describe any blogger who had a Democrats for Life link on their website.

    …cough**TheAmericanCatholic**cough…

    Seriously – when do you learn? Wishing this were a strong viable group does not make it so. Wishing the Dems will see the light is the height of folly. Please grow up. Soon. We need you. We need you to wake up and deal with the reality of the situation. The Dems are the party of death. You need to accept this.

  3. Joe Hargrave says:

    Daledog,

    Why don’t you knock it off already?

    One of our bloggers is a pro-life Democrat and I’m fairly certain he doesn’t buy the executive order business.

    Stupak’s idiotic actions have tarnished pro-life Democrats, but there’s a difference between tarnishing, and somehow rendering the whole position logically invalid. It isn’t.

  4. Tito Edwards says:

    I agree with Joe.

    We have that particular group under “secular”.

  5. daledog says:

    Yeah, that’s right. Bart Stupak is the problem. Not all the gullible voters who fall for the ‘pro-life’ Democrat line. Fools.

  6. Sydney Carton says:

    Dale,

    In fairness, I always thought that the Dems were 1,000% pro-abortion, ever since they wouldn’t let Casey speak at the Democratic convention in 1992. The existence of Stupak was a shock, frankly. I thought pro-life Dems were extinct, so it was surprising to see Stupak fight on this.

    Now, at least, I KNOW that they’re extinct. But the shock of it is probably a lot for many people who don’t follow politics. No need to rub salt in the wound. The ones who are fools are those who somehow believe that the Democratic party can be salvaged. It can’t.

  7. Sydney Carton says:

    Dale, I take that back. You’re right. Stupak was never going to hold up the bill because of abortion. It was always a scam. Here’s the proof:

  8. Eric Brown says:

    Would a pro-life voter who voted for Bobby Bright (D-AL) be a gullible fool?

    Bright voted against the stimulus package, cap-and-trade, the first health care reform bill in the House, is voting against the current one and has a 100% score from the National Right to Life.

    So much for the straw man argument.

  9. RL says:

    That video is saddening. In the beginning I was skeptical of Stupak and is his comrades because pro-life Dems have a history of turning out to be more Dem than pro-life. Nelson selling out his pro-life creds for a chunk of the national treasure validated my thoughts, but when Stupak criticized the Senate bill and the shenanigans involved, I thought he was indeed different. Apparently I was wrong.

    So it was all smoke and mirrors, he knew he’d vote for this no matter what.

  10. daledog says:

    Eric,
    Bobby Bright is going to be primaried by the abortion Dems (the real Dems). He is going to have to work his butt off the keep his seat. He is not welcome in the Democratic party. With the his voting record you recount he would be welcome and wanted within the R party.

  11. daledog says:

    Sydney,
    I have never seen this video, but I just knew it was a scam all along. I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I can discern patterns. I have seen so-called pro-life Dems cave again and again. Libs, you see, are libs before they are anything else. If only Catholics could be half as dedicated to their orthodoxy. If the salt makes the wounds more memorable, then so be it.

    I want what most people here want. The time for pretending that ‘pro-life’ is anything other than a slogan for some politicians has long past.

  12. Eric Brown says:

    Well I don’t know how many real, committed pro-life Democrats you have met daledog, but many of us are not interested — in the slightest — with joining the Republican party.

  13. daledog says:

    Eric,
    Great – you keep spinning your wheels. I don’t know any committed pro-life Democrats, and I’m quite the loquacious social butterfly. Who stood up for life today and who did not? According to Hot Air, the R’s are trying to force a vote on the Stupak language to kill this abortion bill. Surely you hope they succeed, no?

  14. Elaine Krewer says:

    I still think that it is dangerous and counterproductive for the pro-life movement to be so closely chained to one faction within one political party. That’s how we ended up in the situation we are now — with conservative Republicans so far out of power they can do nothing to stop this juggernaut.

    Yes, I’m really ticked off at Bart Stupak right now because I thought maybe, just maybe, he was going to get a pro-life foothold in the Democratic Party. So now our only hope is to place Republicans in total control of every branch of government? Well, see how long that lasts until the GOP screws up or becomes corrupt (I may be a Republican, but I’m not naive about them). Then they get voted out, liberals take over, we lose everything we’ve gained.

