Collins, Murkowski: We Sunk Skinny Repeal to Protect Planned Parenthood

[Machiavelli]

Cortney O'Brien
Townhall
August 7, 2017

Two of the senators who singlehandedly derailed the skinny repeal of Obamacare were awarded a sit down interview with the admiring Dana Bash Friday on CNN. The bright faced journalist applauded Sens. Susan Collins (ME) and Lisa Murkowski (AK) for having the “cajones” to vote against the Republican bill when they knew half the country would view them as heretics.

Collins admitted it was an “uncomfortable” vote. But, they both insisted it was the right thing to do, which is why they did not fear backlash from GOP leadership, or even intimidating tweets from the Oval Office.

Both women said they were voting for their constituents, not the Republican Party...

Part of standing up for their states, the senators argued, was protecting Planned Parenthood funding...

Full article

[Emjay]

Cortney O'Brien
Townhall
August 7, 2017

Full article

Thanks for the link to the full article.  These two women do not deserve to be in the government at all and certainly not as Republicans.

[bilo]

Pub Senators protect an organization that uses tax dollars to campaign against Pubs. 

I have no doubt these liars will bask in the adulation from the left. My response is unless it's a real conservative good riddance to all of them.

[mystery-ak]

Thanks for the link to the full article.  These two women do not deserve to be in the government at all and certainly not as Republicans.

Why don't they just switch over to the rest of the baby killers..the Dems.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Why don't they just switch over to the rest of the baby killers..the Dems.

But how would murk get elected if she didn't run as a republican?

[jmyrlefuller]

But how would murk get elected if she didn't run as a republican?

Write-ins.

[mystery-ak]

But how would murk get elected if she didn't run as a republican?

How does she get elected now...don't the folks in Ak look at her voting record?

[truth_seeker]

But how would murk get elected if she didn't run as a republican?

She defeated the Republican as a write in if my memory serves me. Yep memory still good. Checked it before posting.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Why don't they just switch over to the rest of the baby killers..the Dems.

What difference would that have made?

[mystery-ak]

What difference would that have made?

Makes no difference..just saying she ought to proclaim herself a Dem...Dems flaunt their pro-abortion stance..it is the party of abortion.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

How does she get elected now...don't the folks in Ak look at her voting record?

She lost the Rep primary, then won the general running as in Independent.  And then the Reps took her back.?.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

At the risk of sounding sexist, seems that if one elects a woman to power in DC, it will have an overwhelmingly chance of meaning she is supporting abortion.

How many of the current women US Senators are pro-life vs pro-abortion?

Only pro-life I can see is Joni Ernst and Deb Fischer

That means that only two of the 21 women Senators are pro-life.  In other words, right now less than 10% of the women Senators.

Draw your own conclusions from these facts.

U.S. Senate - 21 (16D, 5R)
AK   U.S. Sen.   Lisa Murkowski (R)
CA   U.S. Sen.   Dianne Feinstein (D)
CA   U.S. Sen.   Kamala Harris (D)
HI   U.S. Sen.   Mazie Hirono (D)
IA   U.S. Sen.   Joni Ernst (R)
IL   U.S. Sen.   L. Tammy Duckworth (D)
MA   U.S. Sen.   Elizabeth Warren (D)
ME   U.S. Sen.   Susan Collins (R)
MI   U.S. Sen.   Debbie Stabenow (D)
MN   U.S. Sen.   Amy Klobuchar (D)
MO   U.S. Sen.   Claire McCaskill (D)
ND   U.S. Sen.   Heidi Heitkamp (D)
NE   U.S. Sen.   Deb Fischer (R)
NH   U.S. Sen.   Maggie Hassan (D)
NH   U.S. Sen.   Jeanne Shaheen (D)
NV   U.S. Sen.   Catherine Cortez-Masto (D)
NY   U.S. Sen.    Kirsten Gillibrand (D)
WA   U.S. Sen.   Maria Cantwell (D)
WA   U.S. Sen.   Patty Murray (D)
WI   U.S. Sen.   Tammy Baldwin (D)
WV   U.S. Sen.   Shelley Moore Capito (R)

[Jazzhead]

Why was the decision made to muddy a health care reform bill with language defunding Planned Parenthood?  Especially when every last vote was needed?   

Whatever the merits of defunding Planned Parenthood,  given this interview the decision to include it in the reform bill amounts to political malpractice.   

Congratulations, conservatives - the ACA remains the law of the land, and PP remains funded.   

[Jazzhead]

At the risk of sounding sexist, seems that if one elects a woman to power in DC, it will have an overwhelmingly chance of meaning she is supporting abortion.

Makes sense to me - it is the woman's liberty at issue.   

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Makes sense to me - it is the woman's liberty at issue.

I can see you still define liberty by the taking of an innocent's life.

[Jazzhead]

I can see you still define liberty by the taking of an innocent's life.

It's not that simple.  No question about it - like you, I consider abortion to be morally wrong.  The issue is what role the State should play in forcing women to conform to religious norms.  Lots of things that are morally wrong aren't proscribed by the State.   The uncomfortable reality is that a woman has to go through nine months of profound physical changes and pain.  It is a decision that she has to make for herself - with the help of her partner, family, spiritual adviser and God.   It cannot be forced upon her by the government.  THAT is the liberty she possesses - she needs to be free to make that decision based on her own values and conscience - not the religious diktat of the State. 

[thackney]

It's not that simple.  No question about it - like you, I consider abortion to be morally wrong.  The issue is what role the State should play in forcing women to conform to religious norms.  Lots of things that are morally wrong aren't proscribed by the State.  The uncomfortable reality is that a woman has to go through nine months of profound physical changes and pain.  It is a decision that she has to make for herself - with the help of her partner, family, spiritual adviser and God.   It cannot be forced upon her by the government.  THAT is the liberty she possesses - she needs to be free to make that decision based on her own values and conscience - not the religious diktat of the State.

That is not justification to take the life of an innocent.

[dfwgator]

It's not that simple.  No question about it - like you, I consider abortion to be morally wrong.  The issue is what role the State should play in forcing women to conform to religious norms.   

Is prohibiting murder a "religious norm"?

[jpsb]

It's not that simple. 

Yes it is


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[jmyrlefuller]

Why was the decision made to muddy a health care reform bill with language defunding Planned Parenthood?  Especially when every last vote was needed?   

Why was the decision made that these two Senators were going to put funding for one specific organization (forget for a moment PP's very bad reputation) as their reason? The specifics of PP's actual work aside, this reeks of cronyism.

[Jazzhead]

Is prohibiting murder a "religious norm"?

It's not murder, not when the fetus isn't yet viable.   I understand your perspective - according to your religion, the fetus has a soul at conception.   But we're talking about the police power of the state here.   We are not a theocracy. 

Preach what you believe.   Millions of folks share your view.   But it is still a decision that must be made by the woman alone.   

[Jazzhead]

Yes it is


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Those noble sentiments can be equally applied to justify a woman's fundamental right of self-determination.   

[Jazzhead]

Why was the decision made that these two Senators were going to put funding for one specific organization (forget for a moment PP's very bad reputation) as their reason? The specifics of PP's actual work aside, this reeks of cronyism.

Cronyism it may be, but the defunding of PP should have never been in the bill in the first place.   

[Maj. Bill Martin]

It is a decision that she has to make for herself - with the help of her partner, family, spiritual adviser and God.   It cannot be forced upon her by the government.  THAT is the liberty she possesses - she needs to be free to make that decision based on her own values and conscience - not the religious diktat of the State.

I'm assuming you are defending that "right" regardless of whether or not the woman was raped.  If so:

She did make a choice -- to have sex without ensuring that she couldn't become pregnant.  Lots of decisions we make come with potential consequences with which we are stuck if they happen to come about.  She's not being forced to bear a baby by anyone other than Mother Nature.

2) The uncomfortable reality is that a woman has to go through nine months of profound physical changes and pain.

Big deal.  So do most people who join the military, even if they subsequently regret it.  Suck it up.  The consequences of some of the decisions we make cannot be retracted after the fact.
The problem with the absolutist position you are taking regarding "choice" is that it has no logical limits.  Why not abortion at 7 months?  Or 8?  Or right before it is born.  Frankly, why should any adult have any legal obligation, at all, to a child after birth.  Those of us with kids know that the easiest part is before they're born.

Those noble sentiments can be equally applied to justify a woman's fundamental right of self-determination.

What exactly does "fundamental right of self-determination" mean - other than with respect to abortion?

Women don't have the legal right to commit suicide, nor do they have a right to grow and ingest whatever drugs they'd like, even if it affects nobody other than themselves.  Neither do men, for that matter.  Those things are just as much "personal autonomy" or "self-determination" as anything else.  Even more so, I'd argue, since they don't directly affect anyone other than themselves.  So this rather grandiose sounding "fundamental right of self-determination" sounds like something invented simply for abortion.

[dfwgator]

It's not murder, not when the fetus isn't yet viable.   I understand your perspective - according to your religion, the fetus has a soul at conception.   But we're talking about the police power of the state here.   We are not a theocracy. 

Preach what you believe.   Millions of folks share your view.   But it is still a decision that must be made by the woman alone.

It has nothing to do with religion.   When is that magic moment when a fetus becomes viable?   Can you identify it?