extensive update below
TM-DC podcast
Listen now!
“To pretend that now the House has passed this bill is real progress – it’s at the expense of women’s access to reproductive rights,” Ms. Coakley said in an interview on WTKK-FM, a Boston radio station. She is currently the frontrunner in the race. – Candidates in Mass. Senate Race Spar Over Stupak Measure
The above quote is similar to what Martha Coakley said in the interview we did last night. She made it clear that if she’d been in the House she simply could not have voted for the bill, because of the Stupak amendment. Coakley also said that she wasn’t going to criticize anyone else for their vote, but that’s just how she saw it.
Martha Coakley stands in direct contrast to Nancy Pelosi and many others, who thought forwarding a bad health care bill was better than getting it right in the first place. You simply cannot eviscerate women’s civil rights, hoping you can change it later. You might get the chance, but what if you simply embolden those on the right? As a Democrat, you’ve changed everything and for what?
That evidently doesn’t phase Alan Khazei, the founder of the non-profit City Year, and Steven Pagiluca, Boston Celtics co-owner, Coakley’s challengers, both of whom would have supported the House bill.
Mr. Capuano, her opponent, in the Times article says he thinks that Coakley’s stance on Stupak is “manna from heaven” for his campaign. Capuano thinks that it’s “realism” to cave to the idea of Stupak, which is devastating to women’s health care. But wait! Now that he’s seen the shock waves from Stupak passing as part of the House bill, he’s flip flopped.
This is what I’m talking about when it comes to Martha Coakley. It doesn’t take a finger in the wind for her to decide what is right.
The late Sen. Ted Kennedy would be proud to have Martha Coakley, the current attorney general of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, take up where he left off, especially on health care. Ms. Coakley is sharp, frank and well qualified, reminding me of another female, whom I don’t dare mention for fear of what might ensue. The election is Dec. 8th. So if you know someone in Massachusetts, send out the word.
I wrote about many of the terrific women who have recently stood up against Stupak over at Huffington Post today. …and I’m not talking about Sen. Claire McCaskill, who had to see which way the wind was blowing before she came out strongly against Stupak.
Martha and I had a great conversation. An important one, because it’s clear after what we are experiencing, first with the House, but now the Senate with people like Ben Nelson, we all need to make sure that when strong, pro civil rights women run for office that we’re behind them. That goes for feminist men as well. Ones that also won’t invite the religious hierarchy into the process and let them write, or at the very least, okay legislation, especially when women’s civil rights are at stake.
There was also another conversation going on today on a similar subject. This one over at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., where women’s groups let Administration officials know that they weren’t happy about where things stood after Speaker Pelosi invited the Catholic Bishops in to make sure the Stupak amendment got an up or down vote. Via Jake Tapper:
White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, senior advisor Valerie Jarrett and Domestic Policy Council director Melody Barnes, health care reform czar Nancy-ann DeParle and other White House officials met with a dozen officials from liberal women’s and abortion right’s groups this afternoon where they had a “frank exchange,” in the words of one attendee. …
“Frank exchange.” I bet.
Comments are closed.