Subscribe Now!


News & Views

Volume 37, Number 10                                                                                                                                                                        October  2010

What You Can Do to Make a Vitally Important Difference on November 2

By Dave Andrusko

As this edition of National Right to Life News goes to press, we are just weeks away from the pivotal November 2 off-year elections. Like sailors clinging to a capsized vessel, pro-abortion Democrats are frantically attempting to avoid drowning under a tidal wave of voter backlash. While most media talk is about the powerful impact of a weakened economy, the Democrats’ plunge actually began with the public’s deep resentment at having ObamaCare shoved down its collective throat.

How best to understand the stakes? Consider the price the unborn have paid because the Presidency in the hands of a man joined at the hip to the Abortion Establishment, aided and abetted by two uber-partisan pro-abortion Democratic leaders--Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Obama’s forays into abortion advocacy are many and varied, but we rightly focus on the laughably misnamed “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010”–ObamaCare. We know the truth, but even now much of the “mainstream media” insists on recycling the same half-truths and mis-truths all (ironically) under the guise of clearing up “misunderstandings.”

For example, driving into work yesterday I heard a radio reporter impatiently state (as if there can be no possible disagreement) that ObamaCare does not subsidize abortion and does not prevent access to lifesaving medical treatment. In fact, it does both, meaning ObamaCare indiscriminately attacks vulnerable life at both ends of the age continuum.


Post-election "lame duck" session looms
Obama-backed pro-abortion bills blocked; Congress goes home to face voters

WASHINGTON (September 29, 2010)–With Congress entering a month-long recess to allow full-time campaigning during the final weeks before the November 2 general election, NRLC legislative staff has analyzed the damage done by nearly two years of collaboration between pro-abortion President Barack Obama and the large majorities of mostly like-minded Democrats who currently control both houses of Congress.

Following the election, the same lawmakers–including those who have been defeated–will again convene in a "lame duck session" that will begin in November and run into December. The new 112th Congress–which will include all of the candidates who are victorious in the general election–will convene in January.

"Since April, our side has been pretty successful at blocking bad legislation–but we're not out of the woods, because we will still face some serious threats during the lame duck session," explained NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. "During the lame duck session, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid will still be in control–and pro-abortion lawmakers who have been defeated on November 2 will still be allowed to vote. So for a few weeks, we may face 'The Attack of the Living Dead Incumbents.' NRLC will be braced to strenuously resist any attempts by the Democratic congressional leadership to ram through pro-abortion legislation, using the votes of lawmakers who have already been 'fired' by their constituents."




of NRL News are available!!!
Click here for details

Click here
for an easy way to help your Pro-Life friends and NRL News

Be a Part of the NRLC Email List

From the President

Wanda Franz, Ph.D.


By Wanda Franz, Ph.D.

"In the current U.S. debate over health care reform, 'rationing' has become a dirty word. Meeting last month with five governors, President Obama urged them to avoid using the term, apparently for fear of evoking the hostile response that sank the Clintons' attempt to achieve reform…" -- Peter Singer, New York Times Magazine, July 19, 2009

Princeton Professor Peter Singer, an open advocate of rationing of health care, invoked the above comment by President Obama in order to make his own point that politicians shouldn't be afraid to argue for health care rationing. It was clear to Singer that the Obama administration intended to build rationing into the Health Care Reform Law--it just wasn't going to be open about it.

To advocate for rationing, as Singer does, is to propose a radical change in the fundamental values that undergird America's health care system. Traditionally, we have assumed that our health care will further the values expressed in America's founding documents. The Declaration of Independence says "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Read Dr. Franz's Entire Column

NRL News Archive

January 2010
February/March 2010

April/May 2010
June/July 2010
August/September 2010

NRL News 2009 Subject Index
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July/August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November/December 2009

NRL News 2008 Subject Index
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July/August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November/December 2008

NRL News 2007 Subject Index
January 2007
February 2007

March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007

July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007

December 2007

NRL News 2006 Subject Index
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006

April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006

December 2006

NRL News 2005 Subject Index
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005

NRL News 2004 Subject Index
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
une 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004

December 2004

NRL News 2003 Subject Index
January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003

NRL News 2002 Subject Index
January 2002
February 2002
March 2002
April 2002

May 2002

June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002

NRL News 2001 Subject Index
January 2001
February 2001
March 2001
April 2001
May 2001
June 2001
July 2001
August 2001
September 2001
October 2001
November 2001
December 2001

NRL News 2000 Subject Index
January 2000
February 2000
March 2000
April 2000
May 2000
June 2000
July 2000
August 2000
September 2000
October 2000
December 2000

NRL News 1999 Subject Index
January 22, 1999
February 19, 1999
March 15, 1999
April 8, 1999
May 11, 1999
June 10, 1999
July 6, 1999
August 10, 1999
September 14, 1999
October 12, 1999
November 1999
December 1999

NRL News 1998 Subject Index
January 1998
February 11, 1998
March 11, 1998
April 14, 1998
May 7, 1998
July 8, 1998
June 9, 1998
August 12, 1998
September 28, 1998
October 12, 1998
November 17, 1998
December 10, 1998

NRL News 1997 Subject Index
December 9, 1997

Subject Indexes for 1990 - 1996
NRL News 1996 Subject Index
NRL News 1995 Subject Index
NRL News 1994 Subject Index
NRL News 1993 Subject Index
NRL News 1992 Subject Index
NRL News 1991 Subject Index
NRL News 1990 Subject Index