Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 05:48 PM
Original message |
|
Quite recently the House vote seen as a mere formality and votes were being rounded up for medicare+5.
Suddenly the House is life-and-death just to pass a less robust plan with an atavistic anti-choice measure being needed to get over the goal line.
Is this all about independent voters in New Jersey and Virginia?
Were the House Dem opponents just laying back hoping for a wing-nut miracle before making the extent of their opposition known?
Both? Neither?
|
| aSpeckofDust
(292 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 05:49 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. The church and it's house followers happened. They are a party onto themselves. |
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 05:50 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. New Jersey and Virginia spooked a lot of people |
|
as did state wide races in other states.
of course acknowledging that isn't liked around these parts.
|
| bbinacan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
that had something to do with it.
|
| high density
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
| 14. Well in Maine we just voted down a couple of crazy right-wing tax ideas |
|
Yet I haven't seen Olympia Snowe quaking in her boots and getting a clue.
|
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
| 16. I think her being a Senator |
|
and not being re-elected till 2012 has something to do with it...you also voted down gay marriage at the same time.
|
| high density
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
| 19. So some people are spooked because you say they are |
|
and others aren't because you say they aren't. Yep, got it.
|
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
| 20. That is pretty accurate |
|
I'm pretty sure Evan Bayh can give a shit less, he has 12 million dollars and is the most popular politician in Indiana.
I'd say someone in the House who won election for the first time in 2006 or 2008 from a district that used to be republican is probably a little more spooked and I'd say that democratic governor's up for re-election or the nomination in 2010 are shitting their pants.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 05:54 PM
Response to Original message |
| 4. this wasn't as close as it appeared. Pelosi released some Dems in Red Districts to vote against it. |
|
I really don't think Kucinich would have voted against it if his vote had made the difference, either.
|
| demwing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 5. Iilke to believe that, but am unconvinced |
|
a link to a good source would be appreciated, if possible
|
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 6. They almost postponed the vote on Friday |
|
and if it wasn't for the President personally walking to the House Saturday this would have failed.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
| 7. did it pass, or did it pass? |
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
| 8. I'm addressing your premise |
|
You said people were released...there was not a confirmation of 218 votes till miday Saturday. On Friday there was talk of postponement.
This was a squeaker. If it wasn't a squeaker I doubt we would have had an hour long debate on a woman's right to choose right before the vote.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
| 9. Pelosi knew what she had. She wouldn't have held the vote if it had a chance of failing. |
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
| 10. There would be no-anti choice admentment |
|
on Friday if she knew what she had going into Saturday.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
| 11. first, it's not anti-choice, it's anti-subsidy. second, Nancy allowed the amendment. |
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
| 12. I'm sure the leadership in the house |
|
wanted an hour debate on abortion prior to making history
:rofl:
|
| high density
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
| 15. Well if that was needed to get the votes |
|
It seems to have worked.
:rofl:
|
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
| 18. Didn't say it didn't work |
|
just saying if this was a done deal this week...that amendment would have never made it to the floor.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
| 21. how else would the amendment have been added? |
|
it had to go to the floor.
|
| AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
| 22. Yes but the House Leadership decides what comes to the floor for debate |
|
So if this was a done deal..guess what this would have not been debated last night.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
| 23. perhaps the deal with the blue dogs was for the vote, not a guarantee of inclusion |
|
if the amendment had failed, the language would not be included in the Bill
|
| villager
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
| 17. It is, of course, anti-choice, in that the pratical effect is to limit what poor women can chose |
|
Edited on Sun Nov-08-09 06:26 PM by villager
as in "actually chose to do."
Kind of like, sure, abortion's "legal," but we'll keep murdering abortion doctors and watch the government do nothing about the hate groups behind the killings. Voila! Fewer doctors performing abortions!
Hence, in a very real practical way, "choice" is limited.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
| 24. are there currently any government subsidies for abortion? |
| Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
| 25. Is it your impression that all exchange-offered plan customers are subsidized? |
|
Edited on Sun Nov-08-09 07:11 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
If a choice-plan cannot be offered through The Exchange we are not just talking about government money.
We are talking about access, cost containment, convenience, availability from certain employers, etc..
If I can purchase a choice-plan through the exchange please correct me. I do not want to be mis-informed on the point.
|
| Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
| 26. you can purchase a plan, just not with the subsidy. it has to be a rider which you pay for yourself. |
|
Edited on Sun Nov-08-09 07:16 PM by Aramchek
|
| villager
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-09-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
| 27. it prevents insurance companies from offering coverage *already included* in current policies |
|
It is an anti-choice rollback. Quite obviously.
|
| DrToast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 06:18 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)     |
Wed Jul 30th 2025, 12:38 PM
Response to Original message |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
