They think they own our Bodies

Update:  Women’s Health Outrage of the moment: BREAKING: Appropriation Committee sticks gov’t-funding law that cuts $372 mil in funding for Planned Parenthood/family planning into HR358

The Republican Party is waging a war against American women and is being joined by a few bad Democratic sell outs.  Representatives like Joe Pitts are attacking the rights of women to make personal health-related decisions daily.  HR#3 is just the first of a series of bills designed to narrow definitions of rape, prevention, and what constitutes federal support of women’s reproductive health.  Any one that voted for any Republican under the guise of being pissed at Democrats should take this as a lesson.  Republicans cannot be trusted to do right by women.

This is nothing less than a crusade against the autonomy and adulthood of women. We need to take to the streets again. This is the latest affront: Under Banner of Fiscal Restraint, Republicans Plan New Abortion Bills.

All but invisible during the midterm elections, the abortion debate has returned to Congress.

Invoking the mantra of fiscal restraint that has dominated House action since lawmakers reconvened last month, Republicans began committee work this week on two bills that would greatly expand restrictions on financing for and access to abortions. Another bill, one that would cut off federal dollars to women’s health care clinics that offer abortions, is expected to surface later this year.

“This House is more pro-life than it’s ever been,” said Representative Joe Pitts, Republican of Pennsylvania and the author of one of the bills to limit money for abortions.

Democrats in both the House and Senate immediately fought back Tuesday, working closely with reproductive rights advocates. They have appropriated the Republican charge from last year that Democrats were working on a liberal policy agenda instead of on job creation and the economy, and turned it on its head.

We’re fortunate that some Democratic office holders are fighting against this religious crusade against American Women.  Others are not as reported here by StarkReports.  Is HR#3 so overreaching that it could end even the watered down abortion rights that we now know in the US?  Will Democrats like Harry Reid be complicit?  The Youtube above and the quote below cover the recent Democratic Press Conference on Republican attempts to control women.  It makes this important point.  Dozens of Democrats will probably join their crazed Republican counterparts to pass this abomination.  There is one thing in particular that I’d like to point out in bold below that will let you know why no woman that respects her own autonomy can vote Republican period.  This should also increase our skepticism of Democrats too.

Since every Representative in the Republican House majority is anti-choice, and since there are probably dozens of anti-choice Democrats that will join them, HR3 will assuredly pass the House.

In the Senate, Harry Reid is anti-choice and has been rolled by Mitch McConnell and the Republicans at every turn. Moreover, procedure in the Senate is much more amenable to minority priorities. Abortion supporters are hopeful, but nobody is saying with any degree of certitude that HR3 will die in the Senate.

With that in mind, I decided to ask the people in the room if they were willing to withhold their support from the President if he signed the bill if it reached his desk. Nadler dodged the question, saying it was premature. I pointed out that there was a reason he called the press conference: that he didn’t wan’t to see this bill become law. He stayed silent on the President.

The Republican party no longer represents a sane alternative to the Democratic Party.  Still, the Democratic Party cannot be trusted to do the right thing by women either.  Women have no choice but to ensure that any one that is willing to sell us out to religious extremists in the Democratic party does not get our vote.  PERIOD.

HR#3 and its counterparts make women second class citizens.  There is no other personal health decision that the government feels the need to make for any man.  This says that the majority of people in Congress and a good deal of them in the Senate do not think we are adult enough to make a ‘moral choice’.  It also continues the special treatment of fetus fetishists to opt out of paying taxes for women’s health while forcing the rest of us to pay for their bridges to no where, their murderous wars, and their religion-based stupidity like ‘abstinence education’.   The rape redefinition trick is still in these bills too.

One bill, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” would eliminate tax breaks for private employers who provide health coverage if their plans offer abortion services, and would forbid women who use a flexible spending plan to use pre-tax dollars for abortions. Those restrictions would go well beyond current law prohibiting the use of federal money for abortion services.

