Comments on: Health Care Free For All

By: Health Care Free For All | Taylor Marsh Taylormarsh.Com News …

Health Care Free For All | Taylor Marsh Taylormarsh.Com News … — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 01:26:11 +0000

[...] on the final piece of health care reform. When it passes, it then it goes to the Senate. …This Blog Cancel [...]

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:39:21 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by taylormarsh: White House doesn’t think Stupak exec. order necessary; will do it for 216 or to “pad” vote. http://tinyurl.com/y8tv5hg (video) #hcr #women…

Edit

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:08:51 +0000

…and it’s a good thing you didn’t, Iceblinkjm!

By: lynnette

lynnette — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:04:51 +0000

The Repubs were never going to be bipartisan because there are so few moderates left. They’ve gone so far over to the right it’s ridiculous. I think we need a new progressive movement in this country, JA. I think there is a hunger for it but we have no charismatic progressive leaders that can come up with the funding to run for the Presidency. At least I haven’t seen one. Obama is no progressive – I always thought Hillary was more progressive on domestic issues than Obama was and she really wasn’t all that progressive. They all still rely on corporate donations to run for office – that’s the problem. The hope and change was a marketing tool and it worked well. I’ll tell you, I wish I had the answer but I don’t.

By: Iceblinkjm

Iceblinkjm — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:59:49 +0000

Sorry ladies but us gays didn’t expect shit from Obama or congress in this bill. It took two Clinton’s respectively to get HIV/AIDS services fully funded through Ryan White or the Early Treatment/Care Act. It wouldn’t be a pressing matter if states were not slashing HIV/AIDS services….

By: lynnette

lynnette — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:50:05 +0000

Maybe not, but we’ll never know unless she gets some funding to get started.

By: lynnette

lynnette — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:47:08 +0000

I know what you mean, LL.

By: Lake Lady

Lake Lady — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:41:05 +0000

They are going to have to fight it out all over again.From what I saw during the primaries with many young women being intimadated to even say they were for Hillary I don’t hold out much hope.

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:36:59 +0000

BRAVO for that one. I love it.

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:36:13 +0000

It’s just women over 40 who remember.

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:35:11 +0000

Connie Saltonstall is terrific.

Now that he’s voted yes on the bill, I’d say he’s shored up some things, but his constituents are furious at him.

That’s why the exec. order was such bullshit. He has been getting hate mail & livid calls about stopping health care because of abortion funding WHEN THERE ISN’T ANY FUNDING IN THE BILL.

I think he was bluffing about voting no.

By: Lake Lady

Lake Lady — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:28:52 +0000

What do you want to bet the majority of young women are watching the basketball play offs today because that is what the men in their lives want to watch. They are distracted while their rights are being thrown away.

By: Jane Austen

Jane Austen — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:27:52 +0000

But the problem is lynnette, they say they are progressives and then they get elected, and they cave. My very progressive congressman notified me yesterday he is voting for this bill, regardless of what he maintained he was willing to fight for. So who do you believe? Obama was no different–he sold the American electorate on “hope and change.” I’m still trying to figure out what has changed. He was going to be bipartisan. How many repubs are voting for this bill?

By: Lake Lady

Lake Lady — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:26:51 +0000

he is Micheal Moore’s rep.

By: Lake Lady

Lake Lady — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:25:40 +0000

So sad…so true. we have no organizations they have all been co opted.

By: cmugirl

cmugirl — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:24:11 +0000

And Stupak’s district is pretty conservative. It’s mostly rural (while some parts have money – people with second homes on the lakes) and Stupak was the first Dem elected from there ever (or in a while). It’s really a Republican district. The only reason it has some Dem principles is that is a largely unionized district as well.

His primary challenger really doesn’t stand a chance.

By: Lake Lady

Lake Lady — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:23:38 +0000

*Waves* back at ya Wonk the Vote

By: guyski

guyski — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:22:39 +0000

Comparing his executive order from Jan 2009 to the one he will soon be signing. Appeasement referring to Stupak. An odd contradition?

By: lynnette

lynnette — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:18:58 +0000

You’re right, Taylor.

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:17:41 +0000

Unfortunately, Lynette, hoisting Stupak as some kind of hero reasserts the right leaning segment of the Dem Party, while humiliating the pro choice caucus.

Remember Nancy Pelosi when we talk about “electing more women.”

The truth is that women have no strong champion in politics today.

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:15:56 +0000

I want whatever Ms. Baldwin is smoking.

We can’t even protect women!

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:15:19 +0000

You’re talking about the Global Gag Order, guyski, yes?

By: djjl

djjl — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:14:38 +0000

Yes, it surely did. In the back room as they made their selection.

By: Jane Austen

Jane Austen — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:11:43 +0000

HA HA HA HA!!! Do you really think he has cajones?

By: lynnette

lynnette — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:09:33 +0000

This should be a giant wake up call to pro choice advocates. Stupak and his crowd claim to be pro life, but only when it involves abortion. They were willing to oppose health care for millions of people, including children with pre-existing conditions, if they didn’t get their way with the abortion issue. So let this be a lesson. We have to organize for and contribute to pro choice candidates, including the woman who is running against Stupak in the next primary. And boy am I going to donate to her! We need to work toward electing more women to Congress, period. No more Conservadems. If Bart Stupak sets the status quo for Democrats, I will no longer be one. This is scary stuff when a Democratic President is willing to go down this road. I listened to Howard Dean and he seemed to think that this was a fig leaf to save face but somehow I don’t feel reassured.

By: guyski

guyski — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:08:24 +0000

Appeasement. Using this definition:

to yield or concede to the belligerent demands of (a nation, group, person, etc.) in a conciliatory effort, sometimes at the expense of justice or other principles.

By: Wonk the Vote

Wonk the Vote — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:08:15 +0000

LL, *waves* Since you got that from me, I’d just like to add that Stupakistan didn’t start on March 21, 2010… it has it’s roots in May 31, 2008. That is all.

By: Jane Austen

Jane Austen — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:05:58 +0000

I feel like crying. Women are really right back where we started. But so many don’t realize it. There’s a black cloud hanging over us and I do mean it. Those who oppose choice are feeling more and more emboldened now. And just maybe President Obama shouldn’t count on my vote in 2012.

By: Joyce Arnold

Joyce Arnold — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:05:31 +0000

By the way, the “pro-gay” provisions Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) had hoped to include in the health care / insurance reform didn’t survive. Baldwin still had hopes until Thursday of this week.

By: Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:05:20 +0000

There is no way DeGrette was going to stand up on it.

What Dems see is an exec. order that doesn’t do anything, except repeat what’s in the Senate bill.

DeGrette’s “pro choice caucus” has been proven toothless.

Wouldn’t it be delicious if Obama didn’t put the exec. order forward after the bill comes out of reconciliation?!

Hey, it’s the Chicago way.