Letters to the Editor

Monday, August 3, 2009 at 12:00am

Don’t pay for abortions with our taxes

Like many families across the country, my own family is struggling to make ends meet, pay the bills and fill up the car with gas. Now President Obama wants to tax my family even more to pay for the trillion-dollar health care bill.

But that’s not the worst of it. He is mandating that abortion be covered under the health care plan, meaning that my family will be paying for abortions, whether we want to or not.

Whether or not I am pro-life or pro-choice is irrelevant. Abortion does not fall under the guise of health care and is not a right. I believe it is my choice to decide whether or not I should be funding abortion and whether or not I should be forced to fund it under bureaucrat-run health care.

Tell Congress to vote against any proposal that forces Americans to pay for abortion.

Michelle Sanders Brinson, 37203

Send comments via e-mail to letters@nashvillecitypaper.com

152 Comments on this post:

By: Dragon on 8/3/09 at 11:49

Remember when the GSA paid $10 million to redesign the recovery.com website? Guess what. It’s now up to $18 million. Chalk up another success for the stimulus bill.

http://www.recovery.gov/sites/default/files/508%20Second%20Contract%20Modification%20SF%2030%20and%20Pricing.pdf

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 11:53

brrrrk,

All you have listed sound like the norm for the liberal protests.

However, what you are suggesting doesn't wash...because if there were insufficient numbers, the larger crowd would have drowned them out.

Everything else you've mentioned, I've seen before...from the liberals. So first, let's really look to see how many really are protesting and two, don't throw stones if you're living in a glass house.

By: house_of_pain on 8/3/09 at 11:55

Blanket, you gotta check this out:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkxgP2jYPRo&feature=related

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 12:23

Don't live in Oregon if you to be sure you aren't offered physician assisted suicide, rather than help. Oregon health care plan indeed. Hope the Federal plan isn't based along THIS plan!!!

Letter noting assisted suicide raises questions

http://www.katu.com/news/26119539.html?video=YHI&t=a

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 12:24

Guess they meant:

If they are going to die then they'd better hurry up and do it --- and decrease the surplus population.

By: 2476 on 8/3/09 at 12:26

Well i don't want to be paying for someone else to be aborting a baby . I just read where that Obama is now wanting to impose a tax on the middle class to help pay for his 3 trillion dollar health care plan. But we all expected for this to happen from his tax and spend policy.

By: dargent7 on 8/3/09 at 12:28

Slacker: You should be doing stand-up in L.A., you're so funny.
Chief: "Our religion...doesn't allow for abortions"...but,
You're in the military?
Which allows for killing in the name of an elected "Commander-in-Chief" who says so? Albiet, Iraq was a "mistake" from faulty "intel" from the CIA? Six years later...
We're advancing into Afghanistan. Not to "free the Afghan" people this time, but on the hunt for bin Laden and contain, neutrilize, or kill al-Qaeda.
Did I get it just about right?

By: dargent7 on 8/3/09 at 12:32

Do you people proof read, think out, and re-read what the fu**k you post here?
Or, it it just a knee-jerk response to some other post and you want to hurry it up to get on the board before the site signs you off?

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 12:37

Dargent,

I am indeed in the military. And war is a dirty business...but I never saw in the bible where war was specifically banned. Abortion either, however it does say suffer not the little children.

Let's see...last I looked we advanced into Afghanistan to look for bin Laden about 8 years ago. And one could make the point that we have hardly contained, neutrilized or killed al_qaeda. Of course, we are slowing moving into Pakistan as well.

Now, I understand you do not like money being spent on war...and you protest this expenditure. Ok...that's your right.

It is also MY right to protest spending money on abortions. I fail to see a problem. We each have the right to protest what our government is doing with our tax money.

By: gdiafante on 8/3/09 at 12:38

I know this will discourage 2476, but you, and others, appear a little overzealous about wanting increased taxes...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/03/white-house-obama-committed-shielding-middle-class-tax-hike/

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 12:45

Gdia,

Ok...so if Obama is committed to not taxing the middle class, and the additional taxes he's putting on the rich will not get the job done - per his own advisors and staff - then one HAS to wonder just WHERE will the money come from to pay for his programs.

You can only print so much money before it becomes valueless after all.

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 12:57

chief said,

"brrrrk,

All you have listed sound like the norm for the liberal protests"

Really? Cite one hard example. You say it's the norm then it shouldn't be hard to find one. Google youtube to your hearts content.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 12:59

brrrrk,

Code pink protests, million man march, want more?

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 1:01

Obama’s Pledge to Tax Only the Rich Can’t Pay for Everything, Analysts Say

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/us/politics/01taxes.html?_r=2

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 1:07

So much for the Canadian health care.

ABC 20/20 Takes on Health Care Reform

http://tinyurl.com/mq45tn

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 1:10

chief

Code pink march I'll admit.... but their tactics are far from what we're seeing these days. Protesting is one thing, but attempting to prevent free discussion is something all together. In addition, why aren't the people that are disrupting the current town hall meetings being hauled off like the code pink protesters?

Now marches are something completely different.... they are not design to PREVENT anyone from expressing their opinions.

And even you, a die hard conservative must admit that this line alone.. "If you are questioned by anybody there, don’t give them the satisfaction of admitting you are a Republican."... is nothing short of cowardice.

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 1:13

chief

Code pink protests I'll admit.... but their tactics are far from what we're seeing these days. Protesting is one thing, but attempting to prevent free discussion is something all together. Don't you fight to protect freedom of speech for all people... or does that only count for conservatives. In addition, why aren't the people that are disrupting the current town hall meetings being hauled off like the code pink protesters? Or like "Skip" Gates for that matter?

Now marches are something completely different.... they are not design to PREVENT anyone from expressing their opinions.

And even you, a die hard conservative must admit that this line alone.. "If you are questioned by anybody there, don’t give them the satisfaction of admitting you are a Republican."... is nothing short of cowardice.

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 1:15

Oops, sorry about the double post... thought I caught the first one...
The second one is better anyway.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 1:27

brrrrk,

Please. The code pink protest were classic. Now if you are talking about those birthers, I'll admit they don't have much of a case. But if you are talking about the protests about healthcare...well we'll have to differ on that.

Not saying you are a Republican? Never heard that one before. And frankly a LOT of them aren't Republicans...they are moderates or libertarian or some such, They just don't agree with it.

And why aren't they being hauled off like the code pinkers? Because there are too many of them with. Haul all of them off who are protesting and you'll have a relatively empty room. The Congresspeople know that most in the room are protestors and not supporters...else they WOULD have them all hauled off.

At any rate, we will see how many politicians will survive this come election time.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 1:31

brrrk,

I mentioned the march in that it was acclaimed as a million man march - but it never had that many there...if I recall correctly, best estimates were 600,00 or so.

But you are correct in that they are specifically designed for gaining recognition.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 1:38

Isn't it interesting how many politicians on the Hill intend to go on "fact finding missions" overseas during the recess instead of going home to their constituents?

House members take recess cue to leave the country

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-members-take-recess-cue-to-leave-the-country-2009-08-03.html

By: house_of_pain on 8/3/09 at 1:40

They all have to go visit their mistresses.

By: dargent7 on 8/3/09 at 1:40

Chief: You're mixing me up with another poster, I think Kosh III who doesn't like the monetary aspect to the war.
I could care less about the money. The USA has been bankrupt for 8 years.
I DO care about the legitimate reason(s) for going to war.
And, unless you're as dumb as a box of lava rocks, you'd know Iraq was 100% falsified. That's right, 100% total bullshit.
But, let's forget about that sorry peice of American history.
I cannot remember one Pope, in the last 40 years, who said (any) war was justified.
And you, as a recent convert, say "your religion" does not allow for abortion, but in your Bible, there is no statements concerning war(s)?
Chief, pal, do you have any idea how freakin' stupid you sound? I mean, really now.
Do you really enjoy being the laughing stock of this pathetic paper?

By: Loner on 8/3/09 at 1:44

I tuned in to Rush Limbaugh on Saturday afternoon, while piloting a U-Haul truck from Massena to the Rchester area. The man had the chutzpah, the shameless audacity to accuse President Obama of being an "egomaniac". I did a spit take.

