Why aren't Nelson and Stupak's anti-abortion actions labeled 'ideological'?
Can someone explain to me why Rep. Stupak and Sen. Nelson's attacks on a woman's legal reproductive rights are not being called into question over nothing more than their push to inject conservative ideology into the health-care bill? And why are the media not highlighting this at all?
It's a complete and utter media bias against women. Liberals are being portrayed by the media elites as being against the Senate health-care bill on the grounds of ideology because of the exclusion of the public option, but any serious person knows our beef is with the actual legislation of the bill and how it will help Americans. The public option is a tool that could create real competition against the health care insurance industry, and is its own cost-control mechanism. We also loved the Medicare buy-in at fifty five, but that fig leaf which was yanked out from under us -- a fact missing from the Sunday talk shows.
What function does the Stupak amendment or Nelson's anti-abortion compromise actually serve in the implementing of health-care reform for America, except to target the health-care concerns of women across America?
Barbara Boxer's compromise gives states the right to opt out of actually having health-care providers cover abortions and all medical issues that arise for women who deal with this issue. That's a huge step backwards for women in America.
Does allowing all those "pro-life" state legislatures like South Dakota's to completely opt-out of any requirement to offer coverage for abortion sound like an improvement to you? Do we all relish the inevitable, bloody state-by-state abortion battles?
On Meet The Press, David Gregory didn't even bother to have one female on the panel to discuss what is happening to their rights, as Taylor Marsh observed:
Well, as with the late Tim Russert, once again with David Gregory on “Meet the Press,” women are not seen or heard at a time when abortion politics has been at the center of the healthcare debate. (I’ve been covering this reality for years.) That women also pay more for health insurance evidently doesn’t meet the “Meet the Press” standards for being included in the debate. That says it all, not only about the continuing If It’s Sunday, It’s Misogyny...
Yeah, why would the opinion of a woman be needed when talking about abortion rights anyway?
religion is why
For the same reason that the MSM believes that there is a far left in American politics, but seems to label even the most outrageously ideologically insane conservative a "mainstream conservative."
In a sense, though, they're half right: the right in this country has been wholly overrun by John Birch whackjobs.
But there's very little that could truly be called a far left position. You can count the number of elected politicians who call themselves "socialists" on one finger, for instance.
enough for you people? What about Reagan's speechwriter who does the lubricated George Will impression? I am sick of this gender scorecarding from the ideologues on the left fringe.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
with a bunch of chickenshit conformists!
One of my favorite photos during the Bush years was the signing of the Partial Birth Abortion ban. Seven guys and zero woman. Most of the men there were at least 65 except Slick Rick Stantorum. Yep, who needs a woman present when determining their rights.
is intended to be a factual statement
Liberals are being portrayed by the media elites as being against the Senate health-care bill on the grounds of ideology because of the exclusion of the public option
You're a tea bagger, John! You're a closed minded fundie! The media said so!!
Don't like it? Call Bernie Sanders. I'm sure he'll stand up for you.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
So, have we decided to sit out the next election cycle yet?
Or do the Democrats have to use the spiked dildo on us?
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
Once a woman has been impregnated that part of her body then belongs to either the state, her husband, or the man who impregnated her.
It is a way to control a woman’s sexuality and is no different than turning her into a broodmare.
It isn't even religion, just control because we all know a pregnant woman can't possibly make a sound decision about her life and her body - she is pregnant so her hormones are all off kilter.
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
You must be masochistic.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
Perhaps to some, but not everyone who are against abortion. What about children? Do they belong to the state?
That is how many people see fetuses - as children. The state does not OWN them, but they are certainly obligated to protect them.
Handypants writes, "It isn't even religion, just control..."
Right. For many thousands of years, women have had the power of life and death in this matter. This scares the sh*t out of insecure men, and their fear turns to hate and the desire to control women, and therefore (they think) control life.
I am glad that so many modern men have rebelled against this fear-based belief and can accept women as human beings. Even in Iran, lots of young Muslim men are now reacting to a previous attempt by the dictatorship to humiliate dissidents by making them wear women's coverings: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond...
to make a point. Check out the photo at that L.A. Times article!
I respect and admire all you guys on C&L who stand up for women's rights (and gay rights, etc.). It's comforting to know that you exist. *♥*
"Yeah, why would the opinion of a woman be needed when talking about abortion rights anyway?"
