Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘President Obama’

Incumbent pro-life Sen. Pat Roberts and challenger Greg Orman

Incumbent pro-life Sen. Pat Roberts faces pro-abortion challenger Greg Orman

In the cola-dominated soft drink market, 7-up enjoyed great success after it labeled itself the “UN-cola”. And for the last 2 months, a multi-millionaire without public service experience, Greg Orman, has gotten some good poll numbers portraying himself as an independent “UN-politician” running against incumbent Kansas U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts.

 But in the candidate debate last night, Roberts charged that Orman’s attitude about abortion is “UNconcionable.”

Here’s how it developed: more than halfway into the debate, the sole “life issue” question was posed:  Kansas abortion law requires a mandatory ultrasound, should that be a federal law? (By the way, no such ultrasound mandate has been filed in Congress.)

Orman didn’t answer, instead responding:

  • that, as a man, he’ll never face that issue, and he “trusts women” (this is the slogan created by the late-term abortionist George Tiller);
  • abortion is settled law about which we have wasted too much time when there are other important issues to discuss.

The debate moderator interrupted to ask whether he was pro-life or pro choice and Orman said pro-choice.

Roberts looked at Orman with incredulity, saying that to admonish us to “get past” the rights of the unborn and those at the end of life is unconscionable.

“I am pro-life,” he said [voting record: 64 out of 64 correct pro-life votes] and am proud to be endorsed by National Right to Life and Kansans for Life.

In a follow-up rebuttal, Roberts added, “[abortion] isn’t settled law because we had a great fight over Hobby Lobby, didn’t we? …[that] we’re not going to accept Obamacare because it strikes at our religious beliefs. And the Hobby Lobby won. And so it isn’t settled law, not by a long shot.”

Later on, during discussion of second amendment gun rights, Roberts brought up Orman’s support for a bill [S.J. Resolution 19, see here] that would severely restrict first amendment free speech rights of groups like Kansans for Life.

Orman is running neck and neck with Roberts and the Kansas Democrat candidate for Senate dropped out of the race Sept. 3 (more here). Notwithstanding Orman’s repeated claim that, if elected, he has not decided which party he will side with, no one believes it; there are currently two “independent ” Senators who vote with the Democrats.

Roberts’ key message is that a vote for Orman is a vote for the Democrat anti-life agenda of Harry Reid and President Obama; for example, Reid has refused to allow a vote on the Pain-capable Unborn Child Protection Act (s. 1670, read here) which passed this year in the U.S. House.[Kansas passed this law in 2011.]

KFL executive director, Mary Kay Culp, commented, “One Kansas City-area abortion business has posted Orman signs on the premises. They know that Orman is not a new-style, problem-solving “UNpolitician”– he is an old-style politician trying to downplay an unconscionable pro-abortion position in a state with a pro-life majority.”

Read Full Post »

TopSecretPaperclipThe Internal Revenue Service has proposed new rules for political activity by nonprofits –overturning more than 50 years of settled law– in order to conceal the true political record of pro-abortion politicians.

The IRS proposal will undermine the ability of certain (“C-4″) tax-exempt nonprofits to conduct

  • nonpartisan voter registration and
  • voter education.

Such organizations advocating for the unborn, like Kansans for Life and the National Right to Life Committee, would be

forbidden to leave records of officeholder votes and public statements on their websites in the two months before an election.

In other words, during the small, premiere window of time that the general populace is paying attention to elections, pro-abortion politicians’ records would be locked away!  Read details by former Federal Elections Commission Chair Bradley Smith here.

NRLC, and affiliates like KFL, are invaluable for informing the public about the positions of candidates, including those nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court! The Obama team sees pro-life organizations as a threat and want to muzzle those views.  It’s that simple.

NRLC has issued a nationwide alert to raise a storm of public protest against these regulations, to make it as hard as possible for the IRS to give final approval. 

We need to educate the American people that it seems every group that opposes Obama’s policies is now under threat of having their most fundamental rights taken away. The use of the IRS as a political weapon has to stop!

Read Full Post »

U.S. Reps Tim Huelskamp (Dist.1), Lynn Jenkins (Dist.2), Mike Pompeo (Dist.4), Kevin Yoder (Dist.3). Photo: CJOnline

The majority of the U.S. House–including all 4 members of the Kansas delegation– voted Thursday to ban sex-selection abortions, but the measure failed to reach the necessary 2/3 majority. The vote was 246-168 in favor of the bill.

The Prenatal Discrimination bill, (PRENDA) H.R. 3541, addresses a true “war” on women —the destruction of innocent little baby girls in the womb. Four states currently ban sex-selection abortions and Kansas offered such a ban as a provision in the Pro-Life Protection Act, which passed the House this session but was dropped for action in the Senate.

PRENDA would apply federal criminal penalties to any person who does any of the following four things:

  1. performs an abortion knowing that such abortion is sought based on the sex of the child;
  2. uses force or the threat of force to intentionally injure or intimidate any person for the purpose of coercing a sex-selection abortion;
  3. solicits or accepts funds for the performance of a sex-selection abortion; or
  4. transports a woman into the United States or across a State line for the purpose of obtaining a sex-selection abortion.

President Obama opposed the ban, (more…)

Read Full Post »

Abortion supporters continue their brazen complaints that Kansas has already spent nearly $480,000 in legal fees defending 3 pro-life laws enacted in 2011.

But it’s those very abortion supporters that are forcing that drain in state resources, for profit and ideological motives, plain and simple.

Let’s look at the three lawsuits and examine what is really at stake.

1. The family planning funding prioritization is a new measure, attempted this year in differing forms by a half dozen states, with Kansas having arguably the strongest legal ground.  Wichita Judge Thomas Marten placed the law on hold by injunction and ordered supplemental money sent to the three businesses that did not meet the new criteria. The Kansas Attorney General has appealed those actions to the 10th Circuit appellate court, and a ruling on the merits of the appeal is expected at any time.

