Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 10:32 AM ET, 02/18/2011

House Dem reveals abortion on the House floor

By Greg Sargent

Strong stuff from Dem Rep. Jackie Speier of California, who delivered an emotional speech on the House floor last night, revealing she had an abortion as she dressed down a Republican colleague for trivializing the decisionmaking that goes into deciding whether to undergo the procedure:

The debate was over GOP Rep. Mike Pence's drive to defund Planned Parenthood. Speier's outburst was triggered by GOP Rep. Chris Smith, who had read aloud graphic descriptions of abortion from a book only moments before. Speier responded:

"I really planned to speak about something else. But the gentleman from New Jersey just put my stomach in knots. Because I'm one of those women he spoke about just now. I had a procedure at 17 weeks pregnant with a child who moved from the vagina into the cervix. And that procedure that you just described is a procedure that I endured.

"I lost the baby. And for you to stand on this floor and suggest that somehow this is a procedure that is either welcomed or done cavalierly or done without any thought, is preposterous."

It's a reminder that the battle lines on this issue remain as sharply drawn as ever. It's not TV on a par with Alan Grayson or Steve King, but let's hope it gets a bit of cable play, anyway.

By Greg Sargent  | February 18, 2011; 10:32 AM ET
Categories:  House Dems, abortion  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Cops now pursuing missing Wisconsin Dems, senator alleges

Comments

I'm glad she spoke out. The only thing I'd disagree with her about is the idea that there's a vendetta against Planned Parenthood. The republics have a vendetta against women.

Where are the jobs, Mr. Speaker?

Posted by: LilyNW | February 18, 2011 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Another Leftist jaw-dropper from Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee: "This is not about abortion, this is about saving lives."

Maybe that’s what Philadelphia Horror doc Kermit Gosnell thought every time he picked up his death scissors, too.
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/21/the-philadelphia-horror-how-mass-murder-gets-a-pass/

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 18, 2011 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Live Action is a California-based "new media, investigative and educational organization committed to the protection and respect of all human life" led by Internet undercover pioneer Lila Rose. The group's latest video footage at abortion clinics in Perth Amboy, N.J., the Bronx and four cities in Virginia shows Planned Parenthood officials aiding and abetting individuals posing as criminal sex traffickers seeking abortions for underage girls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW5xVxSQ5v0

Abortion activists first attacked the videos as "doctored," then claimed they had already taken steps to rectify problems at the targeted clinics, then fired a worker after the tapes had been released and finally denied any systemic failures while patting Planned Parenthood on the back for ordering new re-training measures for their employees this week.

Those who dismiss the scandal as an anomaly are in denial or abjectly ignorant.
http://www.creators.com/opinion/michelle-malkin/de-fund-the-predators-of-planned-parenthood.html

What other enterprise receives taxpayer support to entice children to hide their health decisions from their own mothers and fathers?

Planned Parenthood is a $1-plus billion business that rakes in one-third of its budget from government grants and contracts at both the state and federal levels. Congress has interrogated banking, energy, health insurance, tobacco and oil execs — treating them like serial killers before the cameras. When will they finally de-fund a corrupt industry that has real blood on its hands?

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 18, 2011 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Republican backed by the CofC, Koch Brothers, big corps and Right Wing nuts want to take the country back to the 1800's. The Tea baggers drool and follow their masters like the dumbarse zombies they are.

Posted by: clintt5 | February 18, 2011 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Jobs, jobs, jobs and attack women's rights.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | February 18, 2011 11:09 AM | Report abuse

As the right wing theocrats in the House make their case,

Islamists have attacked the red light district of Tunis and been beaten back by police supported by helicopters.

Imams in the mosques of Tripoli refuse to read the sermons given to them by regime.

...to say nothing of Iran.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 18, 2011 11:11 AM | Report abuse

BRAVO Rep. Speier. Shameful that she had to expose a personal and obviously painful experience to a male who will never ever have to make or go through that procedure.

Posted by: rlj1 | February 18, 2011 11:22 AM | Report abuse

It bears repeating: What does this have to do with JOBS or THE NATIONAL DEBT? Answer - Nothing.

Posted by: msevitaperon | February 18, 2011 11:25 AM | Report abuse

OT

Anyone else notice that there is very little coverage of what's going on in Wisconsin (and other states where protest are beginning) on HuffPost?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | February 18, 2011 11:28 AM | Report abuse

It has to do with theocracy, Pence was the choice of the "values voters" straw poll last Fall. He couldn't care less about the economy, he cares about institutionalizing his religion as the law of the land.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 18, 2011 11:29 AM | Report abuse

AOL doesn't like politics.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 18, 2011 11:30 AM | Report abuse

WHERE ARE THE JOBS, MR. BOEHNER?

That's all we heard during the election. But now -- nothing about jobs. Gone. Forgotten.

Now all we have is a sustained attack on women and working people.

Teabaggers are just the Taliban by another name.

Posted by: fiona5 | February 18, 2011 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Very confusing to hear her say that "I lost the baby". I say this even though I am pro-choice.

Posted by: GeneWells | February 18, 2011 11:35 AM | Report abuse

As important of a topic this is, it appears recall of Wisconson state Senators is picking up steam.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/18/wisconsin-recall/

Posted by: mikefromArlington | February 18, 2011 11:37 AM | Report abuse

"Teabaggers are just the Taliban by another name."

Wait, I thought we were Mubarek supporters, which makes us secular supporters, at a minimum. Uh oh, lines blurring. Watson winning. The singularity approaches. Skynet senses... something.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | February 18, 2011 11:37 AM | Report abuse

mike: "it appears recall of Wisconson state Senators"

To clarify this a little, it's the Repubs that the immediate recall is aimed at, and not the absent Dems! YES!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | February 18, 2011 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Please stop forcing The Pope and America's Hillybilly Ayatollahs to undergo abortion procedures. God wants those weird old men, especially the celibate ones, to carry their pregnancies to term.

Posted by: Liam-still | February 18, 2011 12:01 PM | Report abuse

"Very confusing to hear her say that "I lost the baby". I say this even though I am pro-choice." Well if it was moving from vagina to cervix, it was definitely lost.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 18, 2011 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Please stop forcing The Pope and America's Hillbilly Ayatollahs to undergo abortion procedures. God wants those weird old men, especially the celibate ones, to carry their pregnancies to term.

Posted by: Liam-still | February 18, 2011 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Wow! I'm impressed. I'd never heard of Jackie Speier. Rep. Smith definitely got his butt kicked.

Posted by: brian23 | February 18, 2011 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Conservative men like this jackarse are the scum of the Earth.

Go WOMEN!

Stand up for your RIGHTS as Americans!

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 18, 2011 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Can we say open mouth insert foot? It's sad to hear what did happen to Rep Speier but had she not had the procedure done, it may have cost her life as well as the unborn child. It makes you wonder if the pro-life proponents would be willing to suffer and lose their life even if their child would also be lost.

Posted by: Falling4Ever | February 18, 2011 12:47 PM | Report abuse

I'd like the anti-abortion zealots to tell us how they reconcile their obsession with these fun facts:

1. The total human population is increasing at the rate of 140 per minute. That's right--every single minute there are 140 more people than there were the previous minute, even after deaths are subtracted. This is based on United Nations statistics.

2. The human race cannot feed the seven billion people who now exist. The UN reports that around 1 billion people are starving at any given moment.

3. No, we can't just move the food around better--because even today's level of food production is unsustainable. Modern food production technology has produced an agricultural time bomb that is polluting waterways, destroying porous aquifers, causing fish stocks to collapse, and more, while rain forest destruction is putting land into farm production that loses its ability to produce food after three or four growing seasons at best. Meanwhile the rainforests that produce 2/3 of the oxygen in the atmosphere are vanishing.

4. No, the United States isn't off the hook even if we tell the rest of the world to get lost. Our population has quadrupled since 1900 and doubled since 1950. We can't fill the vast open spaces of the West with people people those spaces are open because they don't have enough water. And irrigation has had the unintended consequence of bringing salts into solution in irrigated water tables--as is happening now in California's central valley and elsewhere--as well as harming the watercourses the water is taken from. Damming the Colorado destroyed Mexican agriculture in the Colorado delta, for example.

5. Anti-abortionists act as if the world has infinite arable land and water and fish etc. Obviously at the rate at which the human population is doubling we're going to run out. Wait, I'm kidding. We've already run out for the billion humans who are starving already. Want to see Earth's future, and that of humanity? Visit Haiti.

6. Anti-abortionists don't tell other Americans how their beliefs play out in countries where they've gotten their wish. Take Mexico, where abortion under all circumstances is illegal outside of Mexico City. In the Yucatan a 10 year old girl who'd been raped by her stepfather is being forced to not have an abortion. At age 10. Even if not getting an abortion will kill both the mother and the fetus, these people don't care. It's the principle.

7. Anti-abortionists call fetuses "unborn babies." This is a contradiction in terms. Moreover, many fetuses are not viable, so no they aren't unborn babies, because they'll never be babies--and you can't tell which are or are not viable without an amniocentesis, often. For example, an anencephalic fetus has no brain. That's not an "uborn baby."

8. Saying that "life begins at conception" is a canard. Identical twins and chimeras form later. So do they get half a soul each and two souls in once respectively?

Antiabortionists need to grow up.

www.blogzu.blogspot.com

Posted by: ehkzu | February 18, 2011 12:48 PM | Report abuse

I would strongly urge folks to watch the WHOLE speech. It was very moving.

Americans didn't vote for Republican moralizing and their take on social issues. They were voted in there because Dems didn't create jobs fast enough. Instead of jobs we get, "So be it."

Buyer's remorse anyone?

Posted by: Alex3 | February 18, 2011 1:16 PM | Report abuse

This is my opinion but unless the man and woman agree to have a baby, its the woman's choice. The guy isn't the one who has to carry it, deal with complications, stigmas, and pain of birth. If the guy had no intention of having a baby with her then its not his choice. Saving a life? I think we all know what us guys do that religions such as orthodox christianity says you are not allowed to do. Having a child is a choice, it never should be something that is forced that just hurts everyone including the child. I really don't like the idea of telling other people how to live, as long as what they are doing is harmless to everyone else. I'll say it again, having a child is a choice to be made with care just like having an abortion is a choice to be made very carefully. Are there women who don't treat it with care, yes most likely but thats the minority. Most women would treat having an abortion as probably as a nightmare.

As for Planned Parenthood not requiring Parents at times, theres a reason for that. Children don't want to tell there parents out of shame or embarrassment, they will go to great lengths to hide it. This gives them a way to get real help that otherwise they wouldn't have. A teenager getting an abortion is difficult enough but also having your parents know? Having that cloud hanging over you for who knows how many years? I couldn't imagine it. Unless you have been put into that position, you can't understand and its just outrageous for you to try and decide what they should do. I do not know any large organization that doesn't have bad eggs here or there. What that employee did was wrong and unbelievable but once again thats the minority. Conspiracy theorists should really just get a clue, you are an outsider, unless you do an actual legit investigation on the whole organization and not just a few select locations, you dont have any evidence for your accusation. It's easy to accuse, its hard to actually do the effort of proving what you say is actually true. It's also easy to point at some failures, you ignore all the good Planned Parenthood has done and everyone they have helped. I'm sorry but unless the fetus has a working brain or reached a certain stage of development, it's ludicrous to say Planned Parenthood has blood on its hands. If you believe its so wrong how about you actually take responsibility for your words and take charge of the baby? Not likely huh? Having a child is a lifetime commitment, give it the respect it deserves, its a choice. Sorry but this is something that guys have to defer to women for. Women have and should have final say on having a baby. It's never a decision to take lightly.

Posted by: Rush3 | February 18, 2011 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Alex 3, exactly, the November election results may turn out to be a good thing for the Democrats.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 18, 2011 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Chris Smith doesnt give a crap about women who do or don't have abortions because he can't have one, although he most likely has a microscopic nutsack.

Posted by: Observer691 | February 18, 2011 1:37 PM | Report abuse

That took courage, Jackie Speier! Thank you for telling those who don't know, that abortions, horrible as they are, also save lives. That there are many women who have faced terrible decisions and made them.

Posted by: amelia45 | February 18, 2011 2:10 PM | Report abuse

The mother's 'rights' dont trump those of her fetus. Thou shalt not kill.

The government should not be funding 'Planned Destructive Non-Parenthood.

Posted by: bruce18 | February 18, 2011 2:14 PM | Report abuse

bruce, you can quote the bible all you want, but it's not the law of the land. not by a long shot, since we have the death penalty.

but regardless, yes, the mother's rights DO trump those of her fetus. because the alternative is that the fetus's rights trump those of the mother, which would mean that men can go around raping women and making babies all they want, and there's nothing women can do about it.

yes, i realize that we're talking about the woman's rights over her body vs the fetus's right to life. but let's say this: suppose i needed you to donate part of your liver to me, or a kidney, so that i could live. i have a right to life. you have the right to control your body. can we force you to donate to me, to keep me alive? no. it would be the moral thing to do, perhaps, but we can't force it.

now you'll argue that you have no responsibility to me, but women have a responsibility to the fetus. so: can we force a parent to donate a kidney to their kid? still no. not to mention that a woman who had no intention of getting pregnant has pretty minimal responsibilities to that kid - or at least, she doesn't have any more responsibility than the unintended-father has (and his required involvement is, at most, financial). especially if she was raped, but even if she wasn't, you can't force a woman to undergo a pregnancy and childbirth that she doesn't want. pregnancy and childbirth can be pretty traumatic even if you WANT the kid.

so, sorry. the rights of an adult trump the rights of the fetus depending on her.

this changes once the fetus is viable. if the fetus can survive outside of the mother, she no longer has to support the child with her body, but their rights are no longer in conflict and the baby can just be born.

Posted by: anonymice | February 18, 2011 2:32 PM | Report abuse

bruce, you can quote the bible all you want, but it's not the law of the land. not by a long shot, since we have the death penalty.

but regardless, yes, the mother's rights DO trump those of her fetus. because the alternative is that the fetus's rights trump those of the mother, which would mean that men can go around raping women and making babies all they want, and there's nothing women can do about it.

yes, i realize that we're talking about the woman's rights over her body vs the fetus's right to life. but let's say this: suppose i needed you to donate part of your liver to me, or a kidney, so that i could live. i have a right to life. you have the right to control your body. can we force you to donate to me, to keep me alive? no. it would be the moral thing to do, perhaps, but we can't force it.

now you'll argue that you have no responsibility to me, but women have a responsibility to the fetus. so: can we force a parent to donate a kidney to their kid? still no. not to mention that a woman who had no intention of getting pregnant has pretty minimal responsibilities to that kid - or at least, she doesn't have any more responsibility than the unintended-father has (and his required involvement is, at most, financial). especially if she was raped, but even if she wasn't, you can't force a woman to undergo a pregnancy and childbirth that she doesn't want. pregnancy and childbirth can be pretty traumatic even if you WANT the kid.

so, sorry. the rights of an adult trump the rights of the fetus depending on her.

this changes once the fetus is viable. if the fetus can survive outside of the mother, she no longer has to support the child with her body, but their rights are no longer in conflict and the baby can just be born.

Posted by: anonymice | February 18, 2011 2:33 PM | Report abuse

bruce, you can quote the bible all you want, but it's not the law of the land. not by a long shot, since we have the death penalty.

but regardless, yes, the mother's rights DO trump those of her fetus. because the alternative is that the fetus's rights trump those of the mother, which would mean that men can go around raping women and making babies all they want, and there's nothing women can do about it.

yes, i realize that we're talking about the woman's rights over her body vs the fetus's right to life. but let's say this: suppose i needed you to donate part of your liver to me, or a kidney, so that i could live. i have a right to life. you have the right to control your body. can we force you to donate to me, to keep me alive? no. it would be the moral thing to do, perhaps, but we can't force it.

now you'll argue that you have no responsibility to me, but women have a responsibility to the fetus. so: can we force a parent to donate a kidney to their kid? still no. not to mention that a woman who had no intention of getting pregnant has pretty minimal responsibilities to that kid - or at least, she doesn't have any more responsibility than the unintended-father has (and his required involvement is, at most, financial). especially if she was raped, but even if she wasn't, you can't force a woman to undergo a pregnancy and childbirth that she doesn't want. pregnancy and childbirth can be pretty traumatic even if you WANT the kid.

some people make a rape vs any other unintended pregnancy distinction. i don't. because otherwise you have to demand that if a woman wants to have sex, she has to be willing to get pregnant and have a baby. aside from being obviously absurd, men don't even want this, because if that actually happened men would get to have sex only when married and then only a few times in their lifetime.

so, sorry. the rights of an adult trump the rights of the fetus depending on her. because nothing else makes any sense.

Posted by: anonymice | February 18, 2011 2:39 PM | Report abuse

pardon the triple post. WP kept rejecting it and i edited it and then...thank god it's friday.

Posted by: anonymice | February 18, 2011 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Speier was right to speak out and I glad that she did.

I am so sick and tired of these Right-Wing thugs with their overreaching hostile and bigoted attitudes always trying to demonize and belittle women who have had abortions for various reason unbeknownst to them.

These Conservatives are always trying to tell a woman what to do with her own reproduction system, and none of these butt_heads have been trained or educated in the intricacies and complications of a woman's reproduction system, pregnacy, child birth, etc.

Republican's need to stay the hell out of women's reproduction systems.

Especially, when it comes those women who do NOT want some man telling them what to do with their own bodies.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | February 18, 2011 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Here we go again for the umpteenth million time the Repubs dredge up abortion, dust it off and throw it out there as a wedge issue to assure votes from their base. That's it! They have no sound budget platform and....oh yeah! Bonehead; read my lips: Where's the jobs?

Posted by: steve_j | February 18, 2011 3:59 PM | Report abuse

These procedures are RARELY done frivolously or cavalierly. For Politicians to have ANY say over a woman's medical safety in a critical pregnancy is ASSININE! It is a matter to be dealt with by the principals involved and their Physician, not some yahoo Senator with an axe to grind!

Posted by: billnbillieskid | February 18, 2011 4:01 PM | Report abuse

When men start getting pregnant, then they can have a say about abortion. Not until then.

Posted by: alienlovesong | February 18, 2011 4:05 PM | Report abuse

She's a tramp.

Posted by: wewintheylose1 | February 18, 2011 4:06 PM | Report abuse

The Republican Party = the Tea Party = the American Taliban.
I'm fed up with the pompous morality trumpeted by portly men who like little boys.

Posted by: theodorebrown | February 18, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I would strongly urge folks to watch the WHOLE speech. It was very moving.

Americans didn't vote for Republican moralizing and their take on social issues. They were voted in there because Dems didn't create jobs fast enough. Instead of jobs we get, "So be it."

Buyer's remorse anyone?
---------------
NONE! They are doing exactly what they were sent there to do. Only the liberal fools and of course the unions have remorse. Not buyers since these fools pull the straight liberal knob in every election. The free lunch for the democratic base is OVER!

Posted by: steelers01 | February 18, 2011 4:16 PM | Report abuse

re: KaddafiDelendaEst

You are a fool and an idiot as the Philly doctor was running an illegal butcher shop which the state and local governments could not bothered to address - even after repeated complaints. Guess jerks like you won't be satisfied until women are forced to use coat hangers in the back ally

Posted by: clemons1 | February 18, 2011 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I hope the same group that religiously trusts the global warming science and wants us to use that to form leglislation, also takes a look at the science surrounding human development. The more we know the more clear it becomes that abortion is wrong.

Posted by: sarno | February 18, 2011 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Knowledge is power. When the mother's life is at stake, most would chose the mother. Jackie, of all people, should know the value of human life--she said that she lost her 'baby'. She was either putting on a good show, or, to this day, she mourns the loss of her child--a beautiful life. So, she should be working for abstinence and educating young people--not promoting abortion. Also, if Planned Parenthood wants to continue counselling people--fine, however, they should never suggest or be involved with abortion. If it appears that medical or professional help is required, they could make referrals.

Posted by: coffic | February 18, 2011 4:32 PM | Report abuse

The gentlelady from California doesn't get it. Smith know Jesus says women are chatels. In this, he agrees with bin Laden. But since Jesus has given Smith power, he can use regardless of how many die.

Kill for Jesus! Yeah! Praise SS Grupenfuhrer Smith! Kill! Kill! Kill! Kill for the baby Jesus!

And don't forget: Abortion reduces the number of the pre-molested.

Posted by: Garak | February 18, 2011 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Abortion wouldn't be an issue if men could get pregnant.

Posted by: jamesrgaston | February 18, 2011 4:43 PM | Report abuse

"I would strongly urge folks to watch the WHOLE speech."

I dare Half-Bright Bart to excerpt it. And Beck to run the edit. And S---- P---- to tweet about it.

Posted by: mattintx | February 18, 2011 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Have all GOP members entered some sort of death pact? They pick up 60-odd seats because of economic issues and are at the first point in their modern history wherein women are actually beginning to possibly tip in their party's direction (women being in charge of many households' finances). Now, however, these guys can't resist reversing so many of the gains they have made since the summer of 2008, all because they can't accept a Supreme Court ruling that was made 38 years ago and because they want desperately to appeal to their evangelical base. And for added effect, they inject a fair amount of hypocrisy into their dogma by doing this while simultaneously claiming to be the party that wants the government to get out of citizens' personal business.

My kingdom for a true democracy, one that's not monopolized by two corrupt, idiotic parties.

Posted by: justin_timberwolf | February 18, 2011 5:00 PM | Report abuse

The Dem Congresswoman is a bald-faced liar who knows that kind of procedure for slaughtering babies occurs over a million times a year in America and her case is a far far exception, and she knew she was lying on the House floor and creating that deception on purpose.

Posted by: jacquelynwoods | February 18, 2011 5:01 PM | Report abuse

What's the fuss all about. 80 years ago my mother lost a sibling of mine because of a similar occurrence the representative describes. There is no connection between abortion for the reason of not wanting a child and having one aborted to save the life of the mother and in this case the sure death of the baby also.

No person of Christian belief and I presume other civilized religions would not agree that that kind of abortion is done for life saving reasons, not for convenience which is murder of a living person.

I remember Rep. Smith from years back when I lived in his district and he first ran for congress and he is a man with a conscience who lives up to his beliefs even if the leftists want to hang him for standing up for what his beliefs are.

Posted by: rmilitello | February 18, 2011 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Only males should be allowed to decide about a woman's pregnancies. Men's decision-making abilities are based on logic and righteous and without emotion. Women are far too emotional to think clearly about these matter. Also, men can seek guidance from the male head of the Church of the Pedophile Priests.

ALL HAIL MALE TALIBAN! MAY THEY RULE FOREVER!

Posted by: uche05 | February 18, 2011 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Just out of curiosity, KaddafiDelendaEst, do you know the difference between an opinion column and a news report?! I ask because your postings here cite Michelle Malkin (twice!) and a Youtube video as your sole sources for a long series of vituperative attacks on Planned Parenthood and abortion providers.

If there is a shred of truth to anything in your rant, then please cite a NEWS source that contains verifiable facts substantiating your claims. Otherwise, please spare us your venom.

Posted by: DCSteve1 | February 18, 2011 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Did she have an induced abortion or miscarriage where they needed to extract the baby after it have "moved down" on its own? There is a difference.

Posted by: SusanMarie2 | February 18, 2011 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Abortion is a states rights issue and shouldn't be part of the federal agenda. A male member of Congress is the last one to be speaking about abortion in any way.

Why is the GOP spending time on Planned Parenthood? The country needs jobs created!

Why aren't the teabaggers talking about creating new jobs? Where are the jobs, Mr. Boehner?

Posted by: mikesba | February 18, 2011 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Replying to:
"The Dem Congresswoman is a bald-faced liar who knows that kind of procedure for slaughtering babies occurs over a million times a year in America and her case is a far far exception, and she knew she was lying on the House floor and creating that deception on purpose.

Posted by: jacquelynwoods | February 18, 2011 5:01 PM"

Just when I thought I could no longer be shocked by the lengths some people will go to make a point, I read this.

Jacquelyn, the type of procedure Rep. Speier underwent is actually much MORE common than the stereotype you cite of a woman who uses abortion as birth control. And in any case, you present zero evidence that she lied or misrepresented her situation.

Instead of posting garbage like this, you ought to slink away into a corner and think about how vile you are. But that would require you to develop a conscience.

Posted by: DCSteve1 | February 18, 2011 5:22 PM | Report abuse

The abortion issue is a complicated one. In reality, this issue needs to be discussed and decided by women. Men can be rather sanctimonious about this issue since they have no dog in this fight. For most women and or families that get involved with the abortion option, the decision is a difficult one. In reality, abortion becomes a real option for those who are so pure that an unwanted pregnancy must be hushed. I encourage the religious right to look at themselves. The stigma of abortion lies in their circles. Hence, they do it in private and then dare preach about its evils to the rest of the world. This type of hypocrisy is not new. Abortion is not the only issue that the radical right treats this way. Let me just mention a few: homosexuality and pornography.

Posted by: EarlC | February 18, 2011 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee's remarks were nothing more then another attempt to legitimize killing babies. Abortion is and always will be murder, no matter how you twist it!

Posted by: jmail3 | February 18, 2011 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Stop the jihad of wasting precious time in Congress on attempting to write your RELIGIOUS beliefs into our secular laws! The irresponsibility of the GOP members is stunning! Now cut the cr*p and start creating the jobs you keep harping about! Guns, gays, G*d, women's uteruses are off limits, dammit! And Chris Cilizza, not one more word about Jeb Bush, the has-been terrible, immensely disliked FL ex-governor. His expounding on anything is ignored by the voters, so save your kudos!

Posted by: JanisL55 | February 18, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

When the Republican and religious right starts valuing people who are already born with the same fanaticism they aver to have for a single-cell, fertilized egg, then this will become a better world. Then we'd see plenty of programs aimed at improving the lot of disadvantaged babies and children. We'd see them bolstering our public schools so they are as fine as the most private of private schools; we'd see them lavishing school-aid dollars on anyone with the energy and determination to get a higher education; we'd see right-wingers rushing down to New Orleans post-Katrina to help, instead of maligning them in unspeakably bad terms like some infamous ex-First Lady did; we'd see steady streams of cargo ships loaded with what it takes to fix Haiti moving southward; we'd see them urging withdrawal from wars started under pretense and continued under dogged service to Big Oil; we'd see them laying down sleeping bags so they could be first to line up behind Obama's initiatives on healthcare for all Americans. We'd see them take to heart the Native Americans' desire to keep in mind the next 7 generations, when using natural resources, so they'd pour funds into alternative energy solutions, and pour funds into mass transportation, and stop devastating our crops with genetically-modified seeds. And we'd further see them inspiring all Americans to start treating each other with dignity and love, instead of stirring the pot of villainous hate.

Now, any ideas on how we get the bankers and others, who sucked the public money well dry during and after the R/E bubble, to gain a soul and a conscience?

Posted by: ByHeart | February 18, 2011 6:35 PM | Report abuse

It sounds nothing like the Planned Parenthood video. Why is there such a vast difference between the descriptions on the floor of the House and the reality described by the Planned Parenthood employee?

We pretty much have to allow abortions. Because even when abortion is not the choice, women have been successfully (and unsuccessfully) murdering their children for tens of thousands of years.

If you think an unaborted unwanted child is expensive to society, you should see the cost of an unsuccessfully aborted child.

Posted by: blasmaic | February 18, 2011 6:45 PM | Report abuse

When the Republican and religious right starts valuing people who are already born with the same fanaticism they aver to have for a single-cell, fertilized egg, then this will become a better world. Then we'd see plenty of programs aimed at improving the lot of disadvantaged babies and children. We'd see them bolstering our public schools so they are as fine as the most private of private schools; we'd see them lavishing school-aid dollars on anyone with the energy and determination to get a higher education; we'd see right-wingers rushing down to New Orleans post-Katrina to help, instead of maligning them in unspeakably bad terms like some infamous ex-First Lady did; we'd see steady streams of cargo ships loaded with what it takes to fix Haiti moving southward; we'd see them urging withdrawal from wars started under pretense and continued under dogged service to Big Oil; we'd see them laying down sleeping bags so they could be first to line up behind Obama's initiatives on healthcare for all Americans. We'd see them take to heart the Native Americans' desire to keep in mind the next 7 generations, when using natural resources, so they'd pour funds into alternative energy solutions, and pour funds into mass transportation, and stop devastating our crops with genetically-modified seeds. And we'd further see them inspiring all Americans to start treating each other with dignity and love, instead of stirring the pot of villainous hate.

Now, any ideas on how we get the bankers and others, who sucked the public money well dry during and after the R/E bubble, to gain a soul and a conscience?

Posted by: ByHeart | February 18, 2011 6:51 PM | Report abuse

I think Rep. Jackie Speier was pretty upset when she spoke on the floor last night. Her comment didn't make sense. Simplistically, babies go from the uterus through the cervix to the vagina to out in the world. People are wondering about her comment that she "lost" her baby. I think she was so upset, she mis-spoke, but I think it would be cruel to ask her to clarify what she meant if she had what we in the medical profession refer to as a therapeutic abortion (and if you think there is no such thing look up mermaid syndrome or anencephaly). That said, Rep Speier illustrates how anti-abortion activities traumatize women who had abortions.

It's sickening.

Posted by: jdwolverton | February 18, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

When the Republican and religious right starts valuing people who are already born with the same fanaticism they aver to have for a single-cell, fertilized egg, then this will become a better world. Then we'd see plenty of programs aimed at: improving the lot of disadvantaged babies and children; bolstering our public schools so they are as fine as the most private of private schools; lavishing school-aid dollars on anyone with the energy and determination to get a higher education. We'd see right-wingers rushing down to post-Katrina New Orleans to help, instead of maligning them in unspeakably bad terms like some infamous ex-First Lady did. There'd be steady southward-moving streams of cargo ships loaded with what it takes to fix Haiti. We'd be withdrawing from wars started under pretense, and continued under dogged service to Big Oil. They'd be laying down sleeping bags for overnight vigils to be the first in line supportiing Obama's initiatives on healthcare for all Americans. We'd see them live the Native Americans' maxim to use nature with the next 7 generations in mind, so they'd pour funds into alternative energy solutions, and pour funds into mass transportation, and stop devastating our crops with genetically-modified seeds. And we'd further see them standing on their bully pulpits urging all Americans to start treating each other with dignity and respect, instead of stirring the pot of villainous hate.

Until then, their talk is a tinkling cymbal in a cynical wind, signifying nothing.

Now, any ideas on how we get the bankers and others, who sucked the public money well dry during and after the R/E bubble, to gain souls and consciences?

Posted by: ByHeart | February 18, 2011 7:01 PM | Report abuse

I repeat what someone else said above: pardon the triple post. WaPo's website made it look like it had failed several times. My apologies.

Posted by: ByHeart | February 18, 2011 7:05 PM | Report abuse

This just goes to show how heartless and ignorant of the facts these right-wing ideologues are... They just assume that ALL abortions are done cavalierly by people who can't be bothered with birth-control.

The truth is that a lot of abortions are actually performed on women who WANT a baby; but for a variety of medical reasons must terminate the pregnancy.

Posted by: koygdb1 | February 18, 2011 7:06 PM | Report abuse

This kind of argument is EXACTLY what this country needs right now, by the way. To have an issue like this, that's pointless in its practicality (the Supreme Court has already spoken, it's legal, deal with it) as well as its possibility as rational and productive dialog, is precisely what we shouldn't be doing at a time of what amounts to national emergency.

Posted by: justin_timberwolf | February 18, 2011 7:20 PM | Report abuse

It is important to note that government funding of Planned Parenthood is not allowed to support any abortion services. All gov't funding goes to essential women's health services such as routine exams, preventive care, disease screening, and contraception.

Everyone who wants to reduce (or eliminate) abortions in the U.S. should be arguing for MORE funding for Planned Parenthood.

All politicians who support de-funding PP, should explain why this is a good idea, given that it will increase unwanted pregnancies, thus increase abortions.

This isn't rocket science -- it's simple logic.

Posted by: truly1 | February 18, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

With so many supporters of Planned Parenthood, why not have 100% of their funds raised by fundraising instead of tax dollars? I have no problem with Planned Parenthood offering abortions. I have a problem with them offering abortions with my tax dollars.

Posted by: sales7 | February 18, 2011 7:34 PM | Report abuse

The GOP is very good at telling people what to do. This topic is one of them. It is a personal decision, not one for the right wing of the GOP. If the GOP wants to strip women of the right to chose, then they should step up to the plate, and provide taxpayer funding for every child born which was forced upon the parents. This fund would pay for all medical, including care for the mother and child during pregnancy, food, medical, educational expenses, total support of this child through 18 years of age.

Then, and only then could I agree with the GOP position on abortion. Not to worry, it will never happen. The GOP would rather have unwanted children be born, then allow them to die for lack of food, care, heath care, as is already happening in the US, children growing up in poverty. The right wing has done its job, if the child is born, once that happens, they don't give a rats behind. Not their problem.

Something is very sick about this approach.

Posted by: ATC444 | February 18, 2011 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me folks BUT the procedure is an abortion but it is not what people a upset about. Folks are upset with the women who, for no reasonable reason, abort a child. Inconvenience is the PREDOMINANT reason for abortion these days. I will not judge anyone BUT I will NOT PAY FOR IT in any way. You all KNOW that Planned Parenthood gives abortions to minors without parental or legal notification. They could care less if the girl is being sexually abused or not as they feel it's not really their business. Fine, but don't give them a dime of my money. That is what this is about and I will fight for abortion rights as I will God handle it whenever. NOT A DIME TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

Posted by: etshoney | February 18, 2011 7:42 PM | Report abuse

It sounds like the fetus had moved from the uterus (not the vagina) down into the cervix because the cervix was weak or otherwise unable to keep the fetus inside the uterus (womb) until term. Since a full term is 37–40 weeks, 17 weeks is far too early, and it is sometimes but not always possible to compensate for cervical problems by surgical means. The earliest preterm births on record have occurred at 21 weeks, in 1987 and 2006. The first survived and is quite healthy; the second also survived but suffered digestive and respiratory problems, as well as brain hemorrhage.

Posted by: metonyme | February 18, 2011 8:18 PM | Report abuse

"I had a procedure at 17 weeks pregnant with a child who moved from the vagina into the cervix."


Going from the vagina into the cervix, is an upwards motion, not an expelling motion. It's the sperm that moves into the cervix from the vagina, where the best little swimmer eventually meets the ova. When a baby is expelled, either through a natural birth, or a horrific abortion procedure, it goes from the uterus through the cervix and into the vagina...where it meets at least one parent (natural birth process), or it 'meets' the horrific suction machine which ends its life (an abusive murdering abortion procedure).

It sounds like this woman had an incomplete miscarriage, not an abortion. So she's trying to get sympathy for something by calling it a different procedure.

Posted by: momof20yo | February 18, 2011 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Representative Speier demonstrated the courage required to make one's own moral decisions instead of simply following decisions from someone else. I've known a lot of women who have that kind of moral courage, and I think any woman who does can be trusted with choice concerning her body. As for those women who simply accept decisions made by others, I wonder what kind of mothers they can be when they lack that courage.

Posted by: amstphd | February 18, 2011 9:55 PM | Report abuse

The largest problem facing us today is the deficit. It can destroy us ... Abortion is a very minor issue. I do not care what a mother does to her unborn child. I just don't want the citizen taxpayers of America to pay for it.

Posted by: rbrown11 | February 18, 2011 10:10 PM | Report abuse

The United States of America has too many important issues facing us to worry about a minor issue such as abortion. I do not care what a mother does to her unborn child as long as the American taxpayers do not have to pay for it.

Posted by: rbrown11 | February 18, 2011 10:13 PM | Report abuse

You may want to actually read what this Congresswoman has said since the floor speech. She did have the d & e procedure, but as part of a miscarriage. She doesn't consider that she had an abortion.

Your headline uses the word "abortion" which is a great click generator, but you might want to change it so that it's actually reflective of the story even if that means fewer clicks.

Posted by: fairfaxvoter1 | February 19, 2011 1:04 PM | Report abuse

“Abortion foes never want

To admit the fact they won’t confront:

Those unviable tissues that they treasure

Are not babies by any measure.”


-- Victoria Woodhull

Posted by: jismquiff | February 19, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

It is clear: The Republican conservatives elected in 2010 will FORCE their "values" down the throats of all Americans. They won't stop until everyone accepts their beliefs. After all, "you elected me to do this" Buyers remorse is setting in so quickly!!!!!!!!

Posted by: pgmichigan | February 20, 2011 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company