The bill, sponsored by Representative Christopher H. Smith, Republican of New Jersey, has drawn fire over language that undercuts a longstanding exemption on the ban on using federal money for abortions in the case of rape or incest; the measure narrows the definition of rape to “forcible rape,” a term that his office has never defined. Democratic lawmakers and others repeatedly hammered on the term, saying it suggested that victims of statutory rape and other crimes could not get abortions paid for with federal money.

While Mr. Smith’s staff said last week that the term “forcible rape” would be removed from the bill, the staff of Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, said that language remained intact as of Tuesday.

Another bill, sponsored by Mr. Pitts, addresses the health care overhaul head-on by prohibiting Americans who receive insurance through state exchanges from purchasing abortion coverage, even with their own money. The bill is essentially a resurrection of a provision in the House version of the health care law but was not in the Senate version.

The bill would also permit hospitals to refuse abortions to women, even in emergency situations, if such care would offend the conscience of the health care providers.

We now have senators whose narrow religious views will be used to define rape and will allow hospitals to let women die.  Many of you have heard this story before, but my daughter has already experienced some of this conscious clause bullshit during her forth year in Medical School while doing a rotation in Michigan.  A resident left my daughter–not a qualified physician at the time–and a nurse to clean up the remnants of a botched abortion that was rapidly going septic in one woman’s uterus.  That’s right.  This woman was left by a doctor to a fourth year medical student and a nurse as a result of an abortion-gone-wrong.  The doctor basically left her to die.  Thankfully, my daughter was a competent and conscientious caregiver and so was the nurse.  This last bill allows entire hospitals to walk away from dying women.

These bills would go no where with out the duplicity of Democrats like Nebraska’s wacko Senator Ben Nelson.  We need to make it loud and clear that we will not contribute to any mass campaign fund that includes support for people who believe women are not adult enough to make moral decisions for themselves.  You need to make sure that your donations do not go to Democratic Politician’s PACS that can sneak money to these culprits.  Lastly, we need a pledge that pro choice Democrats will not sell out women for any reason.  There needs to be an absolute understanding that these bills will not reach the President’s desk and if they do, the President will not sign them.

Woman’s should not be hung on a cross of bipartisanship or kumbaya centrist compromises.  It’s time to make that very clear. We do not want to return to the days of forced pregnancy or wire hangers. We need to know that we can trust each and every one of them to stand by us before they get any form of support from us.  This includes the President.

Rachel Maddow is on the forefront of this fight.  You can follow her efforts and get more information here at The Maddow Blog. Send letters to your congressman via NARAL.  Support Planned Parenthood here.  Read more Feminist bloggers on this.  We are not alone in our fear and outrage.  Here’s the latest from Shakesville:  ‘Take Your Legislation OFF  Me‘.

100 Comments on “They think they own our Bodies”

  1. grayslady says:

    What an incredible video! This is what makes me so angry. I truly believe that men think abortions only have to do with unmarried pregnant women, and that the issue is all about (gasp!) sex. They truly don’t understand that we are talking about the health of women, and, often, the emotional and financial well-being of their families. The abortion issue is absolutely about whether women are going to allow anyone–male or female–to infantilize them.

    • dakinikat says:

      The first time I heard a friend of mine who was in med school at the time describe the same situation happening at Creighton university’s hospital and that the male doctor and a bunch of priests when in to ‘counsel’ the woman to just lay back and be an incubator was the day I got radicalized about abortion rights. It can be THE moral decision.

    • The abortion issue is absolutely about whether women are going to allow anyone–male or female–to infantilize them.


      • dakinikat says:

        That’s why I think we’re going to have to take this back to the streets. Hopefully, American women will have the same desire for freedom that Egyptians do.

      • Minkoff Minx says:

        I hope you are right Dak, but I wonder if today’s young women are willing to fight for those rights. So many young girls have had this pro-life crap shoved down their throats, that I worry they may be complacent when it comes to abortion rights.

        • dakinikat says:

          I just heard some news from a friend on his 22 year old daughter and a few friends at the University of Maryland that are really riled up. They’ve also been covering some of this at Jezebel and similar sites that cater to young adult women. I’m hoping there’s more blowback as a result.

