"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
What is this another stupid joke?
Democrats are pro death so stop with the Hoo-Ha.
"Democrats for Life" oh now THAT is a good one!
I wish them a lot of luck, and will be watching to see how they do. I'm all for the cord blood act -- I offered to donate when my daughter was born, but there was no system in place in 1993.
There have been pro-life democrats in the past (John Bonior was one, believe it or not), but they've never been allowed to be vocal about it.
These democrats shouldn't get hammered by us for their willingness to speak out on being pro-life. They need to be told when they're doing something RIGHT!
It's the beginning of a wave that wipe the abortion lobby out of majority control in their party, and eventually, all together wipe it out.
Yes, some of them are more pro-life in name only - voting for a PBAB here but not supporting Parental Notification there. But the movement in their ranks is gaining strength, no doubt. It is only a matter of time. This is the last gasp of the abortion lobby.
The only thing remaining is an about face by a well-known abortion pushing politician. When that happens - boom - the walls will fall in their ranks as if flooded. Pray for it!
Besides, in no case this election, as far as I can tell, did a pro-life Dem actually defeat a pro-death Republican. The net result is that the Congress will be even less pro-life than it was in the past.
LOL! Their first vote in the new House will be for pro-abortion nancy pelosi.
Oberstar is from NE Minnesota, a Democratic stronghold, and was thus able to continue as a pro-life Democrat without having to cvompromise his principles.. Similar is Colin Peterson from NW Minnesota, whic is more conservative. Peterson is a blue-dog Democrat. The problem is that the positions they are being assigned to will have absolutely no impact on legistlation whic affects pro-life legislation.
I think the group of so-called Pro-life Democrats are simple-minded if they think having pro-life chairmen in charge of Agriculture and Transportation Committees is significant in the culture war against abortion, infanticide, embryonic stem cell resaerch, gay marriage, etc..
This is nothing more than delusions.
I'm witholding my judgement since we haven't seen how they vote yet. But, in general, I think we need to cooperate with these people, and remind them every single time what a pro-life means.
They may be pro-life now and wet behind the ears to boot.
As they take their seats in January, they will emerge far wiser about the workings of the political parties, especially democrats.
Toe the party line or you do not get any help for your district, nor do you get re-election money.
All these pro-life electees are about to become nothing more than creatures if their hubris overcomes their good conscience. Just watch...
The very first vote these "pro-life" Democrates will pass, is to elect "pro-death" Pelosi as their leader.
The dems have finally found out why they can't get elected. I had a girlfriend, a strong Christian, who voted for every tax increse in the world. She was; so lib she was practically a socialist, but she "had to leave" the dem party because of abortion. She was very upset about it.
She was dem through and through but abortion effectively stopped her from voting dem.
This is the dem strategery. Get votes by prolife candidates, but keep them marginalized. Pelosi will make sure they have no real power. Abortion is way too sacred to Dems to allow such things.
How many took the place of pro-abortion Republicans? What was the net effect on the pro-life makeup of the House and Senate?
"Democrats For Life of America’s top priorities for the 110th Congress
are:...fully funding the National Cord Blood Inventory Act..."
I'll applaud if the Democrats do this. And I'll hardly believe it
until it happens.
The Sunday Los Angeles Times did a hit-piece last year on cord-blood
banking, including the name and city of a lawyer that wants to get
a class-action suit up against cord-blood banks.
He didn't specify why, but my guess is that the lawyer and The
LA Times are angry that more people have received treatments/therapies
from their cord blood...than via Embryonic stem cells.
I got the feeling the article was written by an Embryonic stem-cell
zealot that was out to "abort" the competition, no matter how successfully
it performs in the real world.
Unlike ESCs so far.
They were critical in winning elections but they will have no share in running the House.