”If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”
Renee Ellmers would do herself some good to heed that famous advice from Will Rogers. The congresswoman’s own words of late have done a pretty good job of painting her — according to your perspective — as either (1) a pathological liar, (2) hopelessly incompetent, or (3) psychologically unbalanced.
On key issues ranging from federal spending, ObamaCare, amnesty for illegal aliens, and late-term abortion, Ellmers has been busy throwing supporters under the bus and dishing out a steady combo of half-truths, exaggerations and outright lies.
She’s been caught so many times contradicting herself and LYING that you’d think someone who cared about her would advise her to stop talking and go seek professional help.
The most appalling example of her fast-and-loose handling of the truth has come with this late-term abortion bill that just got tossed by the House leadership
. Ellmers ran in 2010, 2012, and 2014 with the strong backing of pro-life activists and groups across North Carolina and the nation. She’s mouthed platitudes in her campaign literature about being pro-life.
But a few weeks ago, we got a hint — thanks to a leak from a closed-door GOP caucus meeting — that Ellmers was trying to convince her GOP colleagues to tell the pro-life movement to take a hike. Then, she put out statements about how she was FOR the ban on late-term abortions. Then, we heard she was helping Planned Parenthood lobby against the ban.
Then, we learn that Ellmers voted FOR this exact same bill, she is now bitching about, back in 2013. Ellmers claimed the 2013 bill was different than this one, but The Weekly Standard called her out on it. Now, she’s slightly altering her story ONE MORE TIME:
The debacle over an abortion bill quickly pulled from the House floor Wednesday didn’t have to happen that way, says Rep. Renee Ellmers, who started the rebellion against the measure to begin with.
“It’s unfortunate the way it played out,” Ellmers, a Republican from North Carolina, told reporters Thursday morning. “I think we’re all just going through some growing pains.”
Ellmers supports banning abortion past the midway point of pregnancy — which is what the bill the House originally planned to pass Thursday would have done. But she wants it tweaked so that women who have been raped don’t have to report it to law enforcement before they can obtain an abortion.
The measure, which leadership still intends to bring for a vote at some point, would ban abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy unless a woman has been raped or her life is in danger.
Ellmers said she’s pushing for removing the reporting requirement because it’s hard on women who may not want to notify law enforcement. A majority of rapes in the country go unreported, she noted. And now that Republicans have majority in both the House and Senate, any legislation they pass must be carefully vetted to make sure it’s not viewed as harsh by women or young people, she said.
“When we come off as harsh and judgmental, we stop that conversation and we’ve got to learn to be doing a better job,” she said.
But Ellmers has already voted for the bill before, when the House passed it in June 2013. She dismissed that vote, saying she didn’t realize at the time that it contained the reporting requirement because it “wasn’t evident in the base language of the bill.” […]
Not evident? Here’s the text of the 2013 bill. As hard copy, it’s likely no more than 3 to 4 pages long. Not exactly an intense read. I found the reporting requirement right away:
[…] (A)Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the abortion shall not be performed or attempted, if the probable post-fertilization age, as determined under paragraph (1), of the unborn child is 20 weeks or greater.
(B) Subject to subparagraph (C), subparagraph (A) does not apply if—
(i)in reasonable medical judgment, the abortion is necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, but not including psychological or emotional conditions; or
(ii)the pregnancy is the result of rape, or the result of incest against a minor, if the rape has been reported at any time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency, or if the incest against a minor has been reported at any time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency or to a government agency legally authorized to act on reports of child abuse or neglect.[…]
“The congresswoman’s own words of late have done a pretty good job of painting her — according to your perspective — as either (1) a pathological liar, (2) hopelessly incompetent, or (3) psychologically unbalanced. ”
Whatcha mean, “either”? 🙂
I think the confusion with wingdings like Ellmers happens if we make the (false) assumption that actual ideological principle or “reasoned thought” has anything to do with the “why” behind these kinds of votes or statements or whatever.
She certainly “has” motivations for her actions, but they arent the ones she actually wants to give voice to, like “money”, or “favors”, or “what my boss Boehner tells me to do”…. so, of course, you have to invent a new rationale, which for her, I suppose, is “hard”. She isnt really the sharpest thingee in the tool… place. 🙂
She’s for it ….wait….she’s against it ……..
It’s not the same …….it’s the same ………
I don’t remeber …….. I remeber ………
Ladies and Gentlemen of the second district how the hell did you elect a COMPLETE idiot. She is a shinning example of what’s wrong in Washington DC.
There’s only one thing that makes any sense to explain Ellmers’ serial lying, flip-flops, double-speak and extremely bizarre behavior.
Somebody has promised her something very lucrative. Remember her comment about “needing her paycheck?”
The three choices are NOT mutually exclusive!
Ellmers is now at the top of many people”s hit list for 2016, not just voters in NC2:
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=354508
Renee is beginning to make Bob Ethridge look better. Now that’s a success story!
Heck, she is just Bob Etheridge in drag.
More whining coming from losers. Being for the bill on Monday pays out well. Perks and Benjamins. Then on Wednesday being against the bill pays out well too, sometimes better and the Monday crowd will give you more money to be against the Wednesday crowd, then the Wednesday crowd will lobby you and give you “more” money to be against the Monday crowd so playing one against the other scores big for us politicians. Don’t y’all know anything, there’s money to be made here in DC so don’t you people get in our way. This is how us adults govern you see.
By the way, there’s no money to be scalped from the abortion bills or all these other silly conservative issues that we’re supposed to pretend we care about during election. The banking and energy bills is where the ka-ching ka-ching is to be found. Thanks for helping us get elected now send us more money. Its working out great!
Didn’t you forget the amnesty bill? I am sure Renee ”Judas” Ellmers got her thirty pieces of silver for selling her constituents and the country down the river on that one.
Actions and voting record don’t matter for most of the voting public. The people will vote for Ellmers as long as she says mean things about Obama and sounds conservative in her ads and mailers. Now a primary opponent with a lot of financial backing to get a message across can change that.
A primary opponent does not have to have equal money or even close to it. They just have to have enough to be able to get their message out so that it resonates with voters. Dave Brat’s defeat of the much better financed Eric Cantor showed that. The 2nd district needs its own Dave Brat, and from what I hear, his name may likely be Jim Duncan.
Some national help would be useful. I would like to see the National Right to Life Committee make a special project of taking out Renee Ellmers. Then there is the Club for Growth, a Reaganite PAC that can put big money in a race, and which included Ellmers on its ”Primary My Congressman” list in 2014.
That’s being far too kind to today’s turncoat reptiles. What we need, now, is a “Primary My Lying POS Congressman.”
How many former Tea Party candidates have turned on it, like this lying sack just did? There’s a few, yes?
Can we make them sign a pledge to either keep their campaign promises or get recalled or prosecuted for fraud?
NC doesn’t have a recall process?
Imagine that.