That’s also why it is important that what happens in 2008.

Even if it’s a DLCer we have to hold our nose to vote for.

What, am I first again?

You all realize that if I’m first, you have to actually go read the post and all the links embedded in it!

IGreat post. Just as “partial birth abortion” is a term that is misleading, so is “pro-life. Let’s call them what they are. Anti-choice.

ifthethunderdontgetya @ 0

That’s also why it is important that what happens in 2008.

Even if it’s a DLCer we have to hold our nose to vote for.

Yeah. Hillary Clinton wouldn’t have appointed either Roberts or Alito. (Neither would John Kerry, for that matter.)

Phoenix Woman @ 1

What, am I first again?

You all realize that if I’m first, you have to actually go read the post and all the links embedded in it!

I read the post, but I’ll have to home before clicking all the linkies.

(P.S. Don’t tell anyone where I’m posting from, it’s hard work, I tell you.)

Why does Roberts hate elderly fetuses?

ifthethunderdontgetya @ 5

I read the post, but I’ll have to home before clicking all the linkies.

(P.S. Don’t tell anyone where I’m posting from, it’s hard work, I tell you.)

Hmmm…the White House?

ccmask @ 6

Why does Roberts hate elderly fetuses?

707 on the floor.

khouz65 @ 3

IGreat post. Just as “partial birth abortion” is a term that is misleading, so is “pro-life. Let’s call them what they are. Anti-choice.

Too vague. Anti-woman and anti-sex. at least for women.

pw –

may i suggestion a language change?

For Roberts and Alito, women’s death in childbirth aren’t bugs, they’re features.

maybe should be:

For Roberts and Alito, womens’ death during pregnancy aren’t bugs, they’re features.

there’s probably a better way to phrase it, but you get the idea?

thanks.

Khouz65 @3, not just anti-choice.

Forced pregnancy.

PW – great post. Love the title. I would say wonderfully snarky, but it’s so painfully true, I’m not sure it qualifies as snark.

Can’t believe that 34 years ago I believed this was all settled.

It never fails to amaze me how this administration has dragged us back to the thirteenth century in six short years.
It will take decades to recover a national sense of perceiving science as a good thing.
If the Dems take the whitehouse in 08, we need to go through every level of every department of our government and root out every low life bastid that has any connection to the current administration and start bringing in intelligent people.

Eureka Springs @ 8

ccmask @ 6

Why does Roberts hate elderly fetuses?

707 on the floor.

But it’s true. I know I was once a very attractive fetus and age does funny thing to you (men-o-pause) but I am actually still a fetus. Just an elderly one. When does one stop being a fetus?

OT and EPU’d from the previous thread.

BlueAmerica’s Charlie Brown has won Democracy For America’s “Grassroots All-Star Challenge”!

Go Charlie!

There is a logical explanation for this.

These are horrible people.

selise @ 9

pw –

may i suggestion a language change?

For Roberts and Alito, women’s death in childbirth aren’t bugs, they’re features.

maybe should be:

For Roberts and Alito, womens’ death during pregnancy aren’t bugs, they’re features.

there’s probably a better way to phrase it, but you get the idea?

thanks.

Thanks — you’re right; this covers the whole period, not just the very end. My problem was that I was writing this with that infamous scene from the infamous novel The Cardinal, wherein the “hero” priest Father Fermoyle lets his beloved baby sister die in childbirth rather than countenance an abortion.

Yeah, I know, tejanarusa and leinie. Just speaking in terms of jargon…they really should be corrected when they call themselves “pro-life” and not allowed to get away with it. They’re pro-death to the woman, clearly.

This was the chiller in that piece for me:

At Bellevue’s Reproductive Choice Unit, for example, unnerved residents circulated stories about the hospital’s sordid past, when floors were once full of women who attempted termination on their own.

These young residents haven’t known a time when women had to risk a “back-alley abortionist” or try to do it themselves. Coathanger, anyone?

I guess what I’m trying to say is I wish I was a fetus again so my government would protect me and fight for me.

Bustednuckles @
13

It never fails to amaze me how this administration has dragged us back to the thirteenth century in six short years.
It will take decades to recover a national sense of perceiving science as a good thing.
If the Dems take the whitehouse in 08, we need to go through every level of every department of our government and root out every low life bastid that has any connection to the current administration and start bringing in intelligent people.

De-Bushification?

ccmask @
20

I guess what I’m trying to say is I wish I was a fetus again so my government would protect me and fight for me.

Exactly. They’re pro-life right up until you leave the womb. After that they don’t give a shit.

ccmask @ 20

I guess what I’m trying to say is I wish I was a fetus again so my government would protect me and fight for me.

But unfortunatly, the protection and fighting for you ends after you are born.

De-Bushification?

I like it.

It is generational amnesia…. Who in the medical profession under the age of 55 remembers what life before legal and safe abortions?

At the ripe age of 20 in my third year of nursing school, I held the hand of a 14yr old child who bled to death following her illegal abortion. An event that I remember 35 years later, that has imprinted itself on my psyche and forever made me a PRIVACY advocate.

