In threads such as this, we usually have by now heard from some member who tells us that we've got it all wrong- either we've misinterpreted the story, or the story was presented in a false or deceptive fashion in order to incite people.

I've been waiting for such posts to show in this thread, but I'm not going to see them, am I? These insane communists are actually trying to do this crap.

The woman who proposed this bill was shocked at the level of pushback they received. Washington Post had an article on how Gillespie and Tran have given Trump a huge gift by proving his 2016 campaign statements on Democrats and abortion to be correct.

Following this logic changing the death penalty should be easy. Simply ask the mother if she has had or will have undue mental stress due to her offspring's actions. If so it's not corporal punishment - its just a late term abortion and perfectly acceptable to leftists.

Sick, insane, hateful, the whole works. Something is profoundly wrong with these people.

The negative feedback is having an impact

https://hotair.com/archives/20...condemn-infanticide/

Kathy Tran:

“I wish that I was quicker on my feet and I wish that I was able to be more agile in that moment,” Tran, 41, a first-term Democrat from Fairfax County, said Thursday in a telephone interview. “And I misspoke, and I really regret that.”

When she was asked by a Republican lawmaker during the hearing whether the bill would allow for an abortion to occur when a woman is in labor and about to give birth, Tran said yes.

But on Thursday, Tran, a mother of four, corrected herself. “I should have said: ‘Clearly, no because infanticide is not allowed in Virginia, and what would have happened in that moment would be a live birth.’ ”

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

only honest thing she said was that she really regrets saying it

Maybe Tran should explain to Gov Northam (DEM) about " because infanticide is not allowed in Virginia".

Since Northam was perfectly okay w leaving babies to die

DEMs are so supportive of women but they want to

a)allow dangerous abortions outside of a hospital and

b) lower the requirement to have life support available for the baby.

Meanwhile, Dem presidential candidate, Kamala Harris is concerned because “assault weapons in and around communities, can kill babies and police officers.”



After viewing the video again, perhaps the connection to the Dem sponsored abortion bills is tenuous. Maybe it’s too easy to go after them for wringing their collective hands over “babies” and gun violence while condoning abortion through (beyond?) the 40th week. Let me know, para

quote:

only honest thing she said was that she really regrets saying it

“I wish that I was quicker on my feet and I wish that I was able to be more agile in that moment,” Tran, 41, a first-term Democrat from Fairfax County, said Thursday in a telephone interview. “And I misspoke, and I really regret that.”

When she was asked by a Republican lawmaker during the hearing whether the bill would allow for an abortion to occur when a woman is in labor and about to give birth, Tran said yes.

But on Thursday, Tran, a mother of four, corrected herself. “I should have said: ‘Clearly, no because infanticide is not allowed in Virginia, and what would have happened in that moment would be a live birth.’ ”

Did she misspeak? You can go ahead and watch the video of Tran’s statements. She is taking her time responding to the questions. She’s even being a bit argumentative. She knows what she’s saying. She misspoke in the narrow sense that all gaffes are misstatements, i.e. she accidentally told the truth.

And that’s why this morning she was still going with those answers when she recorded and published the video statement. If she had really misspoken it wouldn’t take her three days to figure that out.

Putting that aside, Tran’s new answer has a couple of obvious problems. First, as a purely political matter, she just said that her initial statement equates to “infanticide” which means everyone who was upset by her comments was right to be upset and everyone who defended those comments was wrong to defend them. Her supporters, including the Governor, have just been thrown under the bus.

Here’s the other big problem. It’s not clear that Tran’s statement is true. She wasn’t asked about aborting a child after birth. She was asked about aborting a child when the mother was about to give birth, say within the next 12-24 hours.

Maybe Tran is right. Maybe there’s something in the law she was promoting, a law which would roll back numerous abortion regulations, which would judge an unborn infant a live birth. Maybe, but I sort of doubt it. I think her first answer was probably the right one. Her bill does not take into account the viability of the baby and covers pregnancy all the way through 40 weeks. So that’s the second problem: Tran’s statement probably isn’t strictly true.

