AP: Stupak “more optimistic” on ObamaCare deal
posted at 9:11 pm on March 8, 2010 by Allahpundit
Remember, the Stupak bloc voted for Pelosi’s bill in November so she wouldn’t be picking up any new votes if they made a deal this time. They’d be right around 216, still with no margin for error and plenty of fidgety Blue Dogs thinking hard about November.
But let’s face it. With the main pillar of opposition having crumbled and maybe one or two votes the difference between passage and defeat, it’d take more courage at that point to vote no than to vote yes. Gulp:
Rep. Bart Stupak said he expects to resume talks with House leaders this week in a quest for wording that would impose no new limits on abortion rights but also would not allow use of federal money for the procedure.
“I’m more optimistic than I was a week ago,” Stupak said in an interview between meetings with constituents in his northern Michigan district. He was hosting a town hall meeting Monday night at a local high school.
“The president says he doesn’t want to expand or restrict current law (on abortion). Neither do I,” Stupak said. “That’s never been our position. So is there some language that we can agree on that hits both points — we don’t restrict, we don’t expand abortion rights? I think we can get there.”
As far as I know, the only way they can fix the abortion language to Stupak’s liking would be via a separate third bill that would have to pass the House and Senate. (They can’t do it in reconciliation because abortion isn’t related to budgetary matters.) Ed is skeptical that Obama would go for that but I don’t see a problem: He’s already crapped away so much political capital on this, what’s a few ounces more? Besides, his base will be happy enough to have finally passed O-Care that they’ll tolerate a cave on abortion.
The real question is what sort of guarantee Reid and Pelosi can give to Stupak that they’ll actually take up an abortion bill later. Remember, the first thing that has to happen is the House passing Reid’s Senate bill. Everything after that is a wild card, which is why House Democrats are nervous about Reid or Obama stabbing them in the back by abandoning the reconciliation process once the Senate bill is passed. Stupak would have to worry about that plus being stabbed in the back on the promise of a separate abortion “fix.” And even if an abortion bill were introduced, they’d need 60 votes in the Senate to get it through.
If the GOP wanted to play hardball here, McConnell and Boehner could issue a statement saying that Republicans will not vote for any abortion fix later on but will instead vote “present” as a way of protesting the passage of ObamaCare. That would leave Stupak in a bind because, without Republican votes, there’s likely no way an abortion bill to his liking would pass the House or Senate. The risk is, if the GOP makes that move, then the pro-choice Democratic congressional majority could pass a law providing for abortions to be fully funded under ObamaCare, which would leave Republicans who voted “present” with some ‘splaining to do to pro-life groups. Exit question: What happens now?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
I live in Stupak’s district and to be honest I am having trouble believing what I am seeing. Rep. Stupak may be many things, but he would not cave in on abortion like this… Unbelievable.
That said:
I do not think there is enough information either way. The report just says talks have resumed and those talks may just lead to nowhere. Never doubt the Shiny One factor either, he may just hit himself again. All we can do is hope, pray, and swamp Stupak with messages both textual and vocal.
Shogun144 on March 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
Might as well be honest if you’re going to be part of the death of the United States, Bart-baby.
MrScribbler on March 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
What makes you believe that?
The process seems to care little about the will of the people.
Itchee Dryback on March 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
people like Representative Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) are the entire problem. Yet Massa himself apparently was willing to stand on principle and leave office rather than be intimidated into a vote for Obamacare.
None of the god forsaken representatives in this nation are clean, and can be blackmailed or pushed out of office at any time by a Chicago thug enterprise such as we have in the White House and the hired guns we have in the house and senate who are willing to do the dirty work. This is how politics works in our nation today.
astonerii on March 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
So basically, the moral of the story is: “Don’t pin your hopes on the integrity of Democrats”
darii on March 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM
Remember, PR thinks Obama is intelligent…
MeatHeadinCA on March 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM
Get your stupid bullcrap out of here, troll.
GOP with a weak Senate trying to override a Presidential veto? Yeah, nobody here is stupid enough to buy the sludge you’re selling.
fossten on March 8, 2010 at 10:06 PM
As objectionable as the abortion component is, and as much as it fires up a significant chunk of both Republicans and Democrats, it’s not the sum of why people hate this bill. It’s only a part.