    • madamab says:

      I truly believe that men think abortions only have to do with unmarried pregnant women, and that the issue is all about (gasp!) sex. They truly don’t understand that we are talking about the health of women, and, often, the emotional and financial well-being of their families.

      Yes, and this is why God did not allow men to become pregnant. The male of the species cannot be trusted with important decisions like whether or not to bring another life into the world. Poor, benighted, short-sighted creatures that they are, they are only able to think as far ahead as their next orgasm.

      I am only kind of snarking here. If men got pregnant, as the famous quote goes, abortion would be a sacrament.

      I applaud Dana Weinstein for coming forward and explaining that abortion funding is necessary for all women, because no woman ever knows when she might need an abortion.

      It is almost certain that HR 3 will pass the House. The Stupak Amendment did – and remember, there were more Democrats in that Congress than there are now. I believe we need to contact our Senators, especially our pro-choice ones, and ENSURE that this sh*t does not stand. All that needs to be done is for one Senator to filibuster and/or place a hold on the legislation.

      In the meantime, Senators Gillibrand and Boxer are drumming up support for stopping HR 3 in the Senate. Their petition is here.

      The anti-choice extremists, emboldened by Obama’s and the Democrats’ collusion, are rolling out their blitzkrieg. They have been waiting for this chance for decades.

      • dakinikat says:

        Thanks for the Gillibrand/Boxer link. This entire republican effort is an abomination.

      • Nancy says:

        Are we sure the Democrats are pro choice these days? Sotomayor? Kagan?

        • dakinikat says:

          No, I’m not sure that we are and I’m pretty positive the Republicans in those state legislatures must think all those bills they’re placing are headed to a friendly supreme court. That is especially true since Justice Kennedy seems to buy into the idea that women aren’t adult/moral decision makers and is stupid enough to buy the fetal pain propaganda.

  2. Pat Johnson says:

    This stuff makes me so angry I cannot find the words to properly express my outrage!

    Who are these assholes who think they can just shove their sense of morality down the throats of women? Who are they to determine right and wrong when it comes to a woman making a decision that affects her and her alone?

    I am so sick of these hypocritical, two faced, bible thumping, women hating asshats that I sound like a raving lunatic!

    I want to barf whenever one of these smug asshats spew forth “god’s will” and I reserve much of my disgust at women who follow this line of b.s. by turningh their backs on their sisters.

    Pass the damn ERA now before we are all in chains!

    This nation is turning into a band of “holy rollers” with their anti intellectual, lack of compassion crapola disguised as political legislation.

    Shame on those men and women who buy into this form of bondage. A pox on the whole lot of them.

  3. Fannie says:

    Ok, I’m a little bit insulted with the statement “anyone that voted for any republican under the guise of being PISSED at democrats should take this as a lesson”.

    Yes I was pissed then, and still pissed today. Something about not accepting those who are your allies, and who those people really were and are. In other words, back during the campaign sisterhood didn’t matter, it was all about Americanhood that mattered.

    I feel insulted because I was told then, and as today that I didn’t what, GET IT?

    Who were those tearing Hillary down, bashing her, and running to endorse Obama?
    Who was it that said Hillary was a monster?
    How about Susan Rice and that 3 a.m. phone call?

    And yea, I pissed that Keenan said the same thing today that she said in 2008…..”we have the confidence in his pro-choice committment”, and she continues to defend him because what, he really does stand for change?

    I will certainly agree, it is war against women, it pisses me off, and I am not going to get OVER IT, I am smack in the middle, and ready to do battle.

    I am thankful for Dana Weinstein in sharing her story, and I just hope the millions of other women get a chance to share their story too.

    • dakinikat says:

      Voting Republican is making the situation worse. They’re not amenable to women’s rights under any circumstances which means we have to either fight within the Democratic party or leave their conversation. Republicans said they’d drop the culture wars and stalemate the Democrats. It’s clearly a lie. They’re agenda is active and worse plus they field women that are more than willing to sell out other women under the guise of attracting women that just vote for women. There are no voices of reason left there. We are also armed with the knowledge that many Democrats will undercut is and sell us out. That’s the new reality. We either have to opt out when Democrats hand us their stinky fish and opt back in only when they fight or go to some third position that’s not yet available. There is no compromise possible with Republicans that is good for women on anything. There is no way to stalemate democrats through Republicans now. That door is shut now. This is not 2008 or 2009 or even 2010. Republicans have put their cards on the able. We can’t play any of them. There are very few good Democratic cards out there but some of them are still playable. We have to focus on that or we will lose completely.