Why would it be? If they all of the sudden decided that vascetamies were illegal, would you need to consult a man on the implications of that? I don't think so. Anyone who is informed on the issue can discuss it, regardless of gender. To be honest, I think this whole only women can discuss women's rights is just a cheap tactic since your opposition is traditionally republican males.
Secondly, if you believe abortion is wrong, as I do, it is usually based on the belief that it is a life that is being terminated. Therefore, in that case, I really don't think we need to consult a woman or a man specifically. This is what your opposition believes too. The issue is NOT whether abortion is right or wrong, it is when does life begin. If you see it as life begininning at birth, then you often believe its just an issue of women's rights. If you believe its at conception, then its a matter of that life's rights. As long as you keep on dancing around the REAL issue and mischaracterising the opposition (as they do to the pro choice movement) this issue will never be resolved. But I think most of you don't really care about women's or childrens' rights as much as you enjoy the battle over them.
it would seem you who's doing the dancing around the central issue: the life in question, the fetus, is not able to grow and survive without the mother's body, which makes all the difference in the world when discussing and legislating this issue...
Mischaracterising the opposition? I don't think so. The "pro-life" group (and I use that term loosely) will stop at nothing to push their agenda onto every single person around them. Furthermore, they care nothing of the child once outside of the womb so don't lecture us on who enjoys the battle. Saying life begins at conception is a very simple minded philosophy. Most of us recognize "life" at viability. Basic biology should teach you at least that much. This is an issue of women's rights whether you accept it or not.
then why do they want to force us to carry pregnancies when we have been raped? Why do they want to force us to carry pregnancies inspite of the fact it may be killing us. Why are our babies sh*t out of luck once they're born if we do continue our pregnancies? I am a childhood rape survivor. If "pro-lifers" care so damn much about women and girls, tell me why the RCC excommunicated a 9 year old child for having a life saving abortion following rape?
The answer is that the "pro-life" movement is only pro-forced pregnancy. I am nothing but a potential incubator for a possible child to them. They don't give a rat's patootie about what I or any other woman would go through with a pregnancy, how the birth will affect us, or if we can even provide for the child.
And furthermore, I'll thank you kindly to never lecture me about caring for women's rights. After enduring rape, sexual abuse, and sexual assault as a child and then teenager, after witnessing domestic violence, and then getting into an abusive relationship of my own in my mid 20's, I have spent the last several years comforting, listening, organizing, writing, and fighting tooth and nail for fellow women and girls who have had to deal with the very real impact of misogyny.
I've never seen change without a fire
haven't outlawed abortion yet. Could it be that they really don't care about whether abortion is wrong or right in all truthfulness and just like the battle itself and suckering "pro-lifers" into voting for them?
I've never seen change without a fire
May your Solstice be peaceful and full of love, good friends, and joy! You deserve it! I deeply admire your courage, your honesty, and your humor.
Kate
most wonderful one too! :)
I've never seen change without a fire
Someone tell Stup(id)ak who he's working for...
________________
common sense matters as much as truth
Stupak knows who he's working for. He receives huge donations from the mega churches.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
because everyone's landlords are going to knock off $600 to $1000 a month off the rent so their tenants can pay for Health Insurance and won't have to make babies?
tough one . . how bout no one really gives a shit when all is said and done.
and a Raiders pants come off during tackle is what sells not substance.
Transfusion is a legal medical procedure. If your religion prohibits it, don't have one. Abortion is a legal medical procedure. If your religion prohibits it, don't have one. Any politician seeking to impose their religious beliefs into the politics of the country should get out of politics and mind their own beeswax.
Right now the media would rather talk about the death of Brittany Murphy who I had never heard of until she died.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
"Americas new whiners and cry babys" . .
going after or pushing back?
After 30 years of a well thought out and protracted campaign by the right to have liberals marginalized and devalued as not being real Americans, what did you expect?
Have you really not been paying attention for all this time?
This IDEOLOGICAL fight has been going on for three decades. We've sat back and taken it and taken it and taken it. Our own Party did it to us, when the Clintons fullfilled their goal of making the Democratic Party into GOP-lite. When they won the Presidency...we cheered. When the legislation to unwind fully the Fairness Doctrine and allowed massive media consolidation, we sat quietly. When they "reformed" social services...OUR programs...we sat quiet. When they destroyed the unions...we sat quiet. When they privatized healthcare...we sat quiet.
Now all of sudden we're all shocked to shit about what is going on.
