WASHINGTON, D.C., May 12, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – When Congressman Chris Smith questioned Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last month over the Obama administration’s commitment to dismantling pro-life laws around the world, Clinton gave an impassioned response for “reproductive rights” that included a description of women in a Brazil hospital she witnessed, “fighting for their lives” after botched abortions. However, when the National Catholic Register asked for details on the trip, Clinton’s staff refused to substantiate the claimed visit.
“When I think about the suffering that I have seen of women around the world – I’ve been in hospitals in Brazil where half the women were enthusiastically and joyfully greeting their babies, and the other half were fighting for their lives against botched abortions,” Secretary Clinton told Smith in a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing April 22. (See: YouTube)
Department of State spokeswoman Laura Tischler told the Register yesterday that she was “unable to confirm where or when the trip she referred to in her testimony was – where specifically in Brazil she was visiting or when the trip occurred.”
Tischler said she referred the question to Clinton’s personal staff for a response, but was declined any information to substantiate the visit.
“This is part of a long-standing problem of abortion advocates making unverifiable and/or bogus statements about abortion data and then using the information to try and craft bad policy,” Congressman Smith told the Register. “Pro-abortion activists have a long history of making these type of unsubstantiated claims. That’s how they drive policy – with gross exaggeration of numbers, hyperbole and junk science.” [reference]
The minions of the Culture of Death can’t help but lie.
7 comments
The minions of the Culture of Death can’t help but lie
Lie? To lie, there must be a truth that is being denied, but there’s no such thing! There is only propaganda that can promote or retard progress toward good goals or away from them!
Whatever “good” means.
Sounds like Archbishop Burke is needed, or his equivelent, in the realm of politics.
Reproductive rights what a strange phrase- any person using it is the outcome of reproduction How is it possible for a rational human being to argue and defend any action to end the process that enabled them to exist? It is irrational!
This is not the first time Mrs. Clinton has been caught in such a bold lie.
As she tried to talk up her national security experience during the presidential campaign, she claimed that when she visited Bosnia in 1996 she and daughter Chelsea came under sniper fire while exiting the plane.
Reporters accompanying her and TV footage from the time confirmed Senator Clinton and daughter were welcomed by smiling officials on the tarmac at Tuzla, and listening as an eight-year-old Bosnian girl read out a poem.
Clinton’s spokesman, Howard Wolfson, did the back peddling for her.
People sometimes do not behave rationally, IJDGI!. In this case, however, I don’t think we can slap the irrational label on Ms. Clinton. Not wanting others to have the same opportunities you’ve had isn’t necessarily irrational, just evil.
Suppose you were part of a group of hikers lost in the desert. You’ve been able to survive because someone has been handing out their food. Now suppose another group of hikers appears and they’re starving. You may decide that you’re now against handing out the food because you see it’s going to hurt your own chance of survival. It’s called “slamming the door shut behind you,” and while it’s usually evil, it’s not always irrational.
Madame Secretary’s existence has already been secured. Her main concern now is not with reaching back and helping the unborn.
Reproductive rights what a strange phrase
Indeed. Can we come up with some parallels that put the lie to the concept?
Culinary rights
Athletic rights
Literacy rights
These, along with “rights” whose existence are contingent on cultural artifacts like “free” health care, sort of sound like they might be somehow derivative from natural law, but considered rationally wouldn’t mean how they’re taken to mean.
I mean, “I have a right not to have children” sounds kind of like “I have a right not to be pulled over by traffic cops.” Well, yeah, sort of….
As my 85 year old mother says, “Is that Hilary on TV? Shut that crap off!”