Monday Reads

1-Antique_American_Game_of_Troublesome_Pigs__01Good Morning!

Most of the news today is about the looming shutdown of the Federal Government.  Our government is truly dysfunctional.  The states have gerrymandered us into a Congress that doesn’t care about the country at all.  They just take care of their base and their personal pork.  We’ve also got a krewe of congress critterz that’s about as dumb as they come.   Why are some of them gleeful over the idea of a shutdown?  What do they think they have to gain and why would they hurt so many people?

Why have House Republicans pursued their effort to defund, and now to delay, Obamacare so relentlessly, even though they have almost zero chance of success in the face of a rapidly-approaching deadline for shutting down the government? And why have they done so when many in their party have warned that a shutdown would be suicidal for the GOP?

I talked with one of the most vocal of the defund/delay advocates, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, on Friday night, as she waited to hear what path the House Republican leadership would take. It’s safe to say her views reflected those of many of her conservative colleagues, and her reasoning was this: One, Obamacare as a policy is so far-reaching, so consequential, and so damaging that members of Congress should do everything they can — everything — to stop it before it fully goes into effect. Two, lesser measures to fight Obamacare — repealing the medical device tax or making Congress purchase coverage through the exchanges without special subsidies — are just not big enough to address the problem. And three, there have been government shutdowns in the past over far less urgent reasons that did not result in doom for Republicans.

“There is a very large group of us who believe that this is it, this isn’t just another year, this isn’t just another CR fight,” Bachmann told me. “This is historic, and it’s a historic shift that’s about to happen, and if we’re going to fight, we need to fight now.”

“This isn’t just another bill,” Bachmann continued. “This isn’t load limits on turnip trucks that we’re talking about. This is consequential. And I think the reason why you’ve come to this flash point is that this is an extremely consequential bill that will impact every American, and that’s why you have such passionate opinions. And we’re not giving up and we’re not caving in that easily.”

For Bachmann and many of her colleagues, the enormity of the issue serves to highlight the problem with less extensive anti-Obamacare measures. “The Vitter Amendment isn’t going to help real people,” Bachmann told me. “It’s going to be a political move, but it’s not going to help real people. Obamacare will continue to destroy the economy. Now, repealing the medical device tax does help the economy. Here in the Beltway, we get the medical device tax issue. And in my state of Minnesota, we get the medical device tax issue. That’s our industry. And I’m all for [repealing] it, but for most Americans, that is not something that they see that they want to get.”


It’s really strange to see the apoplexy shown by Republicans when they call the American Heritage’s Dole/Chaffey Care alternative to Hillarycare some kind of socialist plot. What happens under the law if implementation is slowed down even one year? Many states, businesses, insurance companies and health care providers have already started their transition.

So what does this “compromise” actually look like? For a party that has centered their platform around reducing spending and the deficit, it’s surprisingly bad economics.

First of all, repealing the medical device tax would actually add $30 billion to the deficit. That provision, which imposes a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices, is one of the funding sources for Obamacare’s coverage expansions. Proponents say that the tax will be balanced out by the influx of new Americans entering the insurance market. But getting rid of it now without finding another way to finance health reform would simply increase health reform’s price tag.

Furthermore, delaying Obamacare’s individual mandate — a central tenet of the health law that requires everyone to purchase insurance — would have catastrophic effects. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects it would end up forcing Americans to pay higher premiums for their health coverage. Healthier people would be discouraged from buying insurance, resulting in an older and sicker pool of people in the individual market and encouraging insurers to submit higher rates. The delay would ultimately hike premiums by an estimated 15 to 20 percent.

And according to the CBO, a one-year delay would leave about 11 million Americans uninsured, ultimately reducing the expected coverage gains under the health reform law by nearly 85 percent. As those uninsured Americans end up seeking care in hospitals, the cost of providing that uncompensated care will offset any costs that are achieved by delaying Obamacare’s coverage expansion. Ultimately, delaying the mandate doesn’t actually save the government any money.

