Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Thank you Mr. President. You have now officially kicked me under the bus.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:23 PM
Original message
Thank you Mr. President. You have now officially kicked me under the bus.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100324/ap_on_bi_ge/us_heal...

Obama signs order on abortion in health care bill

By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer 5 mins ago

WASHINGTON With little fanfare, President Barack Obama signed an executive order Wednesday designed to ensure that no federal money can be used for elective abortions under the nation's new health care legislation.

The order had been demanded by a key bloc of anti-abortion Democrats as the price for their support for the health overhaul legislation that narrowly passed the House Sunday night.

Since then it's been criticized by anti-abortion groups who say it has no actual impact other than restating restrictions on abortion funding already in the law. Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., leader of the anti-abortion Democrats, insists that's not the case, but lawmakers supporting abortion rights did not object to the order because they said it made no difference.

Obama invited Stupak and other lawmakers to the Oval Office for the signing of the order but made no effort to draw attention to it, and no media were allowed in the room....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. And thanks for the unrecs, kids.
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. k/r
to try and offset.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
42. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
64. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
100. you're so very welcome, darling. don't mention it. you earn these unrecs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #100
181. ~*~
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timtom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
197. K & R
Also to try and offset, but to no avail.

I mean...what the hell???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FSogol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Didn't the Hyde Amendment already exist? This order changes nothing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Then why create and sign it?
:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. If it were meaningless, Stupak would not have caved
And they hid the signing ceremony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Stupak wanted attention
And they hid the signing ceremony so as to minimize the impact of the whole thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. not true... Stupak needed to save face...
He was looking for an out...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catbyte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
36. I'm from Michigan, Believe me, Stupak would have caved
after a little attention. He's not that deep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
40. stupak caved because he couldn't add anything to a bill that was going to
reconciliation. that's the rules.

This bill saves the DINO's face. And gives Obama their vote on other upcoming bills.

Obama didn't have the press so the right couldn't make political hay from nothing.

the hyde amendment already prevents federal funds from being used for abortions.

it's political theater.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:29 PM
Original message
Because Stupak and his group are dumber than a box of rocks
and needed extra reassurance about something that was already settled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Because Stupak wanted to say he "got something"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
70. He did.
Perception management
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #70
86. Precisely.
But we have a board of people who couldn't look at the reality of the health insurance bill, nor accept the fact that there were indeed MANDATES. They don't get reality; they just believe what they are told.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #86
89. Wow, so I guess...
If I was against the bill, yet saw this current thing to apease stupak as political theater, that makes me sort of evil?

sigh. complex thought is an amazing thing, try it now and then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #89
93. Right. That thought was so "complex"
it doesn't even make any sense.

"If I was against the bill, yet saw this current thing to apease stupak as political theater, that makes me sort of evil? "







http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #93
108. Given your train of thought, that's exactly how it was depicted.
Oh and one more thing...

I WILL NOT BE SILENCED. Cheers. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #108
110. Thank you for kicking my post.
I appreciate your time and consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #108
126. Are you trying to say your projection
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:52 PM by omega minimo
of your misinterpretation is what someone else actually meant?

That REALLY doesn't make sense. Esp. since you can't track whose "train of thought" you're driving off the track. :spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #86
118. Which board?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #70
87. yes, for those of unthinking masses. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #87
99. Thank you for kicking my post.
I really appreciate it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #87
140. for the cameras, for the media, for the history books, for the appearance that it was valid and
relevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
22. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. Same reason we've had to explain 20,000 times that this bill won't kill Granny
with "death panels".

I think the Hyde Amendment- shit, I can't even type those words without thinking of that corpulent fuck and his stupid "the flag is falling" speech- should be overturned and done away with, but that's a separate battle.

I think it's reasonable for this bill to maintain whatever the status quo was prior, if someone can show some definitive proof that this will make reproductive choice access measurably worse, I'm all ears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #26
47. Here here. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #47
111. Thank you for kicking my post.
I appreciate your time and consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #26
48. You need to educate yourself on the power of symbolic acts
The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Look at this health insurance bill fiasco? We were showing you how the bill would hurt people, how it was NOT a social program, how it required MANDATES for people but not for insurance companies that had loopholes built into the law. I read the Senate bill, I know where the loopholes are. But no one listened to the facts: they went for the pretty public relations.

This event is public relations and will energize those who want to take away my rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. it's a closed door meeting. So the only symbol is in your imagination nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #52
60. A closed door meeting we know about. The symbolism still exists.
The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Look at this health insurance bill fiasco? We were showing you how the bill would hurt people, how it was NOT a social program, how it required MANDATES for people but not for insurance companies that had loopholes built into the law. I read the Senate bill, I know where the loopholes are. But no one listened to the facts: they went for the pretty public relations.

This event is public relations and will energize those who want to take away my rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #52
82. BS nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #48
57. So you admit that this makes absolutely zero real-world, legislative difference.
The majority of Americans are pro-choice. The largest peaceable assembly on the DC mall, in 2004, was for reproductive choice (I was there- were you?) ... you want to talk about PR? Symbolic acts? Let's fight the Hyde Amendment. Let's get leadership that isn't afraid to stand up for personal self-determination & the right of citizens to control their own bodies and make their own decisions.

But that's not what the health care bill was about, and sinking it, and the numerous good things it DOES do (expands medicaid, ends denials for Pre-existing conditions) over a, as you put it, "symbolic act", wouldn't have helped anyone or their rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #57
80. It undermines women's rights and women and may affect future "legislative difference"
When your body and your life is used as a battleground and a bargaining chip, when your gender is second class or lower than a zygote, when it's more important to appease Repukes than women and when you're told to not worry your pretty little head about it, THEN come back and tell us it doesn't make any difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #80
101. stupak is s dem. A DINO but still a dem.
politics is about give and take. I'm certainly sensitive to the issue of abortion and it being used as a battle ground for womens rights in general.

But at the end of today, the current rights women still have regarding abortion have not been affected by this bill.

Granted your point regarding perception and symbolism has valid grounds, but in the long run, it still will take a movement to keep your reproductive rights your own.

The pro-choice movement has certainly suffered set backs lo these many years, but give the fact that is a massive political hot potato, (made so by the ultra right wing), it will be used and continued to be used as a divisive tool until reason returns to this nation and gives all women the full rights they deserve over their bodies.

Until that time, it will be used and continued to be used as a devise to get things the dems want and for the repubs to get things that they want. And as a result, there will be much political theater.

If there was ground that was lost, it was lost purely in a, as you say, symbolic role, but not in an actual legal loss.

Does this symbolic loss portend future losses? No one knows and it's up to us to make sure that it doesn't.

Although stupak is far from my favorite dem, he is still a dem. In the larger context of what the democratic party is up against, in the short term, even political symbolic sacrifices must be made in order to push the ball forward to a point, where being pro-choice in this nation is not looked upon as being evil by the right. I know that day will happen. but until that point, there will be times were the cause will take two steps forward and one step back. Today, was a symbolic one step back, but that certainly does not mean that the cause will not take two steps forward in the future.

Voting out the DINO's and pressuring congress with yet another symbolic bill to improve women's rights will undue this unjust symbolic act, but again, at the end of the day, although symbolic as it was, it still doesn't change the law.

Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #101
107. Interesting:
"Does this symbolic loss portend future losses? No one knows and it's up to us to make sure that it doesn't. "

So you admit there could actually be a real loss from this. Thanks for seeing that.

Now, my problem is that considering the way that Dems have treated abortion rights, I have very little faith the Democrats can or will "make sure it doesn't" happen that abortion goes the way of Medicare for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #107
121. From my point of view...
being a traditional Democrat, rather than the center right we are currently experiencing, we won't have med for all, nor a public option, nor a single payer, ever.

Until we get progressive dems into office, nothing will change from the status quo.

We will get nothing but political theater.

We are still at war, we still torture people we praise wealth over compassion, we care little for womans rights and we play to the lowest common denominator.

If at the end of 4 or 8 years none of these things have changed or at least improve to a degree, I think we can safely assume that's just the way, very sadly, given the political winds, how things will be for a while. I'm not a doom and gloom type persay, but I feel we are entering into some really dark times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #121
137. You're not the only one.
California is in its worst crisis in a long time and the "answers" all seem to be coming from the radical right. The left is attacked on a daily basis and, in the end, the solutions we get will be neoconservative (or neoliberal economically speaking).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #101
124. The Democratic Party stands solidly for full human civil rights for women or it doesn't
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:50 PM by omega minimo
"But at the end of today, the current rights women still have regarding abortion have not been affected by this bill. "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"If there was ground that was lost, it was lost purely in a, as you say, symbolic role, but not in an actual legal loss."

"Does this symbolic loss portend future losses? No one knows and it's up to us to make sure that it doesn't."

The president set a precedent and yes, we know that it portends future losses.

"Until that time, it will be used and continued to be used as a devise to get things the dems want and for the repubs to get things that they want. And as a result, there will be much political theater."

Your point is understood, your peaceful tone is appreciated. We should not have to fight the same battles over and over again and maintain a "movement" to continuously fight for legal rights once achieved. Yet there's always something trying to regress the progress of the past.

However, it doesn't help when those detractors and regressives are on one's own side, whether "DINO's" or those here saying this doesn't make any difference. They mean it doesn't make any difference to THEM -- and I refer them back to my previous post you replied to.

"In the larger context of what the democratic party is up against, in the short term, even political symbolic sacrifices must be made in order to push the ball forward to a point, where being pro-choice in this nation is not looked upon as being evil by the right. I know that day will happen."

Politics is not a football match. Women's lives are not INCIDENTAL to political convenience for Dems and faux Dems. The day will NEVER come that the Repukes don't try to portray women's rights as evil and women's bodies as the property of the state. It is up to DEMOCRATS and their platform to stand firm against that tide of bigotry, hatred, hypocrisy and authoritarian arrogance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #80
149. Previous poster admitted that this is purely symbolic. Preserving the status quo is NOT an erosion.
Yes, let's overturn the Hyde Amendment. But that's not what this fight, or this bill, was about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #149
156. There is no "pure" about symbolism, or PR
There are two types of victories: substantive ones and public relations ones. Sometimes, the substantive overtakes the PR: the toppling of Saddam's statue in Iraq was a PR event staged by a PR company (Rendon, I believe). That PR victory overtook reality for awhile, but in the end, the piper had to be paid, and Iraq was eventually seen for the debacle it was.

But sometimes, the PR victory becomes the path to the substantive victory. 37 years of PR from the Catholic Church, the Right Wing, the fundamentalist Xtians, talk show hosts, have made it impossible for public officials to talk about abortion rights without public embarrassment. And that's a victory.

I was watching an old "WKRP in Cincinnati" recently: Mr Carlson's wife is pregant and both are older--late 40s I think. Carlson's mother actually suggests an abortion, not because she's a "babykiller" but because she is worried about the wife's health and the difficulties of a late in life pregnancy. This show was in the late 70s. I can't imagine that show airing today. That's what a public relations victory does. It marginalizes supporters and forces officials who support those rights into the shadows.

Today, Obama joined that PR war--against abortion rights. He allowed himself to be reported on as he signed a piece of paper saying that no public funds would go to abortion. It's not a substantive change--right now. But it is an offensive in the PR war, and on the wrong side. In the same way that the constant 37 years of PR has made it impossible to talk about abortion rights openly and normally (like WKRP), a Democratic president's support of Stupak's beliefs, in public, leaves those of us who actually defended clinics and supported abortion rights under the bus. Obama's "stunt" for Stupak actually aids and abets the enemy of women's rights in their PR war. And the PR war begets the social changes that we have seen across the US with states like North Dakota without abortion services for most women in the state. In many places in the US, it's already the back alley abortion because the RW has managed to shut down the clinics. And it's the PR war that made it so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #156
158. Why don't we see who the next person he puts on the SCOTUS is, first.
Because that will have far more bearing on the future of reproductive rights in this country than this ever will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #158
173. IOW you don't care because you're not female
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #173
174. Who are you talking to?
Yourself? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #156
169. All true. Our first AA president turning back the clock on civil rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #169
178. you have jumped the shark nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #178
184. He has jumped the shark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #156
175. Late to the party (your thread) but this post is brilliant. K&R.
Nothing left to be said after this. DUers (and real Dems) either get it or they don't.