In any case, it’s amazing to see the way the Washington Post circles the wagons when someone accidentally tells the truth as Tran did here:



https://hotair.com/archives/20...condemn-infanticide/

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
Taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood should have been stopped when Republicans had control of the House.

There are very few true conservatives in Congress. The congressionals that refer to themselves as Republicans are merely "Democrat-Light."

chellim,

thanks for posting the video.

video proof Tran is pushing a bill she doesn't begin to comprehend

Two things the Federal Government MUST stop supporting monetarily:
1. Planned Parenthood
2. NPR

Evil is taking over this country. Anyone who supports this bill is not my fellow countryman. They should be treated accordingly should circumstances call for it.

I am ashamed to be a Virginian...

If anyone tries to get a petition to remove both these politicians please post it so we can sign it...

I tell my State Reps all the time that "Pro-Life" is just a fundraising campaign...


It’s Time For Pro-Lifers To Realize They’re Losing

The pro-life movement has too much bark and no bite, too much signal and too little virtue. It takes participation in a march as more significant than legal victories ending abortion.

Bill Kilgore

When is it time to question the power of the pro-life movement? This week the state of New York passed a law that will mean babies can be killed up to the moment of birth. Babies that feel pain, cry, and could easily survive outside the womb will be brutally killed, chopped up, and sucked out like pieces of meat. Vermont is considering a similar bill. So is Virginia.

Meanwhile, the annual March for Life had a huge turnout this year, estimated to be as high as 300,000 people. How do these two things go together? Perhaps big marches are not a sign of success.

A New York book store owner, who became somewhat famous after he shut down his store in protest of the new abortion law, put it this way: “When intense pro-life involvement is defined by going to an annual pep rally or giving five bucks to a pro-life lobbyist at a Sanctity of Life Sunday, it’s not surprising that someone hanging a sign in his window, turning off the lights and going home is viewed as heroic.”

The pro-life movement has too much bark and no bite, too much signal and too little virtue. It takes participation in a march as more significant than legal victories ending abortion. The simple truth is that the pro-life movement is stagnant, dominated by an uncritical and defeatist attitude. It needs some new life.

A friend who worked for a pro-life organization very much in the “the movement” confirms this. He became frustrated that people there ignore the evidence in front of them, and instead show excitement about the size of the marches, acting “as if our country is turning a corner and is getting closer and closer to life.” Meanwhile, they react more strongly to those who challenge their approved legal tactics or rhetoric than they do actual political defeats, as if questioning the success of the movement is some sort of heresy.

Attitudes like this indicate that people in a group aren’t reflecting on their strategy honestly or taking a critical eye of what they have actually achieved. Successful organizations have ways to examine closely and honestly if they are achieving their goals. As Winston Churchill once said, “However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.” But how is the pro-life movement doing?
What Even Are Pro-Lifers’ Goals?

To evaluate success, we would first have to agree on the aim. But what is the pro-life movement trying to achieve? Are we trying to end legal abortion any time soon? If so, abortion is still legal everywhere before 20 weeks. Many states allow it after that. New York and soon Vermont allow it until birth. Some success.

Believing we will never end abortion in our time, are we simply trying to restrict it more? I could list all of the supposed successes in places like Alabama, West Virginia, or Texas, but it would be misleading. Every law meant to restrict it in any way, big or small, is failing in the courts, even in Texas, if it even gets that far. People in the pro-life movement seem to have few practical answers for what to do about activist judges.

Meanwhile, supposedly pro-life Gov. John Kasich wouldn’t even sign a heartbeat bill in Ohio because he was confident it would fail and defending it will cost too much money. Too much money—let that sink in. Kasich is right, however: the bill will be challenged in the courts and there pro-lifers will let it die.

Many people in the pro-life movement have stopped trying even to eliminate abortion, instead settling for mere restrictions. As a result, blue states are expanding access to abortion and red states, where pro-lifers supposedly dominate, can’t even restrict it if the baby has a detectable heartbeat.

Are we trying to maneuver toward some viable legal challenge to Roe v. Wade? If so, that isn’t working either. Every half measure is passed under the pretense that babies are not individuals with a right to life at conception. Each law that merely restricts abortion grants that women do have some right to choose death.

And each law that is successfully challenged adds to the body of legal precedence that must be overcome. Each year that goes by establishes Roe v. Wade more. Each pro-choice law that passes in blue states makes undoing their legal work harder.
No, This Isn’t the Most Pro-Life Generation Ever

Are we trying to change public opinion to be against abortion? The tide isn’t turning in public opinion. No matter how successful the pro-life movement is in inspiring people to attend the March for Life, no matter how much we declare that this, this is the pro-life generation, nearly 60 percent of people nationwide support keeping abortion legal. This is no change from 1995—after 20 years of marches and movement.

Are we trying to make pro-choice advocates less radical? That isn’t working either. Having dropped any pretense about being hospitable to pro-life people, Democrats are now unfettered to pursue their pro-abortion agenda with impunity. In the face of more and more science making the humanity of unborn children undeniable, the pro-abortion crowd has taken a hard left turn and shed any pretense that this is about anything but women’s liberation from nature. They openly celebrate killing babies for convenience.

Are we trying to reduce abortions generally? There is some success there: “approximately 882,000 abortions took place in the United States in 2017—down from approximately 885,000 abortions in 2016 and 913,000 abortions in 2015.” Except it isn’t clear that this shift by 30,000 babies is a result of the pro-life movement or if it is just because people are no longer bothering to get pregnant. Thirty thousand babies saved is something in which to rejoice, but it pales in comparison to 882,000 killed.

So in all only 50 or 60 million babies have been killed in the womb since Roe v. Wade, and each year close to a million more are added to the body count. There is no end to the slaughter anywhere in sight. Is that success?
Don’t Believe Your Bleeding Eyes

Despite all of this lack of tangible success, many in the pro-life movement insist it is succeeding. It is as if they no longer believe they can win the argument that abortion should be illegal, and so they shift the goal posts to merely “limiting abortion.” In this way, pro-life leaders seem to think they can show that they are winning the argument.

People who argue we ought to stand firm on our convictions and not settle are deemed idealistic, as if ending abortion any time soon is unrealistic. If I were cynical, I might say pro-life organizations have a good business model. Are they interested in winning the argument and rendering themselves unnecessary? Are they trying to win the argument for life? How could we tell, given their track record?

It is as if the pro-life movement lacks, well, life. It is as if many pro-lifers have accepted defeat and no longer believe in even the justice of their cause. They say they do, to be sure. The individual right to life is the cornerstone of the movement, they say. But like movement conservatism, the people in the pro-life movement appear to have become too comfortable in their role as beautiful losers, happy to pat themselves on the back for their moral purity while failing to question methods that have so far been shown rather ineffective.
A Culture of Life Is Still Distant

It is as if the pro-life movement has joined the rest of the let’s pretend world, meant in the way of the old Russian political joke: “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.” People in the pro-life movement pretend to move, and abortion activists pretend to be concerned about it.

Perhaps this is too uncharitable, and I am sure many pro-life people in pro-life organizations mean well. I know some of them and they do. But I am also frustrated, and I wonder if others are too. We are not moving toward a culture of life without abortion for convenience.

In a time when slavery, something very similar to abortion, was the question of the day, President Lincoln told Congress, “The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise — with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.”

It’s time for people to examine the pro-life movement closely and honestly. We need a change, and we need to be more than pro-life in name only. It’s time to actually fight for the unborn, instead of just saying we’re fighting.

https://thefederalist.com/2019...alize-theyre-losing/

Tran represents the House district just south of mine. A social worker by profession. Adams, I read is a nurse practitioner. Most of the "barriers" to an abortion in her bill that were to be removed dealt with sonograms, counseling on other options to abortion, three physicians on board with the decision not one (and I think NY's allows licensed health care professional to perform them not just physicians). I hope it's one term and done for all of them that signed on, and those who trotted them out to sponsor it for some visibility, etc.

The liberals and nutcases that put them in office are now about to reap what the sowed. Unfortunately, those of that voted against them are also having to suffer. These people are making this state a laughing stock.

headline on Drudge

https://pilotonline.com/news/g...d1-c7ed70e09b50.html

Ralph Northam yearbook page shows men in blackface and KKK robe

A photo from Gov. Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook shows two men, one in blackface and one in a Ku Klux Klan robe and hood, on the same page as the governor.

The photo, which The Virginian-Pilot obtained a copy of Friday from the Eastern Virginia Medical School library, comes from the 1984 yearbook, the year Northam graduated.

On the half-page set aside for Northam, there is a headshot of him in a jacket and tie, a photo of him in a cowboy hat and boots and a third of him sitting casually on the ground, leaning against a convertible.

The fourth photo on the half-page has two people, one wearing white Ku Klux Klan robes and a hood, the other with his face painted black. The person with the black face is also wearing a white hat, black jacket, white shirt with a bow tie and plaid pants. Both are holding canned drinks.

It’s unclear who the people in costume are.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

adding: yearbook stupid stuff from long ago seems like a cheap shot, but the DEMs adopted that tactic to try to take down Brett Kavanaugh. So let them deal w it.

Insanity.

Abortion is murder, late term abortions are barbarity.

It's so interesting to me, the people who would shy away from calling any abortion what it is, a murder, are so intent on making sure law abiding citizens can't defend themselves.

But they can murder their unborn.

Considering the average number of gun deaths is about 33,000 a year, with 20,000 being suicide, tell me again how many abortions are recorded? Because they all aren't even recorded.

Should abortion be a right women have? Sure. But there need to be rules as to how and when one can murder ones child. If you think it's OK to do it after that child can survive outside the womb, you're not human.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
headline on Drudge

https://pilotonline.com/news/g...d1-c7ed70e09b50.html

Ralph Northam yearbook page shows men in blackface and KKK robe

A photo from Gov. Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook shows two men, one in blackface and one in a Ku Klux Klan robe and hood, on the same page as the governor.

The photo, which The Virginian-Pilot obtained a copy of Friday from the Eastern Virginia Medical School library, comes from the 1984 yearbook, the year Northam graduated.

On the half-page set aside for Northam, there is a headshot of him in a jacket and tie, a photo of him in a cowboy hat and boots and a third of him sitting casually on the ground, leaning against a convertible.

The fourth photo on the half-page has two people, one wearing white Ku Klux Klan robes and a hood, the other with his face painted black. The person with the black face is also wearing a white hat, black jacket, white shirt with a bow tie and plaid pants. Both are holding canned drinks.

It’s unclear who the people in costume are.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

adding: yearbook stupid stuff from long ago seems like a cheap shot, but the DEMs adopted that tactic to try to take down Brett Kavanaugh. So let them deal w it.

Let's see if he survives this? It's a cinch a Republican governor would not. In the past, the governorship has been a stepping stone for Democrats to the US Senate. I think he can forget that, even if he survives as governor.

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
headline on Drudge

https://pilotonline.com/news/g...d1-c7ed70e09b50.html

Ralph Northam yearbook page shows men in blackface and KKK robe

A photo from Gov. Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook shows two men, one in blackface and one in a Ku Klux Klan robe and hood, on the same page as the governor.

The photo, which The Virginian-Pilot obtained a copy of Friday from the Eastern Virginia Medical School library, comes from the 1984 yearbook, the year Northam graduated.

On the half-page set aside for Northam, there is a headshot of him in a jacket and tie, a photo of him in a cowboy hat and boots and a third of him sitting casually on the ground, leaning against a convertible.

The fourth photo on the half-page has two people, one wearing white Ku Klux Klan robes and a hood, the other with his face painted black. The person with the black face is also wearing a white hat, black jacket, white shirt with a bow tie and plaid pants. Both are holding canned drinks.

It’s unclear who the people in costume are.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

adding: yearbook stupid stuff from long ago seems like a cheap shot, but the DEMs adopted that tactic to try to take down Brett Kavanaugh. So let them deal w it.

Let's see if he survives this? It's a cinch a Republican governor would not. In the past, the governorship has been a stepping stone for Democrats to the US Senate. I think he can forget that, even if he survives as governor.

Of course he will survive it! Too much money from out of state, and too many votes from refugees from MD, who moved here to get away from what they created in MD. Then promptly started creating it all over again.