    I keep saying that establishing a pro-life presence in the Democratic Party should be the most important political priority of the pro-life movement, behind or perhaps equal to getting the “right” Supreme Court justices. Well, Stupak has just made that impossible for the foreseeable future. Thanks a lot (not).

  15. R.C. says:

    Eric:

    I get that you’re sincere about that. (I refer to your statement “…many of us are not interested — in the slightest — with joining the Republican party.”)

    As someone who doesn’t know you, who has cast no aspersions, and who has family members who are congenital Democrats with whom I disagree but who I respect, can I ask you: Why not?

    And before you answer that, let me redirect the question a little. For me, “joining the Republican party” is not the issue. I’m not registered for a party since my state doesn’t require it, and I am therefore free to join or not, contribute or not, as much as I deem helpful for enacting the policies, causes, and political philosophy I support.

    So for me, the question is, “Forgetting party registration for a moment, aren’t you interested in supporting causes, policies, and political philosophy which, taken together, are identified more closely with the Republican party than with the Democrat party?”

    If not, why not? What political philosophy common among Democrats is preferable to that among Republicans? What causes? What policies?

    I realize it’s a more complex question, and I apologize for being a bit off topic. But only a bit: The ability of pro-life Democrats to exist and have any serious policy influence at the Federal level now looks to be entirely chimerical. But the notion of pro-life Democrats having any sway in the national party has been extremely dubious for over thirty years now. It’s not news.

    So for a person to identify as a pro-life Democrat is, well, hard work: Somewhere between being a die-hard fan of a team that never wins, and tilting at windmills.

    It seems to me that one would only exert oneself so greatly if there was great incentive: If either (a.) the other policies/causes/philosophies of the Democratic party were so profoundly great, or (b.) the policies/causes/philosophies common to Republicans were particularly repugnant.

    But I find the policies, causes, and philosophies common among Democrats to usually be quite bad, even apart from the whole “party of death” problem. And I find the policies, causes, and philosophies among Republicans to be inconsistent, but more often good than bad — and often very good, lacking not in correctness but only in failure to implement.

    So, for you to be a “pro-life Democrat” and so strongly, suggests that you and I disagree widely on some of those policies, philosophies, and causes.

    Which ones, and why, may I ask? No rebuke intended; I’d just like to know.

  16. Sydney Carton says:

    The issue is not that you want a pro-life presence in the Democratic party. The issue is: they do not want you, and they will never want you.

    Are you a cheap date? Time to wake up. Despite begging for a seat at the table, they’re pushing you away. There is no point in avoiding the matter any more. The Democrats are not pro-life. Any single Democrat who is, and still hopes to use his position as leverage, is fooling himself. Today has proven the truth of it.

    dale is right. I didn’t know about that video either until today, but I was amazed that a guy like Stupak could even exist. That amazement led me to hope that he would follow through. But, “do not put your trust in princes.” Stupak, and other so-called pro-life liberals, are liberals first, and pro-life second. It’s a shame, but today, that has proven to be the truth.

  17. Donna V. says:

    Sydney is exactly right: They do not want you, and they will never want you.
    Elaine, the pro-life movement is not aligned with one political party because of some grand and misguided political strategy but because there is absolutely no place for them in the other one.
    Pro-life Dems are like the nerdy kids who keep trying to join the Kool Kidz Klub, even after being insulted and getting the clubhouse door slammed in their faces time and time again. How much more humiliation and disappointment do you want to subject yourself to?

    Mark Steyn has pointed that that the trouble with those bumper stickers that use different religious symbols to say “Coexist” is that it only works when all the religions want to co-exist and some of the practitioners of one faith seem to have a problem with that. Similarly, calls for bipartisanship on the abortion issue only work if the Dems give pro-lifers a place at the table. They pretend to – and then pull the chair out from under you when you try to sit down. How often do you have to land on your behind before you get the hint?

  18. […] the the Upper Peninsula Representative Bart Stupak of Michigan, an alleged “pro-life” Democrat that recently voted for government funding of abortion, made it clear that he was never going to […]

%d bloggers like this: