Skip to comments.White House threatens veto of House abortion bill
Posted on 01/27/2014 4:22:46 PM PST by markomalley
he Obama administration is threatening a veto of legislation that would permanently ban federal funds for abortion.
In a statement on Monday, the administration said the measure would intrude on women's reproductive rights and prohibit the ability of individuals to spend their own money on insurance coverage for abortion under President Barack Obama's health care law
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
How’s that bipartisanship working out for you dumbasses in the Stupid Party.
It’s bad enough that women get to kill their babies, but it is salt in the wound of the body politic that the taxpayers have to fund the murder.
How can the executive veto the outcome of a vote for cessation of funding on anything? What happened to “power of the purse” in this case?
I’m still trying to wrap my mind around...
“...the measure would intrude on women’s reproductive rights and prohibit the ability of individuals to spend their own money on insurance coverage for abortion...”
How would it prohibit individuals from spending their
It’s just another battle in the ‘Rats “War on Helpless Children”.
It’s like a comment on a article I was reading...about Hobby Lobby might close all it’s stores due to being forced to provide birth control. Some gal writes, stay out of our vaginas.....really? You want employers to pay for your vagina, government to pay for abortions, etc- but you want them to stay out of your vagina?
This administration, this idiotic group of liberals! How about looking toward the future...things will change!
Our problem is with our so called Conservative Representatives in the House (forget about the Senate) as all tend to vote against anything that might offend the minority...geez! No, things will never change - we have voted our beliefs and we also gain the benefits of our votes, usually not to our benefit!
One of these days, we might actually vote for freedom but doubt it... Mo9re likely, we will have to again fight for it!
Anyone with a brain already knows how little Zero cares about life.
Bart Stupak, your President just made you a liar!!!
Your statement puzzles me.
If a minority party knows that a measure will be vetoed -- as certainly is the case here -- should they totally give up trying to advance their own agenda?
Given this President and this Senate, I imagine that there is literally nothing of their own agenda that the Republican House can expect to pass into law. There will be no compromise coming from the 'Rats.
So, should the Republicans confine their efforts to addressing only that which must be addressed? Otherwise idly waiting for recess or adjournment?
Legitimate question. I don't know the answer.
It depends upon what one is trying to accomplish politically. Which story does one want in the news?
Abuse of power resolutions would be higher on my list. Budget cuts would be higher on my list. A better "farm bill" would be higher on my list. Doing something about stupid military spending would be higher on my list.
Everybody already knows that the bulk of the GOP opposes abortion and regulations, wants low taxes, and a strong military. Unfortunately, given the GOP performance prior to 2006, the public has a legitimate lack of faith in the GOP doing anything about spending or invasion of privacy. For our positions to take, that is where our focus should be. We shouldn't be giving the media news with which to "remind" those voters we seek to enlist with what they already know that they don't prefer. When it comes time for them to "weigh" competing candidates, that total of "reminders" will matter.
Hence, I regard this move to be politically tactless. Should we gain power again, there will be plenty of time to ax Federal spending for Planned Parenthood and any number of other Slave Party slush funds.
>> the measure would intrude on women’s reproductive rights
Specifically the reproductive right to kill nascent human life.
A person can opt to have many procedures done, due to the advance of knowledge and ability of the medical community, I tend to believe most are performed to heal that individual and that is a blessing.
What too many women refuse to admit is that another human being has begun his/her own life in her womb. This other person is NOT them and they have no say about ending this person's life.
We all know that baby didn't magically pop into existence. His/her mother and father brought a new life into the world and they must be responsible for the child's well-being.
If they destroy this growing human being, they kill their child. Period.
Legitimate question. I don't know the answer.
Did you wish to discuss this further?
Abortion....the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.
Forget the race card....the ‘Rats are now dealing the ‘womens rights card’ as their royal flush. As America gets flushed down the toilet like an aborted. baby.
Heaven is unimpressed with innocent shedding of baby blood. Hell is being enlarged for its future occupants. Demanding rights will not apply in the hot place below.
I understand your point and it is well taken.
Personally, I don't have a problem with sending an abortion bill up the ladder. The social conservatives in the party deserve to have their agenda served, as well.
The fiscal conservatives have a legitimate bitch, however. With the exception of some ineffectual resistance to the Farm Bill, there's been no definitive action by the House to cut -- or even control -- spending.
Similarly, the GOP leadership seems satisfied to leave the abuse of power issue alone. Along with the multitude of egregious scandals -- the IRS, Benghazi, Fast & Furious scandals are all, in effect, abuse of power scandals.
In effect, the GOP Congressional leadership seems to define their job as a.) helping to keep the government open and b.) functioning smoothly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.