Pro-Abortion Advocates Issue Bloodthirsty Mailer

The latest bloodthirsty mailer put out by the Democrats and their pro-abortion advocates is a pretty typical campaign tactic used during the final days of a campaign. In this latest piece they attempt to create fear and panic by misleading and patronizing women to think they are losing some sacred rite. It’s as if the very survival of abortion-on-demand teeters at the edge of oblivion by the election of David Schweikert.

The truth is that David Schweikert can do NOTHING to overturn Roe v. Wade. That ruling can only be overturned by the US Supreme Court and the High Court does not appear to be heading that direction any time soon, especially if Barack Obama becomes the next President.

Furthermore, David Schweikert is running for a congressional seat. He can have no impact on approving a nomination to the Supreme Court. That approval actually takes place in the US Senate. Given the trajectory of the national election, it is unlikely that any conservative pro-life, anti-Roe judicial candidate will be nominated and submitted to the Senate – and that there will be enough pro-life, conservative Senators in the Senate to even approve such a nominee.

Let’s face it, a Barack Obama Administration will be in league with a pro-abortion Senate and there is no way they will give the time of day to a pro-life judicial nominee.

But even if the High Court did decide to overturn Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the states would each be compelled to take up the issue in their respective legislative bodies! This is the big lie put out by the abortion industry and their advocates. They would have you believe that abortion would be made illegal across the country – a bold faced lie!

For anyone who has been involved with this issue intimately, this is actually where the real battle will occur as state legislators will be required to address the issue of reconciling scientific facts with the law.

The bottom line is that David Schweikert will have no opportunity or ability to single-handedly overturn Roe v. Wade.

If the issue of abortion is your threshold issue, your true concern really is where Harry Mitchell stands. Mitchell has been endorsed and financially supported by the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and Planned Parenthood’s Political Action Committee. (Planned Parenthood kills more unborn babies than any other abortion provider in the country.)

This degree of pro-abortion support does not come easy.

Any candidate who receives the full-blown support of the abortion industry must support the horrifying partial birth abortion procedure. Harry Mitchell has pledged to vote AGAINST a ban on Partial Birth Abortion. Harry Mitchell opposes parental consent and notice. Harry Mitchell opposes a woman’s right to access accurate and timely medical information about abortion, its risks and alternatives. Harry Mitchell opposes spousal consent and notification. Harry Mitchell opposes regulation of abortion clinics. Harry Mitchell opposes a prohibition on transporting minor girls across state lines to get an abortion without parental knowledge. Harry Mitchell opposes the born alive infant protection act. Harry Mitchell supports the Freedom of Choice Act which allows abortion for any reason or no reason at all throughout all nine months of pregnancy. And Harry Mitchell supports your tax dollars going to pay for abortions here in the states and internationally! (NARAL on Harry Mitchell)

If anyone is extreme on the issue of abortion, it is Harry Mitchell!

While David Schweikert is a proven and trustworthy advocate for the unborn and their mothers, his efforts and impact will be to reform Congress and to restore fiscal sanity to our federal budget. Any efforts to bring sanity and reasonable legislation to this issue will find a vote of support by David Schweikert but that’s if a pro-abortion Congress even allows it a committee hearing. Don’t expect that to happen anytime soon if the Congress is controlled by Democrats.


Comments

  1. So, you’ve really been dying to use this animated gif since you had to remove it from the post in which you erroneously claimed Mitchell voted against the partial abortion ban which was passed 4 years prior to him being elected.

    Now, your argument is that Schweikert can’t do much about abortion and then list all the ways Mitchell has supposedly affected abortion policy. Seems like a pretty contradictory argument.

  2. Todd,

    Harry has not had an opportunity to vote on a ban against Partial Birth Abortion. That was corrected in an earlier post.

    Harry Mitchell has pledged to vote AGAINST a ban on partial birth abortion to his friends at NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Voting against that ban is a litmus test for the abortion industry and its advocates. You don’t get an endorsement without promising to vote against that ban.

    All you have to do is look at Harry Mitchell’s voting record to see that he has voted against every reasonable piece of pro-life legislation while in office.

    The intent of the post above is to debunk the myth that a congressman will have the authority and power to overturn Roe v. Wade. The mail piece that went out against David Schweikert was extremely misleading and basically lied about David Schweikert’s ability to overturn Roe. That would have to be done by the US Supreme Court by a majority of justices. If you remember your high school civics class, it is the Senate that approves these justices to the High Court not the House of Representatives which David Schweikert is running for.

    The only caveat to this is that the House will have the opportunity to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law if the Congress becomes more pro-abortion and Barack Obama is elected as President. David Schweikert will vote against the Freedom of Choice Act – a bill that would federalize abortion and infanticide! Harry Mitchell will vote for the bill. In fact, Harry Mitchell has been a co-sponsor of this horrific bill.

  3. As other people pointed out to you on politicker where you basically took this post and copy pasted into a comment, he stated Schweikert’s position correctly.

    Schweikert does not believe a woman should be allowed to have an abortion even in cases of rape or incest and given the opportunity he would over turn Roe v. Wade. That is a factual statement, Schweikert is upset about the mailer because he knows he is in the minority on this issue.

    If this is issue is important to someone who is pro-choice they have a right to know where Schweikert. The same for Mitchell and someone who is pro-life.

    Why doesn’t Schweikert put out a mailer claiming just what you said in your posts about Mitchell and partial birth abortions if he is so radical on the issue?

    Oh yeah that’s right because there is no proof Mitchell would no on a ban of partial birth abortions. You are purely speculating. Maybe those groups are giving to Mitchell because they KNOW how radical Schweikert is on the issue.

  4. “The intent of the post above is to debunk the myth that a congressman will have the authority and power to overturn Roe v. Wade.”

    The is only partly true. The post is also intended to send the message that while Schweikert can’t directly affect SCOTUS appointments he will do whatever he can to make the Roe decision meaningless.

  5. Straight from NARAL’s PAC website:

    Rep. Harry Mitchell (D)

    U.S. House of Representatives, Arizona district 05

    * Representative Mitchell is fully pro-choice and received a 100% rating from NARAL in 2007.

    * Representative Mitchell was a co-sponsor of both the Freedom of Choice Act and the Prevention First Act.

Leave a Reply