      We have to force Obama and Democrats to act like Democrats and get around the media narrative that centrism or bipartisan compromise is necessary on all issues. When any one plays with Republican fire they get burned. PERIOD.

      Again, this is not 2008. It’s worse. These folks think Orrin Hatch is a sell out. How can you align past anger with this? I’m not trying to insult you, I’m trying to convince women that we’ve lost so much ground that options that may have available to us in the past are no longer there.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Sorry, I won’t vote for Obama. I don’t trust him to stand up for women. This bill couldn’t pass without Democratic votes.

        Of course I’m not voting for any Republicans, but I will also be very very choosy about which Democrats I vote for. We already found out with Stupak that the few women in the Senate didn’t stand up for abortion rights.

        • dakinikat says:

          My guess is he’ll try to get the senate to block it because he won’t want it on his desk either way. But, we’ll see. My vote for president never amounts to anything here in red state hell.

  4. Fannie says:

    I hear what you are saying, and I keep looking over my shoulder as to the new reality coming at me in the form of back stabbers.

    Here’s my point, let’s all get so pissed that we are in the streets.

    • dakinikat says:

      That I completely agree with … I think getting pissed and taking it to the streets just might be the only way. Look what the TP people did to the republicans.

      • TheRock says:

        Egypt and Tunisia can be the examples……

      • Branjor says:

        Could we maybe learn from history? Were women in the streets demanding choice prior to Roe vs. Wade? Is that how we finally got RvW? What did women do then that we’re not doing now? One thing, if I remember correctly, is that the women’s health movement of the day and the movement in general were just walking completely away from the system, setting up their own feminist health clinics, book stores, rape crisis centers. A lot of these services have since either become defunct or been taken over by the govt.

      • Branjor, my advice is we need to break the complacency and make concrete to people that our rights are being used to distract from jobs and how this affects everyone, man, woman, child… there’s a lot of taking for granted of abortion rights and people aren’t seeing the broader implications. We’ve got to make this tangible so that even unemployed Obamagirl can make the connection to her own life. This is about equity, about poor and unemployed women who deserve unobstructed access to family planning and reproductive health services the same as rich women, and this is about JOBS for everyone, which is what we need to be talking about, because all those babies that are born need a working mom/dad/parents with healthcare and childcare… my two cents.

  5. TheRock says:

    So what is the solution? The opportunity for women to get behind a candidate that values their bodies and minds ended with that candidate being relegated to FOREIGN affairs (of which she, of course, does magnificently). Currently, most of the state houses are republican. Most of the governors are republican. The House is republican. There is a Republican in the White House. Where do women go? What is the solution?

    Being a guy, it’s the Public Health professional that is frustrated in this case. Grayslady put it so well saying that it’s not an abortion issue, it’s a women’s health issue. And we in this country (not the people here, but the rest of the voting masses) are forced to watch one of the most passionate advocates for women’s issues to advocate everywhere EXCEPT the United States. How backwards is that????


    Hillary 2012

    P.S. I’m REALLY starting to worry that she will not make a run in 2012. Not that she is required to run or anything like that. But I don’t see anybody on the horizon, male or female, that can handle the mess that this current government is creating. And she doesn’t look like she has enough fight left in her to try again. I SO HOPE that I am wrong…..

    Hillary 2012

    • dakinikat says:

      My belief is that Hillary is ready to retire from government service and will do what Bill is doing. I don’t think she’ll run. We have to either kick the Democratic Party in the butt right now or take it to the streets and find a third option. I think that we’re going to hit a critical mass shortly as the Republicans get more crazy and the Democratic folks look more impotent. Right now there’s not third option. There’s only not empowering Republicans and threatening Democrats. We’ve got to get that to a tipping point.