The idea that someone without any medical education are telling practicing physician’s how to practice is beyond any sane rational thought. But then we do know that wingnuts really do not think.

thanks Phoenix Woman @ 17 – haven’t read The Cardinal… was just thinking of how a fertilized ovum, embryo and a fetus are so frequently (and wrongly) described as children by the forced pregnancy crowd.

Robert Mueller on C-Span 2.

Just because the Supreme Court make a law does not mean that they are immune to it’s consequences. If a single woman dies because these jokers made a law against the advice of doctors to prevent Doctors from ussing a lifesaving procedure to save a patient then I think the Supreme Court judges who voted for this decision should be brought up on murder charges.

tejanarusa @ 19

This was the chiller in that piece for me:

At Bellevue’s Reproductive Choice Unit, for example, unnerved residents circulated stories about the hospital’s sordid past, when floors were once full of women who attempted termination on their own.

These young residents haven’t known a time when women had to risk a “back-alley abortionist” or try to do it themselves. Coathanger, anyone?

A few weeks ago at another blog, there was discussion about the forced pregnancy types placing crosses on the grounds of a university to symbolize the abortions. Someone suggested going along after and placing coat-hangers on each of the crosses.

OMG, PW!

My problem was that I was writing this with that infamous scene from the infamous novel The Cardinal, wherein the “hero” priest Father Fermoyle lets his beloved baby sister die in childbirth rather than countenance an abortion.

My next comment was going to be about that very scene from the movie of The Cardinal. It’s burned into my memory – Carol Lynley, as the sister, on her gurney being wheeled away– and we just know the baby, but not she, will survive, while Tom Tryon, as Father F agonizes. The take is clearly that his decision NOT to choose her life over the baby’s life is absolutely the righteous moral choice.

I was 10 or 12, and horrified.
(That’s why my take on the issue has always been pro-theexistingalready-person over the one-whohasn’tevenbeenbornyet.)

That was the early ’60’s, IIRC.

ccmask @ 20

I guess what I’m trying to say is I wish I was a fetus again so my government would protect me and fight for me.

I think it was Barney Frank (someone else was quoting this the other day) who said, “They’re pro-life up until the moment of birth.”

things come undone @ 28

Just because the Supreme Court make a law does not mean that they are immune to it’s consequences. If a single woman dies because these jokers made a law against the advice of doctors to prevent Doctors from ussing a lifesaving procedure to save a patient then I think the Supreme Court judges who voted for this decision should be brought up on murder charges.

Morally, I agree 100%. Practically, how could it be done? I mean, capital punishment is legal, and this would be only indirect. Never mind who would prosecute.

To all who helped me yesterday, THANK YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART, ESPECIALLY RAVEN WHEREEVER YOU ARE!!!
O.K….Since when does “conservatism” have anything to do with bigger gov’t.? Isn’t that their mantra? Smaller , less intrusive gov’t these f*cking hypocrits are so despicable they make me wanna puke! They have taken “spinning” to a whole other level. It’s the truth when they go and issue 1052 subpoenas to Clintons’ admin., but it’s harrasment when we serve 5. F*cking liars.

Bustednuckles @ 13

It never fails to amaze me how this administration has dragged us back to the thirteenth century in six short years.
It will take decades to recover a national sense of perceiving science as a good thing.
If the Dems take the whitehouse in 08, we need to go through every level of every department of our government and root out every low life bastid that has any connection to the current administration and start bringing in intelligent people.

It amazes me, too.
Thinking back to my parents’ and grandparents’ generations, science was sought after hungrily because it helped people live longer, it made work easier, made life more pleasant, brought so many advances. People seemed hungrier for knowledge.
Now, there’s a sharp step backward due, in part I think, to fundamentalist teachings.
No one remembers having an earache that was never treated, I guess.

They care about the fetus, they just don’t care about the baby. Jesus is rolling in his…well he’s probably pissed!

Yeah, nothing like having some old man who’s never met me decide my health care for me. Cuz the doctor who has been through years of med school and I aren’t capable of making that decision. I need to be dictated to. Poor, week, feeble minded female that I be. It might make someone who has never even MET me feel “icky” if I don’t decide their way.

It’s been what, a week? and this thing is still making me incoherent with rage.

The utter contempt for women, it’s breathtaking. The idea that the potential inside me has more value than I do – that what should be a private, personal, decision isn’t mine to make.

I’m not just pro choice. I’m pro abortion. Because sometimes, abortion saves lives. And if it isn’t legal, it’s gonna mean women dead who don’t need to be. Where’s the morality in that?

So there is a brief window for government love. Conception thru birth to the Easter Egg Roll at the White House. After that, you’re on your own.

Who was it who said “For conservatives, the sanctity of life begins at conception and ends at birth.”

And it’s so clearly just for control. I mean, it doesn’t make sense even if they just see us as breeders. You don’t kill your cow to save the calf, the cow can make another calf sooner than the calf can.

Tap Duncan @
36

They care about the fetus, they just don’t care about the baby. Jesus is rolling in his…well he’s probably pissed!

That’s cuz for the fundies, actions have no meaning. It is only important to express “I BELIEVE!” and all is forgiven, actions be damned

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 42

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Kiddo, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

Morris Sheppard, , I think I love you. Knowing there are men out there like you (assuming you are one) gives me some small comfort, and even a little hope. These are such discouraging times.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 42

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Hear! Hear!

I call it the “nunya factor”

In my most despairing moments, I think about the fact that in the early ’70’s, we “women’s libbers” called ourselves the third wave (1st was Seneca Convention for suffrage, 2nd was the 19-teens and 20’s that finally got suffrage), and figured this was pretty much the final wave where we would achieve our goals of equal opportunity, equal treatment without discrimination.

Now I keep thinking about my informal ongoing study of history – noticing how women have had many periods of “liberation,” (looked at over centuries and across societies) to some degree, after which, as women become more successful, men begin feeling threatened, and soon enough, women lose the rights they fought for (or that societal conditions brought about).
Afghanistan is that historical circle in a very short time. You still hear people saying the Afghan war is working, now girls can go to school, don’t have to wear burqas, etc. But it isn’t true except in smaller and smaller parts of the country. If we don’t keep our eyes open and keep fighting, we too will lose more than the right to safe and legal abortion.

As they say be careful what you wish for. If abortion becomes banned, then all those men who impregnate a women will then become financially responsible for those children. And all those parents whose daughters get pregnant will have to face the neighbors over her promiscuity.

By all rights it should be an ABC conversation.
A= Doctor.
B= Pregnant lady.
C= anyone else, see your way out of the conversation.

HotFlash @ 40.

Control is the key, isn’t it?

Cuz even if they get to the Holy Grail, and Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortions don’t stop. They just get to punish the sluts that dare to have the sex by either forced pregnancy or what, a murder conviction if the terminate? Control.

I just don’t understand what is so freaking THREATENING about letting women have bodily autonomy?

You know what I want? Constitutional amendment, guaranteeing the right to privacy. Yeah, I know. They’ll respect it about as much as they do the 4th, 5th, and 8th, but I can dream that they treat it with the reverence they give the 2nd.

cathy @ 46

As they say be careful what you wish for. If abortion becomes banned, then all those men who impregnate a women will then become financially responsible for those children. And all those parents whose daughters get pregnant will have to face the neighbors over her promiscuity.

Hey, there’s always the Florence Crittenden Homes – they’ll be revived and there will be lots of babies (esp. white ones) available for adoption again. Just like the good ol’ days!

tejanarusa @ 46

In my most despairing moments, I think about the fact that in the early ’70’s, we “women’s libbers” called ourselves the third wave (1st was Seneca Convention for suffrage, 2nd was the 19-teens and 20’s that finally got suffrage), and figured this was pretty much the final wave where we would achieve our goals of equal opportunity, equal treatment without discrimination.

Now I keep thinking about my informal ongoing study of history – noticing how women have had many periods of “liberation,” (looked at over centuries and across societies) to some degree, after which, as women become more successful, men begin feeling threatened, and soon enough, women lose the rights they fought for (or that societal conditions brought about).
Afghanistan is that historical circle in a very short time. You still hear people saying the Afghan war is working, now girls can go to school, don’t have to wear burqas, etc. But it isn’t true except in smaller and smaller parts of the country. If we don’t keep our eyes open and keep fighting, we too will lose more than the right to safe and legal abortion.

Back in the late 70s-early 80s, when the ERA was still alive, I was given a t-shirt from NOW that had the message “A Man Of Quality Is Not Threatened By A Woman For Equality”

I think I still have it somewhere. Had to quit wearing it as it was too small but always loved the sentiment since I was raised in a “liberated” household back before that was a know term.

dakine01-

Back in the late 70s-early 80s, when the ERA was still alive, I was given a t-shirt from NOW that had the message “A Man Of Quality Is Not Threatened By A Woman For Equality”

I think I still have it somewhere. Had to quit wearing it as it was too small but always loved the sentiment since I was raised in a “liberated” household back before that was a know term.

Good on ya, as they say around here!
(My ERA t-shirt got too small, too. Sigh.)

We need to divide our enemies I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is still ok with Abortion when the mothers life is in danger, or if its a choice between the mother and the child. We just need a gutsy Bishop or Pope’s opinion on this subject on record to throw back at the Supreme Court Justices who blame being Catholic for their decision. We need to point out that Scalia’s postion on this issue is harsher on women than the Catholic Church’s postion was preVatican2.

cathy @ 47

As they say be careful what you wish for. If abortion becomes banned, then all those men who impregnate a women will then become financially responsible for those children. And all those parents whose daughters get pregnant will have to face the neighbors over her promiscuity.

At least with DNA today, we won’t have the guy getting a bunch of his friends to stand up with him in court and swear they all had slept with her so no telling who was the father.

If abortions are banned, how will they win elections?

OK Kid, thank you.

As a female who isn’t a doctor, it’s none of my business either, unless it’s my body.