More than hating the fact that this bill would force taxpayers to pay for abortion, they hate it because it subjugates the will of the people to the will of the government, when they know the American contract with the very notion of government is founded on exactly the opposite principle.
The Dems can pass this with or without the abortion language – I still think they will take a beating beyond comprehension in November, and probably well beyond.
greggriffith on March 8, 2010 at 10:07 PM
Pass it Dems.
Red state Democrats, border state Democrats, and swing state Democrats get eviscerated in November. Repeal Obama care and pass free market reforms.
What if conservatives do not take back the Senate? Harry Reid will be gone and in the face of a red tsunami whoever is left is not going to stand in the way. If they do. It’s a two year flogging of Obama (and he most definitely loses in 2012.) And Republicans take back the Senate in 2012. There is alot of red meat running in the Senate in 2012. Claire. McCaskill.
Theworldisnotenough on March 8, 2010 at 10:08 PM
From youtube archives via Sweetness & Light…
Stupak: “Let’s say we get 217, and we lose, would I vote against health care? If I had the chance to vote my conscience on it, I probably would not. I probably would still vote for the Health Care Bill at the end of the day.”
“If everything I want [is] in the final bill, I like everything in the bill except you have public funding for abortion, and we had a chance to run our amendment and we lost. OK, I voted my conscience, stayed true to my principles, stayed true to the beliefs of this district, could I vote for healthcare? Yes I still could.”
Once a rat…always a rat. Nothing new here
lukespapa on March 8, 2010 at 10:09 PM
Ya thaynk?
Chewy the Lab on March 8, 2010 at 10:09 PM
Humpbot, R.I.P.
ThePrez on March 8, 2010 at 10:09 PM
The legislative process doesn’t care at all on account of it being the legislative process.
If health care reform passes, run against it, win, and repeal it. Pretty straightforward.
Proud Rino on March 8, 2010 at 10:10 PM
this is simply profoundly disgusting. . .it is all a political football game with absolutely NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in what is actually good legislation for the nation as a whole. . .interesting to watch and speculate on but far more heartbreaking than anything else.
Willie on March 8, 2010 at 10:11 PM
Nonsense. Obama still wants to get re-elected, doesn’t he? If health care reform is just going to get repealed in 2013, he’ll sign it through if it continues to be unpopular.
And there are a lot of red state Democrats up for re-election in 2012.
Proud Rino on March 8, 2010 at 10:12 PM
Well, from his pov he wouldn’t be caving on abortion. They’re going to sell him a line of goods that will appeal to him and he’ll be happy and vote for it.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 10:13 PM
Basically, yeah. Democrats are liars. Stupak is grandstanding. If the man thought that much of the unborn, he’d have voted to defund PP. He didn’t. The man is a Democrat. Id est, he’s a liar.
spmat on March 8, 2010 at 10:15 PM
We can hope!
Oink on March 8, 2010 at 10:21 PM
Obama doesn’t care about getting re-elected anymore; haven’t you been listening to him?
He has already said he’d rather be a “great” 1 termer then a mediocre 2 termer. Which was a dig at Bill Clinton, btw.
In his eyes he’d be a “great” 1 termer if health care passed. If he loses re-election because of it, he doesn’t care.
Kamikaze man, kamikaze.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 10:21 PM
What a Pelosi whore…
Cheese, this guy had his 15 minutes of fame when he falsely stood up for right to life.
Seriously, look up the word “whore” in the dictionary??? Guess who’s mug is next to it??? I’m sorry, there is no other word to describe this slimeball.
Chewy the Lab on March 8, 2010 at 10:22 PM
Well, in that particular case, he was actually lying, but the other times he was telling the truth.
/s
MeatHeadinCA on March 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM
I think he’d prefer to be a great 2 termer even more, which is why he’ll be running.
No.
If Obama doesn’t win in 2012, it’s not like another Democrat wins. A Republican wins, with a Republican wave in both houses. Bye bye health care reform.
Proud Rino on March 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM
I smell another Cornhusker-style Kickback.
Ugh.
NebCon on March 8, 2010 at 10:27 PM
Yup, I’ve heard the quote a million times. Here’s the deal… “Great one term President” is an oxymoron. If yu-own-self is a one termer, um, guess what??? That means that you registered a negative sumpin’ sumpin on the greatness scale. And, if y’all were great…cheese! it wouldn’t be one term, homey!
