FLASH: Stupak deal-in-the-making would put Pelosi over 216

[Lunar]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=

How can you read that article and not think otherwise.  He sounds so dejected!

I think Nancy has the votes.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

[The Mikado]

I've always doubted he could bring a full dozen with him.  That said, 7 or 8 would still be a pretty formidable obstacle.  There's no doubt that this bill, if it passes, will pass by the skin of its teeth.

[Joe Republic]

I think it's been pretty clear for a while that Stupak is a few short of a full dozen. 

Also:

Demoncrap party

Welcome back to the fourth grade, everybody!

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I think it's been pretty clear for a while that Stupak is a few short of a full dozen. 

Also:

Demoncrap party

Welcome back to the fourth grade, everybody!

Hey, maybe you'll pass this time around, Joe.

[Joe Republic]

Touché.

[Smash255]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

[Bo]

It's a shame. One thing about the Democrats that really makes me angry is their uncodnidtional support for abortion, even late-term abortions in some cases.

[Lunar]

I think people forget what Stupak's amendment does.  It bans private insurers who choose to take part in competitive exchanges from covering abortions, even if they, the business, and the employees all want it to.  It's basically radically changes the status quo as far as abortion goes (and as I understand it) in the name of ensuring not one penny of federal money ends up paying for an abortion...but that's not possible.  

This would be like, in a highway bill, forbidding any roads from going to any cities with an abortion clinic in them, or, in an energy bill, specifically saying abortion clinics are not eligible for tax breaks associated with increasing their energy efficiency or something.  Maybe all federal employees should be forced to sign contracts promising not to spend any of their salary money on abortion...if they want to have one, they'll have to juggle on the street or babysit or something for that money.

[Iosif]

Pelosi is a fantastic speaker.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's time to primary the Stupid Five (or however many). Lipinski, in particular, should have a big bullseye on his back.

[Brittain33]

It's time to primary the Stupid Five (or however many). Lipinski, in particular, should have a big bullseye on his back.

Kos sponsored a primary challenge to Lipinski and it was a total dud. Not sure there's enough non-machine votes to be had in that district or else there wouldn't be a congressman Lipinski in the first place.

[Conservative frontier]

Haha Stupid 5 and Stupak, not funny. The State of Michigan should kill you now.

[CultureKing]

What an idiot, the senate bill already bans any government-backed plans from supporting abortion, it would have to be paid separately by individuals.

[CARLHAYDEN]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=

How can you read that article and not think otherwise.  He sounds so dejected!

I think Nancy has the votes.

This is priceless!

Got to post it so that the original won't be scrubbed.

[Joe Republic]

Why would the original post be scrubbed, CARLOS?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

Protecting the health of unborn children is still healthcare.

[Badger]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

Protecting the health of unborn children is still healthcare.

So you would support this measure, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95-10_Initiative

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

Protecting the health of unborn children is still healthcare.

So you would support this measure, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95-10_Initiative

Yes, I don't see why not. What's your point?

[Badger]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

Protecting the health of unborn children is still healthcare.

So you would support this measure, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95-10_Initiative

Yes, I don't see why not. What's your point?

I assumed you would've instinctively opposed the various "socialist" measures designed to ensure pre-natal health such as fully funding WIC and extending SCHIP to all pregnant women. I'll admit you surprised me here.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

Protecting the health of unborn children is still healthcare.

So you would support this measure, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95-10_Initiative

Yes, I don't see why not. What's your point?

I assumed you would've instinctively opposed the various "socialist" measures designed to ensure pre-natal health such as fully funding WIC and extending SCHIP to all pregnant women. I'll admit you surprised me here.

The costs of that would be a pittance compared to the lives that could be saved. There is plenty of other spending that could be cut to pay for it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

If it passes, it'll be close.  And if it doesn't pass, Stupak will be one of those to thank for it - and that'll save him in Michigan.  Right to Life is STRONG here in Michigan, and if he were to lose their endorsement, in a bad year for Democrats, it would hurt him (probably not enough that he'd lose, but that all depends on a range of other factors).

[Badger]

These people should read the writing on the wall. There is no room for pro-life views in the Demoncrap party any more.

1.  The language in the Senate Bill already banned public funding on abortion.

2.  This bill was about healthcare, not about abortion.  Stupak wanted to change the abortion law in this country by trying to ban Private Insurers from covering abortion.  I'm sure some pro-life Democrats probably support banning Private Insurers from covering abortions, but realize this bill is not the time or place to try and change abortion law. 

Protecting the health of unborn children is still healthcare.

So you would support this measure, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95-10_Initiative

Yes, I don't see why not. What's your point?

I assumed you would've instinctively opposed the various "socialist" measures designed to ensure pre-natal health such as fully funding WIC and extending SCHIP to all pregnant women. I'll admit you surprised me here.

The costs of that would be a pittance compared to the lives that could be saved. There is plenty of other spending that could be cut to pay for it.

Kudos.

[Lunar]

FLASH: Stupak deal-in-the-making would put Pelosi over 216

via Mike Allen

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Dang it.