Democratic View on Life

 

Wasserman Schultz goes nuclear over 24-hour waiting period, but comfortable with aborting 7-pound baby

Send to Kindle

By Dave Andrusko

Pro-abortion Democratic Party Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fl.)

I am convinced if a bill was proposed that said abortion clinics in Florida must have an actual address (as opposed to a PO Box), Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz would indignantly announce that it is a “dangerous step toward the ultimate goal sought by some Republicans: banning all abortions,” as she did today in explaining her opposition to a 24-hour waiting period bill.
To be clear, it is true that Wasserman Schultz, who pulls double duty as a congresswoman and chair of the Democratic National Committee, hyperventilates at a drop of a pro-life hat. So we shouldn’t be terribly surprised–or surprised at all–that she would claim that such commonsense legislation “will increase suffering for women and their children — and might cost some their lives,” according to the Florida Sun Sentinel’s Anthony Man.

Wasserman Schultz and a handful of similarly-minded people held a news conference this morning at in the courtyard of the Federal Courthouse in downtown Fort Lauderdale. Gov. Rick Scott is expected to sign the bill–passed overwhelmingly in both houses–in short order, so Wasserman Schultz had to hustle if she was going to get her demagoguery for the day in before HB 633 is law.
At the risk of stating the obvious (to anyone other than the Wasserman Schultzes), waiting periods don’t cost lives, they save lives. But, of course, those lives–the unborn’s–don’t matter.
After all this is the same woman who got into a sparring match with pro-life presidential candidate Rand Paul (R-Ky.) over whether Wasserman Schultz was okay with aborting a seven-pound unborn baby. Answer? Of course, she was.

“We have very different definitions of personal liberty,” she said. “The Democratic Party’s position is that we are pro-choice.”
Mr. Man’s article ended with “This article will be updated. Check back for more.”
He is correct. Wasserman Schultz will probably add something equally over-the-top in the next couple of hours.

 

 

Source: NRLC News