Patsies for Life

Still monitoring the fetus fetishist reaction to Stevie Peevie's 'NO' to a new abortion law. And his political death threat 'strong recommendation' to other ReformaTories:

A senior government official also says that while the prime minister will not "whip" or demand Conservative MPs vote as he votes, it will be "very strongly recommended" that Conservatives vote to defeat the bill.

Over at ProWoman ProLife a blogger gets all riled up in a blogpost titled 'Well that's a bit much'.

In the comments, we get the Official TheoCon Party of Canada spin.

Veronique Bergeron on 22 May 2010 at 3:49 pm

He is letting the MPs vote as they wish. That’s what “will not ‘whip’ or demand Conservative MPs vote as he votes” means , right? Full disclosure (for those who have not read my bio lately), I am a Conservative staffer for a pro-life MP.

On the question of why pro-lifers generally support the Conservative government (see the last comment here http://www.prowomanprolife.org/2010/05/19/we-are-not-over-reacting/)*, it is true that Harper’s Conservatives are not all that pro-lifers wish they were. But the “no new abortion law” position does exclude the co-existence of pro-life and pro-abortion positions within the same party. What makes the Conservatives the best option for pro-lifers – or the least bad option – is the possibility for pro-life MPs (and by extension the large swath of pro-life Canadians) to have their voice heard and their position considered politically. But it doesn’t mean that they should always get their way. That’s what democracy is all about, isn’t it?

There is a difference between welcoming the pro-life position and passing new abortion laws. By reflecting the spectrum of abortion positions that exist within the Canadian population, the Conservative government is the best home for pro-lifers. Because the Bloc Quebecois or NDP caucuses unanimously condemn the pro-life position doesn’t mean that there are no pro-life voters in Bloc or NDP constituencies. It just means that their voices are not heard. Ignoring the existence of pro-life voices in their constituencies was the downfall of Ignatieff’s Liberals on the infamous “abortion motion.” The critical mass of pro-life MPs on the government side of the House makes it impossible to ignore the way Michael Ignatieff ignored his pro-life MPs. At the political level, pro-lifers shouldn’t expect a democratically elected government to reflect anything but the mushy-middle-of-the-road view shared by most Canadians. But they are within their rights to expect their voices to be heard. Harper’s Conservatives are the only ones listening.

Shorter Conservative Staffer: 'Silly fetus fetishists. Just because we've been stringing you along forever, you really expect us to endanger our chance at a majority? Keep sending money and voting for us, though, and we'll pat you on your pointy little heads occasionally.'

*That was moi asking if people thought Stevie Peevie was lying and if so are they OK with that. And if they don't think he's lying, are they really happy being patsies?

Harpo: 'Read my (glossed) lips'

So now we're supposed to trust him on this?

A new abortion law for Canada just isn't in the cards, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday as the issue continues to bubble and backbench Conservatives press for new legislation.

Harper's statement came in response to a question about a private member's bill by Conservative backbencher Rod Bruinooge, who wants to penalize anyone who "coerces" a woman into ending her pregnancy.

"I generally don't comment on private member's legislation," the prime minister said.

"But I have been clear: I will oppose any attempt to create a new abortion law."

When I posted that question at the Left-Wing Fringe Group Facebook page, Antonia Zerbisias replied:

No. Has he honoured anything he has said? Senate appointments? Accountability? Deficit? ANYTHING?

And, of course, that list could go on and on and on.

The man never met a promise he didn't want to stomp his widdle feet on.

If this isn't the clearest signal yet that the CPC is stringing the fetus fetishists along, I don't know what would qualify. Why the hell don't they wakey-wakey?

JJ counsels vigilance. I agree.

But if you'd like to mosey over to Bruinooge's glurgey yet eerily quiet Facebook group to snerk at them, I would entirely understand *ahem*.

In related news, another! poll! on abortion! Demonstrating yet again that despite the fetus fetishists' wishful thinking, Canada is definitely pro-choice!

A third of Canadians want the abortion debate reopened - but a far greater number want politicians to leave the explosive issue alone and are satisfied with the status quo, according to a poll released Friday.

In fact, Canadians are so blasé about the status quo that

. . . 17 per cent said they didn't care one way or the other.

I find that number kind of reassuring. I'd like to see that 17% not as ignorant slackers but as people who think: 'Yeah, whatever. No matter who's shrieeeeeeking what, we're not going back to the Dark Ages. It's a done deal. Now, go away, I've got a hockey game to watch/patio to hang out on/cottage to open.'

ADDED: Da woims toin. Fetus fetishists getting it, ya think?

Won't someone please think of the kidney? (Part 2)

You want your WHAT!?!?! back?

It appears that Rod Bruinooge is not the only male afflicted with an exalted sense of self-importance nor an obsession with the kidney.

A Long Island surgeon embroiled in a nearly four-year divorce proceeding wants his estranged wife to return the kidney he donated to her, although he says he'll settle for $1.5 million in compensation. ...

Matrimonial attorneys were quick to shoot down any possibility Batista would succeed. "I've been in this business over 40 years and I've never heard of that," said Seymour J. Reisman, a Long Island divorce lawyer. "It's not marital property, not a marital asset you can put a price tag on."

Manhattan attorney Susan Moss said, "The good doctor is out of luck and out a kidney. This is similar to cases where a husband wants to be repaid for the cost of breast implants and the such. Our judges are not willing to value such assets, so to speak."

Wow! And some men claim that women have a monopoly on spite and vengeance?

Grand merci to TD for the scoop.

Rod Bruinooge Is Brilliant. No. Really.

As if we needed any more reasons to demonstrate why we emphatically do NOT need to debate the forced-pregnancy gang. . .

They are maroons. Dig this from the Ottawa Citizen:

In Canada, he explained, there are many more legal obstacles to selling your kidneys than there are to killing your unborn child. So, he said, "The bottom line is that people like myself are not going to stop until, at the very least, unborn children have more value than a Canadian kidney."

It's a brilliant line. We wish we'd thought of it ourselves.

h/t to Mike in the comments here.

A: Slow News Week

From the Ottawa Citizen:

Harper stiff-arms Tory talk of reopening abortion debate

In the face of dissension within the party, Stephen Harper's Conservative government is reiterating its commitment to not reopen the debate on abortion.

"Throughout his political career, the prime minister has been clear on this issue," said Dimitri Soudas, a spokesman for the prime minister. "We will not introduce or support legislation on abortion."

The issue resurfaced Monday when Rod Bruinooge, a Conservative MP for Winnipeg South, published an opinion piece in the National Post arguing why he has "no choice but to advocate for the unborn and seek to have their value restored."

Bruinooge was recently elected chairman of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus, a multi-party caucus that predates the Harper government by many years. Bruinooge could not be reached for comment.

Conservative officials were quick to denounce any suggestion that the government will reopen the debate on abortion, but the issue is likely not closed.

So. I guess we have our answer: Slow news week.

Ottawa Secrets

Slow news week? Trial balloon? Here we go again with the shrieeeek about Canada's lack of abortion laws.

And some bozos MPs have formed a 'secretive' caucus led by embarrassingly logic-impaired Rod Bruinooge to fix this sorry state of affairs.

What I'm wondering this morning is what other 'secretive' caucuses those idiots have up there in Ottawa. One to revive slavery? To reimpose racist immigration laws? Rescind sexual assault laws? Recriminalize homosexuality?

As JJ says: let's out them all.

Shocking News?!?!?

Not so much. From LuLu at Canadian Cynic, we learn about a secretive Con caucus dedicated to re-opening the abortion debate.

"I think the debate is ongoing," Bruinooge says. "We need to have a starting point of debating whether or not abortion should be legal right up until the moment of birth."Bruinooge wouldn't say how many MPs are formally part of the pro-life caucus, but said there are supporters from every party. It's up to individual members to "present their personal philosophy on this issue," he says.

Bruinooge was in the spotlight last July because of his association with the MASSIVE poll.