Alito and Roberts are just dogma. Since this country decided that how well you take the LSAT and how well you do on law school exams is the basis for judging your career, we will have political operatives like Roberts and Alito and Scalia. These guys could not get near a hard nosed pressurized law practice. They are so far over institutionalized that they actually idolize themselves. You have never met a more boring guy than Alito, a more insecure and mean spirited guy than Scalia. Never met Roberts. But these three think that their ideas are what count, not the reality the world’s population has to live in.

gotta run….L8tr

khouz65 @ 44

Morris Sheppard, , I think I love you. Knowing there are men out there like you (assuming you are one) gives me some small comfort, and even a little hope. These are such discouraging times.

You’re female, I assume? Not that there would be anything wrong with it if you weren’t.

And here is an addendum to control of women. You can bet your bottom dollare that *rich* girls and women will still be able to get safe abortions. It is control of the poor. Slowly I am gettin gthe hang of this.

Another Epiphany I had last week is that they are working hard to break the cities. They want to break any institution that could challenge their hold on power.

leftdcin72 @ 57

Alito and Roberts are just dogma. Since this country decided that how well you take the LSAT and how well you do on law school exams is the basis for judging your career, we will have political operatives like Roberts and Alito and Scalia. These guys could not get near a hard nosed pressurized law practice. They are so far over institutionalized that they actually idolize themselves. You have never met a more boring guy than Alito, a more insecure and mean spirited guy than Scalia. Never met Roberts. But these three think that their ideas are what count, not the reality the world’s population has to live in.

Federalist Society patriarchy in operation.

Well, Ms. Hamsher has written several articles in critique of the communication failure by progressive democrats on this issue. And I’ve made several comments professing my own confusion on all this. I’m afraid that “bad PR” has, in part, contributed to the debacle. Finally, from this article by Ms. Phoenix, I learn something more:

“And the ban doesn’t outlaw abortion itself, just this one particular method, so it makes for complicated decisions should emergencies arise.”
I compliment Ms. Phoenix on continuing, for me, the education. So….it’s a surgical procedure that’s at issue??? You know, there seems to be so many misunderstandings being brought to light, I’m beginning to wonder if the Congress even knew the basics of this issue when it passed the law. Did Congress engage in any type of intelligent floor debate on this statute? What a mess.

Ghostman

things come undone @ 52

We need to divide our enemies I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is still ok with Abortion when the mothers life is in danger, or if its a choice between the mother and the child. We just need a gutsy Bishop or Pope’s opinion on this subject on record to throw back at the Supreme Court Justices who blame being Catholic for their decision. We need to point out that Scalia’s postion on this issue is harsher on women than the Catholic Church’s postion was preVatican2.

Huh? How old are you? You need to watch/read The Cardinal. That statement could not be more wrong. In this century (not in medieval times, or when “quickening” was still believed to be the time when the fetus became quick, or alive), the Church has NEVER favored an exception for the life of the mother.

For the Church, in the case of Mother v. Unborn Fetus, it’s foreordained, Mother ALWAYS loses, Fetus ALWAYS wins.

women have either:

(a)choice
(b)forced pregnancies

that is all

a friend of a friend had an anencephalic baby and chose to terminate the sad sad pregnancy … and told friends and family that she miscarried because she feared their wrath

sad sad sad …

Oklahoma kiddo @ 42

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Don’t neccessarily agree, OK.

I have two delicious granddaughters, their health and freedom are important to me, so I feel it is some of my business.

Morris Sheppard,
Yes, I’m female, forgot to mention. All this really weighs me down. Thank you for making a sad girl smile .

HotFlash @ 32

things come undone @ 28

Just because the Supreme Court make a law does not mean that they are immune to it’s consequences. If a single woman dies because these jokers made a law against the advice of doctors to prevent Doctors from ussing a lifesaving procedure to save a patient then I think the Supreme Court judges who voted for this decision should be brought up on murder charges.

Morally, I agree 100%. Practically, how could it be done? I mean, capital punishment is legal, and this would be only indirect. Never mind who would prosecute.

Just because something has never been done before does not mean we can’t do it. I admit the how requires some thought but first we must create a climate that wants it to be done. Maybe a few TV specials on the lifetime channel and we could get Oprah involved we need public support to turn this issue around.

On this particular aspect, I’m with the OK kiddo.

But, when the fundies had their annual DC protest – a cold wet day, iirc – the online CBS article photo showed a protester’s sign. It wasn’t ‘STOP THE MURDER’ or something along those lines. I was one word: ‘ABSTINENCE’.

Roberts says he wants narrowly based decisions. Eventually he’s going to narrowly overturn Griswold, as some here have already commented prior.

So, as a male, even though I am not in a position of ‘choice’ – I have a stake in these outcomes. Not to mention any female friends/loved ones etc.

Women should band together and insist on no more sex until women’s rights are restored. That’ll reverse it.

leftdcin72 @ 56

Alito and Roberts are just dogma. Since this country decided that how well you take the LSAT and how well you do on law school exams is the basis for judging your career, we will have political operatives like Roberts and Alito and Scalia. These guys could not get near a hard nosed pressurized law practice. But these three think that their ideas are what count, not the reality the world’s population has to live in.

