Facebook Commentary: September 2015, Late-term Abortion and Planned Parenthood

Several Facebook posts by Michael “Vass” Vasquez, from September 9 – 10, 2015.

    Sept. 9, 2015 @ 5pm

Rep. Richard Hanna

“As I sit listening to the Congressional hearing on Planned Parenthood, which I know many will never watch regardless of their position on the issue, I must wonder if Rep Richard Hanna has watched this in its totality?

Will this hearing finally allow him to clarify why he sides with North Korea and China in allowing abortions of babies up to 6 months in the womb – a practice the constituents he is supposed to be obligated to represent oppose.

Will Rep Hanna finally choose to return the political donations from Planned Parenthood (which receives federal funding to start with) as it enacts ethically questionable behaviour that the constituents of the NY-22 oppose?

Will Rep. Richard Hanna finally and clearly explain why he consistently has voted in favor of late-term abortion and federally funding Planned Parenthood which his constituents oppose, even as the fact that the services it supplies are more readily and widely available – in his district and across the nation – with the exception of abortion?

Lastly I wonder, does Rep. Richard Hanna and the Democrat supporters of Planned Parenthood understand that in removing federal funding to an ethically challenged organization we do not close it’s doors or prevent it’s continuation. Instead we only abide by the will of the people in not paying for an act many feel is barbaric, or supporting an ethically challenged proses with taxpayer funding.

I know that the staff of Rep. Hanna will read this, as they read all my posts and articles related to Rep Hanna. I call on them to have my congressman step up and do his job by speaking to the people directly and clearly – not via staffers as he hides from voters over the Congressional break.

But we will see. – Michael Vasquez”

    Sept 10, 2015 @ 12:20am

“Did you notice, in the House Judicial Committee hearing, that the very same people defending Planned Parenthood – citing that the law allows for the abortion of 5 month old babies in the womb (otherwise called a fetus) and must be followed and unchanged – are the very same people that defend the selective violation of law with regard to immigration and sanctuary cities (as just 2 examples).

I would ask these supporters, especially the Democrats (and the single Republican) in Congress, why they are so adamant that one law must forever be immutable while at the same time other laws are considered entirely arbitrary and/or mandatory to change (especially with regard to it’s political benefit to a singular political Party)?

Such action is either a massive and nearly Party-based disease of the mind, or indicative of the worst kind of political pandering, in my opinion.”

By Michael “Vass” Vasquez

“This is keeping me up at night. Viable vs. Born Alive. This is what Rep. Richard Hanna voted for, against the wishes of the NY-22. Watch this clip and tell me if the question is too hard to understand. Better yet, if you are in the NY-22, please ask Rep. Richard Hanna to explain why this is a difficult question to answer.” – By Michael Vasquez, Sept 10, 2015 @ 12:58an

Rep. Richard Hanna

“Credit where it is due: While I disagree (like the majority of Americans historically) with late-term abortions, ie at 5 months in the womb or 20 weeks as some like to categorize it, I will give credit to the supporters of abortion that have held steadfast that babies capable of living outside the womb should be aborted. They at least are will to be accountable for their views, as I am for mine.

But, after the Judiciary Committee hearing in Congress yesterday, there has been a singular voice absent from the debate. Rep. Richard Hanna, remains silent. I again single him out because he is the sole Republican to receive donations from Planned Parenthood (that he has yet to return though the organization is under scrutiny for possible ethical violations) that he voted to fund, and is a supporter of late-term abortions (as he has voted since 2011).

Where is his voice in this discussion? Where is his justification for supporting late-term abortions his constituents oppose? Where is his defense of funding an organization that may be ethically challenged, via the taxes of his constituents that do not wish to fund this organization? Where is his comment – for or against – the Committee hearing yesterday?

Rep. Hanna is OBLIGATED to represent the people that elected him. Thus, I believe, he is OBLIGATED to discuss this obviously significant and controversial issue with his constituents, on both sides of the issue. Instead he has remained, all summer long, out of reach of voters and the public – sending his staff while he hides. That is wrong.

If he is willing to vote against the will of the public, he should be equally bold enough to stand up and defend his view. If he is willing to take the money to help get re-elected, he should be able to explain why he should keep that money. He should have conviction in his votes, or else why is he in Congress? Rep. Hanna, I call on you again to speak to the public. It is your job after all.” – By Michael “Vass” Vasquez, September 10, 2015, @ 4:35pm

About the Author

Michael Vass
Born in 1968, a political commentator for over a decade. Has traveled the U.S. and lived in Moscow and Tsblisi, A former stockbroker and 2014 Congressional candidate. Passionate about politics with emphasis on 1st and 2nd Amendments.

Be the first to comment on "Facebook Commentary: September 2015, Late-term Abortion and Planned Parenthood"

Thank you for lending your voice. We appreciate hearing what you have to say.

%d bloggers like this: