Stupak in the crosshairs

Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.) has been talking abortion with Dem leaders and has learned a thing or two:

“I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwilling to change its stance,” he says. “Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” The arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, he adds, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”

Their argument, crass and inhumane, is this:

“If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

“They don’t even want to debate this issue. We’ll probably have to wait until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this.”

The pressure is great:

“This has really reached an unhealthy stage,” Stupak says. “People are threatening ethics complaints on me. On the left, they’re really stepping it up. Every day, from Rachel Maddow to the Daily Kos, it keeps coming. Does it bother me? Sure. Does it change my position? No.”

Nasty people, those libs.

(Good work here by Robert Costa for NRO Corner)

Stupak in the crosshairs

Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.) has been talking abortion with Dem leaders and has learned a thing or two:

“I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwilling to change its stance,” he says. “Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” The arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, he adds, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”

Their argument, crass and inhumane, is this:

“If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

“They don’t even want to debate this issue. We’ll probably have to wait until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this.”

The pressure is great:

“This has really reached an unhealthy stage,” Stupak says. “People are threatening ethics complaints on me. On the left, they’re really stepping it up. Every day, from Rachel Maddow to the Daily Kos, it keeps coming. Does it bother me? Sure. Does it change my position? No.”

Nasty people, those libs.

(Good work here by Robert Costa for NRO Corner)

Horowitz vs. Feinstein

David Horowitz reports on what’s bothering The Left:

The most recent edition of Newsweek‘s “Declassified” reports that [Senator Dianne] Feinstein and her Democrat colleagues are upset that the Department of Homeland Security uses DiscoverTheNetworks.org to identify unnamed Muslim security risks in America.

Foolishly.  “As I am quoted . . . in the article,

“American left-wingers, including some members of Congress, have a long history of – actively working with and collaborating with America’s enemies.”

And this attack confirms that the site is doing its job. I have no knowledge of the Homeland Security papers that the senators are complaining about. But I can assure you that the material on DiscoverTheNetworks.org is factual not inflammatory. The Freedom Center is very careful about the content of posts. All we do is connect the dots.

Read all about it here.

Et tu, Luis?

Among House Dems who may vote no on health-whatsit who voted yes the first time is Chi’s own Luis G.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) said in a statement today that he plans to vote no “at this time.” He’s demanding changes to the bill’s immigration language, arguing that the current bill would bar some immigrants from buying private insurance with their own money.

That Pelosi dame can’t win for losin’.

Horowitz vs. Feinstein

David Horowitz reports on what’s bothering The Left:

The most recent edition of Newsweek‘s “Declassified” reports that [Senator Dianne] Feinstein and her Democrat colleagues are upset that the Department of Homeland Security uses DiscoverTheNetworks.org to identify unnamed Muslim security risks in America.

Foolishly.  “As I am quoted . . . in the article,

“American left-wingers, including some members of Congress, have a long history of – actively working with and collaborating with America’s enemies.”

And this attack confirms that the site is doing its job. I have no knowledge of the Homeland Security papers that the senators are complaining about. But I can assure you that the material on DiscoverTheNetworks.org is factual not inflammatory. The Freedom Center is very careful about the content of posts. All we do is connect the dots.

Read all about it here.

Et tu, Luis?

Among House Dems who may vote no on health-whatsit who voted yes the first time is Chi’s own Luis G.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) said in a statement today that he plans to vote no “at this time.” He’s demanding changes to the bill’s immigration language, arguing that the current bill would bar some immigrants from buying private insurance with their own money.

That Pelosi dame can’t win for losin’.

The Medjugorje connection

“The devil inside the Vatican” made a big splash in the UK Times with help from Drudge, a week after it broke in lesser pubs.  It’s a feud between exorcists, per a story by Stephen K. Ryan at ministryValues.com, who says it’s a matter of dueling exorcists.

“Well known Vatican Exorcists” Father Gabriele Armoth and Bishop Andrea Gemma have sharply different views of the scene at Medjugorje, a small village in Bosnia-Herzegovina where many believe the Virgin Mary “has been appearing and giving messages to the world” since 1981.

Amorth,  a renowned exorcist  and vigorous supporter of Medjugorje (He called it a “Fortress against Satan”)  in Rome  released a book of memoirs in which he declares to know of the existence of Satanic sects in the Vatican where participation reaches all the way to the College of Cardinals.

In 1973 he backed up the film “The Exorcist” as “substantially exact.”  In the Medjugorje experience, he sees a remedy now for Satanic influence in the Vatican, concerning which he says Pope Benedict “does what he can,” which apparently is not enough.

Bishop Gemma, on the other hand

one year ago . . .   denounced the alleged visions of Our Lady . . . as the “work of the devil” and a “diabolical deceit” [and] has rejected claims made by the six Bosnian ‘seers’ that they have seen the Virgin Mary “thousands [of] times over the past 27 years.”   

He told an Italian magazine, “In Medjugorje everything happens in function of money: Pilgrimages, lodging houses, sale of trinkets. . . .  It is a scandal.” He predicted a Vatican crackdown on the promoters of the visions.

Indeed, in September, 2008, the Vatican did discipline one of them, Rev. Tomislav Vlasic, a Franciscan priest, “for failing to cooperate with a Vatican inquiry” following his being reported “for the diffusion of dubious doctrine, manipulation of consciences, suspicious mysticism, disobedience toward legitimately issued orders” and charges that he “violated the Sixth Commandment,” Australia-based Cath News reported.