As Wonkblog reports, delaying the individual mandate would have a “ripple effect” throughout the health insurance industry. That sector has been preparing for impending changes under Obamacare, and a last-minute decision to delay the law would be a huge drain on the companies that have already spent millions of dollars on advertising and outreach campaigns. “It’s just too late,” Joe Antos, a health policy researcher at the American Enterprise Institute,told Wonkblog. “Everybody who is involved, insurance companies and hospitals and any other big entity, they’re ready to go. They really can’t make any changes.”

When the Affordable Care Act was winding its way through the court system last summer, a conservative federal judge made the point that suddenly striking down health reform would create “economic chaos.” And at this point, as many of Obamacare’s consumer protections have already taken effect, the individual mandate is inextricably linked to making the health reform law work in practice. A new paper from the Urban Institute notes that delaying the individual mandate would “seriously disrupt overall implementation” of health reform.

Most folks believe that the GOP will get the blame for the shutdown.

The federal government swerved toward a shutdown on Saturday when House Republicans demanded to hold a vote to delay Obamacare by one year instead of cooperating with the Senate to pass a “clean” spending bill. It’s now practically assured that parts of the government will go dark on Tuesday for the first time in 17 years.

From a Republican point of view, there are three possible happy endings to the looming catastrophe.

Happy Ending #1: The president blinks. He’s blinked before after all—notably when he agreed to sequestration in 2011—and who knows? He might blink again.

Problem with Happy Ending #1: This time, though, “blinking” means blowing up the president’s most important legacy: his health-care plan. That’s more than a blink. He might as well hand in his resignation after that.

Happy Ending #2: The country blames the Democrats for the shutdown. After all, the GOP is only asking for the president to negotiate. It’s the president who refuses to yield.

Problem with Happy Ending #2: Republicans actually shut down the government in 1995. They took the country to the brink of debt default in 2011. Their caucus is reacting to this shutdown with enthusiasm, not regret. It’s going to be hard to sell the claim that it’s the Democrats who brought about this latest outcome when Republicans come out of caucus looking so happy about it.

Happy Ending #3: Even if the president does not blink, and even if Democrats don’t get blamed, perhaps Republican activists will be so motivated and mobilized by the shutdown that their excitement will loft the party to big wins in the 2014 races.
Problem with Happy Ending #3: Because Happy Endings 1 and 2 look so unlikely, the shutdown is likely to end in a Republican retreat. Party activists will be demotivated—and may waste their energy recriminating against their own leadership rather than organizing to fight Democrats.

pig gamesThere is also the usual Republican slap to women included in the budget.

Typical of the privileged, entitled spoiled brats that they collectively are, the House Republicans threw everything but the kitchen sink into their government funding bill. The bill, which purportedly was to stave off a government shutdown, was instead a big, fat sloppy kiss to all of the special interests that want to curtail average Americans’ lives while enriching the top one percent even further.

Telling, perhaps, that they were unable to do it without drinking heavily enough to be noticeable from the gallery. Putzes.

The “funding” bill included a clause that for the puritanical and/or science ignorant Republicans, may be the king of unintended consequences: delaying funding for contraceptive care under ACA:

House Republicans included a so-called “conscience clause” in the government funding billin a plan they approved early Sunday.

The House voted 231-192 on a bill that would delay much of the 2010 health care overhaul for a year. It would also repeal a tax on medical devices that helps finance the health care law. The measure would allow employers and insurers to opt out of providing health care services that they find morally or religiously objectionable. The addition reignites the debate over a portion of the health care reform law that requires most insurers to cover women’s preventative health care, including contraception.

It’s enough to make me want to nut punch a Republican member of Congress. Need I remind them once again that in addition to preventing unwanted pregnancies, contraceptives are used therapeutically as well for a host of women’s health issues? Those “family-friendly” idiots will not be satisfied until Americans see an increase of abortions (oh, wait…), an increase in people applying for federal assistance due to the forced births (oh, wait…) or a bunch of motherless children,

However, the Exchanges set up by the Affordable Healthcare Act are being set up.  It’s interesting that the Republican plan to shut down the Government isn’t really shutting down Obamacare.

Many pieces of the health care law, the Affordable Care Act, aren’t tied to the annual spending bills. Much of the health law is mandatory spending — a kind of fiscal autopilot that’s not part of the annual appropriations battle that has Congress tied in knots. The mandatory components of the health law include the subsidies to help people buy private health plans as well as the expansion of Medicaid in many states. Both of those functions will be handled through the new health insurance markets or exchanges.

