how can that be defended? As hard as it might be for some of my readers to believe, I have been hoping for the best in this situation, really hoping that he was just clueless and didn’t realize what, exactly it is, that Plann.ed Parenthoo.d does. Yet he just keeps going on and on about how wonderful it was that he funded it while in the senate.
I have been called a hate-monger or worse regarding my sharing of this information. I have been told that we are all on a journey for truth. Well, why is that when, presented with facts (truth about his voting record) from his own mouth that people still support Santorum? And they support him, to the point of lying about or denying his record.
I have said this before and I will continue to say it: Isn’t this the biggest insult of all, to have a man claiming to be pro-life yet funding the organization who is at the center of the Life v Choice debate?
Pro-life website LifeNews.com is attacking a new ad by the Ron Paul campaign which exposes some uncomfortable news for pro-lifers who support Rick Santorum. The ad (video below) simply exposes the fact that Santorumâ€”a warhawk who describes himself as â€œconsistently pro-lifeâ€â€”â€even hooked Planned Parenthood up with a few million bucks.â€
The statement in the Paul ad is absolutely true, and yet LifeNewsâ€™ headline reads â€œPaul Ad Wrongly Implies Santorum Supports Planned Parenthood.â€ The article then tries to defend Santorumâ€™s vote, pointing out the vote was part of Â â€an overall budget bill that funded the federal government that contained Title X funding,â€ and then showing that he has been a staunch supporter of funding abortionsÂ through PP.
Neither the headline nor the defense is acceptable. The ad does not argue or imply Santorum directly supports abortion, it just proves that he will compromise on the issue given the right circumstances. And it is an unavoidable fact that, for all of his boastful rhetoric about consistency on moral values, Santorum will flip-flop Mitt Romney style even here.
For example, although Santorum told Fox News â€œLook, Iâ€™m not a big fan of Title X, that is Planned Parenthood. No, I want to defund Planned Parenthood,â€ he turned right around and literally wore his funding vote as a badge in another interview. Tom Woods exposed this nonsense here. Santorum in his own words:
â€œJust look at my record,â€ he said smiling, â€œI was criticized by governor Romney . . . or maybe it was Congressman Paulâ€™s campaign for voting forÂ contraception! That I voted for funding for, I think it was Title X, which I haveÂ voted for in the past, that provides for free contraception through organizations even like Planned Parenthood.â€
So in his own words, he voted to fund Planned Parenthood and that is exactly and all that the Paul ad states. What makes Christians and pro-lifers uncomfortable with this is not just the hypocrisy involved in voting to support, materially, PP while claiming to be â€œconsistentlyâ€ pro-life, but more importantly the fact that all funds are fungible. Giving PP funds for the purpose of contraception is just as bad as directly funding abortion because the money for other purposes simply frees PPâ€™s other funds to be used for abortions. This is true for allÂ federal funding in all areas of government.
â€œI canâ€™t imagine any other organization with its roots as poisonous as the roots of Planned Parenthood gettingÂ federal fundingÂ of any kind.â€
Canâ€™t you, Rick? Because YOU voted to give PP just that: federal funding, and the most general kind of federal funding there is, directly from Congressional approval.
How in the world can anyone square his vote with his own words?
So while LifeNews may find it ethical to report that Paulâ€™s ad â€œWrongly Implies Santorum Supports Planned Parenthood,â€ Iâ€™m not sure how else the giving ofÂ federal funds can be defined other thanÂ â€Support.â€ Sure, Mr. Santorum may indeed oppose abortion, but due to this vote it is not wrong to imply or even to state openly that he has supported Planned Parenthood. That may be difficult to admit for some people, but it is a clear and inescapable fact.