US Politics: Deception Via Omission of Facts
Anti-Abortion Rally: Washington DC Jan 29, 2011
In this rally, the usual calls to ban abortion were heard. They urged people to vote for a pro-life candidate who would appoint Pro Life US Supreme Court Justices and then overturn Roe VS Wade.
On the surface, this seems a possibility. But when one does a little research, one finds that the personal moral beliefs of the Supreme Court Justice or Associate Justices is not relevant when considering a case. This could be realized by looking at the various Supreme Court cases throughout our nation's history.
The second problem with the call to ban abortion is that no Republican President could force the US Supreme Court to review Roe VS Wade. It already was reviewed via another US Supreme Court case in 1992.
The case "Planned Parenthood vs Casey" originated in Pennsylvania. In it, the Pennsylvania Control Act of 1992 was challenged. The challenge eventually reached the Supreme Court. However, in that case, the Supreme Court also ruled that an unconditional ban on abortion is unconstitutional.
Those advocating reversing Roe vs Wade never mentioned this US Supreme Court case.
This is not the only instance where the voters are not being told the truth.
Repeal Of The Health Reform Law
As you well know: On Jan 19, 2011, the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted to repeal Health Reform. That is what they want the public to know.
Now here is what the public may not know: On January 26, 2011, the HR Ways and Means Committee questioned Dr Goolsbee about what Obama was willing to change in the Health Reform bill and agreed (without a vote) that they would make those changes. I listened to that this meeting. One representative even apologized for holding the meeting after voting to repeal the health reform law!
The advantage of listening to Congressional Committee hearings is that one quickly realizes what public statements by Congress members are deceptive and what statements are true. Whether intentional or not, the omission of certain facts can be deceptive. Originally published as a comment regarding the following article about Nancy Pelosi written by Marc Schenker in the Examiner.
Almost everyone (regardless of political orientation) agrees that the political claims regarding the health reform law is another prime example.
Reference: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=505&invol=833
Published by John Mario
As a child, I wrote short stories and read them to my friends. I studied interior house wiring in a vocational high school. I majored in electrical engineering in college. I worked for 8 years as an electon... View profile
- The Supreme Court Case of Dartmouth College Versus Woodward in 1819A summary of one of Cheif Judge John Marchall's rulings on a Supreme Court case which emphasized the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution.
- The Morality of Abortion: Should Roe Vs. Wade Be Overturned?An analysis of the ethical and scientific issues surrounding abortion. Examines popular theories such as future of value and personal autonomy, in an effort to determine the moral importance of choice, and subsequentl...
- Nebbia V. New York: A Great Depression Supreme Court Casea landmark Supreme Court case during the Great Depression and the affects it had on the American public.
- A Landmark Supreme Court Case: Albertson V. Subversive Activities Control BoardThe case of Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board during the Cold War and communist period
- Westboro Baptist Church Plans to Picket Elizabeth Edwards Funeral Could Affect Sup...Members of the controversial Westboro Baptist Church have announced their plans to protest the funeral of Elizabeth Edwards. Why are they protesting Edwards' funeral? Will it have an impact on their pending Supreme Co...
- Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Late Term Abortion
- The Truth About Health Reform Republican Congressmen Never Wanted
- Improving Health Reform and Controlling Spending
- The "Law of Large Numbers" and Health Reform
- Obama's New Health Reform - a Medical Student's Thoughts
- Is Roe vs. Wade Overemphasized?
- An Investigation of Media Bias in the MGM vs. Grokster Supreme Court Case
3 Comments
Post a CommentOOPS...P.S... I should've said he talks to her (by computer) from somewhere else and pushes a button on his computer from wherever he is.
Thanks for your bold viewpoint, John, and your comment on my article. Yes, I'm aware of the PP v Casey case. The first term abortive drugs I was speaking of though, are doled out to girls without ever seeing the doctor in person (he talks to her from somewhere else -- maybe the golf course -- while the girl is at a clinic..then he pushes a button to release the drugs from some locked cabinet to an attendant who gives them to her). She takes the drugs and goes home to "miscarry" or abort the baby without any physician interaction. This doesn't hold up the theory of "safe, legal abortions" at safe clinics.
thanks for this very informative article