Your post spells it out pretty clearly though. If they don't get "it" now, they'll never get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #149
168. It does not "preserve the status quo"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REACTIVATED IN CT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #48
66. Thank you for calling it the Health Insurance Bill.
Its not a Health CARE Reform Act. Its a Health INSURANCE Reform Act. If everyone in the media would stop calling it a Health Care Reform Act, my blood pressure would go down several points.

Kucinich was correct - it is a start. A foot in the door. That's all it is.

We need Single Payor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #66
75. You're welcome.
It is a health insurance bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #48
166. Which is why he didn't invite the press
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 06:50 PM by Hippo_Tron
If he wanted to make a big symbolic act he would've invited the media and made a big show out of it like Bush did when he signed the late term abortion ban. The fact that the press wasn't invited sends the message that he was forced to cave to these people and that he wants to keep it as quiet as possible, not that he's proud of the fact that he has to sign this crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Yes.... this order has nothing to do with a change in policy...
The argument SHOULD be to strike down the Hyde Amendment--but that is a separate action and thus a separate argument from HCR. This pro-choice woman will fight to do so, but I'm not going to get distracted by these kind of political stunts that have no impact beyond somewhat neutralizing the radical right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #16
38. Even if only as a "politicial stunt," this has impact.
It doesn't "neutralize the radical right." It alters public perception, it miseducates, it proves what Democrats will or won't do to their own constituents, even if it is political pantomime.

It reinforces the position of those who use women's bodies as their battleground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FSogol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
55. Yes. Put the energy into overturning the Hyde Amendment. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #55
77. I am.
But I am also keeping track of the PR war. One can do both at the same time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #77
104. I applaud your effort.
The PR war will be particularly tough given the right wing control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #104
123. It's even harder when your own go against you.
I worked for a number of Democratic candidates over the years--nothing big. Voter reg, phone banking, low level stuff. But I always felt a strong conviction that the party was connected to my principles.

In the past decade, it has gotten harder and harder to feel that way. I still like Boxer and will vote for her. She's in trouble in California at the moment. High unfavorables and the RW is gunning for her. Feinstein is hanging it up so there will be a new Dem against a known moderate pro-choice Republican, Tom Campbell. The problem is that once he gets to DC, he'll be subject to party discipline. There is a lot of anger against Washington and I could see either seat (or both) going GOP and that's not good. On the other hand, can I trust the new Dem to back the things I believe in? I don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
61. It DOES have to do with a change in perceived support.
The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
county worker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
24. Wait a minute! Your making sense! Stop it right now!
Don't you see the sky is falling?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #24
50. You need to educate yourself on the power of symbolic acts
The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Look at this health insurance bill fiasco? We were showing you how the bill would hurt people, how it was NOT a social program, how it required MANDATES for people but not for insurance companies that had loopholes built into the law. I read the Senate bill, I know where the loopholes are. But no one listened to the facts: they went for the pretty public relations.

This event is public relations and will energize those who want to take away my rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
county worker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #50
147. You are stronger than those who want to take away your rights.
You weaken yourself by posting this. Join with others who are protecting your rights. Everytime you post things like this you are moving that much further from where you want to be. Think about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #147
153. Have you ever defended a clinic county worker?
When you do, come and talk to me.

I did that kind of work for years. And I fundraised and I marched and did voter reg and phone banked.

And donated money, when I had it.

When you do all those things, then you tell me what to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
54. "It's about the public relations, stupid." (Nothing personal against you, just a phrase)
The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Look at this health insurance bill fiasco? We were showing you how the bill would hurt people, how it was NOT a social program, how it required MANDATES for people but not for insurance companies that had loopholes built into the law. I read the Senate bill, I know where the loopholes are. But no one listened to the facts: they went for the pretty public relations.

This event is public relations and will energize those who want to take away my rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
113. And, DADT already exists.... so why fight it?
Yet, it is seen as worth fighting.

But, then, if we actually want the Democratic President and Democratic Congress to have the spine to work on our behalf, we are... what, traitors?

Or, is it only because this just affects poor women, and not those who you associate with?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
171. The Hyde Amendment acts one year at a time and must be renewed annually.
Barack's new order is permanent without need for further action.
Yes, it's another betrayal by "our" President.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #171
176. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
3. Rec
:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. Oh come on...be realistic...
there's no more room under that bus anymore...you're in the waiting line for the next bus to be knocked under.

:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. silly
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Why? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. Just a face-saving measure for Stupak - doesn't change a thing. nt
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:16 PM by polichick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Then why have it without the media, in secret?
It's hard to save face without the media present to record it and beam it back to your constituency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Probably didn't want reporters spinning it into something it isn't...
The Hyde Amendment already applied to this bill - Stupak got himself into a corner of idiocy and the prez pulled him out and got his group on board by doing this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. No, they didn't want protesters.
That's all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Nothing has changed - why protest? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #27
56. A lot has changed. It's ok now for a Democrat to trash abortion rights, if only symbolically
That's a huge issue.

Can you imagine if a Democratic President signed a bill denouncing the 1964 Civil Rights bill? It wouldn't do anything, wouldn't change any laws. But it would make it ok to trash Civil Rights because, after all, the Democrats are doing it.

It's under the bus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #56
67. Unfortunately, there are anti-choice Democrats...
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:04 PM by polichick
When I say nothing has changed, I mean by this bill or today's action. Federal funds could not be used for abortion before it, or after it.

