Skip to main content

(I apologize that this will be short, but I wanted to get it out there to see to what extent other people here may be getting the same thing.)
...with an anti-choice, anti-Obama push poll robo-call.  My wife and I are sitting in the TV room watching a nice little French film we got from Netflix, the evening after I get home from 3 days at the California Democratic Convention, and the phone rings.  It's Mike Huckabee.  Imagine my surprise!  I rather thought they managed to target these things better these days.  It's a robo-call that is pretty much a combination of attack on abortion rights and attack on Obama.  I played along for a little while.

Not too long, since I wanted to get back to my film and it rapidly became obvious that there was no actual note being taken of the answers I gave.
It started by asking me whether I had voted in the last election, then whether I would call myself pro-choice or pro-life or whatever, then ol' Mike said how concerned he was that President Obama was going to keep his promise to Planned Parenthood and sign something called the Freedom of Choice act which, according to Mike would ban all restrictions on abortion at all levels, both state and federal (Anybody know if there is such a bill?  I never heard of it.)  Then he wanted to know if I supported such a law and so I said sure I did, but that didn't seem to bother him any.  Then he launched into describing the horrors of so-called "partial birth" abortion, and that's where I lost patience or interest or something and just hung up.
Then I got to thinking about it a bit.  Is there not a law that requires the sponsoring entity to be identified early in one of these things?  I didn't listen all that long, but more than a minute and there was no hint of info on who the sponsor is.  And is there actually such a bill or is this just a pretext for throwing some mud at the President?  I'm sure there are other interesting questions to ask about this, but that's what occurs immediately.  Any thoughts?

Originally posted to Chico David RN on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 08:00 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I got one too. (20+ / 0-)

    As I posted as a comment in another diary, I thoroughly enjoyed yelling into the phone.  "Yes, yes yes you moron" and "no no no way stupid" etc.  What kind of an idiot sends anti-choice robocalls to San Francisco anyway?  I took the whole survey.  It was cathartic.  ;)

  •  Obama sponsored a 2007 version of the (7+ / 0-)

    Freedom of Choice Act, according to Wikipedia:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    And said on the campaign stump that signing it into law was something he hoped to be able to do when President.

    The National Right To Life campaign has this webpage dedicated to FOCA:
    http://www.nrlc.org/...

    There's also this website, called Fight FOCA:
    http://www.fightfoca.com/

    Obviously the right wing is funding robocalls like this one to try to sniff out potential FOCA opponents and rally sympathizers.  I think your call was more a matter of trying to get the ground troops out in 2010 to try to prevent Dems from getting any more seats in Congress or in the Senate.  FOCA really could become a reality if Dems got a rock-solid majority in both houses.

    •  So it boils down to this aspect of the bill? (4+ / 0-)

      Partial Birth Abortions.  What does that mean?  The baby is in the birth canal?

      Then:

      (3) VIABILITY- The term `viability' means that stage of pregnancy when, in the best medical judgment of the attending physician based on the particular medical facts of the case before the physician, there is a reasonable likelihood of the sustained survival of the fetus outside of the woman.

      First of all, this clause needs to be much more specific.  Surely there is a term that creates 'viability'.  The rate of successful preemies today indicates that 'viability' happens earlier than we used to imagine.  Does it mean capable of living without intensive care?  This law, in my opinion, is so controversial that being more specific could be helpful.

      Also, the bill must clearly state that the mother will die, in the opinion of medical caregivers, if the pregnancy is not terminated.  No fuzzy language.

      May I rant?  I think both sides have a lot to think about regarding partial birth abortions.

      I will start by stating that I don't like the idea of abortion.  Who does?  However, I respect the freedom of choice this law insures.  

      I think it is the issue of 'viability' that both sides have an argument to defend.  The side representing the woman and the side representing the viable child.

      I can't imagine that anyone is FOR partial birth abortion of a viable child.  The thought of sticking a needle into the skull of a newborn and injecting a lethal dose of whatever is too gruesome to support, would you agree?

      However, sometimes nature deals ugly hands.  This huge argument is over a very small percentage of pregnancies that would cause a woman to die if she were to give birth?  And some of these women might have never considered abortion in the first place, but when faced with death, have to decide.  What could be more sad!

      Personally, I would like to see partial birth abortion for viable children removed from the bill, too.  I can't imagine taking the life of an infant who could live if not killed.  And I do fear that, if left in the bill, that the practice could be abused.   I can not support abuse of this rule ever.

      I find it easy to argue that a 'viable' child has rights.  Surely a Doctor could know long before a child became viable that the mother is too high a risk to carry to full term and could make the decision to terminate a pregnancy, to save the mother, earlier in the pregnancy.  There must be alternatives.

      And for those very few horrible circumstances that might present themselves in all their cruelty, isn't the decision up to the mother and/or father?  Where do any of us get the right to legislate whether a mother is to live or die because nature dealt her such a cruel blow?  All efforts should be made to save both the mother and child and, when impossible, do let the parent(s) decide and give them that right under law.  These are rare circumstances.  

      Frankly, in my opinion, abortion is a poor method of birth control.  However, this society is doing such a poor job providing for everyone's health needs either financially or emotionally, and the science of birth control can be greatly improved, is it any wonder there are women who feel they cannot provide for a child, especially if she were impregnated unwillingly.

      The anti-abortion debate has no legs because no one is willing to provide a proper society for a woman, in all circumstances, to properly raise her child(ren).    I can still hear the hateful echo of the GOP "Welfare Queen" mantra of the 1980s when society decided to defund services for the unwed mothers of America.  BTW, there was NO Welfare Queen driving a Cadillac.  They made that up.  Social monsters that they were.

      And Clinton's UnWelfare Reform left too many women and children out on a limb.

      We have this tendency in America to argue over a grain of sand when the bolder is headed straight for us. Is that an American tendency?  Or can we thank Rove and his minions for designing divisive politics?

      We can end abortion in America, but only when we pony up and sacrifice more of our personal wealth to fund the 'least of these' in our society as well as make sure our youth, even the wealthy youth who are very often emotionally deprived, are given the community support they need and deserve to succeed.

      You can't underfund and ignore youth and expect a positive outcome.  Our selfishness creates abortions in my opinion.  Until we cure selfishness and greed, our society will continue to deteriorate and the costs of our failure will be far greater than our investments NOW to solve social injustice and neglect.

      Not one of us has the right to chose for another.  Free will and choice is the very essence of being human.  

      We can all choose to stop calling social responsibility socialism.

      And even if we massively shifted our priorities from ourselves to our youth, there will still be circumstances where people are faced with difficult choices.  We need to support their choices, in my opinion.

      For instance, in my area foster children are literally thrown out onto the streets when they turn 18.  There are no safety nets for them like housing and higher education.  And we wonder why there is crime, drug abuse, and teen pregnancies.  I live in a Red State.  And which states have the largest private prison populations?  Red States.   I find the anti-abortion stance both hypocritical and......perplexing.  They care about the infant and seem to lose interest once the infant becomes a child.

      And why does it have to cost $25,000 or more to adopt a child?  That is prohibitive and another point that the GOP demonstrates their stupidity.  People are selling babies, in my opinion.  And that doesn't seem to raise an eyebrow.

      Poverty does not mean powerless. Unite!

      by War on Error on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 09:43:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Think of what could be accomplished if $10,000 of (0+ / 0-)

        every current adoption fee were put into a fund to help pay for well-baby care, early childhood education, parenting classes, assistance for low-income parents who want to adopt, for medical care for adoptees who may need it, etc. etc.  Just think of how much money that would generate for truly creating better environments for families to grow and for adoptions to have more success.

        •  This is a great idea and on the correct track. (0+ / 0-)

          I am stunned that the Democratic Party doesn't seize the argument by simply, and loudly, stating over and over again:

          They care about the infant and seem to lose interest once the infant becomes a child.

          And then show vignettes of the many, many examples of the sad plights of children who are neglected in our country.

          Unless, and I hope not, the Dems are also loathe to spending the sums required to provide properly for our nations children in ALL ways.

          Poverty does not mean powerless. Unite!

          by War on Error on Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 09:49:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I got this call last week! (5+ / 0-)

    I don't recall Mike telling me there was a sponsor for his call. I didn't hang up, though - I gave the answers as I saw fit. I wonder where he got my phone number from, though. I don't remember having ever given it to anyone or anything Republicant.

    "...fools despise wisdom and instruction." (Proverbs 1:7)

    by bhscartonteach on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 08:12:52 PM PDT

  •  Robocall on health care: (5+ / 0-)

    I hope you don't mind me going slightly OT but I know health care is a big issue for you.  I got a robocall that was sponsored by AHIP (announced at the beginning of the call) asking me several questions on how closely I was following the health care debate.  I answered "very closely."  They then wanted me to leave an email address so that they could update me on their efforts to gouge the rest of us reform health care.  Instead of giving an email address, I told them my opinion of them.  "Vulture" was the polite word.  Obviously they're looking for troops.

    Healthy Minds, Healthy Bodies, discussing outdoor adventures Tuesdays at 5 PM PDT

    by indigoblueskies on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 08:35:51 PM PDT

  •  FOCA House.2354 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    luckylizard

    The wingnuts have been getting really frothy over this bill, sending hysterical emails claiming it will force hospitals to perform abortions because it guarantees women the right to terminate their pregnancies.
    I do believe none of them have read the text of the bill, because the first thing a woman will be guaranteed under FOCA as it's written is the right to continue a pregnancy. It's pro-choice, y'know. (Yes, "terminate" is in there too.)

    And I'm one of those robocall screamers: "That's NOT TRUE you f#$#ing LIARS!" Very cathartic. I live in a very red area so I get 'em...

    Obama/Biden: Restoring honor and dignity to the White House

    by ides of june on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 08:45:22 PM PDT

  •  most importantly (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar

    what was the movie?  I love French cinema.

  •  Huckabee's running behind the rest of the GOPers (4+ / 0-)

    in being an -sshole for '12, now he's trying to catch up and make himself as blatantly and phenomonally unlikeable as the others. He, after all, has to impress the likes of Joe Plumbers everywhere because the Ned Flanders vote isn't going get him over the top by itself.

    Children in the U.S... detained [against] intl. & domestic standards." --Amnesty Internati

    by doinaheckuvanutjob on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 09:23:02 PM PDT

  •  reverse it, If a Sunday school teacher/killer (0+ / 0-)

    of a little girl were a distant relative of a certain religious public official of same name or similar name would you still donate to his campaign? Would you ask him to resign if that teacher were convicted in court of molesting and/or killing any child?

    Insulin in Ca public schools ruling STAYED during appeal. Great ruling for 15,000 diabetic students. http://preview.tinyurl.com/dxafql

    by foggycity on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 10:23:30 PM PDT

  •  I got the same call (0+ / 0-)

    There was a sponsor stated at the end but I forgot who it was.  Something like "Citizens for Life", but that wasn't it.

  •  If He's already attacking Obama (0+ / 0-)

    He's in major trouble for 2012.  I doubt he'll get past the primaries.  

  •  Employee Freedom of Choice Act? (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks, Governor Huckabee!  I didn't know that the EFCA would allow elective abortions.

    "She self-destroy (necessary to self-enjoy). I self-develop (necessary to self-helop)" - J. Richman

    by Cobbler on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 10:40:15 PM PDT

  •  Gomer don't like no "french" films (0+ / 0-)

    you traitor

    Dennis Kucinich was right.

    by lisastar on Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 10:49:19 PM PDT

  •  Yes there IS a notice law, the call was illegal. (0+ / 0-)

    And no, there is no such bill.  Under all proposed bills, third trimester abortions (after viability) will still only be allowed in cases of danger to the life or health of the mother.  Just like the traditional rule for, oh, most of human history.

    -5.63, -8.10. Learn about Duverger's Law.

    by neroden on Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 01:44:39 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site