I don’t think that Tom Coburn understands that you can’t throw unborn babies under a bus without throwing their mothers there as well. And if he had made that point, I’d probably be more inclined to agree with him. But, as has been true for some time, nothing a Republican has to say about this health care reform is likely to be, you know, true.
About The Author

BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
The “AHIP stands down” story is all over DKos, FDL etc, despite being a complete fabrication as AHIP continues to work hard every day to do what Hamsher and friends want and kill the bill.
I haven’t looked into it. At this point, I really could care less what FDL has to say. They fought the good fight, but they chose to mislead people about the core reality of the makeup of the US Senate from the very beginning. They lost their credibility with me a long, long time ago.
I think the operation of the anti-obama “progressives” is very interesting. They create a second front of attack on Obama and both validate and retransmit MSM narratives which are designed to demoralize and divide.
You totally miss the point. The point is this: do you hear AHIP in the news these days? Do you hear Ignani(I believe that’s her name .. AHIP’s head honcho) in the paper these days? No you don’t … meaning of course they want to kill it … they are being a lot more subtle about it now .. as compared to before .. that was the point
IMHO, you totally miss the point. From the start the Administration referred to this major initiative as health INSURANCE reform rather than health CARE reform because they knew they would only be able to get Congress to address the awful insurance practices that keep people from being able to have either affordable insurance or have any at all.
Many of us knew exactly what the fight entailed and how fortunate it would be to get anything done —unlike the Pout & Shout Johnny-Come-Lately All Drama Crowd in the left wing and right wing blogosphere.
AHIP can afford to be subtle now that they have Jane and company supporting their position and advocating to “kill the HCR bill”.
Did you read FDL this morning? They only advocate killing this bill. Not HCR. Besides and I quote from this morning’s FDL post:
President Obama made sure to include instructions to pass health care reform using reconciliation in the budget for a reason.
Why did they bother with the reconciliation language if they aren’t going to use it? And are you happy that Obama has thrown women under the basis to please King Nelson? In the end though, things are what they are. I just hope those that say pass this bill now realize the possible consequences. That you have full realization of the possible outcomes of the ’10 elections because of this bill. If we hold serve or gain seats, I’ll be the first to admit I was wrong. If we lose control of the House, Senate or both, then it will get real ugly around the blogosphere.
P.S. If you don’t think there could be problems re: HCR in the ’10 elections, as always, I suggest you read Digby, especially this one from yesterday:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/clarifying-debate-by-digby-after.html
I actually am tuning Jane et al out after her recent “DNC troll” crap (and lots of behind the scenes crap before that), but couldn’t help but notice that AHIP diary on the rec list yesterday. The AHIP is getting a financial boon in this bill, so of course they’ve shut up (I know some folks are desperate to take credit for successfully intimidating someone or something, but this is silly), and then the fact that there’s no support for the senate bill on the right and the left is just free gravy for AHIP.
I think the mandated coverage, combined with the enormous rate increases that people who purchase their health insurance individually on thier own are receiving this month (452 to 736 per month in my letter from BCBS this week) is a huge liability for the next set of elections.
After watching this morning’s talk shows, I’m not sure that contributing to the “Dems in disarray and disagreement” noise throughout the traditional media and blogosphere helps prevent that. David Gregory made it appear through a roundtable, that there is absolutely no support for this bill from anyone – a total mystery as to where those 60 votes are coming from.
your last sentence couldn’t be more accurate.
Because it doesn’t meet his deadline. If you want to disagree with the deadline that they’ve set, that’s fine.
What changed was the bill stalling in Finance. The administration made it clear that they didn’t care what came out of Finance, just to get it out. That didn’t happen, so any time to be used spent on Conference and/or reconciliation was spent capitulating to Lieberman and Nelson.
Like Booman, I was wary of putting a PO in the base bill once Finance finished their stuff. I wasn’t against it, but I didn’t support it, either. I think the WH made a mistake by allowing Reid to go forward. Rather than giving into Lieberman or Nelson, we only needed Snowe’s vote–this wouldn’t have been a difficult task. Lieberman would have been onboard, as there would have been no PO and his punching of liberal hippies would have been sufficient, and we wouldn’t need Nelson or his anti-woman language as we’d have 60 with Snowe.
So the two things that messed up, really, was the stall in Finance, and putting the PO in the base bill.
