AP: House Dems Bypassing Stupak Faction
Tweet
I sure hope so.
House Democratic leaders Thursday abandoned a long struggle to strike a compromise on abortion in their ranks, gambling that they can secure the support for President Barack Obama’s sweeping health care legislation with showdown votes looming as early as next week.
More: Bart Stupak, Nancy Pelosi
29 Responses to “AP: House Dems Bypassing Stupak Faction”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
good, less women dying of stupak is always better.
Obama and the Democrats are starting to act like they have a spine. I suspect it has something to do with Plouffe being back in the fold. In my opinion Axelrod doesn’t have what it takes to deal with the Republicans and corporate-owned media. He is, in a word, overrated! If the Dems do not lose the House and Senate this year they will have Plouffe to thank for that favor.
“I’ll show them! I’ll go on Fox and Friends”-Bart the whore
But without the Stupak faction who’s left for Pelosi to use her amazing bribing powers on?
“Bribing”. LOL.
Yes, nobody in congress has ever negotiated for a vote, EVAH!
When her ‘amazing bribing powers’ holds up tally for hours after voting, while they take a party member behind the scenes and twisted his arm until he changed his vote, then and only then will she hold a candle to Tom DeLay.
I remember watching that particular vote on the MMA and remember the sound being off for a quite a while on CSpan when one wag of a congressman asked ‘Is there a doctor in the house? I think someone’s arm is being broken.” Good times.
Bribing powers? When Repubs were in charge and Tom DeLay leading the House, corporations were literally writing legislation. That’s right! With Republicans in charge the middle man was cut out of the bribing process. The lobbyist handed DeLay the campaign check and DeLay handed the lobbyist the pen and simply allowed the corporation to write the bill, hand it back to DeLay when done, and DeLay and the GOP voted to pass it—pass it, period! THAT is bribery—cash for favors, straight up!!!
So the killing will not only continue, but people who are opposed to it will have to pay for it!
Yippee!!
America – what a country !
Bless your heart, where were you during the run up to the Iraq War? I bet you were right there in the streets, wielding a giant puppet. Good times, hunh?
Silly abanterer. Don’t you realize that life is only sacred before birth? After that it’s kill or be killed.
I suppose Frank means we should do things the way God intended: we should all pay for poor women’s emergency room visits after botched coathanger abortions.
a) Death is not what I am opposed to. I am not a pacifist, nor I am an opponent of the death penalty. I believe in the right to be born.
b) The “coat hanger” abortion stories were just that – urban legends started by Bill Baird, one of the early pro – abortion activists, who years later, admitted that he made up that story as grist for the pro – abortion propaganda mill. The number of abortions that are actually related to life and death situations, or rape or incest, amount to less than 3 per cent of all abortions.
But this is not about the legality of abortions. This is about the idea that over 50% of Americans oppose abortions on demand. This is about the idea that the Hyde Amendment may be overthrown without a debate. Once again, this is about “mobocracy” versus democracy.
The Democrats could have made Medicare and Medicaid easier to obtain. The Democrats could have subsidized childhood immunizations. The Democrats could have supported interest free loans for catastrophic care.
But, nooooooooooo!!! They had to have ersatz socialized medicine, and to make it even more indigestible, they want to add government funded abortions.
You will fail, as you should.
The “coat hanger” abortion stories were just that – urban legends started by Bill Baird, one of the early pro – abortion activists, who years later, admitted that he made up that story as grist for the pro – abortion propaganda mill. The number of abortions that are actually related to life and death situations, or rape or incest, amount to less than 3 per cent of all abortions.
Really, the facts don’t bear you out:
Link
If one reads books about crime published in the 50s and 60s, they very often mention that aside from doctors operating for cash, very often someone who does abortions illegally could be classified as a sexual sadist.
Hey, that’s an idea, make abortion illegal so that sexual sadists have something to do to make money!
This is about the idea that over 50% of Americans oppose abortions on demand. This is about the idea that the Hyde Amendment may be overthrown without a debate. Once again, this is about “mobocracy” versus democracy.
Yup, they’re going to vote it out of existence and they would’ve gotten away with it if if weren’t for interfering senior citizens like you, Frank DiSilly.
BTW, somethings we don’t put to a majority vote, like civil rights, otherwise, civil rights wouldn’t have been possible in the South where you can bet garbage to doornails the majority of the population would’ve opposed them.
Frank: If all abortions were made illegal tomorrow, in your opinion, what should the criminal penalty be for a woman who gets an abortion? No dodging, no hey-look-over-there. Straight up: A woman commits the criminal act of getting an illegal abortion. You’re in chagrge of deciding the penalty. What is her sentence in the Court of Frank? How many years in prison? Life? The death penalty? What is it?
