What Should Mitch Daniels Do?

[Mike the Progressive]

First, I'd like a source for that claim. Second, I could care less. I have little pity for PP or what they do.

there has been a ban on federal funding for abortion for decades.

Right...and if you read anything I wrote/typed above, you'd know I could care less. I dislike supporting an organization that provides abortion. I don't mind everything else that they do, but either find an organization that doesn't fund abortion at all. Or better yet, let the state provide a voucher to the low income earner that they can use on said tests.

[Ashmoria]

VETO IT.

I'm with tricky dicky on this one.

It's not the role of the gov't to check women with smears and such.

Also it's not right that tax money is spent on other people's healthcare.

We all use roads etc

but pap smears and contraceptives? Leave rubbers to Trojan! I want the state to gtfo out people's lives.

If women of impoverished means or unfortunate circumstances don't have healthcare that's not the prerogative of Indiana.

Yes it's a human tragedy blah blah blah bleeding hearts

However it's a greater tragedy to throw the hard earned tax dollars of the people on frivolous pursuits.

How about giving that $$$ back in a tax break?

Oh and I think it would be a good thing to reduce federal money flowing into the states like that. Pork barrel ear marks cause too much corruption as it is...

the $4million comes from the federal government. it is funnelled through the state to PP. if they defund planned parenthood they have to forfeit the money.

mr daniels is mr fiscal responsibility. it is fiscally irresponsible to throw away $4million in services to indianan women who will either get the services through a more expensive outlet or go without and increase spending for indiana down the road on health care services for pregnancy or cancer treatments.

[Maurepas]

there has been a ban on federal funding for abortion for decades.

Right...and if you read anything I wrote/typed above, you'd know I could care less. I dislike supporting an organization that provides abortion. I don't mind everything else that they do, but either find an organization that doesn't fund abortion at all. Or better yet, let the state provide a voucher to the low income earner that they can use on said tests.

You disliking it doesn't matter. Abortions being available to the public outside of the black market is something that is vital to the health of many women. Not to mention their actual major operations which are arguably even more vital.

It'd be like defunding medicare because you dislike vaccines, or road construction cause you dislike traffic lights.

[Ashmoria]

there has been a ban on federal funding for abortion for decades.

Right...and if you read anything I wrote/typed above, you'd know I could care less. I dislike supporting an organization that provides abortion. I don't mind everything else that they do, but either find an organization that doesn't fund abortion at all. Or better yet, let the state provide a voucher to the low income earner that they can use on said tests.

not that i care what YOU would do but it is fiscally irresponsible to get less services for your money. pap smears are expensive at the doctors office.

[Lacadaemon]

the $4million comes from the federal government. it is funnelled through the state to PP. if they defund planned parenthood they have to forfeit the money.

mr daniels is mr fiscal responsibility. it is fiscally irresponsible to throw away $4million in services to indianan women who will either get the services through a more expensive outlet or go without and increase spending for indiana down the road on health care services for pregnancy or cancer treatments.

He's not Mr Fiscal Responsibility, if he were he would not only fund PP, he'd be throwing money at abortions. Frankly they are the most fiscally conservative option.

[Ashmoria]

the $4million comes from the federal government. it is funnelled through the state to PP. if they defund planned parenthood they have to forfeit the money.

mr daniels is mr fiscal responsibility. it is fiscally irresponsible to throw away $4million in services to indianan women who will either get the services through a more expensive outlet or go without and increase spending for indiana down the road on health care services for pregnancy or cancer treatments.

He's not Mr Fiscal Responsibility, if he were he would not only fund PP, he'd be throwing money at abortions. Frankly they are the most fiscally conservative option.

of course.

but there is no chance that the indiana legislature would go along with the state paying for abortions (and its doubtful that the people of indiana would vote for him if he ran on state funding for abortions).

even if it is the by-far wisest thing that he could do to save the state money.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Not certain what Indiana law is but he should just not sign it and allow it to pass (If he ACTUALLY doesn't want to be Mr. Social conservative). Then he can say he was following the will of the people's elected reps. and be all electable and junk.(Edit: This is known as the Political wiggle-worm answer)

Personally, I'd suggest he veto that sucker. Abortion is tricky any way you look at it and we've survived this long without any new/different laws concerning it. Let it continue as it has been until the Supreme Court declares fetuses parasites/people and the fetus-eating/sanctity of life - begins/is upheld.

[Quelesh]

Daniels should veto the bill just before the end of the session tomorrow night, so that his veto can't be overridden.

However, if he vetoed it and then ran for president, he'd have no chance in the Republican primary.

[The Andromeda Islands]

Mitch Daniels? President? Those three words don't belong in the same sentence. The architect of the Bush economy does not deserve to be President.

Jesse Jackson has a better chance of being elected Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

[Lacadaemon]

of course.

but there is no chance that the indiana legislature would go along with the state paying for abortions (and its doubtful that the people of indiana would vote for him if he ran on state funding for abortions).

even if it is the by-far wisest thing that he could do to save the state money.

Sure. The hypocrisy from all quarters about this bothers me. I wish people would start thinking things through.

[Maurepas]

Mitch Daniels? President? Those three words don't belong in the same sentence. The architect of the Bush economy does not deserve to be President.

Jesse Jackson has a better chance of being elected Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

Hey, don't sell Jesse Jackson short, I'm sure the KKK is looking for a PR boost. I mean, the GOP elected Michael Steele,

[Ashmoria]

Mitch Daniels? President? Those three words don't belong in the same sentence. The architect of the Bush economy does not deserve to be President.

Jesse Jackson has a better chance of being elected Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

someone has to be the nominee.

it cant be donald trump or michele bachmann.

so why not daniels? he has no more disqualifications than mitt romney has.

[Occupied Deutschland]

someone has to be the nominee.

it cant be donald trump or michele bachmann.

so why not daniels? he has no more disqualifications than mitt romney has.

Plus he has two major qualifications.
1- Not Donald Trump
2- Not Donald Trump's hair-piece

[Conserative Morality]

I was under the impression (could be wrong, because it was with a different nation and a long time ago that I talked with CM about it), but I thought he once was a conservative, as he is 16 now (I think) and therefore younger when he created the nation, he most likely misspelled conservative rather than attempt it as a joke. He was after all a staunch evangelical, I think, and most likely fairly conservative.

Shh! It's ironic, I swear! Listen not to the blasphemer!