This president is not denouncing the right of women to choose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #56
105. lol. there have been anti-choice dems since forever
and your comparison to a prez signing a bill denouncing 1964 is ludicrous. As for "under the bus", can't you come up with something a little better?

weak sauce, dear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
11. How so?
the hyde amendment already did this.

this was nothing more than political theater.

So I would love to know how you were kicked under the bus?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #11
29. Don't you need an audience to have theater?
If this is nothing, then why keep the press out? All it does is make me suspicious. I thought we were in an era of "new open government".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. and if it were televised, you'd be even more pissed
Let's face it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #35
58. Of course. But it still retains symbolic power.
The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Look at this health insurance bill fiasco? We were showing you how the bill would hurt people, how it was NOT a social program, how it required MANDATES for people but not for insurance companies that had loopholes built into the law. I read the Senate bill, I know where the loopholes are. But no one listened to the facts: they went for the pretty public relations.

This event is public relations and will energize those who want to take away my rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
13. many dems dont give a shit about policy or good policy..all they care about is
winning, even if it means turning into a party that resembles republicans.

ergo, they will be hit hard in nov, for basically screwing their base.


knr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Screwing the base
That's exactly right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
31. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #31
115. Here in CA, Feinstein's seat will be up and Boxer is in trouble
I like Boxer, always have. And she at least stood up for abortion rights in the Senate. I will probably vote for her for that reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
17. NOTHING CHANGED. NOTHING.
What part of that don't you understand?

And an executive order can easily be undone.

Your outrage is misplaced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Then why do it?
It gives force and teeth to the Democratic commitment against women at very least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. TO GET THE HEALTH CARE BILL SIGNED. IT'S POLITICS.
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 03:34 PM by WeekendWarrior
Nothing changed. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE educate yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #28
46. You need to educate yourself on the power of symbolic acts
And how they lead to other things.

The GOP has made abortion a dirty word, even when the abortion is medically necessary. Obama and the Dems have capitulated to right wing demagoguery, and this paves the way for future action. The fact that "nothing has changed" is meaningless; it's the image that matters.

Look at this health insurance bill fiasco? We were showing you how the bill would hurt people, how it was NOT a social program, how it required MANDATES for people but not for insurance companies that had loopholes built into the law. I read the Senate bill, I know where the loopholes are. But no one listened to the facts: they went for the pretty public relations.

This event is public relations and will energize those who want to take away my rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #46
90. And YOU'VE fed into that and promoted the GOP's cause
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:21 PM by WeekendWarrior
by showing your outrage over what is purely a political maneuver to get the votes Obama needed.

You're the one saying the president "kicked me under a bus" -- even though this means NOTHING.

And the more YOU promote the idea that it does, the more harm you do. You should be out there assuring women that NOTHING has changed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #90
103. The GOP supports abortion rights?
Since when?

Just to let you know:

I remember when abortion was illegal

When the Webster decision occurred in 1989, I got heavily involved in the ProChoice movement. I don't know what activism you have or have not done, but I defended clinics, raised money for clinic defenses, and stood against "bearded patriachs" from Operation Rescue (Randall Terry's organization) at 5 AM on Saturdays to prevent clinics from being closed down.

Now, when Obama can trash women's rights symbolically, the forces that have been in operation since 1973--the Catholic church (that still marches every January), the fundamentalist right, the clinic bombers--are given a sense of rightness about their cause. Even Obama, you see, supports them ideologically. That's how it appears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #103
122. SIGH.
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:46 PM by WeekendWarrior
You obviously have some kind of blind spot.

THE POINT I AM MAKING to you, is that by you propagating the MYTH that something has changed, that Obama has somehow THROWN WOMEN UNDER THE BUS, you are FEEDING INTO THE GOP's hands. You are doing their work for them.

Is THAT what you want?

NOTHING has changed. The Hyde Amendment still stands. There is NO NEW LEGISLATION. This is PURELY a political move to insure the passage of healthcare reform. Women would be BETTER SERVED if you assured them of that -- and let them know that Obama does NOT support the pro-lifers. And that this signing is NOT symbolic but purely POLITICAL. A means to an end.

I don't know how much clearer I can be than that.

And by the way, I remember when my sister went to a back alley in Chinatown to get an abortion but couldn't go through it because the place was a pit and the "doctor" was a sleazy bastard who didn't really look as if he knew what he was doing. Instead, she was forced to have the child and put her up for adoption. So I'm WELL AWARE of what it was like in the days gone by.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #122
141. But something has changed: abortion rights can be disavowed in public by OUR side
That's a huge change. And that's what the problem is.

There are two types of victories: substantive ones and public relations ones. Sometimes, the substantive overtakes the PR: the toppling of Saddam's statue in Iraq was a PR event staged by a PR company (Rendon, I believe). That PR victory overtook reality for awhile, but in the end, the piper had to be paid, and Iraq was eventually seen for the debacle it was.

But sometimes, the PR victory becomes the path to the substantive victory. 37 years of PR from the Catholic Church, the Right Wing, the fundamentalist Xtians, talk show hosts, have made it impossible for public officials to talk about abortion rights without public embarrassment. And that's a victory.

I was watching an old "WKRP in Cincinnati" recently: Mr Carlson's wife is pregant and both are older--late 40s I think. Carlson's mother actually suggests an abortion, not because she's a "babykiller" but because she is worried about the wife's health and the difficulties of a late in life pregnancy. This show was in the late 70s. I can't imagine that show airing today. That's what a public relations victory does. It marginalizes supporters and forces officials who support those rights into the shadows.