Well said. Lawyers at that level live in an ivory-tower more isolated than any academic. That was part of why having Marshall on the court was so wonderful…he often injected a reality-check from actual courtroom, real people-client experience.

selise @ 26

thanks Phoenix Woman @ 17 – haven’t read The Cardinal… was just thinking of how a fertilized ovum, embryo and a fetus are so frequently (and wrongly) described as children by the forced pregnancy crowd.

Oh, it’s gruesome. The guy who wrote the book was a longtime editor at everyone’s favorite right-wing propaganda distributor, Reader’s Digest, which of course meant that the book was featured as one of the Condensed Books in their longtime series of such. And he describes, in loving detail, a common problem faced by Irish Catholic women in America early in the last century.

Seems that Irish-immigrant girls or their second-generation descendants in early-20th-century Boston had tiny frames (partly genetic, partly longstanding malnutrition over several generations) — so tiny that when they got pregnant by American men, the fetus’ heads would be too big to pass through the space left by the women’s slim hips. This, in the pre-survivable-Caesarian days, was a death sentence for the mother and usually for the fetus, who if it did survive was often brain-damaged from the prolonged labor — the Church wouldn’t allow killing the fetus to save the mom, but neither would it put the mom out of her misery to save the fetus from death or brain damage; they waited until the mother died on her own before authorizing a posthumous Caesarian on the mother to deliver what was left of the fetus, assuming it didn’t die first. (In the novel (later made into a film), the author does a huge cop-out by having the fetus — a baby girl — be perfectly healthy and none the worse for a week of having her brains squished against her mother’s hipbones. She’s without a mom now, but hey! God’s will was preserved, and that’s the important thing.)

As a physician, I’ve been disgusted and dismayed by this line of illogic for years. It’s political, cynical, emotional hype to name procedures like this. But that’s our congress, calling what they do by something opposite of its purpose more often than not. And what business is it of theirs to call the medical shots? Shame, shame on them! The procedure in question is NOT done to do an elective abortion, it’s only done in later pregnancy when continuing the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. Not that it’s any of a politician’s business.

The doctor named the ACLU as if it was the perpetrator of this nonesense. The ACLU defends everybody’s rights to free speech. It’s the three branches of government that are abridging free speech these days.

And if doctors in general are outraged as they should be, what’s stopping them from just doing the right thing? It’s kind of a no-brainer. I’d like to see some doctor jailed for saving someone’s life in a situation where life can continue and really mean something. I think that would go a long way in reversing this rank stupidity.

Remember, some people will DO ANYTHING to get elected. Don’t fall for it. Think for yourselves.

cathy @ 69

Women should band together and insist on no more sex until women’s rights are restored. That’ll reverse it.

That’s what the fundies want. And then you wind up only punishing yourself and fellow travelors (like me!) :}) Unfortunately, you’re not in ancient Greece any more, where it appeared to work.

Morris Sheppard @ 64

Oklahoma kiddo @ 42

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Don’t neccessarily agree, OK.

I have two delicious granddaughters, their health and freedom are important to me, so I feel it is some of my business.

I could not agree more with Morris. It about more than just ourselves. Its about Liberty for all. Oh, and I am pro vasectomy..)

HotFlash @ 60

And here is an addendum to control of women. You can bet your bottom dollare that *rich* girls and women will still be able to get safe abortions. It is control of the poor. Slowly I am gettin gthe hang of this.

As my grandmother used to say, “The law is fair. It is illegal for both rich men and beggars to sleep under the bridge.”

hot flash @59:

it’s **all** about control of poor women and working class women … rich women don’t, haven’t and won’t bear children they don’t want; it’s the way of the world

in earlier generations, the nice ladies went to the dr for a “d c” and everyone knew what it was but nobody said

there has been some conspiracy theory talk about a mysterious “abdominal” ailment suffered by either jenna or not jenna some time ago … roughly xmas 2000 … my money is on the theory that it wasn’t an appendix that came out

I’m gonna jump in and defend OKiddo here. From things he’s said previously I believe that he is saying that the *decision* is none of his business, not the *right* to decide, which, I think, he strongly supports. Although he is perfectly capable of saying so himself, I just don’t see him around right now. And if I am wrong he can (and will!) certainly correct me.

Ray Broggini @ 72

As a physician, I’ve been disgusted and dismayed by this line of illogic for years. It’s political, cynical, emotional hype to name procedures like this. But that’s our congress, calling what they do by something opposite of its purpose more often than not. And what business is it of theirs to call the medical shots? Shame, shame on them! The procedure in question is NOT done to do an elective abortion, it’s only done in later pregnancy when continuing the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. Not that it’s any of a politician’s business.

The doctor named the ACLU as if it was the perpetrator of this nonesense. The ACLU defends everybody’s rights to free speech. It’s the three branches of government that are abridging free speech these days.