Grow the hell up. You don't get ANYTHING in this country by saying "please...may I...and thank you". You get it by mobilizing, and we've done none of it. We sat in our little playground called the internet, and whined into the echo chamber.
No one gives you change. You MAKE it.
I'm sitting out the next election cycle. We have NO POWER, except for our votes and our money. Figure that out, boys and girls. Make the Democrats PAY. What's gonna happen? Four more years of conservative rule?!? LOLOLOLOL! What the hell do you think we have now? This bill could have been written by conservatives.
If you don't start making it clear to the Democrats....CRYSTAL CLEAR...they will simply keep railroading you. The Unions MUST DEMAND that their memberships SIT OUT THE ELECTION and cut off the money. Don't accept promises. This group of Democrats is only going to lie to you again. They've proven themselves to be untrustworthy. Figure it out...and accept it...and DO SOMETHING about it.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
http://www.wired.com/images/article/full/2008...
Me too!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3147/267719594...
committes, (DNC, DCCC, DSC), or anything else that begins with a D and ends in a C. Too much of progressive/liberal money finances the stupaks and nelsons of the caucus. I live in John Adlers district and he won't get anything from me, ACTBLUE or a worthy/needy candidate will get my money.
I know its hard to believe but it would be worse if we don't vote
Oh, AND PRIMARY CHALLENGES TO EMPTY THEIR COFFERS, not just in 2010 but until they are gone.
Oh, AND PRIMARY CHALLENGES TO EMPTY THEIR COFFERS, not just in 2010 but until they are gone.
I agree with that. At least you understand that incumbents will likely overcome the challenges, but...it will drain their resources and likely cost them their seat in the general election.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
Where were "Head Waiter of the Special Interests" Harry Reid and "Chambermaid Of the Special Interests" Nancy Pelosi over the weekend?
Were they waiting tables and cleaning the homes of the insurance company lobbyists?
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
a $5 Million earmark to update the old officers club in San Francisco's Presidio. Neither the Department of Defense nor the rest of CONgress asked for it.
Glad to see her working for the people again.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
I'm just waking up
The dove is in the dungeon
And the white washed hawks
pedal hate and call it love
Where the wealth's displayed
Thieves and sycophants parade
I like that little poem, but "pedal" should be "peddle," meaning to sell cheaply.
I've been describing to friends for years why "Meet the Press" is a pile of crap- with Russert and now Gregory.
"If it's Sunday, it must be a big steaming pile" is what I always say.
And I agree with the first post- religion is why it isn't discussed appropriately.
Dems know that the amendment won't stand up against a constitutional challenge so why not let it in long enough to get the bill passed (you notice that point was hushed up rather effectively as soon as it was discovered), so leave it, then have it struck down afterward. Republicans' aversion to reading legislation, especially on this bill, is well known . . . so it isn't too hard to slip stuff past them, they're too busy grandstanding to pay attention. Don't be surprised if there's a whole lot more in this bill that is going to give the GOP whiplash when they discover it's there.
I surely hope so!
Young women today don't know what it was like before Roe v. Wade. My mother, a 79 yr. old (conservative even!) Nurse OB/Gyn specialty does remember.
My daughter, age 20, honestly doesn't care much about the issue. Young women seem to assume legal also means readily available and affordable, until they find out otherwise. It is also human nature to assume you won't need one, until you do. How many women, even if they can afford the separate check, will think to buy that?
We a are a demographic easily sacrificed on this. Women have always been divided, with some supporting strong anti-abortion stances, and now a large number of the demographic is complacent. It's great some males care!
Why has there been no mention of Stupak's association with The Family, and of "C" Street infamy ? The scary part is that year after year this and other ultra-conservative religious organizations have infiltrated the political process in this country, which will ultimately lead to an American Taliban nation. Does no one see this ?
That would be the ideal America as far as the U.S. Senate is concerned.
Barbara F'N Boxer has sold out, what's this tell us about the nature of the Senate people? This is a completely lost cause until the nature of the Senate is altered. That will take a minimum of two election cycles. There is no movement, and barely any time left to develop one, for the 2010 election, to upend the lunacy we have in Congress right now.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21k...
I don't know why any woman would voluntarily get pregnant in this country. At this point, I'd counsel my loved ones to abort early and often because if something goes wrong, there will be very few people who are going to give a shit and fewer yet who will lift a finger to help. That's what I get from this.
Comments are closed on this entry