This lawsuit was filed because financially-failing Planned Parenthood branches in Wichita and Hays, and one independent business in Dodge City, were not going to get nearly $375,000 in Title X state subsidies under the new law. No services formerly provided to Kansas women were being eliminated.  In fact, the only change was that the state would only contract for reimbursements with public clinics serving the poor, and in fact, would provide BETTER access to a full range of health care.

This lawsuit is little better than extortion, backed implicitly by the pro-abortion Obama administration and the federal agency that controls Title X money–HHS, headed by former Kansas governor, Kathleen Sebelius.

2. The law banning coverage of elective abortion in private insurance plans without a separately purchased rider, is not new.  It survived past court challenges and has operated in other states, like Missouri, for decades. Part of eastern Kansas has been covered this way by Blue Cross during that time! This law is operating without an injunction, but is headed for trial next year.

This law was sued by the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) ostensibly on behalf of unspecified women who can’t afford to pay for their own abortions.  But the suit is really a steppingstone to changing the “privacy” basis that undergirds the so-called legal right to abortion. The ACLU is still searching for courts willing to rule abortion is healthcare that must be paid for under the constitutional guarantee of “equal protection.”

Although abortion lawyers have pressed this “gender equality” argument unsuccessfully for decades, they are back at it again, at OUR taxpayer expense.

3. The third lawsuit (actually a series of 3 suits) has blocked the new law instituting state licensure, oversight and inspection of abortion businesses sought by Kansans since 2002. Currently there are only 3 abortion sites in Kansas, all in the Kansas City area, although there are threats to open a new one in Wichita this summer.

After a public fuss (and a suit they filed and then dropped) the Overland Park Planned Parenthood met the new minimum standards for licensure. The other two clinics didn’t, and sued the preliminary agency regulations from KDHE, while securing an injunction. So the law is not currently in effect.

Now get this: the pro-abortion voices complaining loudly about legal fees, themselves wasted a bundle when they filed suit in federal court in July, and then switched their game plan to file suit in state court in November. So last week, lawyers for the 2 clinics formally dropped the first lawsuit and are itemizing months of legal expenses– which will get paid by state taxpayers– if the abortion team prevails in the newer suit.

Next post: the real reason the abortion clinics’ lawyers changed from federal court to state court.

Read Full Post »

In an unprecedented move, the federal Health & Human Services director, Kathleen Sebelius, overruled a decision by the Food and Drug Administration to make Plan B (also called morning-after pills or emergency contraception) available without a prescription.

Since 2009, women younger than age 17 have needed a doctor’s prescription for Plan B, and Sebelius said  it should stay that way.

Sebelius said the pharmacy industry had NOT provided evidence that girls as young as 11 “can understand the label and use the product appropriately”.

Pro-lifers– thankful for any small victory in the culture war– nonetheless scratched their collective heads trying to discern Sebelius’ motives. Some opined she was throwing a bone to religious conservatives riled up at the continuing onslaught of hostile actions by the Obama administration.  To name just two of these actions:

  1. awarding preferential grants to unqualified, but abortion-supportive, groups to rescue & assist sex abuse victims;
  2. issuing contraceptive mandates for insurance plans without meaningful conscience exemptions.

As one well-known pro-abortion blogger noted, “ this victory for women’s health [was] snatched away at the last minute by Sebelius, sending shocks of confusion and betrayal through the pro-choice community, who always thought of Sebelius as a member in good standing.” (That’s an understatement.)

Planned Parenthood was curiously late (Thursday evening) in issuing a complaining letter to Sebelius, perhaps indicating (more…)

Read Full Post »

Pro-Life Action League envelopes NARAL supporter headed to hear Sebelius (photo by Matt Yonke)

Yesterday at a Chicago NARAL fundraiser, 300 attendees gave some of their loudest applause (according to the AP) to HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ mention of the Obama administration mandate that health insurance plans cover birth control without copays.

But beyond the ever faithful pro-life presence of the Pro-Life Action League, another rebuke to Sebelius was today’s good news that the U.S. House will be voting next week on a pro-life bill to UNDO abortion in Obamacare.

HR 358 the “Protect Life Act” is sponsored by Congressman Joe Pitts, and co-sponsored by all four Kansas U.S. Representatives:  Tim Huelskamp, 1st district; Lynn Jenkins, 2nd district; Kevin Yoder, 3rd district; and Mike Pompeo, 4th district. Express your support here.

UPDATE,Oct.13: In a 248-173 vote, the House approved the Protect Life Act, however Senate Democrats oppose it and President Obama has promised to veto it.

Modeled on the former “Stupak-Pitts” amendment, HR 358 would correct the numerous abortion-expanding provisions kept in the final health care law and contains important conscience protections for (more…)

Read Full Post »

Obama and Sebelius

The National Right to life Committee revealed Tuesday that the first Sebelius /HHS-approved “Obamacare” insurance plan for states will indeed cover abortions. (Read their detailed memo here.)

Announced on June 28 as a high-risk pool plan approved in Pennsylvania, the language deceptively claims on one page that “elective” abortions would be  prohibited.  But in another section, the plan allows coverage for “legal” abortions and contraception.  Under Pennsylvania statute, abortions are “legal” through all nine months for any reason except admitted “gender” selection.

So much for the political lies from Democrats like Rep. Bart Stupak and his allies that the President’s March “executive order” would suffice to keep U.S. taxpayers from funding abortion under Obamacare.

UPDATES today: The Washington Times explains the deceit. NRLC says the New Mexico high-risk plan also covers abortion. Stupak squirms.

And even more shameful (more…)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 40 other followers