And if doctors in general are outraged as they should be, what’s stopping them from just doing the right thing? It’s kind of a no-brainer. I’d like to see some doctor jailed for saving someone’s life in a situation where life can continue and really mean something. I think that would go a long way in reversing this rank stupidity.

Remember, some people will DO ANYTHING to get elected. Don’t fall for it. Think for yourselves.

These are the same people who “diagnosed” Terri Schiavo from thirty minute spliced together tapes when they were a thousand miles away from her, physically and mentally.

PW at 70–

Wow, I didn’t know that about the physiological problem, let alone that it was common. Have you read the book recently? I just have a general memory–as I said, that scene was burned into my pre-teen brain.

leinie @
11

Khouz65 @3, not just anti-choice.

Forced pregnancy.

Forced Childbirth.

Mutant Poodle, correct. Forced pregnancy AND childbirth.

My mother used to say that if the woman had the first baby, the man had the second and so forth, no family would have more than three children.

tejanarusa @ 69

leftdcin72 @ 56

Alito and Roberts are just dogma. Since this country decided that how well you take the LSAT and how well you do on law school exams is the basis for judging your career, we will have political operatives like Roberts and Alito and Scalia. These guys could not get near a hard nosed pressurized law practice. But these three think that their ideas are what count, not the reality the world’s population has to live in.

Well said. Lawyers at that level live in an ivory-tower more isolated than any academic. That was part of why having Marshall on the court was so wonderful…he often injected a reality-check from actual courtroom, real people-client experience.

Where Eisenhower misjudged Earl Warren was that Mr. Warren was a former prosecutor. He understood what the deal is and when he got on the Court he took what he had seen and decided it could not be tolerated. I believe that with the exception of Breyer there is not a single sitting Justice who has tried a case. And Breyer has very limited experience. It would not be bad sometime, if Harvard Law Review is the prerequisite these days, to take a real Federal trial judge and elevate him or her or her and him to the Court. Not the faux like Scalia or Alito. Alito is supposed to have had prosecutorial experience but I think he was an administrator and he never had to worry about a pay check or a real client.

Re today’s supplemental vote:

ABC has their correspondent report that Republicans want to look tough and Democrats want to do what the people want (like there is something vaguely unserious about that). As for Harry’s Reid’s statement that Iraq is lost, the reporter says it is “just what the Republicans want him to say” and then go on to a Republican strategist to explain it to us. You might think if they wanted us to know what Reid was thinking they might ask him or a Democrat but that is so not Washington.

NBC had on some babbling airhead Capitol correspondent saying, Bbbbbbut Bush is going to veto this so I don’t know why the Democrats did this. Wow what insight! Then their Defense correspondent Miklaszewski covers the Petraeus presser today. He notes that Petraeus confesses that the Iraqis are not going to meet any of the political benchmarks and then goes on to say that the surge can not be maintained because the Army is stretched too thin but what he doesn’t do is draw the obvious conclusion that Bush’s surge is and was a non-starter, a failure from the get go.

Someone wrote in a thread here a few days ago, that there are 2 choices; forgive me for not getting the quote exactly right:
1) Women have the right to choose.
2) Women have forced pregnancies.
Anyone who denies the first also upholds the second and that is unconscionable and barbaric … even if it is a Supreme Court justice.

tejanarusa @ 63

things come undone @ 52

We need to divide our enemies I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is still ok with Abortion when the mothers life is in danger, or if its a choice between the mother and the child. We just need a gutsy Bishop or Pope’s opinion on this subject on record to throw back at the Supreme Court Justices who blame being Catholic for their decision. We need to point out that Scalia’s postion on this issue is harsher on women than the Catholic Church’s postion was preVatican2.

Huh? How old are you? You need to watch/read The Cardinal. That statement could not be more wrong. In this century (not in medieval times, or when “quickening” was still believed to be the time when the fetus became quick, or alive), the Church has NEVER favored an exception for the life of the mother.

For the Church, in the case of Mother v. Unborn Fetus, it’s foreordained, Mother ALWAYS loses, Fetus ALWAYS wins.

Didn’t the “quickening ” idea die only recently when they discovered the baby has a heartbeat seperate from the Mothers? Also my grandfather was told by Doctors that it was my grandmother’s life and or my father’s life and while the nuns did put presure it still was my grandfathers choice. I admit that I could be wrong I’ll ask my sister who went to Catholic School but I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is not that heartless.

Morris Sheppard @ 64

Oklahoma kiddo @ 42

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Don’t neccessarily agree, OK.

I have two delicious granddaughters, their health and freedom are important to me, so I feel it is some of my business.

Playing devil’s advocate: Abortions should be; Safe, Legal, and RARE!!!

OT – MSNBC reporting that Jack Valenti is dead at 85

The question is do you believe a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy, for whatever reasons? I happen to strongly subscribe to answering, ‘yes’.

Helen @
87

OT – MSNBC reporting that Jack Valenti is dead at 85

I was gonna say CNN. If anyone don’t know, Valenti was LBJ aide who moved on to head the movie industry lobbying group that devised ratings system.

If Johnny and the Supremes ever do decide to force pregnant women to carry to term, and if there is still such a thing as equal protection, mustn’t they compel the man who got her pregnant to share the burden equally? Snd since there is no way to do that – nothing a man can do can ever come close to equating with being forced to give birth against one’s will – how could it EVER be allowed, or even contemplated? Is there no common sense left in our government?

Debate up with intro on MSNBC right now.

Oklahoma kiddo @
88

The question is do you believe a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy, for whatever reasons? I happen to strongly subscribe to answering, ‘yes’.

Seconded !!!
I can’t wait for this Supreme Court ruling to be challenged. Any ideas how this can be done?

Hugh @ 83

Re today’s supplemental vote:

ABC has their correspondent report that Republicans want to look tough and Democrats want to do what the people want (like there is something vaguely unserious about that). As for Harry’s Reid’s statement that Iraq is lost, the reporter says it is “just what the Republicans want him to say” and then go on to a Republican strategist to explain it to us. You might think if they wanted us to know what Reid was thinking they might ask him or a Democrat but that is so not Washington.

NBC had on some babbling airhead Capitol correspondent saying, Bbbbbbut Bush is going to veto this so I don’t know why the Democrats did this. Wow what insight! Then their Defense correspondent Miklaszewski covers the Petraeus presser today. He notes that Petraeus confesses that the Iraqis are not going to meet any of the political benchmarks and then goes on to say that the surge can not be maintained because the Army is stretched too thin but what he doesn’t do is draw the obvious conclusion that Bush’s surge is and was a non-starter, a failure from the get go.

Have you noticed the recent trend of CNN and MSNBC and others (not KeithO) to take great pains in smirking and mocking the Dems in a very overt fashion. ..as if they have been encouraged to do this. It seems totally inappropriate and artificial. It seems that this might be the way the media has decided to cover what the Democratic Congress is doing. Don’t give any weight to the process. Mock them, smirk when talking about what they are doing, roll your eyes as if they are too funny for words. It is weird and they need to be called on this behavior.
There is no skepticism with anything the GOP says, but the Dems need to be mocked and laughed at.

dakine01 @ 89

Helen @
87

OT – MSNBC reporting that Jack Valenti is dead at 85

I was gonna say CNN. If anyone don’t know, Valenti was LBJ aide who moved on to head the movie industry lobbying group that devised ratings system.

That’s him in the infamous picture of LBJ taking the oath of office on AF1 with Jackie Kennedy.

tejanarusa @ 78

PW at 70–

Wow, I didn’t know that about the physiological problem, let alone that it was common. Have you read the book recently? I just have a general memory–as I said, that scene was burned into my pre-teen brain.

It was also common among Native American women who conceived (willingly or otherwise) by European and/or American frontiersmen.

Petrocelli @ 92

Oklahoma kiddo @
88

The question is do you believe a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy, for whatever reasons? I happen to strongly subscribe to answering, ‘yes’.

Seconded!!!
I can’t wait for this Supreme Court ruling to be challenged. Any ideas how this can be done?

Thirded!

It all falls back on the privacy and the fact that it is a personal decision between doctor and patient. Period. Exclamation Point!

I hope there are some good questions and answers to what now passes for debates.

Someone promise me that the msnbc debate will not depress me.

Shorter Kennedy with Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Roberts concurring:

Women should not worry their pretty little heads about things they constitutionally (small c) can’t understand. And what do doctors know anyway?

smapdi @ 98

Someone promise me that the msnbc debate will not depress me.

sorry, no.

Alice B @ 93

Have you noticed the recent trend of CNN and MSNBC and others (not KeithO) to take great pains in smirking and mocking the Dems in a very overt fashion. ..as if they have been encouraged to do this. It seems totally inappropriate and artificial. It seems that this might be the way the media has decided to cover what the Democratic Congress is doing. Don’t give any weight to the process. Mock them, smirk when talking about what they are doing, roll your eyes as if they are too funny for words. It is weird and they need to be called on this behavior.
There is no skepticism with anything the GOP says, but the Dems need to be mocked and laughed at.

I’ve noticed this. So has Bill Moyers. He’s calling them on it, and it’s driving them berserk.

Petrocelli, a SCOTUS decision cannot be be challenged within the Judiciary, they are the final Arbiter, however, Legislative branch can amend the Constitution!

Petrocelli @ 92 asks:

I can’t wait for this Supreme Court ruling to be challenged. Any ideas how this can be done?

Elect a strongly pro-choice, anti-wing-nutter-patriarchy minded majority to both House and Senate to pass a bill repealing this and placing limitations to the court’s ability to overturn? Hey if the Nutters can do these things to block the courts, so can we.

I want to go back to a thought that someone posted in the blogosphere…and I wish I could credit it. It is that, if you scratch the surface of most of the forced birth crowd, you’d find people whose ethics are completely situational – if their daughter was raped, or even pregnant by the wrong man, well, then, we’d have to get together as a family and decide what to do.