Chewy the Lab on March 8, 2010 at 10:27 PM
The Blue Dogs are totally untrustworthy. They are scum no different from the rest of the dems.
This is why attending that voodoo re-animation ritual summit was such a bad idea. This nation does, indeed, hang in the balance.
neurosculptor on March 8, 2010 at 10:29 PM
Obama was saying he wants to do what president Clinton failed to do. Clinton won re-election but he gave up on the BIG liberal HC cause making him -in O’s eyes- a mediocre 2 termer.
I’m sorry but that’s what he was saying.
Obama is using everything in his power to pass this thing because he believes it’s his calling do it. He will stop at nothing. He’s a man possessed now. It’s clear to anyone paying attention right now.
If HC passes in any way shape or form, Obama sits back and doesn’t give a rip what happens next. Bank on that.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Lincoln only won his second term because the south wasn’t allowed to vote, and he only won the first because the pro-slavery vote split 3 ways.
He was a pretty good president.
Proud Rino on March 8, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Stupak wins the coverted “Rusty Coathanger” award from NARAL
TexasJew on March 8, 2010 at 10:33 PM
Somebody check Stupak’s cheekbones.
JKahn913 on March 8, 2010 at 10:33 PM
The thing that everyone is missing when they talk about Obama this and Obama that, is that every single person with a D (and no doubt some with an R) wants this bill or something more liberal and encroaching. Every one of them. Obama isn’t wagering or risking or doing anything. He’s just the front man. They all want to pass it. They all want to f*** America and punish its prosperity in the name of “fairness”. Every one of them.
LibTired on March 8, 2010 at 10:35 PM
PBHO seems to be spending an inordinate amount of time on a policy he had promised to pivot away from a month or so back.
But hey, only 36,000 Americans lost their jobs last week and that is great news.
Bishop on March 8, 2010 at 10:36 PM
The optimist in me says they don’t have the votes or it would have been voted on and signed into law by now.
The pessimist in me says we are screwed as there are no moderate democrats as we found none in the Senate when they voted.
Btw, Charlie Crist is spewing his BS on Gretta.
gatorfanatic on March 8, 2010 at 10:37 PM
In 2013 after he loses re-election but HC has passed: “Listen, I may have lost my re-election bid last year, but I accomplished something that nobody else accomplished in 60 years. Now, to me, that’s a pretty outstanding accomplishment.”
Great 1 termer in his eyes. And remember, it’s ALL about him.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 10:37 PM
That’s the arrogance of this pr#^k. He thinks it would make him a great 1 term President because he believes that we are all ignorant,peons and if he’s voted out, that would just prove how great he is!
Vince on March 8, 2010 at 10:38 PM
I think the essential strategy is mushroom management. Remember all these people love to be in the spotlight. Most of them will do or say anything to get their face on the tube.
The end game will be that we’ll get an anouncement that the house “vote” is scheduled. It won’t be a long delay when they make the announcement…two/three days.
Quick vote from the house…they get 216 (and protect a few)…and it will be over.
Obambi/Media will cheer great victory for people
r keller on March 8, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Interesting timing, coming after Massa’s resignation and all…
Midas on March 8, 2010 at 10:42 PM
… and he’ll be in charge at the UN in short order afterwards, I”m sure. lol
Midas on March 8, 2010 at 10:43 PM
Today: Health care reform, tomorrow…the UN.
Did you see the look on his face when he sat down in front of all those crooks and criminals at the UN early on?
That smug grin and head turned up. Yeah, that’s next after this whole POTUS gig ends.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 10:46 PM
Before we get all bent out of shape:
If they have the votes now, why aren’t they….VOTING?
Sekhmet on March 8, 2010 at 10:47 PM
We’ve all been concentrating on Stupak, but are the Unions okay with the Senate bill if it passes the House? As I recall the Union deal came after the Christmas Eve vote, so would have to be “fixed”. I bet Bambi is way more afraid of pissing off the Unions than Stupak.
txmomof6 on March 8, 2010 at 10:49 PM
They don’t have the votes now. But they don’t need the votes now. When Pelosi had twisted enough arms and Obama has paid enough money out, THEN they’ll have the votes.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 10:51 PM
Nothing. The evil Trinity have shown no interest in being “centrist” about anything. Abortion is their sacrament. They will never relent on it.
