Skip to main content

Special book offer for donors on Giving Tuesday. Learn More 👉

Healthcare and Twitterverse

March 22nd, 2010 | 1 min read

By Andrew Walker

Aside from watching the whole debacle play out last night, my computer screen was toggling in between Twitter and Facebook.

Hunter Baker had a few of my personal favorites from Twitter: "Bart Stupak is now eating that bowl of stew. Birthright in Obama's trophy case."


"In other words, don't expect a socialist to BE something other than a socialist." [I'm not sure if this is meant for Stupak or not, regardless, it's funny].

Baker has nailed it and with this video now circulating, we're all left asking, "Seriously?" How did we not become aware of this until now? Phyllis Schlafly thinks that Stupak exposes the myth of the "Pro-Life" Democrat (Gene Taylor being the exception, a "Blue Dog" from Mississippi). Always looking for some political capital, Stupak's opponent, Dan Benishek, is already plotting. We can complain, but the never-ending beauty of democracy brings with it a charge that thousands have died for: If you don't like him, vote!

The saddest part of the debate came when Stupak appeared to be arguing against his own initial amendment. His allegiance had totally changed. This raises the question of whether standing on principle truly exists in the United States government.

Andrew Walker

Andrew T. Walker is an Associate Professor of Christian Ethics at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.