I’ve been pretty liberal more or less my entire life. My first political stance that I’ve ever taken was during the DC Sniper era, when I was 14 (although the first politician I remember supporting was Bill Clinton in 1996). After he was captured, people were seeking the death penalty. I didn’t see how this made sense; you kill someone, so then we kill you to say how bad killing is? It never made any sense to me. I grew up in an Evangelical Christian home, just for some context (my parents support the death penalty).
Anyway, the only issues where I’ve gotten more liberal over time have been gay rights and abortion. I always supported civil unions, never marriages. This changed when I got older (I think when I turned 17). This was mostly my parent’s influence, even though I’m now more or less an atheist.
Anyway, the reason I post such background is because the other issue I’ve flirted with was being pro-life. I still empathize with their position. However, as I’ve gotten older, I’ve gotten so far to the left on this issue where I’ve called the “unborn” parasites. It’s a bit reactionary, I suppose, but I’m just sick and tired of skeevy old men who think they know what is best for women. I’d say what’s put me farther to the left regarding this issue is the same one that’s put me to the left regarding anything else: their leadership is full of lying liars who only seek control over money, or to control your body. They being a generalization of the old, white, wealthy men who don’t want to change this country and never have. If they cared about the unborn, they would favor social programs which help single mothers. If they cared about the unborn, they would fund contraceptives and sex education that actually works. If they cared about the unborn, they would put more funding into welfare and not make racist/sexist remarks about Welfare Queens.
Sorry for the long post, but if there’s one issue that gets me hot and bothered, it’s women’s rights.
Very good post. The older I get the more liberal I get, as well. I think, by nature, conservatives are very black/white thinkers and the more of life I live, the more gray areas I see and experience. On abortion, I don’t think the fetus is the issue at all for “right to lifers”. The issue, as I see it, is controlling the sexual activity of women. Conservatives are all about there being natural consequences for women who are sexually active (whores in their eyes) which is why they’re against abortion, some of them are against birth control let alone emergency contraception, and why so many of them are against the HPV vaccine for young girls. If you take away the consequences (cervical cancer, an unwanted pregnancy, social stigma, etc)what is going to keep women in their place? Their place being subservient, meek girls who don’t enjoy sex and only have it when their husbands tell them it’s okay.
That’s exactly what it is: control over their sex lives.
It’s the same thing with virginity. Whenever we speak of virgins, we think of women, we don’t think of men. Women are whores for having sex with multiple partners, men are studs. It’s a woman’s fault for being raped if she wore the wrong clothes, or if she got intoxicated. Women need to cover themselves up, never mind men taking responsibility for looking the other way.
It’s a lack of empathy, and as you said, a lack to see the gray in the world. My favorite article on abortion is this one, which documents people’s arguments of “the only moral abortion is MY abortion:”
http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html
I think it’s interesting that you came from an evangelical background and you’ve come to think the way you do. It’s got to be tough. 🙂
It galls me beyond belief to see a bunch of mostly men say that women need “time to think carefully about abortion” or “must be confronted with the fact that the baby is a human”
It’s just absolutely insulting and degrading. While some women become cavalier, most think about abortion carefully.
Abortion is a human right. You MUST be able to think carefully about the results of the sex act. As a parent of 2 19-year-olds and a 22 year old, I am 100% in favor of abortion. Having a child and raising the child is a huge pain in the butt, is very very expensive, and is a lifetime committment. You need the ability to change your mind, especially if you did not intend the pregnancy.
This is all because the Emancipation Proclamation was too compromised. Let’s go back to slavery so we can get a real emancipation proclamation next time.
Sorry Rootless, but that wasn’t even funny.
How about
Evolution is a compromised mess. Let’s start at the drawing board with eukaryotes.
?
they want control over women’s bodies. period.
Totally OT, but I hope you and Cabin Girl are doing well on this cold, snowy night.
Blessings!
Not only on health care reform but on any topic relating to the general welfare, the national defense or the tranquillity of these United States, do I trust for one nanosecond whatever any Republican spokesman said about anything. They are a despicable lot and a much larger threat, IMO, to our collective well being than any terrorist could ever be. They are toxic to our health; kind of like some malicious virus that threatens our present and our future.
And what Coburn says is actually a crock — the Nelson agreement likely actually will advance the pro-life agenda, though Republicans will never admit it.
This is just another Republican meme to try to justify their opposition to health care reform. I don’t know why any journalist takes anything they say seriously.
I know this is a bit OT(it still kinda involves HCR) but everyone should read this, from The Shrill One:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/19/a-whiter-shade-of-pale/
I needed that laugh.