Today, Obama joined that PR war--against abortion rights. He allowed himself to be reported on as he signed a piece of paper saying that no public funds would go to abortion. It's not a substantive change--right now. But it is an offensive in the PR war, and on the wrong side. In the same way that the constant 37 years of PR has made it impossible to talk about abortion rights openly and normally (like WKRP), a Democratic president's support of Stupak's beliefs, in public, leaves those of us who actually defended clinics and supported abortion rights under the bus. Obama's "stunt" for Stupak actually aids and abets the enemy of women's rights in their PR war. And the PR war begets the social changes that we have seen across the US with states like North Dakota without abortion services for most women in the state. In many places in the US, it's already the back alley in Chinatown because the RW has managed to shut down the clinics. And it's the PR war that made it so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #141
161. Public Relations is EXACTLY my point
By YOU saying thing like Obama has thrown us under the bus, you are only feeding into the BAD PR. Instead you should be EDUCATING people, letting them know that was simply a political ploy -- that changed no laws -- in order to get the much needed HCR.

Don't feed into it. Fight against it by educating other women to the point. Otherwise the GOP wins the PR war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #103
182. no they support us fighting each other over bullshit
and they support domestic terrorism in case that doesn't work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPedigrees Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #28
59. Exactly. +1000. To prevent women from dying for want of coverage for
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:10 PM by SPedigrees
for expensive breast, uterine, and other female cancer drugs, this HCR bill needed to pass. Roe v Wade still stands, as does the Hyde amendment, just as before.

The two most important things President Obama can accomplish during his terms in office are HCR and appointments to the Supreme Court. If abortion rights are important to you, Nikki, please consider the latter. If HCR had not passed, Obama might have been a one term president, and I shouldn't have to remind anyone what impact another repub presidency would have on the balance of power in the high court and on Roe v Wade. If freedom of choice is as important to Nikki as it would seem, the mere thought of Roe v Wade falling should fill you with dread, as it does me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #59
78. I hear you. But there is also a PR war going on.
And women are losing that one, and Obama is helping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. I explained in #19 why the prez did it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #21
32. Are you serious? Do you really think things have changed
or are you just engaging in typical Obama-hate? For your sake, I hope it's the latter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #21
39. to kiss republican ass is why they signed it...obama and his moderates
have been kissing the ass of the GOP from the beginning and continue to do so.

big fatwet kisses from day one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #39
84. oh but that's okay because ...............
............
.........................




..............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #39
129. RIDICULOUS
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:57 PM by WeekendWarrior
Are any of you paying attention to what's going on out there or are the knee-jerk stereotypes about us true?

Obama has been reaching out to the GOP to give them just enough rope to hang themselves. This is POLITICAL THEATER. How hard is that to understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #129
154. Weekend Warrior, I took the time to post to you
The least you could do is read the argument.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeekendWarrior Donating Member (849 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #154
162. I've READ your argument and responded to it how many times?
Please read my responses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #17
49. Another legal expert here at DU! Woo-hoo!
No, you've just bought the talking points being used to placate people...nothing more.

IT WAS JUST A TWO-MINUTE PRAYER!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 04:45 AM
Response to Reply #17
189. YES IT HAS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
23. What you quote says ...
opponents of abortion say "it has no actual impact other than restating restrictions already in the law," while abortion proponents didn't object because it "made no difference."

So how are you more under the bus now than you were before?

I am a strong and ardent abortion rights supporter. But I fail to see the big whoop here. It was theatrics. And when I think about it in economic terms, I can't be too upset that a $350 abortion ($600 or $700 if your beyond the first trimester) won't get funded by the government, compared to a $25,000 C-section or a $75,000 breast cancer surgery and treatment regimen. We'll lend you the money if you need an abortion. Honest. Just say the word, and we'll take up donations here: we could get it in about two minutes.

(P.S. I'm not trying to be callous. I just think this is being blown up for reasons other than reality.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeFleur1 Donating Member (973 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #23
114. How Are You More Under the Bus Now Than You Were Before?
This bill was hailed as 'reform'. It was suppose to be a reform of the old crap to make things better. The Democrats celebrated and jumped up and down, clapping because they had done 'something' no one could do for blah blah years by voting to 'reform' health care.

As far as women who need an abortion to live are concerned it did nothing. It was not reform. They were excluded...but then, they are only women so who gives a shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
33. It disturbs me to see rights of certain groups bargained away for expediency
and I realize this EO just upholds the Hyde amendment but symbolism does matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. Symbolism DOES matter.
THANK YOU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #37
44. Wow
another stupider than stupid argument that it doesn't matter because it didn't change anything but it was drafted and signed by the president but that's okay because it doesn't matter because it didn't change anything.

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #44
68. Kinda makes you dizzy, doesn't it.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. Makes me Hope for Change
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #44
183. I thought what we voted for WAS change?
Now we're cheering for the status quo? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #183
187. why that's just CRAZY TALK!
:crazy: Making such a lucid statement sounds quite crazy. We're not supposed to remember, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
34. Like we don't have enough high drama as it is!
so now we need to hear from you too? :eyes:

Isn't OET a better place to vent one's hyperbole and exaggerations
and play the victim? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
41. Stupak got nothing, and everybody knows it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #41
71. Sure it's fine it's only about women's bodies, reproductive health and privacy anyway
they should be used by now to having their status relegated to incubators and their bodies and lives used as battlegrounds and bargaining chips. What's the BFD.

It's not like it was about PENISES.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #41
143. It's not about Stupak. It's about the PR war against abortion rights.
There are two types of victories: substantive ones and public relations ones. Sometimes, the substantive overtakes the PR: the toppling of Saddam's statue in Iraq was a PR event staged by a PR company (Rendon, I believe). That PR victory overtook reality for awhile, but in the end, the piper had to be paid, and Iraq was eventually seen for the debacle it was.

But sometimes, the PR victory becomes the path to the substantive victory. 37 years of PR from the Catholic Church, the Right Wing, the fundamentalist Xtians, talk show hosts, have made it impossible for public officials to talk about abortion rights without public embarrassment. And that's a victory.