    • She’s not running in 2012, imho. Sorry to keep being the bearer of bad news bears on this, because I know you’re completely sincere and I always smile when I see your “Asshats! Hillary 2012″…. but I haven’t seen a single sign since ’08 that Hillary is open to the idea of running in 2016, let alone in 2012. We’ve got to look to ourselves on the domestic front, instead of to Hillary. Once she goes back to her advocacy roots after she steps down as SoS, I think she’s going to set up a foundation, for women and girls…and there perhaps she’ll have more a chance to speak on domestic issues. But, we’ve got to get out in the streets on women’s rights, like Fannie says… this is armageddon on our *civil* rights. They’re using us to avoid doing anything on the economy. Bastards.

      • dakinikat says:

        that’s brilliantly stated!

      • TheRock says:

        It’s painful to agree, because I almost feel like I am giving up, but I do. This stint as SoS has really worn on her. The sadness at her potential loss is that there is no one, save Bill (and not even him so much now), that has the moxy, know how, or worldly experience to deal with the massive problems that this country faces. I’m not looking forward to the next 20 years…..

      • Nancy says:

        She belongs to the world at this point.

  6. dakinikat says:

    In related Stop the GOP Insanity News:

    downwithtyranny Howie Klein
    GOP legislature working to overturn it FostersDailyDem Poll shows support for NH gay marriage law

  7. foxyladi14 says:

    when women finally realize their power and stand together then we can accomplish great things.but as long as we are fighting each other instead of the system.then we fail.SAD.

  8. foxyladi14 says:

    where is my flag avatar:mrgreenL

  9. foxyladi14 says:

    maybe I wasn’t logged in to wp.just went to uppitys and logged in.
    by the by(DAK}hugs :mrgreen:

    • Branjor says:

      You don’t have to be logged in to WP in order for your avatar to appear. I am not logged in now and my avatar is appearing. The only time I ever got one of the designs in place of my avatar was when there was a mistake in my email address.

  10. foxyladi14 says:

    that was it..:lol:

  11. foxyladi14 says:

    that was it. 😆

  12. dakinikat says:


    Here’s some of the real morality of these creepy Republican Congressmen:

    Rep. Christopher Lee is a married Republican congressman serving the 26th District of New York. But when he trolls Craigslist’s “Women Seeking Men” forum, he’s Christopher Lee, “divorced” “lobbyist” and “fit fun classy guy.” One object of his flirtation told us her story.

  13. glennmcgahee says:

    Those Republicans (and Democrats) sure are focusing on jobs like a LAZER aren’t they? Here we are watching the media go back to worshiping Ronald Reagan asthe greatest President ever. I don’t know how much more of this I can stand. Yes, Dak, I believe you’re right. We’re gonna have to take our cue from a third world nation and hit the streets. Hope the Patriot Act reauthorization fails cause otherwise, we won’t make it past the first barrier. We need to offer concerts and free beer. I hope the younger people are willing. They’re able but unless they take a good, long look at history long enough to pay attention to what really happened before and compare it to whats happening today, it’s gonna be too late. So please publish those links and talk and talk and talk. Bring it up in every conversation you have. Don’t be meek.

  14. bluelyon says:

    The Republican party no longer represents a sane alternative to the Democratic Party.

    Do you mean this to read: “The Democratic Party no longer represents a sane alternative to the Republican Party.” ? – Based on the next sentence, it seems that’s what you meant.

    • dakinikat says:

      Nope. I can add an either at the end of the second sentence. Would that make the logic flow any better?

      • dakinikat says:

        What i think is that the republican party has just completely gone over to religious extremists and the democrats are willing to hang women on the cross of bipartisanship and the appearances of ‘centric’ policies

      • It’s like choosing between barefoot and pregnant (Republicans) and coathangers (Dems)…. or like choosing between malaria and smallpox.

        We need a cure to all of them… not more of the disease.

      • dakinikat says:

        Here’s a good link and thought under the heading of I agree with Anne Friedman.

        Oh wait, so all those times that Democrats caved on the issue of women’s health — years of rubber-stamping the Hyde Amendment, rolling over on contraception access, failing to do away with abstinence-only sex ed, shrugging off Stupak-Pitts — they were under the impression they were engaging in a bi-partisan negotiation to protect women’s rights? And now they are surprised (and maybe a little hurt?) that Republicans have been empowered by these compromises to introduce even more radical anti-choice legislation? STFU. Just… STFU.

  15. cwaltz says:

    Nelson won re election by a real narrow majority last go round and is up for re election. If the women’s groups were smart they’d put the screws to him. They’d make it clear that the Democratic platform is pro choice and if you can not adhere to that platform then there is absolutely no reason to put money into his coffers for his re election.

    They need to draw a line with legislators. The fact that they have provided cover for folks like Barack Obama on choice is exactly how we got here.

    Furthermore, if they were smart they’d go on the offensive regarding birth control and the fact that it has been classified an abortifactant, is not required to be carried in formularies and not covered in the health care bill. They nned to bring up how low cost family planning saves the country money because it means children brought into the world are brought into the world by parents who are financially, emotionally and physically capable of taking on the responsibility of a child.

    They need to pull out the pictures of women who died of sepsis or discuss the complications of gestational diabetes or pre eclampsia. They need to make it clear that pregnancy is not risk free.

    • dakinikat says:

      Nelson’s a true believe when it comes to being anti-abortion. His kids are adopted so all he thinks about is that he’d never have had his kids if you can’t force young white women to be incubators. I’ve had sit down conversations with him in his home with no one around to rat him out. A lot of Republican legislators will tell you that they could care less about the issue and the do it because they don’t want to deal with the RTL movement crazies. Nelson isn’t in that camp at all. He just visualizes never being handed those kids of his because a woman might have other options. His abortion views are personal and all about him.

      • cwaltz says:

        He’s allowed to personally choose not to have an abortion. It’s unfair of him to inflict his personal views on others. He has no right to force a woman to risk her life. Pregnancy is not one size fits all and it’s wrong that legislators are seeking to treat it that way.

        The women’s groups need to make the distinction clear that there is no room in a party that advocates choice for any individual to legislate that choice away.

        • dakinikat says:

          I know, but he tells that story and his eyes glaze over like a drugged rabbit. He’s not a fully developed enough human being to have an active sense of empathy beyond thinking about abortion and his children, period. It’s a spooky experience to watch some one that self-involved with an issue.

      • bostonboomer says:

        That’s sick. I feel for his kids. They can look forward to years of therapy or just stay brainwashed and miserable.

    • dakinikat says:

      Tea Party Express names Sen. Ben Nelson as a ‘top target’ –

      That should be interesting. I can only imagine the nuts in Nebraska will take that to a new level of absurd.

      • cwaltz says:

        And the women’s groups ought to be using that fact to push Ben back in line.

        If he can’t adhere to the pro choice platform, even if it is something he personally opposes, then let the GOP have the darn seat. The last thing we need is more people providing cover for the idea that a medical procedure is more the business of the government then it is the actual people whose lives will be affected by taking on a committment that stretches you.

        I’m done with anti choice Dems. I will not vote for a single one who believes that my reproductive rights are something they should have domain over.

  16. Katherine B. says:

    When I saw Planned Parenthood, MS. Magazine and NARAL all swoon for Obama instead of strongly standing up for Hillary I had a sick feeling this would happen. After all it was the “real feminist” who had Rep.Stupak into the White House to sign an executive order preventing federal funds from being used for abortions so Obamacare could get passed. It’s not just Dems selling out women it’s the women’s groups too so they could all bask in the glow of Teh One. It just adds to the loss of having the first qualified and competent woman as President.

    • mablue2 says:

      So, Republicans wouldn’t be doing this had Hillary won?

      • For a variety of reasons that have to do with matters of character and history when it comes to Hillary, Hillary would have fought a heck of a lot more and had the left holding her feet to the fire if Stupak-Pitts came to vote under a Hillary Clinton Administration. And, Stupak-Pitts is the precursor to what is going on with Smith-Lipinski and all the mini-stupaks (as was May 30th, 2008 a precursor as well). This disaster is as much a product of Democratic cave-by-design as it is an obnoxious power play and distraction by Republicans.

      • madamab says:

        Yes, but they would have failed. Epically. Obama has been enabling them every step of the way.

      • Obama enables them… and actively sells us out.

      • dakinikat says:

        I can’t imagine Hillary Clinton using women’s reproductive rights as a bargaining chip. She’s fought to hard for the rights of women and children in the past.

      • bostonboomer says:


        The difference is that Hillary would veto the bill if it passed. Obama will sign it joyfully.

      • mablue2 says:

        I agree with Kat that Hillary wouldn’t have used the women’s reproductive rights as a bargaining chip.

        Still, Republicans would have continued their assault on women’s rights. It has nothing to do with Obama. I’m thinking Republicans would be equally or much more vicious in trying to curtail women’s rights.

        I just find the idea that everything would have gone smoothly had Hillary won divorced from political realities.

        The way Dems are good at self-destruction, I believe even Hillary would have passed either a watered down version, a piece of the legislation or nothing at all. She wouldn’t have passed the reform we dream of.
        UHC ’94 didn’t even make it to the floor because it got sabotaged by Democrats. You guys really think Stupak-Pitts and their entire gang would have been quiet if Hillary was POTUS?

      • dakinikat says:

        Oh, no, MABlue, I actually agree that the Republicans would be horrid if Hillary had won too. I also think they’ve been worse in many ways because it was Obama instead. I firmly believe that much of the current Republican and the Tea Party stuff is rooted in Racism. The secret Muslim stuff and the birth certificate stuff is as crazy as the Hillary killed Vince Foster and white water stuff. Either one would’ve gotten both barrels. I just don’t think she’d have had it as easy with the Democratic party opposition to her stuff. They’ve overlooked a lot of his warts for some reason.

      • mablue2 says:


        I really don’t think Obama would sign such a bill, although I’ve gotten used to expect the worst from him.

        He must be conscious that such a betrayal would be the end of the Democratic Party. Women’s reproductive rights are such a core of the Democratic Party that such an act would not only push women out of the party, but men like me who are strongly pro choice.

        • dakinikat says:

          From your fingers to Obama’s conscious. I have to admit, just when I think there is something he won’t sell out on, he does it. If it buys him the label centrist, makes him look bi-partisan, and his poll numbers go up, my guess is that it’ll go the same way that other things did. By other things I mean the pledge to take public finance, voting against FISA, and not signing on to tax breaks for billionaires. Those were also lines he drew in the sand.

      • mablue2 says:

        Kat that’s all true, but none of these issues comes even close to throwing the vast majority of the Democratic Party overboard. I think this would be the tipping point.

        If a Democratic POTUS gave away women’s reproductive rights who stays in the party? Conservative and moderate Dems? By all accounts, that’s the minority.

        I think even if he wanted to, his advisors wold tell him what the consequences could be and I bet Hillary would leave the Government.

      • If a Democratic POTUS gave away women’s reproductive rights who stays in the party?

        He already has given away women’s reproductive rights.

        Hillary would have fought the Republicans and the left would have held her accountable. There’s a difference between saying that and saying that things would have been perfect under Hillary and the Repubs would have been quiet as a mouse. I actually think they’d be more angrier with her bc she’d be maneuvering the Congress in ways to do things for people that their K/C-street masters don’t want them to do. And that’s not a bad thing! Obama has confused everybody into thinking making Repubs mad is some kind of sin. The difference again–the Clintons fight back. That matters.

      • Fannie says:

        Here’s the thing, you see like Susan B. Anthony, Hillary has fought her entire life for the cause of women. That’s what she does, work, work, and work towards women’s rights. The day is never done.

        15 Feb 2011……..Susan B. Anthony will have been 191 years old. Hell, she had more tomatoes thrown at her than any other woman. She was dedicated just like Hillary.