SouthernGent on March 8, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Sean Hannity has always said this guy would cave. Yes, Mary Poppins Polyanna Republican rose-colored glasses wearing Sean Hannity.
Marcus on March 8, 2010 at 11:09 PM
It doesn’t take Sean Hannity to say that this guy will cave.
B Man on March 8, 2010 at 11:12 PM
This is why attending that voodoo re-animation ritual summit was such a bad idea. This nation does, indeed, hang in the balance.
neurosculptor on March 8, 2010 at 10:29 PM
absolutely. The gop hunched over so berri & Co. could stand on their backs and jump over the fence one more time.
But the real villian here is none other than Mitch McConnell. He is the reason that the bill, all 2000+ pages of it wasn’t read in the Senate TWICE before Christmas. If they had used that, and every other parliamentary maneuver in their quiver, the bill would still be stalled in the Senate as of today.
It was McConnell that enabled the fast track and the Christmas Eve vote that brought the bill to the House and this nation to the edge of destruction. McConnell has been saying for months that if obamacare passes, that will be a great thing to run on for the mid-terms. Should win the gop a lot of seats! The dunderhead is hoping to pick up some seats and thinks the shattering of our country is a good way to do it. Meanwhile, berri has plans for the remaking of America, in his image and likeness. This way to hell…
tigerlily on March 8, 2010 at 11:13 PM
Ruh-roh…I have a terrible feeling that the Winter-Water-Wonderland is about to receive a lovely gift from Bambi. And isn’t it convenient that Meecheegan is also home to so many proud Union members…who will surely be bestowed with favors if only Stupack & Co. are willing to rethink their votes. Crap.
redwhiteblue on March 8, 2010 at 11:13 PM
This is just the tip of the iceberg… have you guys seen the WSJ’s article on Obama’s immigration plan?!?
NATIONAL.
ID.
CARD.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703954904575110124037066854.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird
FRAK THAT.
Skywise on March 8, 2010 at 11:24 PM
I believe a famous British Actor, turned American TV hospital drama star, once said in character the following:
“Everyone lies, Politicians just turn it into an Art form”
A little pork there, a family member getting a governmental job here, a little party donation (or threat to remove it), and Hey… all of the sudden, your conscience just can’t let you honestly stop an overall “great” piece of legislation simply because you’re selfish
Razgriez on March 8, 2010 at 11:25 PM
Are there any men and women left in political life who stand on principle and do the right thing for its own sake? Those calling themselves moderates know what Obamacare means for individual choice and personal liberty, know it is fiscally unsustainable, know burgeoning hard-left statism leads to inevitable cultural decline and economic stagnation, yet they’re voting for it, anyway. For what? Why? I don’t get it. I can’t figure it out.
This isn’t about abortion, that bloody, dismal business. Stupak and those other fence-sitters must know state-funded abortions on demand are coming if this monster passes in any form. He and others are simply using the abortion issue as political cover to mollify their sometimes right-leaning, pro-life constituencies. That’s it, that’s all.
No legislator should vote Present on this, however clever the short-term political strategy voting Present may seem. This vote–more than any other in recent memory–determines the course of our country for decades to come. For a politician to say he or she voted ‘Present’ on the most important vote of their respective careers just isn’t good enough.
troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2010 at 12:05 AM
The spectacle continues and Obama keeps imploding in front of the world. More Beck shows to follow.
Schadenfreude on March 9, 2010 at 12:31 AM
I agree with Rino. Either you’re against a socialist boondoggle or as Biden said, “You agree government should be involved, you just disagree where.” Stick repeal on every House bill. Demand it. DO something, instead of just applauding how smart you are not to get caught pulling the wagon.
Chris_Balsz on March 9, 2010 at 12:32 AM
Getting the bill nailed down on paper was an important step to get the debate shifted from rainbows and unicorns and istead on to kickbacks and cadillac taxes that offended big ticket supporters.
pedestrian on March 9, 2010 at 12:32 AM
We have nine days until the supposed vote.
I’m starting a Novena to St. Joseph, (nine consecutive days of prayer for a specific request of God) whose Feast day is March 18, the same day as the supposed “vote”.
It was St. Joseph who protected the Blessed Mother and the Infant Christ from Herod’s slaughter of the Innocents by taking the Child and His Mother out of Bethlehem, heeding the warning of an angel in a dream.