Because those programs are mandatory, the Department of Health and Human Services has a lot of leeway to say whether Obamacare activities can continue — and HHS officials have made clear they’re going to use it.

On Friday, the HHS quietly posted its shutdown contingency plan. The bottom line is clear: Obamacare would continue, including the health exchanges and their coordination with Medicaid. It also said Medicare coverage “will continue largely without disruption.” True, lots of HHS workers would be furloughed — but those who would be told to stay home are concentrated in agencies that are not driving the launch of the health law.

HHS says its plan is consistent with legal advice that allows activities that “do not rely on annual appropriations, and activities that involve the safety of human life and protection of property” to keep running even if much of the government shuts down. And that means the staff that carry out mandatory programs like those in the health law can keep working — even if their positions are funded through the annual spending bills

I’ll let you know how the process is going to work down here in one of the states that’s fighting the law every way it can.  I was told Friday that the adjunct health care plan that I’ve had for the past few years doesn’t meet the minimum standards for the Act and won’t be offered.  I am going to head to the exchange next week and find out what my options are going to be.  I’m glad to be out of my subpar health insurance plan, but wondering if the federal exchange is going to have many choices here in a state with a hostile governor.

So, I know this was a little oriented to the one topic of the day, but I thought we needed to spend some time on it.  Feel free to share your thoughts on this or any other links on any other subjects that made your reading and blogging list today!!!

67 Comments on “Monday Reads”

  1. RalphB says:

    I’m sorry your health care plan didn’t make the cut but am anxious to know what’s available to consumers in states like ours which are fighting the law. Supposedly you will be able to answer like our questions and then get the lists of plans to choose from.

    Best of luck to you!

    • RalphB says:

      duh – should be 4 questions.

    • ANonOMouse says:

      I’m looking forward to reading about your experience with the ACA. I hope you get a good rate and better coverage. Keep us posted, please!!!

    • bostonboomer says:

      Since Jindal isn’t going along with the law, the feds will step in and set up exchanges. That could mean the situation will be better than if the state was cooperating.

    • dakinikat says:

      Well it certainly has added unnecessary stress to my life. Hopefully I will get better coverage and my rate will be subsidized since I am just working as an adjunct and not earning much money. I really think I need to follow my daughter to Seattle.

  2. ANonOMouse says:

    I’m hopping mad this morning over the “conscience clause” nonsense that was stuck into the funding bill. At this point I’m quite certain that most women DO NOT KNOW that the House GOP members are once again trying to shove this crap down the throats of women. ALL INFORMATION concerning the “conscience clause” MUST be moved to the front burner in this debate because over half of the population of this country is female and even those of us who are well past our child bearing years are directly impacted by this legislation. NO woman should be required to follow the mandates of her employers so-called “conscience”. No employer gets to decide what I/WOMEN believe, what sort of medical treatment our bodies require or what sort of medical treatment WE think is essential to our health and well being.

    FUCK THE GOP/TP’ers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • cygnus says:

      I am equally as appalled at the constant assualt on women, but this “conscience clause” makes about as much sense as defunding all health care everywhere because some employer might be a christian scientist and be morally offended by your desire to seek medical intervention at all.

      Whatever happened to medicine being a confidential partnership between patient and physician? The crazy ups its ante again and again…

      • dakinikat says:

        Amanda Marcotte Republicans always take the time to try to stick it to women, even during a manufactured shutdown crisis.

      • ANonOMouse says:

        It’s a very slippery slope. If employers can use their conscience as a reason to deny certain procedures or medications to women, then they can use the same conscience escape clause to deny healthcare to people for variety of reasons.

        How Americans can allow the GOP/TP to use a continuing resolution budget bill to force it’s specific religious and social ideology on a country of 315 million people with varying belief systems is beyond my comprehension.

        • dakinikat says:

          Just imagine what Jehovah’s witnesses or orthodox Jews or strict Christian scientists or Muslims would do?

          • ANonOMouse says:

            Don’t forget the evangelical snake handlers. 🙂 OUR new healthcare motto could be “If you get bit, tough shit”

        • I know this does not fit in this comment but I am in ATL @ doctor appt and can only respond…just heard the gm at ihop talking saying they have a limit 50 employees for obamacare, since they employ 54 people they will have to let go four people. They cant even put them as part time. Now…wtf is that about?

          • dakinikat says:

            They pay a fine for not insuring employees if they have more than 50 employees

          • ANonOMouse says:

            This is one of those arguments with the ACA that is blamed on the wrong culprit. The law isn’t the problem, it is IHOP that has chosen not to provide health insurance to most of their employees. I understand this is a carrot and stick approach that will push the most unscrupulous employers to layoff to keep their payroll at 50, but this immoral treatment of employees in the food & retail industry is and has been an ongoing problem. The food industry has habitually preyed on the most vulnerable people in the workforce, underpaying them, often at the rate of less than $3 an hour for the wait staff receiving tips, and working them split shifts and more often than not less than 40 hours a week. The franchises like IHOP and McDonald’s, Burger King, Papa John’s and the big box stores like WalMart, are basically sweat shops that make a huge profit beating down the least among us.

            This is a stalling tactic by these businesses hoping that they can outlast the law, this tactic WILL NOT WORK!!!!

          • dakinikat says:

            Yup … exactly!

          • Damn, I here I thought that was the limit of employees they would cover, what a stupid JJ…

            I should have know it was something as shady as that. Just got back home, still need to read the post and get caught up, but it looks like it is a good one Dak.

          • The Obama Admin has been caving to these stalling tactics and allowing all the big corps all kinds of exemptions and exceptions. The problem is that this bill was never designed as healthCARE access. It is entirely insurance based–and heavily dependent on corporate America to suddenly listen to their better angels and put people before profit margins. Yeah right.

  3. RalphB says:

    Really good article.

    Roger Simon, tbotp: The frauds on the Hill target Obama

    Who are these people? Of what are they made that they can say and do such things on the floor of Congress?

    No nonsense is too great, no act too low.

    House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) leaves the floor of the House in the wee hours of Sunday morning, having taken action that will probably shut down the government, and releases a statement saying, “It’s time for President Obama to rise above stubborn partisanship.”

    Which is like an arsonist telling others not to play with matches.

    Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) said on Saturday: “Obamacare is based on limitless government, bureaucratic arrogance and a disregard for the will of the people.”

    Except Congress passed Obamacare, the president signed it, the Supreme Court upheld it, Obama campaigned on it a second time and was reelected. So in what manner was the will of the people disregarded? …

  4. bostonboomer says:

    More would blame Republicans for government shutdown: poll (Reuters)

    Forty-six percent said that if government agencies and programs start closing on Tuesday, they would fault Republicans in Congress while 36 percent said they would blame Obama, the CNN survey found. Thirteen percent said both would be at fault.

    About 60 percent of the 803 U.S. adults polled said they want lawmakers to pass a budget agreement to avoid the shutdown, according to the telephone survey conducted over the weekend.

    • RalphB says:

      That only 46% would blame Republicans still reflects a failure of journalism. Even more stark is the realization that the public is too stupid to know the debt limit is a much more serious thing to be avoided.

      • I don’t know, seems about right considering 13percent find both parties at fault… The GOP is certainly annoying and responsible for being the craven set they are, but the road that got us here was paved with all the worst intentions and backroom deals made with insurance companies and big pharma.

        • RalphB says:

          Fuck that false equivalence crap.

        • dakinikat says:

          I am pretty sure all but a few of us has forgotten the entire process.

        • ANonOMouse says:

          I remember the back room deals and being the Bleeding Heart that I am I was infuriated by the fact that the Dems didn’t work for SPUHC. At this point I’ve calmed down enough to know that SPUHC would never have passed muster, not even in a Congress where both houses were held by a Dem majority. Many of us wanted at least a Public Option, but that turned out to be a big whiff too because to many Dems who are opposed to SPUHC recognized the Public Option to be exactly what it is, a greased slide to SPUHC.

          We also should remember that the GOP didn’t cast a single vote for the ACA in either house, even though they had a hand in shaping ObamaCare into a vehicle that put the ACA into the hands of the commercial insurance market.

          We also need to remember that the way the ACA is written, that funding will continue to ACA/Medicare/Medicaid and SS even if the Gov’t is shutdown. In the end the GOP/TP’ers cannot win the ACA battle because the benefits of the ACA, while not what we want, are considerably better than the healthcare market shaped at the whims of the for profit Insurance companies and healthcare providers.

        • cygnus says:

          Mona, you’ve articulated the real conundrum. As much as I love the idea of an ACA, it doesn’t address the brokenness of the system in the first place. As a person with a chronic disabling condition, and no insurance, and no disability insurance (long story) I would really like to see this work–and yet the truth is the current medical system has little to offer me until I need palliative care on my death bed.

          A system where insurance companies and ICD codes get to decide what you and your doctor can do is not a health care system at all. It is an industry-care system.

          • I’m sorry about your situation, Cygnus. Glad I’m not the only one who sees the problem here is bigger than this political theatre the GOP is putting on right now–this is IMHO nothing about Obamacare and purely a political power play maneuver for them, they get to look like they gave Obama a hard time and rally up their base and in the meantime pocket money from insurance companies who make sure they don’t really repeal anything. I admit Ted Cruz 22hour nonsense display was so disgusting it almost made me want to have Pollyanna hope in Obamacare–almost, but not quite. If a basic public mechanism is too much to ask for from a Democratic Administration and Democratic congress (and yes, it was…Pelosi was still Speaker then, I remember all too well because of Stupakistan), especially from a president who ran as for a public option and against a mandate (which he hung around his now-BFF Hillary’s neck)…… I mean, then whats the point even?

            While I don’t want the GOP to succeed in repealing O-care simply because it would reverse the idea at least that health care is a right rather than a privilege–and I’m certain they won’t succeed in repealing O-care as I’m pretty sure Aetna et al. have made sure their huge new guaranteed customer base isn’t going anywhere. But lets just say I’m also not naive enough to think we’re getting rid of any of the problems we have today under a for-profit insurance industry. They’ve just moved the curtains a little so that it looks like there are no pre existing conditions (because hey, insurance is mandated) but the costs are also just moving a little in the same direction so you’ll just encounter them after they’ve already made you pay for junk insurance that doesn’t really bring you any closer access to the healthcare you need than you were before.

            I hate what the GOP is doing but lets face it, it’s not their fault we tried to be right wing clones and they are still opposing us…

            And, why did we try to be right wing clones anyway? All because right-wing language will all magically turn out as the promised land of single payer? Famous last words of MLK: “the moral arc of for-profit based health insurance bends toward justice.”

            I’m sorry for not buying the kabuki. I know others here have more faith in this law, I hope y’all turn out correct. I would rather be wrong–universal healthcare would be awesome.

          • Seriously says:

            I hope everything works out for you, Cygnus.

            Very well said as always Mona. I keep coming back to this, “ite. If a basic public mechanism is too much to ask for from a Democratic Administration and Democratic congress (and yes, it was…Pelosi was still Speaker then, I remember all too well because of Stupakistan), especially from a president who ran as for a public option and against a mandate (which he hung around his now-BFF Hillary’s neck)…… I mean, then whats the point even?” and I guess it’s pretty much why I’m not too puzzled as to how 30 Republicans can beat 200 Republicans. We already saw a slim majority of Republicans wallop Democratic supermajorities into absolute submission, though God knows the Dems didn’t seem to mind one little bit, at that. But then, who could turn their bAcks on the moral legacy of MLK. Talk about mandates.. ..

          • “We already saw a slim majority of Republicans wallop Democratic supermajorities into absolute submission, though God knows the Dems didn’t seem to mind one little bit, at that”

            this is starting to sound like the Ds have been taking Rihanna’s s&m lyrics a little too much to heart…

        • bostonboomer says:

          That doesn’t make sense. The back room deals would make insurance companies and big pharma more likely to support the ACA.

          • dakinikat says:

            The mandate came from them. That is how it came into the American Heritage plan to start out with …

          • ANonOMouse says:

            The fact that the ACA is basically the same plan proposed by the Heritage Foundation has been one of the biggest arguments pressed by the Dem Party against dissenting Repubs. The Repubs in committee heavily influenced language in the ACA bill and many people assumed that some of them would vote for it, which turned out to be a bad assumption. One of the most contentious fights during reconciliation was the mandate and even the mandate was part of the Heritage Foundation plan. During the presidential debates Obama hammered Romney over and over with the fact that the plan was similar to Romney Care which is similar to the plan of the Heritage Foundation.

            The GOP/TP hate this plan because they hate Obama and as they noted on the floor of the Senate last week, if enacted ObamaCare will soon give way to SPUHC which is an anathema to all things right of center

      • dakinikat says:

        I am sure a large part of the uninformed are the Fox Propaganda network viewers. My dad blames Obama for everything but the rain in Seattle.

  5. RalphB says:

    Texas Tribune: Cornyn Imagines a Blue Texas in New Ad

    Spoiler alert: He doesn’t think it would be utopia. It does have Wendy Davis in the ad though. 🙂

  6. dakinikat says:


    -Minneapolis Fox reporter ‘drunk tweets’ that he wants to have sex with a cat | The Raw Story

  7. ANonOMouse says:

    Barbara Boxer brings it:

    Women Senators: GOP’s Birth Control Amendment ‘Defies Logic’

    “In the dead of night, while most of us were sleeping, they snuck in a provision one more time that specifically targets women of this country,” Hirono said. “It’s just amazing. We have laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, and yet they put in a provision that just targets women. It truly defies logic.”

  8. dakinikat says:

    Jay Rosen ‏@jayrosen_nyu 3h
    Wow. Charles Ferguson’s explanation of why he won’t be making that film for CNN about Hillary Clinton is… scary.

  9. dakinikat says:

    Well, the senate just killed the house bill. Obama is supposed to be meeting with Reid and Boehner this afternoon … government by prearranged self-inflicted crisis continues.

  10. Fannie says:

    3 Mar 1983

    Dear Fannie

    Thank you for your letter of the 28 Feb 1983. I have located in our library two volumes of the book you are interest in, “Three Hundred Years with the Corson Families in America.”

    My boss, Pam S., says that your name sounds familiar to her as someone who may have helped her and her son in their time of need. She wonders if it was you who developed the breast milk bank in …..California. She has a son, Joshua S, whose life was saved thanks to your efforts in that area. This was in 1975-76.

    We are more than happy to help you at this University……………

    Signed Department Chairwoman………….

    Yup that was me helping a divorced woman, with a very young son who could only have breast milk, and yes I went to the local Safeway Store and organized the collection and distribution of breast milk so that her son could thrive. Lo, it was me who loaded boxes of food for her, in order that she herself could survive the hard times and problems of being a single mom.

    I am teary eyed, not just for this woman but all the other women I have helped and given my time and my money in order that their lives could improve and live healthier lives, and joy in family life. Women deserve access to health care and we should continue to motivate them to take charge of their lives, and be sensitive to their special needs as women, as mothers, as daughters. Our ancestors have contributed much to our society, and we need to thank them, congratulate them for all the good they have done. And the republicans want to take away from them their God Given Rights to Health Care. The tree no longer grows.

  11. Fannie says:

    When I was young, my next door neighbor was a fairly young woman in her 40’s. She had breast cancer, and I would go help her with cleaning from time to time. One day she asked me, do you want to see my scars from breast cancer? She slowly took the gauze/sheet like bandages off…………….They were wrapped from above her breast (shoulder area), and clear around her breast, and her torso. She looked like a mummy. She was healing, and the wound was oozing from her. I gasped from shock, I had never seen such a site. No breast, and looked like her stomach had been burned all over. I’ll never forget Dorothy, she had a large stack of hand made bandages she had made, and I helped her put fresh ones back on her body.

    It was then I started collecting gauze and sheets, and every Thursday I had arranged at my local school to make these, so that Dorothy and other women would have them available, and not have to the job of folding and stacking………… thing I knew I had a good number of other women, young and old helping me. What a great feeling that was. Dorothy made me smile when she asked could I get her some marijuana to smoke, and I was glad to help her during her time of need. She’s long gone, but I loved that woman.

    • dakinikat says:

      I nearly died of a rare cervical cancer at 35. Believe me, I know the benefits of having access to health care. That was directly after have a high risk pregnancy–placenta previa. I should’ve died several times over and I would’ve if I didn’t have access to good care. Just very thankful I insisted on going to the local Methodist hospital and then the med center for cancer treatment. My doctor daughter has moved to Seattle. One of her primary concerns about where to practice medicine was having morons in the state or at some religious based hospital tell her what she could and could not do to treat her patients. The small partnership she just joined north of Seattle is run by two men. One moved from Tennessee after going to Vanderbilt because he was gay, has a long term partner and they wanted to get married and they have adopted three kids. He wanted to live some place that was friendly to him. He had to practice at a Catholic hospital that wouldn’t allow sterilizations back in Nashville. They finally gave in and had one surgical suite available for things that they didn’t want the hierarchy to know about but they would agree to look the other way.. He used to call it the surgical room that God didn’t know what was going on inside. Imagine being told you’d die if you got pregnant again and couldn’t get a tubal?

      • Fannie says:

        You are a true friend to all of us. You continue to teach us about our selves and others, and family, and how we are impacted by what is around us. Thank you for allowing us into the privacy of your experiences from cancer. Your doctor daughter and those in Seattle offer a bright new day for women in this country. I hope you take a look at Seattle, I know the weather is totally different than New Orleans, but things can turn out real good, and you know your daughter is just miles away, and a smile away.

        Women have lived and helped other women since the span of time. And we don’t go to the state legislature and ask politicians to take our vitals, and probe our bodies. Keep helping us, keep teaching, and giving of yourself. You have worked very hard Dak………..we love you.

        • bostonboomer says:


          You have experienced so much and done so much good work. Thanks for sharing your stories.

          • Fannie says:

            I do this because women help women, and we all have a part in those lives around us. Can you imagine going to Ted Cruz or any other wingnut and talking about all the pain and suffering you or your sisters have gone through? Come to think about it, if I was in front of Cruz I’d throw a coconut at his head.

      • RalphB says:

        Have you taken a look at he website yet?

  12. Fannie says:

    By the way, I lost a cousin, Linda to breast cancer, oh how I miss her. And I lost a friend, Karen to breast cancer……………When they went through three rounds of chemo, when they knew the time was near, and I looked them in the eyes, and wondered what the hell could I do? Both had husbands, and daughters. Karen, her mother died from breast cancer, her sister died from breast cancer, and Karen told her daughter, if you want children have them soon, then have both breast removed. And so it was. The hurt, and healing is so damn hard, and it’s women who help, and listen and learn from other women about their bodies……….it is not for some legislator place to tell a woman what they should do with their bodies. Husband, and sons, and father, can help, but it other women who is better motivated to help other women in need. It just is, sisters helping sisters.

  13. Fannie says:

    There once was a lady named Marian……….she was from England, and had married a Vietnam vet, and I am became her friend. One fine sunny day I went to visit Marian. She was out back hanging a few clothes on the line, she was pregnant, don’t remember, maybe 4 months. She let out a moan, I knew something’s wrong, and she reach between her legs, and blood began to pour. Talk about jump, it was crazy. I had her lay flat with several pieces of clothing, maybe towels to catch the baby. We didn’t have cell phones, and didn’t have 911. I had to call friends to get over her, and help me get her to the hospital. She survived, and of course her baby did not, she was so glad that I was there to help, and was forever thanking me. One of the reasons she had the miscarriage was because of pregnancy related diabetes…………I am going to get on the phone to her, and let her know I love her, and how much she helped me grow to be the woman I am today.

    No politician has a right to deny women access to health care, these are women who are like ourselves, trying to help create healthy and joyful families.

  14. List of X says:

    I’m glad that Senate isn’t buying the GOP plan to delay Obamacare for a year in exchange for funding the government for a few more months. The only thing this will achieve is that when the government needs another funding resolution few months later, GOP will again ask that Obamacare is delayed by another year (or two) in exchange.

    • Fannie says:

      Me too X……..I just feel bad with all the pain the blockheads are attaching and offering up. These delays are nothing more than stunts.

  15. ANonOMouse says:

    I don’t know if any of u watch Ed Schultz, but he’s on a tear today.