I’m pro-choice and I find Nancy Pelosi’s latest gambit repugnant.
Honestly, is there nothing from the far left wishlist that Pelosi won’t hide under the banner of “health reform?”
Pajamas Media
I’m pro-choice and I find Nancy Pelosi’s latest gambit repugnant.
Honestly, is there nothing from the far left wishlist that Pelosi won’t hide under the banner of “health reform?”
| Comment |
 |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
4 Comments
1. Bob in NW FL:Did you notice the page or post number, I suppose it is, at the end of the “latest gambit” link? Is it mere coincidence that the number 666 comes up in connection with Pelosi, abortion, health care reform? Or does it have more to do with Mr Boehner? I guess it depends on how you swing, socio-politically.
Nov 5, 2009 - 11:30 am 2. Alan K. Henderson:Taxpayers must never be required to foot the bill for elective surgery.
Nov 5, 2009 - 1:34 pm 3. Lurking Observer:But Stephen, that’s the whole point of healthcare reform.
Under its aegis, you can get at almost anything.
Gunshot wounds are a public health crisis, ergo, you need to control guns (or at least ammo).
Childhood obesity means limiting access to sugary soft-drinks and snack foods—and allowing parents to sue the companies that make them.
Better yet, class action lawsuits by diabetes sufferers (oh, sorry, victims). Think that’s exaggerating? Look at what Bloomberg has done in NYC (and he claims to be a Republican!)
Health care is the ultimate cover for nanny-state extremism. After all, YOU are going to have to pay for THEIR ill-health, so it only makes sense that you’d want to keep those folks from behaving poorly, right?
Nov 6, 2009 - 3:41 pm 4. peter jackson:I don’t understand what the deal is with government paid abortions. I mean, abortions just aren’t that expensive. I mean, we’re talking half the cost of a dental crown. Abortion drugs are even cheaper. There are very, very few women in the US who want an abortion and truly can’t afford it. Don’t the Dems have bigger fish to fry when it comes to this abortion of a health care reform they’re trying to enact?
Nov 7, 2009 - 12:09 amSorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.