I am praying that St. Joseph will intercede with His Son for the protection of the innocents from the slaughter that B. Herod obama has planned for them. If anyone else would like to pray for the next nine days asking God to shatter this mad man’s plans completely, please start your novena tonight or tomorrow.
tigerlily on March 9, 2010 at 12:33 AM
Those who are willing to sacrifice their medical liberty for the sake of a little medical security deserve neither.
They won’t take my liberties without a fight.
Skywise on March 9, 2010 at 12:43 AM
I read and read and see no one who ever looks at what seems obvious to me as the key to defeating this thing.
Who are the Democrats that Pelosi allowed to vote “NO” on the initial House HCR Bill?
Those are the people everyone should be writing to, calling, bugging the heck out of.
Those are the people who were already so scared months ago that their vote would cost them re-election that they begged to be let off the hook.
Identify those people and I believe you will have found the votes that will defeat any vote on the Senate HCR Bill in the House this time.
All the “Stupak Gang” voted “yes” the last time. Them voting “yes” this time would give you the same number of votes “yes” MINUS 4 votes — the Wexler, Murtha, Abercrombie, “yes” votes who are gone and the Gao (R-LA) vote that has changed to “yes”.
Needed to pass this time: 216
“Yes” Last Time (-) Gone or Changed: 220 (-) 4 = 216
We need to identify and start pinning down the Democrats who voted “no” or “present/didn’t vote” last time. Those are the only possible people one can hope will stick with their “no” votes. The rest are politically posturing.
Greyledge Gal on March 9, 2010 at 1:15 AM
“The President promised to stay away from my District this fall, Howard Dean promised me a blank check from the DNC, and ACORN promised all the vote fraud I’d need to survive the fall,” said Stupak after ducking rotten tomatoes thrown by constituents.
“Plus Rahm Emmanuel said he’d beat me up if I didn’t go along with it. I really like the convenience of the Congressional Gym and he’s always hanging around there,” he continued after making sure the President’s Consigliere was not within earshot, “You have no idea how intimidating he is in the locker room.”
MrBrowncoat on March 9, 2010 at 1:24 AM
We need to identify and start pinning down the Democrats who voted “no” or “present/didn’t vote” last time. Those are the only possible people one can hope will stick with their “no” votes. The rest are politically posturing.
Greyledge Gal on March 9, 2010 at 1:15 AM
Dick Morris has identitifed 30 vulnerable House Democrats. Go to his website, http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/for the list and phone numbers and call them!!!!!
Then go back to praying, because human efforts alone are useless against this pack of demons.
tigerlily on March 9, 2010 at 1:45 AM
tigerlily on March 9, 2010 at 12:33 AM
P.S. You don’t have to make your novena to St. Joseph for obama’s total defeat. You can pray for the next nine days for the intercession of any favorite saint, the Angels or the Blessed Mother.
It goes without saying, but on this site it must be said, that they will be praying with you and for you to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
tigerlily on March 9, 2010 at 1:50 AM
Jay Cost has some friendly advice for Moderate Democrats still contemplating how to vote on the Senate version of HC. Look around, because you could be gone in one year less two months.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2010/03/its_time_for_moderate_house_de.html
Americannodash on March 9, 2010 at 2:09 AM
Umm…no. Lincoln did not win because of the split in the proslavery vote 3 ways. He won all the Northern states basically running against Douglas with Bell taking a few votes here and there. He did not have the majority of the country, but he did have the majority of the North. The South was totally irrelevant in the election of Lincoln. It’s called the electoral college see presidential election of 2000.
cpaulus on March 9, 2010 at 2:15 AM
While everyone is focusing on Stupak, there were more than 50 house Democrats that voted for his ammendment last time around.
Since the senate already voted against that same ammendment, how could anyone expect them to vote for it even in as a ‘reconciliation’?
As mentioned last week, this is a test to see who the stupidest democrats really are!
Freddy on March 9, 2010 at 3:14 AM
Apparently you a) can’t address my argument b) can’t count Senate seats and c) don’t understand the principle of overriding a veto.
fossten on March 9, 2010 at 6:14 AM
Yeah, because this country has such a GREAT history of repealing themselves money.