I turned off the radio and I wondered how many gun nuts, religious fanatics and white supremacist bigots were listening to this demagogue on a regular basis. I didn't have a calculator on board, so please correct me if my math is wrong. If only ten percent of twenty million loyal listeners fits into any of those three categories that means that two hundred thousand potential assassins are probably out there. Ten percent of those - 20,000 - may actually be waiting waiting for an opportunity to strike.

It only takes one to do the job - according to the Warren Report. Our President's safety and security is being jeopadized by Rush Limbaugh and his ilk. And these guys fancy themselves as being American patriots. It's disgusting.

By: gdiafante on 8/3/09 at 1:47

You got that right Loner.

Dargent, rhetorical questions, right? lol

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 1:53

And Chief, what about the "If you are questioned by anybody there, don’t give them the satisfaction of admitting you are a Republican."... nothing to say there?

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 1:58

brrrrk,

Sure...sounds like BS to me...but then that means they are not representing themselves.

Who cares if they are Republicans or not? Doesn't matter, as far as I'm concerned.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:00

Dargent,

Are you Catholic? If so, then you'd better brush up on your knowledge of the Catechism:

2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.

However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."106

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

- there must be serious prospects of success;

- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

2310 Public authorities, in this case, have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.

Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace.107

And BTW, the Pope hasn't justified war in a very very long time...as a matter of fact, I don't believe he justified us being in WWII either.

By: dargent7 on 8/3/09 at 2:01

gd: buy the way, in case you're on Jepardy you'll thank me...the chorus on "My Sweet Lord" was the Hare' Krishna's chant that George adhered to. It's a sub-sect of Hinduism.
The judges would of nixed your answer.

By: house_of_pain on 8/3/09 at 2:02

George Harrison & Alex Trebek walk into a bar...

By: dargent7 on 8/3/09 at 2:04

Chief: You are the reining regional bombast of bullshit. Name one Pope who would of signed off on these war(s)? Why did you convert anyway, if not to play "follow the leader" like you do in the military?

By: Dragon on 8/3/09 at 2:05

Loner, that is one HUGE leap. Going from someone accusing Obama of being an egomaniac to being a threat to the president's safety and security. Obviously, anyone of a critical opinion of Obama should be arrested.

That's the kind of rhetoric and scare tactics that turn people off. Maybe I should start listening to Limbaugh to see what all the fuss is about.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:05

Loner,

And if someone had taken a shot at Bush? Would you have said that, say Bill Maher for example, would have been responsible for it?

Difficult to prove and if you set the precedent that you can't criticize the President, then that means no President can be from now on.

And just how far do you take this? If someone criticizes the President around the watercooler and then someone he's talking to picks up a weapon and assassinates the President, is the person he was talking to responsible for the assassination as well?

By: dargent7 on 8/3/09 at 2:06

"House"...we'll be getting to your category, animal husbandry, shortly. Be patient.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:07

Dargent,

"Name one Pope who would of signed off on these war(s)?
Here's a better question for you, name one Pope who has signed off on any war in the 20th century.

"Why did you convert anyway, if not to play "follow the leader" like you do in the military?"

Ah so, now we revert to name calling when logic has fled?

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 2:13

Here's the reality, the GOP and big medicine don't want a real discussion on health care because they know that they'll lose the argument. Why else would they go to such trouble to try to shut down the discussion? If they're so sure of their position... put it out there in cold hard facts. Back it up with all the successful statistics from the last 30 years. Defend the position that it's OK to have a health care system that's ranked 37th in the world. Defend a health care system that has an infant mortality rate ranked at close to 50th in the world. Defend a health care system that has more uninsured people than there are people in the entire country of Canada. Defend a system where the CEO's from the top ten health care providers earn enough just in salaries to pay the health care premiums of over 100,000 people. Defend a system where 50% of all bankruptcies (and of that 50%, 70% are insured) are a direct result of catastrophic health care issues. Their only hope is to spread as much FUD as possible. Frankly I hope this all boils down to a televised filibuster so we can all see where everyone stands on the issue.

By: Dragon on 8/3/09 at 2:15

Post office looking at closing hundreds of offices
The post office has been struggling with a sharp decline in mail volume as people and businesses switch to e-mail both for personal contact and bill paying. The agency is facing a nearly $7 billion potential loss this fiscal year despite a 2-cent increase in the price of stamps in May, cuts in staff and removal of collection boxes.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99RJSDG0&show_article=1&catnum=0

Still looking for the the successful government-run business example that justifies taking over the healthcare industry (almost 1/5 of the US economy). To paraphrase another's description of government-run healthcare, "the efficiency of the Post Office and the compassion of the IRS".

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:21

brrrrk,

"Here's the reality, the GOP and big medicine don't want a real discussion on health care because they know that they'll lose the argument."

I thought that was what was happening now. I thought the DNC didn't WANT everyone to read the bill but just pass it. I thought it was critical that this bill pass, unread, or we would all die and go to Hades. I thought healthcare was going to since our economy and raise our deficits to new heights - oh wait, that was the bailouts.

Frankly, I agree with you...I hope it turns out to be a fillabuster...however, I believe it will pass. At that point, I intend to make SURE I have a list of who voted for it and against it.

And after some time has passed, we will see just what happens from it.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:22

Dragon,

Also, you can include Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security as locations of poor managment and financial black holes that are run by the federal government.

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:24

Sorry that was supposed be sink our economy not since.

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 2:31

Chief, uhh... just curious... which bill are you talking about? There is no official bill yet. They're all still in committee.

And here's a big surprise... from what I've been hearing, I'm not a big fan of any of the bills either. Any bill that continues to feed the insurance leaches at the expense of the average American won't get my support.

By: gdiafante on 8/3/09 at 2:34

It appears that Loner's point flies above several little pointy heads. No shock there.

Dargent, the judges would accept Hindu or Krishna...but you still haven't answered my question...what song where they recording when George was running around with an ashtray on fire?

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:37

brrrrk,

The last one. You are correct that there are many out there but one has passed committee, last I heard.

If you have a problem with insurance "leaches" then you will be waiting a long time as right now that's all that's out there.

But whatever, I still hope it fails as socialized medicine isn't the answer.

By: Dragon on 8/3/09 at 2:41

Sink the economy? How about the decline of government revenue?

Biggest tax revenue drop since 1932
The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_plummeting_taxes

Yep, time to raise taxes. Even with "all" the stimulus money for infrastucture, "Last week, Congress voted to spend $7 billion to replenish the highway fund, which would otherwise run out of money in August. Congress spent $8 billion to replenish the fund last year."

By: chiefpayne568 on 8/3/09 at 2:46

Dragon,

You haven't seen anything yet. Wait for the tax increase on the wealthy to see what will really happen in 2010, assuming Obama get the tax rate increased from 33% to 45%! Try finding a job THEN!

By: slacker on 8/3/09 at 2:53

''My sweet lord.. do.. lang do..lang do..langgggggg''

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 3:05

chief said

"But whatever, I still hope it fails as socialized medicine isn't the answer."

Ok, let's say you're right. Then why does our infant mortality rate rank close to 50th in the word? Why is our overall health care system ranked 37th in the world? Why do we spend twice as much per person as the next country to us in expenditure but don't have the best health care system in the world? Given your logic, with insurance companies making record profits and private health care providers making record profits, we should have a health care system next to none for everyone. After all, other countries are doing better than we are for far less money.

By: gdiafante on 8/3/09 at 3:08

It's not the best system or it wouldn't be universally recognized as needing reform.

By: brrrrk on 8/3/09 at 3:09

Oh Chief, one more thing.... I'm sick of you're bitching! At least the Democrats (for better or worse) are attempting to come up with a solution. You remind me of my wife (sometimes :-) ), you bitch and moan about everything under the sun... but you do nothing about it. You have no solution.

By: slacker on 8/3/09 at 3:31

The thought of a huge change, frightens people who now have insurance, and are reasonably satisfied with it. Of course anyone without insurance, welcomes it.
I don't have any idea what the ratio is on the haves and have nots. I hope they take their time on this.