You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Roe’ category.
comes from this tweet
the first I set my eyes on this morning. It seems the Rs are not content with the Jane Crow provision eliminating public insurance, they want termination of pregnancy to cease to be a medical expense all together.
Explains the article
They view it as a Trojan horse for the elimination of private insurance coverage for abortion. If they’re right, tens of millions of Americans could see their health insurers stop covering abortions.
The article goes in a detailed analysis of the effect of this proposed bill on tax deductions for abortions, and therefore loss of incentive to cover it. Wait, why do I have a feeling of deja vu?
Nowhere near is the fact that the Hyde amendment is already enshrined in an executive order, Obama’s Jane Crow EO.
What the Rs are doing now (and btw, a D is co-sponsoring this), is merely spreading around some more of the Obama’s own Stupakistan. You know, the one Pelosi and others hailed as a great step forward for women.
That Rs do not consider this good enough is significant, but one cannot write about extending the Hyde amendment and ignore this event. At least, not in good faith, Mother Jones.
Stupak does get a paragraph in the story, but Obama’s name is nowhere to be seen.
This article seems a Newspeak effort, designed not so much to inform about a new bill proposal as to – once again exonerate Obama of his betrayal.
After endorsing Obama over Hillary, after cheering for the historical healthcare reform, it seems someone at Planned Parenthood finally read the small print.
This is a letter they sent a member
This is not what we worked for. This is not what we fought for.
I agree. You worked for defeating the first woman president.
You and I, and millions of Planned Parenthood supporters, fought
for a year to make sure that health care reform would provide
comprehensive coverage to every woman, man, and child in
America. We achieved some tremendous victories, including
defeating the Stupak amendment that would have banned private
insurance coverage of abortion for millions of women.
Someone missed the detail that Stupak eventually won – more than he really wanted
Now, a Stupak-like rule is back — and it came from the Obama
Now the rule is back? Did they sleep through the signing of the Jane Crow EO?
Well, it’s true, Obama did reach new heights of anti-Roe
but the decision announced by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services yesterday goes beyond even these
The Obama administration has decided that no woman in the new
high-risk insurance pools will be allowed to obtain abortion
coverage beyond limited cases (rape, incest, endangering the
life of the woman). Not even if she pays for that coverage with
her own money. .
It ends hilariously with
This is not what we fought
for — which means it’s time to fight back against the Obama
administration’s abortion coverage ban now.
Uh-oh! A petition! How so very scary! Some fight against Obama!
New source for this
his week, a commotion arose over the question of whether Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plans, also known as high risk pools, can include abortion coverage. The Obama Administration responded immediately by imposing a total ban on abortion coverage in the pools that echoes the Stupak Amendment, even though nothing in the law requires such action.
Rich and criminals try to get little people at each others throats again –
in this new meme that NY Post advances today – BP thinks it’s England you see. Maybe I’ll call them UK then..And notice how Murdoch’s NY paper phrases this from UK’s P.O.V (OBAMA DRAWS BP FIRE)
And during this attempt of billionaires to hide behind little people, Mississippi becomes the 4ths state with oil in their fresh water
.And BP-s UK’s lies keep being revealed – it’s 100 milllion gallons in the ocean now
.Stars and Stripes picks the Arlington Story
.while Newsday covers another funeral of a soldier
.and in South Carolina the strange Dem nominee is certified – they’re stuck!
.I’ll end with one piece of uplifting news re: oil-kill
Remember the good old times when Democratic candidates for POTUS were telling voters that women’s right to chose is at stake because of the SCOTUS nominations? I sound very old here – as I doubt Obama made this argument – although his strategists trumpeted on Obama TV that Roe was the “ace in the hole” to bring back the women he demeaned in the primaries. We know how well this worked for them.
When Obama picked Sotomayor, he made a point in saying he didn’t even asked her about her views on women right to chose. I am old enough to remember when Democrats were accused of posing a “litmus test” on this – Obama ended this “R” worry.
In fact we are now sliding further down with this scary headline from WaPo
Abortion rulings could bring scrutiny of possible Supreme Court pick Wood
Suddenly, being for women’s right to chose (or as the RW an their media put it “abortion rights”) is no longer a Democratic principle, but a SCOTUS candidate “Achille’s heel”.
CHICAGO — If President Obama nominates U.S. Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, social conservatives say they intend to make her rulings on abortion rights the primary point of contention.
“That’s her Achilles’ heel,” said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, which opposes Wood’s rulings on abortion. “It tells you that she’s probably not going to be selected, because Obama doesn’t have the stomach for this to be about an abortion debate.“
Let me repeat this again
Obama doesn’t have the stomach for this to be about an abortion debate.“
This is pretty much telegraphing that Obama is ready to sell women in the SCOTUS pick.
While it made a modicum of sense for Obama to declare that HCR was not about the abortion debate, to say that a SCOTUS pick can be about anything else is to practically send all women back to the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.
And while I don’t know much about Diane Wood, I get an idea from Glenn Greenwald’s simile
f one were to analogize the search for Justice Stevens’ replacement to the recently concluded health care debate, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood would be the public option.
Just as the truly left-wing health care approach (a single-payer system) was eliminated from consideration before the process even began, so, too, have the truly left-wing candidates to replace Justice Stevens (Pam Karlan, Harold Koh) been ruled out as “not viable.” As a result, the moderate-progressive compromises (i.e., the public option for health care and Diane Wood for Stevens’ replacement) are falsely depicted as some sort of liberal extremism, merely because they’re the least conservative options allowed to be considered.
So, the standards – for everything – are moved to the right with the speed of light.
Women’s rights of choice have been dubbed “abortion rights” and they are now considered “the Achille’s heel” of a SCOTUS nominee. It’s a matter of time – very short – until they’ll be both outlawed and be reason for burning at the stake by our new overlords.
Women who voted for “the Feminist” – it’s on you more than it is on the men. Because you should have known better.
I have to confess, grew up in a Newspeak country. 1984 was quite the reality (and also forbidden there).
I especially remember one blood curling moment when old people were interviewed on TV about the upcoming lowering of pensions – and they were saying how happy this makes them.
And still, I was in for a shock reading this in WaPo today
Before giving up the quote, I have to preface that it comes from a political strategist, and which is more a John-I concede for the sake of the war Kerry strategist – Mary Beth Cahill. She thinks women are the biggest beneficiaries of Romney care because
Democratic female House members understood this and refused to let this bill die. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and pro-choice women stared down those who would have weakened further a woman’s right to choose and refused to accept any compromise in the legislation that would undercut women’s rights.
And if this wasn’t enough, she takes it a notch higher
Abigail Adams would be proud. The Democrats remembered the ladies — and they will benefit from it.
You see. this type of fake-out is way ahead that what I grew up with. At least those people cheering for lower pension were telling the truth about the upcoming law. With Cahill as consultant, they would have told everyone they would get an increase. Like this opening paragraph
Some argue that passage of the biggest advance in social justice since the Voting Rights Act will rally the liberal base. That is in part because some of the biggest beneficiaries are American women, who are so often key to Democratic victories.
Some argue that you are full of it, Mary.