Notorious GOP on March 9, 2010 at 6:41 AM
I was with you right up until just before the end. Technically, you are correct that the electoral college and Northern populations favored Lincoln but to call the South irrelevant is a mis-statement. Northerners made the same mistake the current crop of Dems make. They think they can ignore vast swaths of America and govern by numerical advantage only. They didn’t call it fly-over country in Lincoln’s day but the treatment was the same.
Lincoln was to the South an extreme candidate. It would be as if the Dems in 2008 ran Bill Ayers instead of his mini-me radical socialist clone. The fact of the matter is that slavery as an institution was dying because it was becoming increasingly financially inviable. Had the GOP opted for a less radical candidate, it is probable that the Civil War could have been avoided completely. Slavery may have been around into the 1870s but would eventually have ended without the bloodshed.
Bottom line, sometimes being able to bully your way into office is not the same thing as effective governance. Lincoln’s election brought about the dissolution of the union solely because the South was ignored and abused by Northern interests. For this reason, I have a hard time buying into the idea that Lincoln was one of our great leaders.
highhopes on March 9, 2010 at 7:11 AM
Stupid couldn’t really be that Stupak to believe abortion funding will be “fixed” via subsequent legislation, could he? He sounds like a man ready to surrender his convictions. So when he passes from this earth and faces Saint Peter at the pearly gates, he can say, “Well, I held out as long as I could, but I had to let all those additional babies die from Federally-funded abortions because my political party was gonna be really, really mean to me if I didn’t give in.”
I’m sure that’ll fly.
olesparkie on March 9, 2010 at 7:34 AM
The abortion issue was never going to be the deal-breaker.It was and is a smokescreen.With 2500 pages of garbage,did anyone ever really think one issue would kill the bill?Bambi will just couch the funding in Chi-town double talk,and the bill will pass.
Regardless of one’s personal feeling on abortion,as long as Roe v.Wade is the law of the land, the abortion issue will always be a red herring.
DDT on March 9, 2010 at 7:36 AM
Never trust a politician with Blagovich-like helmet hair.
highhopes on March 9, 2010 at 7:40 AM
Dear Ignorant Rubes:
I won the election. I know what’s best for you. Get over it. Now bend over and take it like a man.
Sincerely,
The One
uncalheels on March 9, 2010 at 7:55 AM
stupak is working toward a way that many dems can vote YES for this bill. that is all that he is doing. he will compromise on what many people consider to be a fundamental principle so that he can enable & advance the downfall of our economy. why he wants to destroy our country, I do not know.
my congressman, Perriello, 5th CD, VA, promised up one side & down the other that he would not vote for a bill that provided fed funding for abortions. he wants to vote for this bill so baaaaaad so he is hoping Stupak can give him some cover.
kelley in virginia on March 9, 2010 at 7:56 AM
GUTLESS POLITICIANS?
Who knew?
How many times must we cry from the rooftops? How many times must we SHOUT to the D.C. crapheads in Power that we are looking for GUTS/FORTITUDE/CAJONES/STEEL SPINED…..LEADERS!!!!!!!!
Leaders that can stand up and cry out for INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY FROM THE ALL POWERFUL GOVERNMENT!!!!
PappyD61 on March 9, 2010 at 8:20 AM
Stupak’s difficulty is that he has become so high profile on this issue that any change will get attention and any new language will be carefully reviewed.
Ben Nelson was supposedly pro-life but got conned by what Sebelius later bragged was an accounting gimmick. I think Stupak rejected the Nelson language during the original negotiations.
And it’s not just the language – it’s how to get it in. He knows that he can’t rely on a promise that it’ll get into reconciliation, because this is a policy matter, and reconciliation can only be used to reduce the deficit.
He has to know some kind of amending legislation would never make it past the Senate liberals and would only be introduced “in the near future.”
Like never, once Obama has signed the Senate version.
Wethal on March 9, 2010 at 8:20 AM
Take a look at the letter next to his name. Is it a D? There’s your answer.
angryed on March 9, 2010 at 8:20 AM
I think Obama may actually promise and deliver what Stupak wants via a second or third bill. And Reid and Co. will deliver as well.
They have 9 months left before the party is over for Dems. They have CapNTax, amnesty and card check on the to do list. Taking over health care is the biggie, but by no means is it the only thing.
So if Obama/Reid throw Stupak under the bus and don’t give him what he wants, he – and his gang – will not exactly be ready to vote for amnesty and card check (they’ve already voted for CapNTax).
