Saturday, January 17, 2009

RIGHT WING ADMITS TO FOCA FRAUD

PHONY FOCA CAMPAIGN EXPOSED

After Barack Obama's historic election, winning 54% of the Catholic vote, millions of decent Americans who did not vote for him, nevertheless saw opportunities to advance the common good by working with the new administration in a bi-partisan manner, reflecting the best of American values.

However, a small, marginal but vocal element of conservatives maintained an extreme hostility and bitterness towards the President Elect, seemingly unable to accept the election of a man they or some of their followers falsely labeled a "Muslim", "socialist," "babykiller," or "terrorist."

By the day after the election, they launched a cynical campaign to convince pro-life Americans that abortion rights legislation would be quickly passed in the new year. FOCA is a poorly written, catch-all/wish list the abortion rights movement hastily put together many years ago that has never even received a subcommittee hearing. It is one of the thousands of bills introduced in Congress that never goes anywhere. Obama never said a word about it at any point during his election contest with John McCain.

Sadly, many Catholics and even bishops either unwittingly or knowingly help fans the flames of misinformation.

Truth cannot be avoided forever, and now leading right wingers are admitting to the fraud they have been pushing since November. Even the Republican American Papist Blog now admits:

"FOCA is not scheduled to be voted on or signed around January 21-22 or anytime in the foreseeable future. The bill doesn't have the needed votes."

Even the Right wing Republican group "LifeNews" now admits that FOCA will not be Obama's first act in office and the President doesn't have this authority anyway.

49 comments:

Susan said...

Katherine,
How can you say that he never said anything about it in his campaign? That is a lie and you know it. You can find it right on You Tube. Obama is speaking in front of a Planned Parenthood group and states that the FIRST thing he wants to do in office is sign FOCA into law. Give me a break.

Katherine said...

Susan,

Get real. The right wing has totally lied and distorted this matter. Obama never raised this issue in his campaign against John McCain. He mentioned it once in JULY 0f 2007, a YEAR AND A HALF before the election and long before the Obama-McCain contest started.

The right wing clap trap tries to pretend like this was an issue Obama preached about every other day. As usual, they are full of diddly.

Brian said...

"The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do." -- Senator Barack Obama, speaking to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, July 17, 2007

I agree with Susan. He said it and he was already running for president in 2007.

How can you defend that statment Katherine?

Katherine said...

Because I am literate in the English language and chose my words carefully. In the entire election contest with John McCain (which you can date as starting either at the Conventions or when each of them emerged as the certain candidate of their party), Obama never raised this matter. That is what I said and that is an objectively true statement.

The quote you publish from a year and half ago is accurate. I've long stated that I find that position regretable. However, that does not give licence to people to falsely suggest this was a constant or major theme of the campaign.

You know, the core philosophy of conservativism has signifiant appeal to the voting public. What lost the election was their hysterical overstatements. If some wnat to continue that failed strategy and lose more elections, I'm the last to stand in their way.

Susan said...

He was already campaigning for the presidency in July of 2007 and you know it. You are splitting hairs.

Katherine said...

Susan,

I said what I said and picked my words carefully. Please don't get angry at me because you did not read carefully.

Susan said...

Oh, yes, literate one, you are always right aren't you? I will certainly need to learn how to read. You are way too pompous, my dear. Ever heard the story of Icarus? Be careful, Kate, I would not fly too close to the sun if I were you.

Brian said...

I guess I don't understand what your point is Katherine.

My point is Obama made the statement. It is common in political campaigns to moderate one's views in a general election as opposed to the primaries.

I can't support anyone who would have ever said the first thing they'd do is sign FOCA. That says a whole lot about what kind of person Obama is.

Katherine said...

Certainly you have a right to vote on that basis, if that is what you decide,

Molly said...

I can't believe people who call themselves "Catholic" are still trying to reconcile voting for a horrifically pro-choice candidate. 50 million lives and counting....tell me what is more important than this issue? I bet if the tiny bodies were strewn about in the streets people would wake up and think rationally.

Kurt said...

In many ways it is the inability of conservatives to understand how any one could voter differently than they do that has given them their worst electoral defeat since 1964 and limits them to a narrower and narrower political constitunecy.

