Earlier today, The Foundry wrote about Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich) claim that he and like-minded, pro-life Democrats will work with Republicans to "torpedo healthcare reform unless he gets a vote to strip abortion-related provisions out of the House bill," as reported by The Hill.

That sounded like good news, but in an exclusive Foundry video of a town hall held in Cheboygan, Mich., on Saturday, it appears that Stupak intends to vote for the Democrats' healthcare reform, even if it includes public funding for abortion.

As I have said many times in this blog, there is no such thing as a moderate or conservative Democrat, only liberal Democrats serving in moderate or conservative districts. I have posted several times specifically on Stupak, including this:

The complicated situation, however, is Stupak's:

In the House, U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak, a Menominee Democrat and abortion rights opponent, has told Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., that he and 40 other moderate members of the party could move to block the reform bill if they don't get a chance to vote on an amendment that would make certain federal funds aren't used to pay for abortions

This is softer than many may read. They could block, but that doesn't mean they will block, the legislation. And the exception is that they get to vote on the amendment, not that it passes. As I have mentioned many times before, this is entirely consistent with what is coming out of the Stupak camp off-camera through the dinosaur print media:

It's not make-or-break to his support of the bill ultimately, [Stupak] said. But he wants it considered.

Here's another snippet:

Stupak ... "doesn't oppose a public option," his spokeswoman, Michelle Begnoche , said. "No one issue will dictate his final vote. He will look at the bill in its totality when he makes his decision."

About says it all regarding Stupak. You have to wonder about the game within the game here. 41 purported pro-life Democrats exist that could block the legislation, and all of them are needed. What do you think the odds are that 3 or 4 of the safest ones will peal off from that crowd allowing the other 37 to save face, vote against it to look good to their constituents, but still let the horrible legislation to pass anyway. It's typical modus operindi for Democrats. Lie, cheat, steal. I find that offensive.

The game within the game. Don't. Be. Fooled!

Stupak is a fraud. An enemy of the pro-life movement. Stupak on the surface has some genuine pro-life credentials based on his voting record, including:

• Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)    
• Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)    
• Voted YES on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)    
• Voted YES on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)    
• Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother's life. (Oct 2003)    
• Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)    
• Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)    
• Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)    
• Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)    
• Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)    
• Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)    
• Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)    
• Rated 100% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-life stance. (Dec 2006)    
• Prohibit transporting minors across state lines for abortion. (Jan 2008)