New Jersey Congressman Votes not to Allow Medical Care for Infants Born Alive

It is very alarming to this writer than any US Representative could vote against a law that would require that a baby who survived an abortion at an Abortion Clinic or elsewhere, and is outside the womb alive, should receive the same level of care as any other infant.  To vote against the bill is to legally allow infanticide by neglect.  The delivered infant is allowed to lie in a basin, unattended, until it dies.  Further, non enforcement  of required medical care to live born infants denies their status as babies alive outside the body of the mother.  It denies their rights as a living human being.  Even worse, it allows  that since the living infant outside the womb of the mother is not a person, therefore, it can be treated as a thing.  While still breathing and with heart beating, it can be butchered to remove its vital organs.

Yes, there are some who will defend those who voted against passage of this bill.  They will say that the vote tally already indicated that the bill would pass and that Representatives merely voted “no” in order to play the Democrat party line or to cater to the whims of their several constituencies.  So what.!  To vote that a living infant outside the womb of its mother does not require mandatory medical attention by those performing the abortion is a vote in favor of murder.

Failed Abortions — Passage – Vote Passed (248-177, 1 Present, 8 Not Voting)

The House passed a bill that would require health care practitioners to give the same level of care to an infant born alive during a failed abortion as they would give to any other infant born at the same gestational age. The bill also would require health care practitioners to ensure that these infants are immediately sent to a hospital.

Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. voted NO

Planned Parenthood Funding Moratorium — Passage – Vote Passed (241-187, 1 Present, 5 Not Voting)

The House passed a bill that would bar, for one year, federal funding for Planned Parenthood and its affiliates unless they certify that, during that period, they will not perform abortions or provide funds to other entities that perform abortions. The prohibition would apply to all federal funds, including Medicaid. The bill would provide exceptions for abortions provided in the case of rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother.

Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. voted NO

Governor Christie Survives Navy SEAL Attack

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/governor-chris-christie-idiot-student-damn-man-m-221915452.html

Governor Christie was attacked yesterday during a question and answer period at Rutgers University.  The attacker was a former US Navy “SEAL”.

Firstly, we note that Governor Christie is the elected Representative of the citizens of New Jersey.  Secondly, we note that he is at a public forum in order to appear in person to those citizens.  Thirdly, we note that governor Christie was ambushed by the Rutgers student.  The student did not have a gun but he did have a weapon, his mouth.  He did not have an intention to physically harm the governor, but he did have the intention to inflict harm upon the Governor.  His intention was to cause a shouting match in a public place between himself and the Governor of New Jersey.  His attempt to ambush Governor Christie was successful, although the Governor  survived.

Several items stand out.  The person shouting at the forum was a former US Navy SEAL.  Well, this writer served in the US Army for thirty years and I can state without any doubt that US Navy SEALS are trained to say yes SIR and no SIR or (Mad’m) as the case may be.  Not to amend all statements in such fashion is punishable as disrespect to an officer of the Navy.  So, we know straight away, that the student is acting intentionally and not from emotions, (he’s a SEAL!) and not from ignorance.  Sad that a former US Navy SEAL should think so little of the Navy that he would cause it to be embarrassed by his public conduct.

Next, we note that the person shouting over the Governor of NJ is a person who is probably on monetary support from the US Federal government through the Montgomery GI Bill, the Reserve Assistance Educational Program, (REAP) or the Post 9/11 education bill.  He is attending a NJ State sponsored school, so he is already getting lower tuition and fees because taxes levied on NJ property owners are used to subsidize students like him.  And if there are any other scholarship monies for the former US Navy SEAL then he is getting everything for free.  It is obvious from Governor Christie’s response that the Governor was exasperated with the student and was reminding him, politely, like a  good father to an unruly child, of the aforementioned facts.

Lastly, we note that the student is identified as a Democrat and active in Democrat political activities on campus.  This last factor plays well into my suspicion that this entire episode was a pre meditated political attack using ambush as the method.  Let me be quick to add that I realize that this analogy can be carried too far.  And this writer realizes that heckling is a recognized, although unworthy, political tool, (yes, I know that the Democrats also get this treatment.)  Governor Christie recognized the situation, addressed the immediate threat to his presentation, while expressing frustration concerning the non civil nature of the interchange.   A frustration which President Obama has repeatedly lamented from the stage, after which lamentation, he launches into withering political name calling, and accusations against the Congress blaming them for all the ills that plague the Nation.

One last point here.  It is coincidental that this student ambushes a Republican Governor.  We have witnessed similar ambushes by college student activists against both Democrats and Republicans.  So, the question begs to be asked about student political activism on USA campuses.

This writer applauds Governor Christie and for those who think that the statement, “..look I’m the Governor…” is petty or betrays hubris or its reverse, well, it doesn’t.  How can I say that? Simple, you say it does and I say it does not.