Then again Obama is a thug and he will find a way to intimidate everyone on voting yes for everything else.
Either way, ObamaCare, amnesty, capntax and card check will be law by 2011.
angryed on March 9, 2010 at 8:25 AM
These are not honorable men and women . . . they’re slimy leftist politicos.
rplat on March 9, 2010 at 8:30 AM
The GOP should vote “present” and worry about the consequences later. The pro-life folks need to know just how corrupt the Dems are on their issue.
Besides, abortion is NOT a Federal issue, and it should never be considered in Federal court. JMO
DavidAllen on March 9, 2010 at 8:31 AM
I went to bed too early I guess…PR actually proved my point for me (That great one term pres. is an oxymoron.).
So, was Lincoln a one termer? No. Name me one great one termer…Carter???? I hear crickets.
Chewy the Lab on March 9, 2010 at 8:31 AM
Well, we’ve only had 3 “great” presidents by most definitions (Washington, Lincoln, FDR), so that’s kind of unfair. My point is that Lincoln only won w/55% of the vote in 1864, but that’s because the Southern states weren’t allowed to vote, that’s not exactly a mandate.
Your earlier point was that presidents who were unpopular had to be bad presidents, and that’s what I’m disagreeing with. Your point can’t just be the arbitrary length of the term, right? If Washington decided only to run for one term, would he still not be a great president? Come on.
If it’s *just* based on the one term standard, then (assuming we don’t pick VPs who were elected after serving out the remainder of their predecessor’s term, which eliminates TR, Coolidge, and LBJ) the best one-termer was Polk, who’s a top 10 president but generally not regarded as a “great” president, but he didn’t seek re-election, so that doesn’t really hold up if the standard is more about popularity.
After that, the best is probably Taft. I actually think Taft is an underrated president, but no one would call him great either.
Proud Rino on March 9, 2010 at 8:58 AM
As predicted, all Stupak’s noise was about having his price met.
Everyone is a whore in Washington.
wildcat84 on March 9, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Proving once again that when members of Congress hold up legislation it has nothing to do with prinicple. It’s all about what how high a price they can garner for their vote. In this case, considering the stakes, the Stupak buyoff must come at a price that would make even Ben Nelson blush.
t.ferg on March 9, 2010 at 9:07 AM
He’ll cave with the rest. Say goodbye to the potential babies.
Annar on March 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM
Right before Easter they are working out their 30 pieces of silver deal. Why is it the libs are always trying to do their evil dark deeds right before Christmas or Easter?
immigrantchick on March 9, 2010 at 9:36 AM
I don’t understand your reasoning on this.
The legislative process is staffed by legislators..who are to represent the will of the governed.
This will has been expressed over and over.
Your “simple” solution involves years of process.
At that point the option of private insurance companies will no longer exist….but you know that.
Itchee Dryback on March 9, 2010 at 9:42 AM
If you mean “any damn Yankee trying to open a United States polling station in the Confederacy would have been lynched in broad daylight by a cheering mob” then yeah, they “weren’t allowed” to vote.
Well, I got the rest of my life. How bout you?
Chris_Balsz on March 9, 2010 at 9:51 AM
When will someone point out that illegals will be covered by Obama DeathCare?
darwin on March 9, 2010 at 10:02 AM
I knew that group would cave. They’ve got more reason to vote yes than no. Hope the people in his district remember.
Kissmygrits on March 9, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Joe Wilson did. And you saw what happened to him. Everyone else is probably afraid of the same treatment.
WesternActor on March 9, 2010 at 10:13 AM
Because those two days have absolutely no meaning to them whatsoever except being a way to hide bad news?
WesternActor on March 9, 2010 at 10:14 AM
Elections have consequences. Elections have consequences.
redwhiteblue on March 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM
I agree that the better thing is to stop this before it passes. But I don’t see why, if it passes, it can’t be repealed at the latest by 2013 – before the benefits even kick in.
And if it’s as unpopular as you guys say, remember, it should be pretty easy. Unless you secretly think that Americans actually might want health care reform.
I’m sure the Southerners would have been very happy to vote in the 1864 election. Remember that the representatives and senators of the southern states wanted to continue voting in DC even though they had already seceded.
Obviously, I think it was the right decision not to allow them to participate in government at that point, they wanted to destroy the United States!
Proud Rino on March 9, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »