–updated–
Poor Speaker Pelosi and Pres. Obama, the two who helped make Bart a hero. I bet Mr. Obama is doubly glad he went through the political contortions of proffering and signing an executive order against women’s rights for a guy who bailed on him when he found out he was going to be challenged, not only by a strong woman, Connie Saltonstall, but Tea Party activists, too. (They’re claiming victory, by the way.)
But before you assume Connie Saltonstall will be the automatic Democratic nominee, as Marc Ambinder also writes, this is not at all certain at this point, with rumors swirling that the DCCC may choose someone else for the seat.
Mike Allen gives us a preview, mentioning Saltonstall, but gives the real chances to others:
Democrats who could hold the seat include state senator Jim Barcia (a former congressman), Mike Prusi and Gary McDowell, and state representatives Joel Sheltrown and Jeff Mayes.
As for the Tea Party candidate, Allen also reports that Dan Benishek is expected to raise around $100,000 this quarter, even though he had no infrastructure before Stupak’s national media rise.
One person to watch out for is State Rep. Judy Nerat, who is a close Stupak ally. She, like Mr. Stupak, is pro-selective life. Notice that SwingStateProject purposefully omits Ms. Saltonstall, declaring her “too liberal” for the district. That’s where Democrats put women’s rights today, considering them is “too liberal.”
Okay then, if Democrats cannot field a strong women’s rights candidate in a district, we shouldn’t try to win it. Otherwise, whatever 50-state strategy we’ve got will continue a rightward lean for Democrats, turning the Congress even more against us than they are today. If Republicans get in, with right-leaning Democrats in office, no telling what they could do against women.
There is a real effort to make the Stupak seat about the Tea Party discontent, as well as their selective life stance, which puts women’s human rights second. What is missing in the national narrative is the real rage on the left over the rightward tilt under Pres. Obama, with Speaker Pelosi’s help, aided by the utter fecklessness of the progressives and “pro-choice caucus,” which includes carving women’s rights away via health care legislation that is anti-democratic.
I have no idea what it will take for traditional media to understand what’s happening among a serious slice of women inside the Democratic tent, who are revolted by Obama’s executive order, and Speaker Pelosi’s kowtowing to Mr. Stupak in the first place, which was made possible by the lack of purpose of the progressive caucus.
Women’s freedoms are not a bargaining chip. Obama and the Democratic Party’s willingness to sell us out, with even Planned Parenthood joining in, has already made Independents out of some people, with others simply demoralized enough about Obama’s domestic tilt rightward to consider not voting at all.
Interestingly, the issue of women’s rights didn’t stop the Democratic Party from out fundraising Republicans $13 million to their $11 million. I, for one, wasn’t shocked, as women’s rights are becoming marginalized under Pres. Obama and Pelosi’s House. Granted, the Medicaid funding in the health care plan is good, but considering Democrats put together an anti-democratic bill that eventually hits the middle class hard, women too, while taking choice away from everyone through an onerous mandate, I’d say anyone with any libertarian notions is on their own.
But at least Bart Stupak is getting ready to hit the road. Who the Democrats choose to take his place matters, though whether he or she can win in a conservative Catholic district is another matter. But since Stupak was voting against women’s rights it hardly matters, now does it.
“pro-selective life”
Heh. Good way of putting it.
“Good riddance.” Agreed.
Mornin’ Pilgrim.
Well, it’s the truth.
Amen.
I agree also, but, not for the same reasons as you, I’m sure.
: ))
What is missing in the national narrative is the real rage on the left over the rightward tilt under Pres. Obama, with Speaker Pelosi’s help, aided by the utter fecklessness of the progressives and “pro-choice caucus,” which includes carving women’s rights away via health care legislation that is anti-democratic.
Bingo.
Heya Lynnette, good to see you.
I’m telling you, the Democratic Party under Obama and Pelosi are simply clueless about this reality.
The traditional media is even worse.
There is a reason the Dem brand is plummeting, and Independent numbers are rising.
Well than the party may very well face Independent Democratic challengers during the primary’s. I don’t need to tell you that some dems have deep resentment and issues regarding the national leadership.
Hey Iceblinkjm.
Many Dems have earned it; either that or they should just being beaten outright by someone who stands on his/her convictions.
Via Twitter, I’ve heard even more talk about Mike Prusi.
Stupak a hero?
To whom exactly?
Seems to me ol’ Bart got played like a violin by the President. Obama knew the right would demonize any health care plan that didn’t explicitly point out that no federal dollars would be used to fund abortions. like it or not, that’s the reality.
Perhaps the issue of abortion, or, more specifically the repeal of the Hyde amendment should have been dealt with before any administration tried to craft health care legislation. This is a reality that would have existed regardless of who was President, and I doubt that at this time the repeal of Hyde would be likely. It should never have existed in the first place.