Anonymous said...

Obama said it and we do know he supports a women's right to choose for any reason even if he did not say it again later in the campaign against McCain. I never heard him retract that statement either. Whether it passes is another story and we have an obligation to oppose him on that issue and that we most certainly will.

Brian said...

Kurt, you are right. Conservatives must find a way to broaden our appeal. I think the very future of this nation depends on us reaching out and letting people know that diverse views are welcome in the Republican Party and you don't have to march in lockstep to feel welcome in our ranks.

At the same time, we have to deal in facts and to say that Obama did not at one time campaign as a pro choice radical on the abortion issue in front of certain groups is being disingenuous.

Do I think Obama will sign FOCA 1st thing tomorrow? No I don't think it will ever come to his desk. But you must accept the fact that Obama is above all else a Democratic politician and Democrats are just as beholden to certain groups as Republicans.

Katherine said...

Absolutely, and I join you in your opposition to the President Elect's position on that issue.

Whether is passes is another story, and a much better story. We elected a Congress that has a majority opposed to FOCA.

In many ways, wehave the best of both worlds -- a president with the will and political support to do many good things, and a Congress that will not allow him to do the misguided things.

Kurt said...

Brian,

I wish you the best of luck in finding a way for conservatives to broaden your appeal. You certainly have an element that works for a "smaller and more orthodox" GOP.


I agree with you that FOCA will never come to President Obama's desk.

I'm not sure Democrats or Republicans are beholden to certain groups. I think in both parties, the majority in each sincerely believes in certain things. Sometimes those beliefs are regretable and misguided. But I think both parties are led by people of good will.

Michael said...

"However, that does not give licence to people to falsely suggest this was a constant or major theme of the campaign."

Where's the news article stating that FOCA was a MAJOR theme?


"What lost the election was their hysterical overstatements."

"hysterical overstatements"

Now THAT is a hysterical overstatement.

Michael said...

"What lost the election was their hysterical overstatements."

No, you're exaggerating. There were no hysterics. There should have been but there were not.

What lost the election was threefold.

#1. The Republicans did not give us a truly conservative candidate. McCain was not a fighter. He lost because he's too liberal and too weak.

#2. McCain was outgunned by money. Money ran the campaign.

#3. Sheep are easily lead by shiney bullmanure.

George said...

FOCA or however he does it, he is not pro-life and neither is this blog. This blog conspicuously has no pro-life messages or links anywhere. That makes it a rare anomaly amongst Catholic sites. Here's a story about how Obama has already begun his reign of death and is working towards killing all the babies he can. http://www.lifenews.com/nat4757.html

phred said...

Susan, Brian and others in a snit: Did any of you ever say or write or do anything with the intent of convincing others that FOCA legislation would be quickly passed in the new year?

Carmelo Junior said...

How can someone belongs to the Church of Christ and supports the most pro abortion president ever elected?

martin m said...

Because both our faith and our intellect is deeper than such simplistic and polemical questions.

Brian said...

Phred, I don't believe FOCA will ever pass, so it is not something that worries me at present.

But I can't support any candidate who would even give lip service to such an evil bill as FOCA.

Martin M, it is not that your faith or intellect is deeper that you won't answer Carmelo Junior's question, it is that you don't have a logical, scriptural based answer for the question.

martin m said...

Brian,

Actually, I do.

Brian said...

Please share it with us.

phred said...

So Brian, while I understand that the possibility of FOCA's passage doesn't worry you at present, did it when folks were being whipped up into a hysteria, being told that it was up for passage right about now this time in January?

A lot of pro-life right wingers were saying that Obama was going to push it through this month right off the bat.

Did you ever previously say or post anything to such effect?

What about you Susan? Michael? Molly? Carmello Junior?

Did you ever question the veracity of such claims if you didn't make them yourselves?

martin m said...

Brian,

Would it be worth my time? You previous comment did not state that you don't know of or can't imagine a logical, scriptural based answer for the question. It was that there is not one. If you have already reached a conclusion on this matter, let's not waste each other's time.

Kurt said...

A fair point Martin.

54% of Catholics voted for Obama. He now has an 80%+ approval rating from Catholics. I think it is a fair guess to say that of the 20% who do not approve, maybe half of them would say they don't approve of his policies and programs but consider him a person of good will.

That leaves a narrow fringe of maybe 10% of the faithful who believe he is morally flawed in a gross manner.

Being in the majority doesn't make you right. But from a political and legislative standpoint, when you are reduced to a marginal 10% of the population and cannot understand the reason or logic behind anyone having a different view than yours, fruitful dialogue is not likely to be possible.

Ram Kaur said...

OK, here I am to let everyone know that Catholic or no, I strongly Barack Obama's signing of FOCA. We as Catholics have no right to put our beliefs into law. A woman's circumstances that are known only to her need to be considered and are between her and God. What President Obama IS doing is planning to give more education and financial support to women so that they do not fell that must be their choice. At this time, we are quick to condemn women who make that choice but who is there to help them financially and morally to raise the child? Come on folks - we are not living in the 18th century Catholic or not.

Brian said...

While I personally don't see how it is possible for a faithful Christian to have supported Obama for President, I am very interested in how those who did can reconcile this with their beliefs.

Kurt, it is unfair to put those of us who ask such questions in some sort of 10% minority. If someone was to poll me and ask me do I approve of Obama right now, I would answer yes. So that would put me in the 80%.

I certainly believe in giving the new President a chance and so far he has done nothing that would make me not support him. It is his future actions that concern me.

Kurt said...

Brian,

I am somewhat confused as to your position and therefore really don't know how to respond to you. On the one hand you told Martin flat out that he doesn't "have a logical, scriptural based answer for the question" but on the other hand told me that you "personally don't see how it is possible..."

I'm having trouble navigating if this is docrine or inquiry.

Brian said...

So far Kurt I have not heard a logical defense of how a pro life Catholic or Christian could have in good conscious supported Obama.

I have heard the side that he is right in so many other areas, therefore that makes up for his abortion stance. That position to me seems to not understand just how evil abortion is to God.

I have also heard others say they think Obama's policies in other areas will cause a reduction in the overall number of abortions which should be our main goal.

So, while I don't believe a solid defense can be made, I'm still open to reading them.

Kurt said...

Brian,

I voted for Obama because I believe that his service as president would be better for the nation and world than Senator McCain (even though I deeply respect Senator McCain and consider him a most honorable person).

The president weighs in on many issues. It is almost impossible to find a candidate one is fully comfortable with. On the other hand, in our system of government, power is very diffused.

I do believe on a vast array of issues; almost every other besides abortion, Obama was clearly superior on the issues than McCain. I understand this is not your view. However, while I respect you and Senator McCain's view, I am a strong supporter of the position the Catholic bishops have taken on Iraq, national health insurance, the minimum wage, the right of workers to form unions, etc.

This does not "make up" for the President's regretable position on the legal status of abortion. But is does led to a deeper discernment as to what likelihood either candidate would acheive their stated positions.

I understand abortion is evil to God. I don't accept that people who disagree with me on the criminal status of abortion are evil to God -- so evil it effects every aspect of their character.

The Pope referred to the President as a man of good will. I agree with the Pope. People who are pro-choice (a regretable position) can still be people of good will.

I do think that Obama's policies in other areas will cause a reduction in the overall number of abortions. I have not called for that to be the main goal of the pro-life movement, but it should be one goal. I think it is a shame that the leadership of the pro-life movement has been AWOL on that goal when it should be working for multiple goals. The Obama Administration does give us an opportunity to make some progress on this goal that the unworthy servants of the pro-life movement have ignored.

Marcus said...

I can not believe that these people are misled.

If anyone has any doubt, then look at:

The Freedom of Choice Act (H.R. 1964/S. 1173) is a bill in the 110th United States Congress which "declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.

It prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively.

It also authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action."

Kurt said...

You got it right. Marcus. H.R. 1964/S. 1173 was a bill in the 110th United States Congress. The 110the Congress adjourned sine die last December without taking any action on HR 1964/S.1173, so the bill is now dead. No such bill has been re-introduced in the 111th Congress and the Democratic leadership says if a bill were to be introduced, they would not place it on the calendar for a floor vote.

Besides, the whip counts shows that if it were brought up for a vote, it would be defeated.

Brian said...

Kurt, I agree FOCA will never reach Obama's desk, but how could you in good conscious support a man who is of such low moral character to promise that he would sign such a travesty.

How could you support a man who is so vile he single-handedly defeated the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in an Illinois Senate committee in 2003.

This speaks so lowly of Obama's morals that I don't see how you as a Catholic could actively campaign for him.

I'm trying, I really am to understand people like you and Katherine. Please realize that I'm sincerely trying my best, but the more I think about it the more perplexed I am.

Kurt said...

Brian --

Like you, and as a Catholic, I believe abortion is wrong and that unborn life should have social protection. Unlike you, I don't accept the theory that everyone that I am not in agreement with on a point of law is of "low moral character" or "vile." They are mistaken and in error. Their erroneous and mistaken views can have terrible consequences.

However, I agree with Pope Benedict that the President is a man of good will.

Let me add something else. The question of are all people who are pro-choice on a matter law vile and of low moral character, is not a debate I want to have with you and I don't think it would be productive. But I think there is another issue of the political wisdom of your position.

Increasingly I hear that believing all the things the Pro-Life Movement holds about the unborn is not enough to make someone Pro-Life. That a person is not Pro-Life unless they also believe that our political opponents are vile and immoral people.

I can tell you a considerable number of people are leaving the Pro-Life Movement because they cannot accept those terms being imposed upon them. Many of us have friends, neighbors, relatives, who are pro-choice. We disagree with them; we try to show them the truth; we are encouraged when they can be with us part of the way.

In some cases, we are even married to such people. I am thinking of President Bush and of the very bright, young, pro-life Congressman Eric Canton, who the Republicans elected as Party Whip. His wife is pro-choice and they have spirited but respectful debates. While Congressman Cantor is an exceedingly decent man, I am fairly sure if I told him "Congressman, your wife is vile and of low moral character" I might end up hitting his fist with my nose.

Right or wrong, I think your position is a strategy for the political impotency of the Pro-Life Movement.

I’m sorry if this sounds a little stern, as I am convinced that you too are a person of good will and trying to advance Pro-Life as best you know how. I just think you have a very mistaken path.

Brian said...

Kurt, I would only call someone vile and of low morals who hold radical pro abortion views like Obama.

I agree that someone who is simply pro choice could be a good person and I might could even vote for them under certain circumstances. For example, someone who simply believes that abortion should be legal in the first trimester and that the decision should be between a woman and her doctor. While I personally would disagree, I can see the logic in that position.

But people who believe that infants born alive in botched abortions don't deserve protection or those that can't vote against partial birth abortion, yes I do believe they are vile and of low morals.

Do you understand what I'm saying?

Kurt said...

Do you understand what I'm saying?

Yes, but I can't say I agree with it. The President has never said that he thinks "infants born alive in botched abortions don't deserve protection." If he had said those words, I might agree with you.

He said such protections already existed (a point of some truth). Now, you may disagree and think the Illinois law was more effective than the federal law passed a year before. And if your analysis is right, you should have fought like the dickens to pass it. I would say even if there was some doubt in your mind, go for it.

But that is a far cry from saying the President consciously and knowingly support the infants born alive in botched abortions don't deserve protection."

Brian, I am being sincere. if you care about the success of the Pro-Life Movement, you need to seriously consider the political impact of making it a smaller and more ideologically pure movement.

Anonymous said...

that is definitely what I was searching for, You have saved me alot of time

Anonymous said...

Thanks for this post, it is great

Anonymous said...

thanks to the author for taking his time on this one.

Anonymous said...

Howdy this theme is hugely concerning. Keep it going man !

Anonymous said...

very interesting information! .

Anonymous said...

This weblog is wonderful. There’s always all of the ideal info in the ideas of my fingers. Thanks and keep up the excellent work!

Anonymous said...

del plz erorr

Anonymous said...

Post a good , let down the blog to your bookmarks.

Anonymous said...

thanks, very good =)

Anonymous said...

I think that you can compose much on this issue, it mightiness not certainly be a prejudice circumstance but normally grouping are certainly not sufficiency to be able to utter upon much topics.

Anonymous said...

Your site is really good and the posts are just wonderful. Thank you and keep doing your great work.