# Failed Democrat Pol Sues Critics Over Election Loss **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 25, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757 "2011-10-25T18:31:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/1 "2011-10-25T18:31:21Z")
> **[Failed Democrat Pol Sues Critics Over Election Loss](https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/10/24/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss)** > > A federal judge, who formerly headed a chapter of Planned Parenthood, allows a lawsuit against a pro life group to move forward. Oh this is hilarious. "When voters in Ohio’s 1st Congressional District threw Democrat Steve Driehaus out of office after only one term, he did not bow out gracefully. No, he decided to get even. So he did what anyone does in today’s culture: he sued somebody. Charging that its activities contributed to his defeat and thus to his “loss of livelihood,” Driehaus is suing the Susan B. Anthony List, a group that supports pro-life candidates for Congress and which has been one of the leading and most effective organizations involved in the fight to cut off federal funding to Planned Parenthood." The judge didn’t throw the suit out. Why? Maybe because he is the former president and director of the Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/2 "2011-10-25T18:58:23Z")
First off, an opinion piece, an editorial. The author of the piece is a member of Let Freedom Ring, which advise us that "Our mission is to promote “Constitutional Government, Economic Freedom and Traditional Values.” We sometimes say that Let Freedom Ring operates “at the intersection of faith and politics.” And the Institute for Liberty! Well, that’s gotta be good, they are for Liberty! “Help us stop Big Government’s war on small business and our economy.” And the plus side, he also works for Fox. And this just in! Right wing shill opposes Planned Parenthood! We gasp. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/3 "2011-10-25T19:04:57Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > First off, an opinion piece, an editorial. The author of the piece is a member of Let Freedom Ring, which advise us that "Our mission is to promote “Constitutional Government, Economic Freedom and Traditional Values.” We sometimes say that Let Freedom Ring operates “at the intersection of faith and politics.” And the Institute for Liberty! Well, that’s gotta be good, they are for Liberty! “Help us stop Big Government’s war on small business and our economy.” > > And the plus side, he also works for Fox. > > And this just in! Right wing shill opposes Planned Parenthood! > > We gasp. Does that mean it didn’t happen? The Democrat who got thrown out didn’t sue? The judge that didn’t dismiss the case is not a former director of Planned Parenthood? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/4 "2011-10-25T19:13:15Z")
He is suing for defamation over a billboard that included what he maintains was false information. The billboard was in fact halted from being displayed pending resolution of legal challenges. He dropped the suit at the time, but is now picking it back up. The question is how far a group can go in misleadingly representing a public figures actions during an election campaign. Certainly a reasonable area for the courts to be involved, I would think. One final note - in seems that the ACLU of Ohio has sided with SBA List in this matter (not this suit, but a related one). ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/5 "2011-10-25T19:31:07Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Does that mean it didn’t happen? The Democrat who got thrown out didn’t sue? The judge that didn’t dismiss the case is not a former director of Planned Parenthood? Did the SBL lie, distort and grossly misrepresent in order to advance a political agenda? ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/6 "2011-10-25T19:34:17Z")
This sort of thing has to make you glad that we vote by secret ballot. Imagine if we didn’t: it’d only be a matter of time before some defeated pol took it upon his/herself to sue the saps his/her phone campaign coerced into saying they’d vote for him but didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/7 "2011-10-25T20:16:53Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > Did the SBL lie, distort and grossly misrepresent in order to advance a political agenda? It’s SBA. Did it? Can you show me the statement where it did? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/8 "2011-10-25T20:29:50Z")
The SBA was going to put up billboards saying "“Shame on Steve Driehaus! Driehaus voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion.” Since he voted for the Obamacare bill, they were right. [http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/4065-obamacare-abortion-funding-has-begun](http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/4065-obamacare-abortion-funding-has-begun) So much for President Obama’s executive order banning federal funding of abortions under ObamaCare. Two states, Pennsylvania and Maryland, have now accepted federal funds for high-risk insurance pools, and both offer significant abortion coverage. [http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/12/white-house-threatens-to-veto-bill-prohibiting-abortion-funding-in-obamacare/](http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/12/white-house-threatens-to-veto-bill-prohibiting-abortion-funding-in-obamacare/) The Obama administration has threatened to veto legislation that would prevent federal funding for abortion, including through coverage programs created by Obamacare. During the debate over Obamacare, the president promised that no taxpayer dollars would be used to pay for abortions under the bill. Unfortunately, this is not the way things have played out,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said at the Values Voter Summit last week. > **[FRC Action: Obama Administration Approves First Obamacare Abortion Funding](http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/frc-action-obama-administration-approves-first-obamacare-abortion-funding-98363859.html)** > > /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Family Research Council Action responded today to a discovery made by the National Right to Life Committee that the Obama... WASHINGTON, July 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ – Family Research Council Action responded today to a discovery made by the National Right to Life Committee that the Obama Administration has given federal approval to send Pennsylvania $160 million in taxpayer funds which will directly fund abortions through President Obama’s recently enacted health care law. This is the first known instance of direct federal funding of abortion through what is called the “high risk insurance pools.” Pennsylvania has already received approval from the Obama Administration to use the funds to provide abortions to pool participants; the abortion funding is available immediately. [http://www.pop.org/content/does-obamacare-fund-abortion-let-us-count-ways](http://www.pop.org/content/does-obamacare-fund-abortion-let-us-count-ways) # The problem was that the Senate version of the bill contained no abortion restrictions. But instead of putting pressure on the Senate Democrats to add the Stupak-Pitts Amendment to their version of the bill, the Obama administration chose instead to place enormous pressure on the House to take this language out of their bill. In the end, nearly all the House Democrats, including the small “pro-life” contingent, did as they were told. As a result, there are no restrictions against abortion in the bill itself. Wow. So many people Driehaus should sue… ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/9 "2011-10-25T20:32:06Z")
Will you at least concede that he filed this suit before the election, not after he lost? > **[Driehaus suit against SBA List moves forward](https://www.politico.com/story/2010/10/driehaus-suit-against-sba-list-moves-forward-044129)** > > Rep. Steve Driehaus can go forward with his complaint against the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List, a federal judge ruled Monday, leaving the Ohio Elections Commission to decide in the days before the midterm elections whether President... ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/10 "2011-10-25T20:40:15Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > Will you at least concede that he filed this suit before the election, not after he lost? Huh? He dropped the suit before the election. This is a new one. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/11 "2011-10-25T20:49:30Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Huh? He dropped the suit before the election. This is a new one. It’s the same issue though. He claims that SBA lied (or was preparing to lie) in a campaign advertisement. This is illegal under Ohio law. He dropped the suit when SBA decided not to put up the billboard and it became clear that the ruling wouldn’t come until election day (or perhaps a few days before). He has now picked it up again, and it seems that some time in August the judge you mentioned ruled that SBA’s claim was in fact a lie. A decent summary is here: [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60475.html](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60475.html). Now you can claim that the judge was wrong, biased, etc. but claiming that Driehaus only sued because he lost is not accurate - he sued before he lost. Now it appears the case moves on, and Driehaus will have to prove that SBA acted with malice when it put up the inaccurate information. I personally don’t have a problem with groups stretching the truth to this degree. I prefer to err on the side of free speech wherever possible. And it’s not like any number of judges stating the obvious (that PPACA doesn’t fund abortions) will change any minds on the matter - too many folks are too strongly wedded to that notion. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/12 "2011-10-25T20:50:16Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > Will you at least concede that he filed this suit before the election, not after he lost? > > [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44129.html](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44129.html) [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/02/judge-allows-ex-rep-to-sue-pro-life-group-over-campaign-season-criticism/](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/02/judge-allows-ex-rep-to-sue-pro-life-group-over-campaign-season-criticism/) “That battle dragged on until, after the election, Driehaus dropped the complaint and instead filed the defamation suit.” How could he have possibly filed the suit that claims “loss of livelihood” before the election? ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/13 "2011-10-25T20:53:30Z")
Politifact disagrees with your conclusion: > **[John Boehner, GOP claims that federal taxpayers will fund Pennsylvania...](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2010/jul/23/john-boehner/john-boehner-gop-claims-federal-taxpayers-will-fun/)** > > As Congress struggled to pass health reforms earlier this year, anti-abortion groups and members of Congress fretted the > [@](#): > > The Obama administration has clearly stated it won’t allow abortion to be covered under the new plans, save for cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. State officials in Pennsylvania and Ohio have insisted their new programs will comply with the federal ban. The high-risk plans in question are designed to cover older people with chronic health conditions rather than the healthy young women most likely to seek elective abortions. I’m siding with them on this one. I think the billboard is a lie. eta: And more: > **[Abortions in Pennsylvania paid for with federal dollars? Not so.](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2010/jul/16/national-right-life-committee/abortions-pennsylvania-paid-federal-dollars-not-so/)** > > Anti-abortion groups have long been warning that Democrats would sneak federal abortion funding through the back door in > [@](#): > > Getting back to our rating: The National Right to Life Committee said the Obama administration will give Pennsylvania $160 million to pay for health insurance plans that cover “any legal abortion.” If we had looked at this case before the Obama administration issued its statements, we might have been a little torn. While the Pennsylvania proposal referred to statutes about legal abortion, it also said that “elective abortions are not covered,” and that is potentially contradictory. But it’s important to keep in mind that this plan is intended to cover older people who have health problems, not young, healthy women who might seek abortions, and that the regulations are being created quickly. In short, we don’t see pre-meditated intent to cover elective abortion. And as soon as the issue of abortion was raised, the Obama administration stated that the plans would not be allowed to cover elective abortions and that forthcoming regulations would reflect that. Given those assurances, we rate the National Right to Life Committee’s statement False. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/14 "2011-10-25T20:56:13Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Politifact disagrees with your conclusion: > > [PolitiFact | John Boehner, GOP claims that federal taxpayers will fund Pennsylvania abortions simply untrue](http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/jul/23/john-boehner/john-boehner-gop-claims-federal-taxpayers-will-fun/) > > I’m siding with them on this one. I think the billboard is a lie. “The high-risk plans in question are designed to cover older people with chronic health conditions rather than the healthy young women most likely to seek elective abortions.” – yet they do cover elective abortions. And are funded by federal money under Obamacare. QED. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/15 "2011-10-25T20:59:29Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > – yet they do cover elective abortions. And are funded by federal money under Obamacare. QED. And they’ve said that they’ll comply with rules prohibiting them from funding an elective abortion with taxpayer money. > [@](#): > > After the anti-abortion groups made the charge, the Obama administration was quick to say that it had not yet put forward formal regulations for the state plans, and that it would include restrictions so that abortion would only be covered if it met the tests of a well-known restriction known as the Hyde amendment. The Hyde amendment, which traditionally applies to federal dollars used in the Medicaid health plan for the poor, forbids abortion except in the cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. > > Pennsylvania officials said their plan never intended to cover elective abortion – hence the “elective abortions are not covered” language. The Pennsylvania Insurance Department released a sharp statement after getting questions from PolitiFact and other news outlets: > > "This program will provide much-needed assistance for the sickest of the sick. The likelihood that any of those covered will seek abortion services is remote, but if they do need such services, they will have to pay for them out their own pocket. (from my above cite) What more do you want? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/16 "2011-10-25T21:02:36Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > And they’ve said that they’ll comply with rules prohibiting them from funding an elective abortion with taxpayer money. They say a lot of stuff. But the facts say otherwise. There is a plan, funded by federal money under Obamacare. It does cover abortions. To say “it was designed for older people” doesn’t mean that there won’t be younger people covered by it. Of course, if there is explicit language in the coverage contract that says abortion is not covered, please show it and I will withdraw my statement. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/17 "2011-10-25T21:09:01Z")
I just looked at coverage contract for Maryland plan - MHIP. [http://www.marylandhealthinsuranceplan.state.md.us/mhip/attachments/CertificateOfCoverage.pdf](http://www.marylandhealthinsuranceplan.state.md.us/mhip/attachments/CertificateOfCoverage.pdf) look on page 54. Abortions are covered. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/18 "2011-10-25T21:09:35Z")
And yet, a federal judge disagrees with you… This whole “issue” is bullshit anyways. Federal money already goes to abortion. Money is fungible. I guarantee you that there have been women on WIC that have used federal money for abortions. There have certainly been women on unemployment that used that money for an abortion. There are people that have used their EIC or some other tax rebate for an abortion. Hell, I would be very surprised if there weren’t women who used their $300 Bush stimulus check on an abortion. The fact is, there is nothing in PPACA that funds abortions. They fund health-care plans, and these plans are required by law not to use the federal dollars for abortion services. Until you, or SBA, shows me one case where this rule was abrogated, the billboard was a lie. Even so, I think they have the right to put it up, because their stupidity is not enough to override the free speech concerns, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/19 "2011-10-25T21:11:34Z")
But…but the National Right To Life Committee says they’re paying for abortions! So obviously Rep. Driehaus voted for that! It’s hilarious! Or a pathetic distortion. On the other hand, if politicians begin hauling into court anyone who grossly distorts or falsifies their record with the intent to deceive voters (and if they themselves are subject to lawsuits for doing so), the dockets will be jammed full and murderers and rapists will roam free. Personally I am rather puzzled over a mailing I just received from a Democratic Party organization, claiming that Republicans in the House voted to end Medicare. The mailing includes a push poll asking if I support such iniquity (I voted for the option putting all elderly people in FEMA camps) and assuring me that “Leader Pelosi”\* will fight to her dying breath to prevent evil from flourishing. \*I swear that’s how the letter referred to her. “Leader Pelosi” - how 1984. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2011, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757/20 "2011-10-25T21:12:57Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > And yet, a federal judge disagrees with you… > > This whole “issue” is bullshit anyways. Federal money already goes to abortion. So if it does, and the Dem congressman voted for Obamacare that directs that money to abortion, how was what SBA List put up a lie? > [@](#): > > The fact is, there is nothing in PPACA that funds abortions. They fund health-care plans, and these plans are required by law not to use the federal dollars for abortion services. Until you, or SBA, shows me one case where this rule was abrogated, the billboard was a lie. See my post right above about the Maryland plan. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/failed-democrat-pol-sues-critics-over-election-loss/600757.md?page=2)