I was certain that Obama set this up as a means of killing any bill that contained a public option or drug-reimportation, since he’d already made his deals at the white house, but since the progressive wing of the party really has no legislative clout, or fortitude as the case may be, he was able to use it as a teaching moment for the nation, the ex order being his signature moment to prove that his bill had no funding for abortion.
That being said, I suspect that almost every woman that voted Democratic in ’08 will do the same this year (present company excepted) there simply is nowhere else to go.
That being said, I suspect that almost every woman that voted Democratic in ‘08 will do the same this year (present company excepted) there simply is nowhere else to go.
Only the self-loathing fools will pull the lever for Dems.
Apparently they are legion
Only idiot right wingers wouldn’t. Peace
Anecdotally, JoeCHI, as an fyi… I’ve heard from dozens of women who simply do not plan to vote.
You don’t have to be a right-winger to refuse to be a lemming.
Not voting is voting just the same. Politics is a game of numbers. If the right wing side gets a bigger number than the left wing side they win and the Left loses. Anybody who is so pissed off that they don’t vote and allows the reactionary right wing—as in T-bagger candidates—to come to power is doing a disservice to the republic. Peace
Only problem there is the fact that their is no left to vote for.
there
Then they will allow the GOP to finish what you believe Obama and Pelosi have begun. This is absolute nonsense.
stupak seems to claim its the death threats that got to him so he is leaving. uhhh. stupak got what he wanted and fucked women over and now bailed. i read how pelosi was begging him not to leave as his seat is a tough hold, but hell stupak lost hsi dem and right wing friends by taking on sucha insane role which nearly killed the bill. he lsot pro lifers and pro choicers at home. swingstate has a good list of poss cnadidates- apparently there is a wide range of longtime dems in the district who would be strong-a dn some a re pro choice.
stupak leaving a swing seat in april of 2010 means, like avarosis says, there will be more pressure to pass progressive items – and sometimes the sense of urgenecy of this being your last chance maybe for a while to pass anything is motivation. this si it. a wild many months lay ahead on fin, climate, jobs, dadt etc..
If the Democrats try anything big except passing some banking and Wall Street reform before November they are truly foolish. Peace
the dems would be fools not to try and pass everything they can. from cliate to jobs to state aid relief to ui to fixes to hcr to repealing dadt. dems psuh ahrd now or wait another 20 yrs
I’m sure you won’t be surprised, Imhotep, that new media conservatives aren’t crazy about it.
http://blogometer.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/04/bloggers_poll.php
fyi… I weigh in weekly on this poll.
Financial reform is the perfect issue for the Democrats. Even the T-baggers hate the bankers and Wall Steert. What could be better than to build a coalition of reactionary right wingers and sane Left wingers to defeat the Republicans? Squeeze the corporatist middle into submission. Peace
Dead on about Pelosi, who got what she deserved for backing his play, then trusting he would care one whit about what she and Obama handed him.
Right now, it’s all about Stevens and the Supreme Court.
Taylor: “Women’s freedoms are not a bargaining chip.”
They shouldn’t be, but clearly they are, as are LGBT’s freedoms, among others. I wish I could, but I don’t see any reason to think that’s going to change. T4H, I think you are correct that “dems would be fools not to try and pass everything they can,” but I’m guessing when it comes down to “now” or “wait another 20 yrs,” they’ll fall on the “wait” side. They’ve already been foolish enough to waste a truly “historic” opportunity. Unless it wasn’t a “waste,” but basically doing more or less what they wanted to do.
Related, as in the right movement of Dems:
http://www.openleft.com/
“Long-term trends show Democratic Party moving to the left (+)
by: Chris Bowers
Thu Apr 08, 2010 at 14:38
Ryan Grim and Arhtur Delaney have a must-read article at the Huffington Post about the power struggle within the Democratic Party between progressive Dems and more centrist Dems. If long-term trends are any indication, this is a struggle that Progressives will eventually win.”
Bowers has a follow-up today. I’m skeptical, even if “eventually” is in the 20 year range.
Ah, but as usual, neither Chris Bowers, nor the Huffington Post article, which is terrific (linked to it yesterday), MENTIONS WOMEN’S RIGHTS.
You cannot talk about a party moving “left” when you have an undemocratic health care bill, which also begins a carving out of women’s rights, while the first female Speaker, as well as the President, provide cover for anti women’s rights Dems they didn’t need to pass hcr.
When Democrats get serious about repealing the Hyde Amendment, I’ll believe they’re moving left.
As I’ve also said about the health care bill, it’s not even so much left, as it is against individual independence, over which everyone should be concerned.
I still do not understand your concern about how individual independence is threatened by this health care bill? Under a single-payer universal health care system every citizen would, by law, be required to pay a tax for his or her health care. This bill takes the public in that direction. Peace
Yes, I noticed that omission. The Huffington piece, as Bowers’, leave out what doesn’t fit in the argument Dems are moving left. As I said, I’m skeptical. It would have been more accurate had I said, “highly skeptical.”
BuhBYE, and don’t let the door hit you in da ass on yer way out!