Dakota Beacon

Bill analysis of

H.R. 3170 voted on July 16, 2009 from the GOP.gov website:

H.R. 3170 - Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2010 The Financial Services appropriations bill has historically included a restriction on government (both federal and D.C.) funded abortions in the District of Columbia, known as the Dornan amendment.  The language of the abortion funding provision has been rendered ineffective by lifting the restriction on local D.C. funds to be used to pay for abortions in the District, without any limitations.  Since Congress appropriates both federal and local funds, this change would mean that taxpayer funds could be used for abortions. Taxpayer Funded Abortions:  Lifts the restriction on local D.C. funds being used to pay for abortions in the District, rendering the language of this abortion funding provision ineffective.  Historically, the Financial Services Appropriations bill has included a restriction on government (both federal and D.C.) funded abortion in the District of Columbia, known as the Dornan amendment.  Since Congress appropriates both federal and local funds, this change will mean that taxpayer funds could be used for abortion. During the full Committee markup, Reps. Tiahrt (R-KS) and Davis (D-TN) offered an amendment to reinstate the original Dornan amendment language, but it was defeated.

Pomeroy voted YES on H.R. 3170

So that we are not considering an abstraction (abortion, the clinical term) be sure to watch this video of an unborn baby at approximately 12 weeks of age:

You have to wonder: Is Earl Pomeroy fighting, fighting, fighting, fighting for North Dakota values or following Democrat party leadership?

From the FactCheck.org posting “Obama and ‘Infanticide’” dated August 25, 2008:

The facts about Obama’s votes against ‘Born Alive’ bills in Illinois.

Summary

Anti-abortion activists accuse Obama of “supporting infanticide,” and the National Right to Life Committee says he’s conducted a “four-year effort to cover up his full role in killing legislation to protect born-alive survivors of abortions.” Obama says they’re “lying.”

At issue is Obama’s opposition to Illinois legislation in 2001, 2002 and 2003 that would have defined any aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a “born alive infant” entitled to legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.

Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 “born alive” bills as backdoor attacks on a woman’s legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been “fully in support” of a similar federal bill that President Bush had signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.

We find that, as the NRLC said in a recent statement, Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session.

To provide precision of thought, we further clarify for the purposes of scientific accuracy, the concept of infanticide as opposed to the clinical abstraction of abortion, Exhibit A:

Teachable Moment: In the cases of Pre-Birth Infanticide, the doctor reassembles the body parts of the killed child to make certain that no tiny hands or feet (having finger and foot prints), nor formerly functioning heart, nor formerly functioning brain, is left behind inside the child’s mother after the child has been destroyed by being ripped into tiny bits and vacuum suctioned out of the womb (if this detail is more than you wanted to know, ignore it and try to think of what has happened in strictly clinical terms, it is just an “abortion” after all, just a medical “procedure”, done in a sterile out-patient facility by nice, caring ($$?) professionals who dressed nice). After all, it was just an un-viable, parasitic tissue mass.

25 Point Bonus Quiz: Is this dismembered 9 week after conception aged child the victim of the type of INFANTICIDE that Earl Pomeroy (D North Dakota) voted to support with taxpayer money in the District of Columbia?

a) Yes

b) No

c) It is above my pay grade.