        I don’t know who asked, what did the women do in the past, they fought, they stood firm, and made a life commitment to women’s rights, civil rights, and human rights. It’s not something you can blog about one day and forget about it the next. We know the advances made by women in our past, so I thought those advances were rooted, only to find out that many women today, do not BELIEVE, they don’t know how.

        What we need is to re-introduce Alice Paul’s
        National Woman’s Party. We need to help women Believe, we need ERA.

    • bostonboomer says:

      You and me both, Katherine B.

    • bostonboomer says:


      I disagree. I think Obama would sign the bill. He already issued the executive order that will result in abortions no longer being available. The damage is already done and this bill is just the icing on the cake. If he does veto it, which I doubt, it would only be because he knows that abortions are going to be unavailable anyway.

  17. Joanelle says:

    In 1971 after several years of trying for another child we became pregnant – but I didn’t know I was pregnant and when I called our family doctor about my “cold” he prescribed a medication that I took and about a week later learned I was pregnant – when I told my gyno what medication I had taken he described what it would do to our fetus and that the child, if it survived at all in my womb would suffer multiple severe physical and mental challenges. When my husband and I asked what to do, he gave us an address and told us to meet him there at 2:00 PM that Friday – I had what he described as a “theraputic abortion” in off the books clinic with licensed medical staff, I was lucky – that was before Roe v Wade. I was fortunate enough to have a doctor with a heart and intellect.
    My belief is that until men can bear children they have no right to tell us what to do with our bodies. What we see today is all about them being able to impregnate a woman and “protecting” their spawn.
    As far as Hill is concerned – she looks like she’s spent – she’s managed to stay away from O as much as possible but I’m afraid that she will be tainted with his ineptitude. She will run if there is a grassroots uprising that creates a mandate for her. There is no one else with the experience, common sense and pure ability.
    Yes, Pat, we MUST have the ERA passed now and we NEED Hillary now. George Washington turned down the presidency but finally acquieced when the populace continued to push him to become our first president – in fact Martha thought at 57 he was too old.
    Acclamation may be the only way.

    • bostonboomer says:

      I’m so sorry you had to go through that, Joanelle, but you were lucky to have an intelligent and caring doctor.

      We do need Hillary, but I don’t think she will run against Obama. I wish it would happen, I really do.

    • cwaltz says:

      The asshats in my state tabled the ERA ratification again.

  18. Joanelle says:

    so what the deal? What went down in 2008 that made both Bill and Hill back O? What on earth…?

      • I’d say Party loyalty and frankly they would have lost the bulk of their power base if they didn’t back him. They wouldn’t have survived politically to fight another day. Former Democratic First Lady and Democratic president not supporting the Dem candidate, let alone the first AA president?! I really don’t think that’s what they wanted in their hearts anyway. I think they want to do whatever they can to make Obama’s presidency not be a complete and utter failure and to actually get some good done. It’s like Hillary says–time for politics, time for governing. Hillary fought longer and harder than anyone, and when the DNC rejected her, she let the pieces fall where they will.

        On a sidenote…the one topic where sadly I’m not really sure Hillary would be better on if it were her WH, is Egypt. I think she’d be almost as bad, though more firm about it than Obama. But if she has to get the blame for it, she might as well have been president. It’s difficult to watch her as SoS on this. The Obama admin is gutless imho and she’s very much a part of how that’s seen as gutless, by those who view it that anyway. She’s not seen as separate from Obama on it, she’s his SOS.

  19. Back Bay Style says:

    Just tell me where to take my wire coathanger sign and I’ll show up. Since Pat, BB and I are all in MA I say we start with the Boston State House. It will be fun watching the Faux News staff across the street turn purple. We’ve already had clinic shootings here so do they think a little legislation can stop us? And Boston was the home of the underground abortion providors known as “Jane” before Roe.

    Don’t mess with us Yankee women Stupak!

  20. Joanelle says:

    Wonk and Dak – I’ve got that about her supporting him once he had the nomination but what has me stymied is what made her basically drop out when she had more votes than him in the primaries?

  21. […] between visits to black Masses and having sex with hundreds of men every day. The video below, courtesy of Dakinikat, debunks that nonsense quite […]