I was watching an old "WKRP in Cincinnati" recently: Mr Carlson's wife is pregant and both are older--late 40s I think. Carlson's mother actually suggests an abortion, not because she's a "babykiller" but because she is worried about the wife's health and the difficulties of a late in life pregnancy. This show was in the late 70s. I can't imagine that show airing today. That's what a public relations victory does. It marginalizes supporters and forces officials who support those rights into the shadows.

Today, Obama joined that PR war--against abortion rights. He allowed himself to be reported on as he signed a piece of paper saying that no public funds would go to abortion. It's not a substantive change--right now. But it is an offensive in the PR war, and on the wrong side. In the same way that the constant 37 years of PR has made it impossible to talk about abortion rights openly and normally (like WKRP), a Democratic president's support of Stupak's beliefs, in public, leaves those of us who actually defended clinics and supported abortion rights under the bus. Obama's "stunt" for Stupak actually aids and abets the enemy of women's rights in their PR war. And the PR war begets the social changes that we have seen across the US with states like North Dakota without abortion services for most women in the state. In many places in the US, it's already the back alley abortion because the RW has managed to shut down the clinics. And it's the PR war that made it so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
43. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
45. Thank you for speaking for me, Nikki.
I'm sorry you take such guff for caring for those who are so badly affected by this.

:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #45
53. Thank bobbo.
How are you doing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
51. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
62. Unrec...nt
Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. Sid!
Nice to see my favorite unrec'er. How are you? It's been awhile. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
63. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPedigrees Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
69. Many young women on this board cannot remember the era before Roe v Wade.
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:02 PM by SPedigrees
My mom's college roommate had an abortion on a kitchen table in NJ. Guess what? She had to pay for that illegal abortion.

You're not thrown under the bus. Women prior to Roe v Wade were under the bus. And back in the day, we didn't have access to OTC morning after pills either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #69
73. You know what, I remember when abortion was illegal
And when Obama can trash women's rights symbolically, the forces that have been in operation since 1973--the Catholic church (that still marches every January), the fundamentalist right, the clinic bombers--are given a sense of rightness about their cause. Even Obama, you see, supports them ideologically. That's how it appears.

When Webster occurred in 1989, I got heavily involved in the ProChoice movement. I don't know what activism you have or have not done, but I defended clinics, raised money for clinic defenses, and stood against "bearded patriachs" from Operation Rescue (Randall Terry's organization) at 5 AM on Saturdays to prevent clinics from being closed down.

If I'm worried, you should be worried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. Great post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #76
79. Thank you. It probably won't be read.
Because it's easier to blow off a real activist than to listen to one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #73
95. +1000 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #69
74. They've been trying to undo R v W ever since.
Any step back is a step back. Any capitulation -- you KNOW that Democrats do not stand solidly for women's rights. Be honest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #74
81. Yeah, and their biggest victory came with Webster in 1989
That was when they sent abortion back to the states, and some states eviscerated the right.

Interesting how few other things go back to the states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #81
85. Interesting how many men tell us it doesn't make any difference
and here's to Echo In Light and other men who do get it and are willing to say so :toast: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #85
88. I just think it's funny that when I put up my activist credentials
people just forget to answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #88
92. "Activist"
Is that like actually like DOING something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #92
94. Lol!
As one good DU friend said, a lot of DUers seem to think activism is manning the phone banks while they watch their 401k accounts grow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #94
97. 2 sure ways to sink an OP on DU
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:28 PM by omega minimo
use the words "do" or "responsiblity" :yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #97
109. It's hard to fight someone who really understands the issue
And who's been there on the front lines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #92
96. Yes.
It's getting up a 4AM, driving down to a clinic, getting coached in non-violent resistance, and having the other side film you while all of this is going on. They target the regulars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #69
83. You've edited your post.
Does that mean you won't take up a collection and pay for my abortion? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bain_sidhe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
91. To the NOTHING'S CHANGED crowd...
It's true that the EO didn't change the language in the bill, but it's not true that the language in the bill "just" extended Hyde to the exchanges.

Previously, the abortion could not be paid for, directly, with federal funds. Now, even women buying insurance with their OWN MONEY cannot get a policy that covers abortion without jumping through accounting hoops, and making the insurance company jump through accounting hoops. The bill's language extends the effect of Hyde to PRIVATE money.

Many people believe that insurance companies will just stop covering abortions - for anyone, not just customers paying their premium in part with subsidies. I don't have a crystal ball, so I won't claim that (although I think it's likely - in the states that already require abortion coverage to be bought separately, there are no abortion coverage riders offered). It also may require women in group policies to affirmatively state that they are buying coverage for abortions. That's not clear, but seems to be suggested by the structure of the "separate funds."

What's changed is that abortion coverage has been taken out of "comprehensive insurance" - even for people paying with THEIR OWN MONEY - and put in a special little boat all by itself. You may call it "symbolic" but it also serves as a precedent to define abortion as something OTHER than "health care" and to segregate women's rights from everybody else's rights.

And spare me the cries that "abortion is cheap!" Yes, first trimester abortions are relatively inexpensive, as medical procedures go. But later abortions required to protect the woman's health (not covered by the exceptions) ARE NOT CHEAP.

By offering and signing this Executive Order, Obama put his stamp of approval on all that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #91
102. thank you -- it is precedent setting and there is a change
"What's changed is that abortion coverage has been taken out of "comprehensive insurance" - even for people paying with THEIR OWN MONEY - and put in a special little boat all by itself. You may call it "symbolic" but it also serves as a precedent to define abortion as something OTHER than "health care" and to segregate women's rights from everybody else's rights."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #91
106. Thanks for spelling this out.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #91
120. +1000
and, although a 1st trimester may be considered cheap, to a woman raising a couple of kids alone on a low income, that's a lot of money. That's the difference between having the rent this month and not having all of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #91
125. People keep missing this.
Maybe deliberately? Thank you for spelling it out again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bain_sidhe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #125
131. There are none so blind as those who will nazi
as one wag put it. Or as another (Upton Sinclair) put it "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

It all goes to the point of people not wanting to see the warts in this legislation that they feel they must support.

And, lest I be misunderstood, I do support the law. I think it will do some good (although not for me), some of it for people I know. But I won't willingly blind myself to its faults and implications, and yes, I WILL hold a grudge against those who insisted on this in order to support the overall bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #131
133. A pun. :)
Thank you. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bain_sidhe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #133
142. Not mine, unfortunately. But I can't remember where I read it
I'd give credit where it's due if I could, but the best I can do is disclaim authorship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #142
152. It's a good one though.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #131
163. Ooh, good Sinclair quote.
I'm writing that down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #91
172. Exactly. Well said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
98. unrec
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
112. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #112
117. Thank you for kicking my post.
I appreciate your time and consideration.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeFleur1 Donating Member (973 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #112
127. What Other Democratic President Has Made A Special Effort
to let everyone know (by executive order) that your tax money will not be dirtied by paying for abortions regardless of need?

What male condition is there for which a president has signed an executive order stating that tax paid medical care will not be available?

I'm curious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #127
132. Uh...Hmm....
...Wait...still thinking.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #112
128. Too bad you haven't read the thread. The correction to your claim is just above there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #128
130. Don't fight the name callers
Alert on them and hope the mods are fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #130
138. at least one in this thread is gone
Mods have been very helpful/timely when needed since the last announcement....


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #138
144. Thank you to the mods.
And to you all. I appreciate it.

Here's something I wrote upthread:

There are two types of victories: substantive ones and public relations ones. Sometimes, the substantive overtakes the PR: the toppling of Saddam's statue in Iraq was a PR event staged by a PR company (Rendon, I believe). That PR victory overtook reality for awhile, but in the end, the piper had to be paid, and Iraq was eventually seen for the debacle it was.

But sometimes, the PR victory becomes the path to the substantive victory. 37 years of PR from the Catholic Church, the Right Wing, the fundamentalist Xtians, talk show hosts, have made it impossible for public officials to talk about abortion rights without public embarrassment. And that's a victory.

I was watching an old "WKRP in Cincinnati" recently: Mr Carlson's wife is pregant and both are older--late 40s I think. Carlson's mother actually suggests an abortion, not because she's a "babykiller" but because she is worried about the wife's health and the difficulties of a late in life pregnancy. This show was in the late 70s. I can't imagine that show airing today. That's what a public relations victory does. It marginalizes supporters and forces officials who support those rights into the shadows.

Today, Obama joined that PR war--against abortion rights. He allowed himself to be reported on as he signed a piece of paper saying that no public funds would go to abortion. It's not a substantive change--right now. But it is an offensive in the PR war, and on the wrong side. In the same way that the constant 37 years of PR has made it impossible to talk about abortion rights openly and normally (like WKRP), a Democratic president's support of Stupak's beliefs, in public, leaves those of us who actually defended clinics and supported abortion rights under the bus. Obama's "stunt" for Stupak actually aids and abets the enemy of women's rights in their PR war. And the PR war begets the social changes that we have seen across the US with states like North Dakota without abortion services for most women in the state. In many places in the US, it's already the back alley abortion because the RW has managed to shut down the clinics. And it's the PR war that made it so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
panzerfaust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #144
195. Yep. Obama signed a law saying that abortion is wrong, and so the gov will not pay for it.
'Cause, if it were NOT wrong, then there would be no reason for the government to not pay for it.

Wrong.

Not illegal.

Not illegal (yet & again) - but wrong: That's the message from our president.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #195
199. It's like cigarettes: still legal but pariah status
Good point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
116. Oh, brother...
This is really dumb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #116
119. Then why post?
Just give it a pass. Go on with your day.

And have a nice one. A little tea, a hot bath, maybe some cookies.

That sounds pretty good actually. :)

Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #119
134. I had an opinion...
I wrote a lengthy one, then decided it wasn't worth the effort...

This signing was symbolic... it was merely a statement saying an already existing law would be enforced... it was hardly a bus throw.

What next? Armageddon?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #134
136. Well, it's duly noted.
Now go do something nice for yourself. It's been a long day. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
135. Henry Hyde was a fat asshole and a homophobe to boot!
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 05:09 PM by IndianaGreen
Why are Democrats defending Hyde's assault on poor women seeking reproductive services? It boggles the mind how much of Reaganism has infected our body politic.

A true progressive party would be agitating for repeal of Hyde's abomination, not bowing down to yet another executive order enforcing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #135
165. I'm for repealing it, and Obama has said he doesn't support it...
But this bill wasn't the best place to repeal, considering how hard it was to get the votes.

That said, imo the Democratic party is not truly progressive at this point.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #165
191. I seriously doubt that it has near the support needed to repeal it
as a stand alone bill. Look at the various polls that are stored on pollingreport.com. There is far LESS support for federal funds being used than for keeping it legal. http://pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
139. The fact there are anti-abortion dems who try to legislate their religious
beliefs by unfairly punishing poor women is in itself repulsive and one of the most blatant signs of the direction of the party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
145. K&R but still at zero, of course; truth gets unrec'd nowadays
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
146. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #146
148. You really don't get it. Alright try this:
There are two types of victories: substantive ones and public relations ones. Sometimes, the substantive overtakes the PR: the toppling of Saddam's statue in Iraq was a PR event staged by a PR company (Rendon, I believe). That PR victory overtook reality for awhile, but in the end, the piper had to be paid, and Iraq was eventually seen for the debacle it was.

But sometimes, the PR victory becomes the path to the substantive victory. 37 years of PR from the Catholic Church, the Right Wing, the fundamentalist Xtians, talk show hosts, have made it impossible for public officials to talk about abortion rights without public embarrassment. And that's a victory.

I was watching an old "WKRP in Cincinnati" recently: Mr Carlson's wife is pregant and both are older--late 40s I think. Carlson's mother actually suggests an abortion, not because she's a "babykiller" but because she is worried about the wife's health and the difficulties of a late in life pregnancy. This show was in the late 70s. I can't imagine that show airing today. That's what a public relations victory does. It marginalizes supporters and forces officials who support those rights into the shadows.

Today, Obama joined that PR war--against abortion rights. He allowed himself to be reported on as he signed a piece of paper saying that no public funds would go to abortion. It's not a substantive change--right now. But it is an offensive in the PR war, and on the wrong side. In the same way that the constant 37 years of PR has made it impossible to talk about abortion rights openly and normally (like WKRP), a Democratic president's support of Stupak's beliefs, in public, leaves those of us who actually defended clinics and supported abortion rights under the bus. Obama's "stunt" for Stupak actually aids and abets the enemy of women's rights in their PR war. And the PR war begets the social changes that we have seen across the US with states like North Dakota without abortion services for most women in the state. In many places in the US, it's already the back alley abortion because the RW has managed to shut down the clinics. And it's the PR war that made it so.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lord Helmet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #148
150. No, I do get it. And I get what you are trying to do here too. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #150
151. You didn't read it. And that explains a lot.
You're not about substance, just about name calling.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChimpersMcSmirkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #146
155. I'd describe it as high drama with flamebait sprinkles trolling.
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 05:41 PM by ChimpersMcSmirkers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #155
157. I have watched so many substantive posts sink.
I am of the opinion that people really like flame wars, no matter how much they say that they don't. Sometimes it is the only way they read anything of substance.

If you come on a thread specifically to insult someone, then you are doing the flaming. If you really don't like the thread, do what I do: ignore it. Let it drop. It's not worth the effort. The fact that you don't understand the symbolic value of what the President did today is really sad. But then, women's rights are always down the list from other things. And yet women have been the most dependable Democratic voters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
159. If you require the tax credit to help pay for insurance with a private company,
you can't get an abortion through your private company. BTW...the "subsidies" are not "subsidies" but tax credits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
160. I need a job. Can I be the busdriver?
Hopefully it pays well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #160
164. Thank you for kicking my post.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
167. On the other hand, it's now much less likely that a Republican President will replace Ginsburg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 04:42 AM
Response to Reply #167
188. So women are treated as worth less than zygotes to achieve some more pie-in-the-sky Dem strategery
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #188
196. It's politics
Look I get the idea. The notion that the government should control women's bodies is an obscene position and it's obscene that we would lend credibility to people who take that position.

But the fact is that anti-choicers are a political force to be reckoned with and if we don't act strategically, they will win and reproductive rights will no longer exist. And sometimes acting strategically means sacrificing a symbolic gesture to ensure that the next justice will uphold Roe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnWxy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
170. Catholic nuns urge passage of Obama's HCR. Call accusation it supports abortion a LIE

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

excerpt from theri letterurging passage:


"..despite false claims to the contrary, the Senate bill will not provide taxpayer funding for elective abortions. It will uphold longstanding conscience protections and it will make historic new investments - $250 million - in support of pregnant women. This is the REAL pro-life stance, and we as Catholics are all for it."





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
177. It is sad and pitiful, isn't it?
One of the more offensive things I've seen from this Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
179. "It's just a two minute prayer"!!!!11111!!! "Get over it!!!111!!"
"Obama's just trying to show bi-partisanship!!!111"

"Rick Warren isn't as bad as you all want to paint him!!!111!!!"

"It's just PR, it doesn't mean anything!!!11111!"




Sorry but symbolic acts have consequences and they matter. Those of you who want to diminish the import of this Executive Order on abortion are as myopic as those who said that Rick Warren's prayer meant nothing sinister to the LGBT movement (when in fact, it crystallizes so much of what's wrong with this Admin's approach to LGBT issues).

This EO codifies this Admin's position on abortion, and codifies it in the most restrictive way possible. There is significance to this, and long term ramifications.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #179
186. +
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #179
194. If that's what this is about, just come out and say it. Don't pretend
to be outraged about the Stupak order when it is really the 'prayer' that you're still angry about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AuntPatsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
180. it is an injustice not to be angry
when remembering those of our sisters who have fought amd suffered so that we women and minoritys can enjoy the freedoms we have being seen as swinging back in time and yet it is also an injustice to ignore what our president is having to deal with in regards to the whole spectrum of politics. i am more angry at we the people, we do those that have fought before us the injustice of walking in their shoes by facing the same odds they have with the same determination regardless of finding ourselves with the threat of losing our highly valued creature comforts, internet access being a strong deterent for far to many
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kitty Herder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
185. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gleaner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 05:01 AM
Response to Original message
190. It has a heck of an impact if you need an abortion and ...
have to depend on federal funding to do it. I am pro choice and I find this very offensive. This was not an abortion bill, it was supposed to be a health insurance bill. Not a bill I think is effective or that will be very helpful, but it had nothing to do with anyone's abortion agenda.

Let the people who want to deny a woman's right to choice step out in the open and try to get the issue to stand or fall on its own instead of hiding it on legislation that is not about abortion.

I gave you a rec and you are still at 0. But at least I can give it a kick. Why does it bother people so badly when we disagree with Obama and his legislation and finagling? He is not above criticism; he is not above dissent. He has not dealt honestly or fairly with his base. Those who want to think otherwise are free to do so, but so are those of us who do not. You do not enhance Obama's image or your own when you behave badly. In fact you make him look even worse. For heavens sake get some perspective. You can't hide what he is doing by trying to hassle people who comment on it. I for one just become more determined to speak my mind. And that is what I am going to do. No matter what names I am called or how I am pushed not to speak. If you don't like it, don't read it or block it. Or call names. I don't care. It reflects on you most of all, not on the people who are under attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 06:48 AM
Response to Original message
192. Why was my one supportive-of-Nikki, non-snarky post from yesterday deleted w/o a reason?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #192
198. Along with the thanks for your support
weird

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toasterlad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
193. Actually, He Kicked You Under the Bus When He Let Donnie McClurkin Campaign For Him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Oct 23rd 2017, 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC