SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: Brumar895/26/2009 1:31:54 PM
1 Recommendation   of 793852
 
“It is not our goal to reduce the number of abortions.”

Melody Barnes, Director of Domestic Policy, Obama administration


More News You Won't See At Vox Nova

It is not the policy of the Obama administration to seek to reduce the number of abortions.

Did you get that?

Let me emphasize it for you again: “IT IS NOT OUR GOAL TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ABORTIONS.” (H/T: Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate, via Creative Minority Report via Hot Air.)

Let's put that quote in context, shall we? Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America, is at a meeting at the White House to discuss abortion with representatives of groups both opposing and supporting abortion rights. This happened a few days before President Obama went to Notre Dame:

Ask nearly anyone, “What is Obama’s goal on abortion?” They’ll answer, “Reduce the number of abortions.”
A Notre Dame professor and priest insisted this in a television debate after Obama’s speech. The Vatican newspaper reported it. Rush Limbaugh led a spirited debate on his radio program the next day based on this premise.

But that’s not what his top official in charge of finding “common ground” says.

Melody Barnes, the Director of Domestic Policy Council
and a former board member of Emily’s List, led the meeting. As the dialogue wound down, she asked for my input.

I noted that there are three main ways the administration can reach its goals: by what it funds, its messages from the bully pulpit, and by what it restricts. It is universally agreed that the role of parents is crucial, so government should not deny parents the ability to be involved in vital decisions. The goals need to be clear; the amount of funding spent to reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions is not a goal. The U.S. spends nearly $2 billion each year on contraception programs -- programs which began in the 1970s -- and they’ve clearly failed. We need to take an honest look at why they are not working.

Melody testily interrupted to state that she had to correct me. “It is not our goal to reduce the number of abortions.”

The room was silent. [Emphasis added.]

This comes as no surprise to me. If you've been paying attention, it should come as no surprise to you. The Obama Administration is pro-abortion. Abortion is not a bad thing, in their view, and they have no interest in discussing ways to end abortion, nor even to reduce the number of abortions.

It was a lie. Just like all his other lies. The people who claim to be pro-life and who supported abortion have been patsies. Suckers. Useful idiots, to use a term I saw over at Vox Nova to describe conservative pro-lifers.

The only question is, will the ostensibly pro-life Obama supporters claim to be surprised? Will they resent being shown, and so quickly, to be patsies, suckers, and useful idiots? Or will they continue to make excuses for their real savior? I expect no conversions. There is nothing, nothing Barack Obama can say or do that will cost him the support of Morning's Minion or Douglas Kmiec. He could sign FOCA, he could personally perform abortions, and his Catholic "pro-life" supporters would still be out there shilling for him.

The "dialog on abortion" that the President called for at Notre Dame was already completed before he went to South Bend, the outcome was never in doubt. Obviously so, because if the President had ever intended a genuine dialog on abortion he would permit a vote on abortion. And why should he? If the issue is, as he said, "irreconcilable," why should he simply not resolve it to suit himself? After all, he won.

I fear that, as I predicted, the abortion issue may have been decided once and for all by the election of 2008, and it's just a matter of time before the pro-lifers have their noses sufficiently rubbed in it.

Congratulations to the turncoats who made this moment possible. This is their achievement, make no mistake, and it is not reasonable to believe any claim they might make that this outcome was unintentional or unexpected. This is Douglas Kmiec's achievement. This is Nicholas Cafardi's achievement. This is the achievement of the Vox Nova Four, and all the contributors at VN who cover for them and lend them credibility by their presence on that blog. They are enablers for getting out the pro-abortion message by attracting readers that these culture war quislings could never attract alone.

The "pro-life left" has lost whatever credibility it may have ever had. Every bad thing ever said about the Obama Administration's pro-abortion policies is fully justified, and every apologist and excuser who has lent his name or keyboard to the defense of the Administration is discredited.

It's a bitter win. The "pro-life" progressives are not allies at all. They are infiltrators, and it's time for real pro-lifers to wake up and see them as they are.
regularthoughts.blogspot.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext