Tag Archives: Susan B. Anthony List

Failed Democrat politician sues pro-life group for exposing his voting record

From U.S. News and World Report. (H/T Sense of Events)

Excerpt:

When voters in Ohio’s 1st Congressional District threw Democrat Steve Driehaus out of office after only one term, he did not bow out gracefully. No, he decided to get even. So he did what anyone does in today’s culture: he sued somebody.

Charging that its activities contributed to his defeat and thus to his “loss of livelihood,” Driehaus is suing the Susan B. Anthony List, a group that supports pro-life candidates for Congress and which has been one of the leading and most effective organizations involved in the fight to cut off federal funding to Planned Parenthood.

During the 2010 elections the Susan B. Anthony List engaged in a campaign to identify and call out a group of allegedly anti-abortion-rights members of Congress who provided the margin that allowed President Barack Obama’s reform of the nation’s healthcare system to get through the U.S. House of Representatives. The Susan B. Anthony List said their vote in favor of the law, which did not include any pro-life protections, amounted to a betrayal of their pro-life principles.

According to Driehaus, who was one of that group, what the Susan B. Anthony List said in its public communications amounted to a malicious lie that contributed to his defeat. Amazingly, rather than laugh the suit out of court U.S. District Court judge Timothy S. Black, an Obama appointee, is allowing it to go forward. …

Driehaus’s suit is breaking new legal ground and may already be having a very chilling effect on political speech. It goes directly at the heart of our First Amendment protections and criminalizes what is at least a difference of opinion. And it’s curious that the case has not received more attention from the national press.

What is equally curious, however, is why Judge Black has allowed the case to move forward and why he did not recuse himself from it since, as Barbara Hollingsworth reported Friday in The Washington Examiner, he apparently is the former president and director of the Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati. As seeming conflicts of interest go this one is a real humdinger.

So this politician takes certain positions and the SBA List makes known to the public what those positions are, and he sues them. And an Obama-appointed judicial activist thnks that the case should go forward. This is just another example of the left wanting to control speech and the flow of information. There is something alarming about the way that the left operates when dealing with dissent. They are so desperate to achieve uniformity of opinion, for all their misleading talk about diversity, that they don’t blink about using force to silence anyone who disagrees with them. And this doesn’t just happen on the abortion issue, where pro-life demonstrators are routinely hand-cuffed and arrested by police. It happens with everything from same-sex marriage to global warming to Darwinian evolution.

People on the secular left are the most close-minded people in the world, and they seem to think nothing about using force to punish those who disagree with them. They won’t debate – they prefer to overpower. Is it really so hard to believe? We just came off of the 20th century where the secular leftists murdered 100 million people, in places like Cambodia, North Kora, China and the Soviet Union. Human rights, like the right to life and freedom of speech, are invented rights on a secular leftist worldview. They aren’t objective – and that’s why people on the secular left find it so easy to violate them – because their worldview has no capacity to ground fundamental human rights. If there is no Creator and Designer of the universe, then anything is possible – we are all just matter in motion. Whatever standards of conduct we agree on are arbitrary and subjective – just conventions that vary from by time and place – from one society to the next. For a secular leftist, any immoral act is permissible. Their rule is “do what you like, and don’t get caught”.

Not all secular leftists are fascists, to be sure. But their worldview does seem to lend itself to narrow-mindedness and intolerance.

Mitt Romney refuses to sign pro-life pledge – is he still pro-abortion?

Here’s a pro-life statement that has been signed by Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul. The statement is from the Susan B. Anthony List, a respected and well-known pro-life group.

Here’s the pledge:

I PLEDGE that I will only support candidates for President who are committed to protecting Life. I demand that any candidate I support commit to these positions:

FIRST, to nominate to the U.S. federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;

SECOND, to select only pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health & Human Services;

THIRD, to advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions;

FOURTH, advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.

Notice how moderate it is. These are all incremental measures that a pro-life candidate can easily accept.

But Mitt Romney wouldn’t sign it at all. That means that he either doesn’t want to nominate strict constructionists, or doesn’t want to select pro-life appointees for certain relevant positions, or doesn’t want to cut funding for abortion, or doesn’t want to sign a bill to ban late-term abortions.

Take a look at this video of Mitt Romney from 1994 claiming that he is not pro-life.

And more pro-abortion Mitt Romney as recently as 2002:

And Mitt Romney again embracing abortion, as recently as 2005:

You can find out more about Mitt Romney’s background, positions and voting record right here.

Compare Mitt Romney with Michele Bachmann

I can look at a candidate like Michele Bachmann, and see a pro-life record. Where is Mitt Romney’s pro-life record?

Romney certainly has nothing like the record on social conservatism that Michele Bachmann has. She actually has done things to show that she is pro-life and pro-traditional-marriage.

Excerpt:

Bachmann also talked about other issues she fought for while in the Minnesota State Senate.  She supported a number of pro-life pieces of legislations, like a woman’s right to know law and a statistical reporting law.  She was also the lead sponsor of the Minnesota marriage amendment.

That’s what a social conservative looks like. Not like Mitt Romney in those videos. When you take a look at his state-run health care plan in Massachusetts, it turns out that he isn’t a fiscal conservative either. Let’s not make another mistake like with Obama and elect someone who has no resume just because of his appearance. Mitt Romney is to the left of many Democrats on the issues.