This is about the idea that over 50% of Americans oppose abortions on demand.
So the government ought to govern via polls?
Once again, this is about “mobocracy” versus democracy.
Right, democracy when it’s something cons want, mobocracy otherwise.
Death is not what I am opposed to.
That is obvious. You are obviously pro-death.
The “coat hanger” abortion stories were just that – urban legends
Unbelievable pro-death, anti-life bullshit, as Dark Avenger points out below.
This is about the idea that the Hyde Amendment may be overthrown without a debate.
This is flatly untrue in all particulars: the absence of Stupak language in the bill would not overthrow the Hyde Amendment, and the idea that there has been no debate is patently ludicrous. If, after months and months of debate the people’s elected representatives vote in the majority to pass a bill that flushes Stupak, so be it.
Once again, this is about “mobocracy” versus democracy.
Utter, utter, bullshit.
But, nooooooooooo!!! They had to have ersatz socialized medicine.
But noooooo, they actually had to have a plan that would actually improve coverage and provide a mechanism to control costs!
You will fail, as you should.
I will file that with all your other predictions, which so far have been pretty reliably wrong.
Frank,
I’m a little confused by your post.
In your own words, what’s the difference between “ersatz socialized medicine” and programs like Medicare and Medicaid? From your post, you don’t appear to have any problem with these programs and wouldn’t have any problem with their expansion.
What do you mean by “ersatz socialized medicine” and how, in your mind, does this square with Medicare?
Making fun of my name earns you no points , and, in this case, ends my participation in this thread. There is no mention of coat hangers or emergency rooms in that story, now , is there…
The health bills under consideration now will fail …
I never said Medicare and Medicaid were NOT ersatz socialized medicine did I?
But, making fun of me seems to have a priority over saying something substantive, so I’ll try another thread.
Reload the echo chamber…
In your ideal world with abortion illegal, what would be the criminal penalty for a woman convicted of getting an abortion?
Rats!
Now that he’s taken his toys and gone home (or at least to another thread), I can’t ask him about how he can support Medicare while still railing on about “ersatz social medicine”.
It kind of reminds me of those quaint little old ladies from the tea bag protests who screamed on and on about socialized medicine while holding placards stating “keep your hands off my Medicare”.
Why do I even try?
I’m not making fun of you, Frank. (Dennis is another story). I genuinely would like anti-abortion rights people to answer that question for me. NO ONE ever has. Here are the questions I would, in all seriousness, like answered:
1. Should abortion be defined as murder in the literal criminal sense of the word?
2. If yes, then wouldn’t it, by definition, be premeditated 1st-degree murder? No one can argue that they get an abortion in the “heat of passion”. You have to make an appt. and plan ahead.
3. Wouldn’t a woman who paid a Dr. to perform an abortion be guilty of soliciting 1st-degree murder?
4. Wouldn’t aggravating circumstances/depraved indifference be involved (a fetus is a completely helpless victim)?
5. What is the usual criminal penalty for aggravated 1st-degree murder with depraved indifference thrown in? It’s either life in prison or death ,depending on what state you’re in.
6. Right?
Oh, and there’s no statute of limitations on murder; so any woman who has ever gotten an abortion would be subject to prosecution and punishment for soliciting 1st-degree murder, right?
I’m not being a smart-ass. I’m not playing “gotcha”. So I can make sense of your position, I sincerely would like to know your answers to these questions. Or have you even thought it out that far? I have posed them to several of my anti-choice friends and family members. All they do is get agitated and defensive and change the subject. NOT ONE of them has ever answered any of the questions.
Frank? Save Ferris? Yes, even you, Dennis?
My family/friends refusal to answer the questions can lead me to only one logical conclusion: They don’t REALLY think abortion is murder. Because if they did, then wouldn’t the answers be simple, self-evident and straightforward. And wouldn’t the anti-choicers chomping at the bit to answer “Hell, yeah” to all of them. Right?
No, ex post facto laws are not constitutional. But interesting points. Pro-lifers I’ve heard seem to favor cracking down on the providers and being more lenient towards the woman. Sort of like being harder on the pusher than the user.
There is no mention of coat hangers or emergency rooms in that story, now , is there…
Look up what a ‘septic abortion’ is, dipshit, then you can come back to the conversation.
in this case, ends my participation in this thread.
Good, take your contemptible anti-life, anti-woman, pro-pain, pro-sepsis, pro-death bullshit and peddle it elsewhere.
Thanks, Hick. As soon as I read your comment, I said, “Doh!”. Of course, you’re absolutely right about that. But the fact remains that the other questions never get answered. And I see that’s the case here as well. Gee, it’s almost like these guys don’t really believe their own rhetoric…
How the socialized medicine you receive due to our tax dollars treating you these days Frank?