Only Alan Keyes (and you know how far out I’m going when I cite him) called bullshit on that favorite theme in a Republican presidential debate: you’re either pro-life, he said, or you’re not.

I think this is more about fear of women’s sexuality, that women will choose to have sex, that women will choose to have sex with someone else, and then their small-minded rules about proper female behavior go out the window.

In the Promise Keepers Dad world view, the only women who need abortions are out of control sluts. When their abstinence-only schooled unwed daughters come home pregnant, I imagine the cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.

Hillary proud of legislation re: out of Iraq.

Alice B @ 93

Have you noticed the recent trend of CNN and MSNBC and others (not KeithO) to take great pains in smirking and mocking the Dems in a very overt fashion. ..as if they have been encouraged to do this. It seems totally inappropriate and artificial. It seems that this might be the way the media has decided to cover what the Democratic Congress is doing. Don’t give any weight to the process. Mock them, smirk when talking about what they are doing, roll your eyes as if they are too funny for words. It is weird and they need to be called on this behavior.
There is no skepticism with anything the GOP says, but the Dems need to be mocked and laughed at.

I watch cable news only for the unintended comedy.

CTuttle @ 88

Morris Sheppard @ 64

Oklahoma kiddo @ 42

Speaking as a male, I’m pro-it’s none of my business.

Don’t neccessarily agree, OK.

I have two delicious granddaughters, their health and freedom are important to me, so I feel it is some of my business.

Playing devil’s advocate: Abortions should be; Safe, Legal, and RARE!!!

Absolutely! But we are discussing here second trimester abortions. In most cases of unwanted pregnancy, the procedure is done in the first trimester. Second trimester abortions are more often done is cases of a *wanted* pregnancy that has gone wrong. The law now requires that a woman carry a child to term even if it is seriously deformed or even dead, and in cases where continuing the pregnancy would risk the life of the mother. Here are a few things that can go wrong in a wanted pregnancy.

Biden just slapped Brian Williams down for asking if Harry Reid is correct to say war is lost. Says it’s not a game show, Brian.

“Agree that the war is lost”?

HRC evades – ditto Biden

not directly on topic, but a stinging example of birth-related misogyny is a scene from the Spanish movie “Pan’s Labyrinth“. The brutal, facist capitan tells the doctor that if it comes down to it, the doctor shall save the life of the baby over the life of the mother (his wife).

wrt the debate.

will someone please say that reid is correct?

I want out of Iraq now. Watching the debate.

Mutant Poodle @ 104

I want to go back to a thought that someone posted in the blogosphere…and I wish I could credit it. It is that, if you scratch the surface of most of the forced birth crowd, you’d find people whose ethics are completely situational – if their daughter was raped, or even pregnant by the wrong man, well, then, we’d have to get together as a family and decide what to do.

Only Alan Keyes (and you know how far out I’m going when I cite him) called bullshit on that favorite theme in a Republican presidential debate: you’re either pro-life, he said, or you’re not.

I think this is more about fear of women’s sexuality, that women will choose to have sex, that women will choose to have sex with someone else, and then their small-minded rules about proper female behavior go out the window.

In the Promise Keepers Dad world view, the only women who need abortions are out of control sluts. When their abstinence-only schooled unwed daughters come home pregnant, I imagine the cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.

Yet Dukakis got hammered for maintaining anti-death penalty stance in debate with BushI when he refused to say he’d support it if Kitty had been raped and murdered.

Obama’s nephew in Iraq

dakine01 @
96
Petrocelli @ 92
Oklahoma kiddo @
88
The question is do you believe a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy, for whatever reasons? I happen to strongly subscribe to answering, ‘yes’.

Seconded!!!
I can’t wait for this Supreme Court ruling to be challenged. Any ideas how this can be done?

Thirded!

It all falls back on the privacy and the fact that it is a personal decision between doctor and patient. Period. Exclamation Point!

… and the sometimes overlooked fact that they are human and thus guaranteed equal rights and freedom …
This law is a giant step back to the dark ages.

Zig freed by Mod

Questions seem to be in the ‘gotcha’ category

Edwards claiming the “trust” moral high ground.

Hugh @ 101

Shorter Kennedy with Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Roberts concurring:

Women should not worry their pretty little heads about things they constitutionally (small c) can’t understand. And what do doctors know anyway?

Reminds me of the Victorian popular medical books that had the racy bits in Latin, becvause of course ladies wouldn’t understand it.

solai @ 114

Obama’s nephew in Iraq

it was the nephew of a woman he met in nh.

I have never noticed Barack’s right ear before. In the windy city, that man better wear a hat! :)

CTuttle @ 102

Petrocelli, a SCOTUS decision cannot be be challenged within the Judiciary, they are the final Arbiter, however, Legislative branch can amend the Constitution!

Would this require a veto proof vote?

Hillary takes responsibility for her vote. Sincere vote. If I knew then what I know now, would not have voted as I did. Question is what to do now. Prez is clueless. Hope he does not veto. Bush will not get us out of Iraq. I will.

Hillary takes responsibility for her vote. What now? How do we get the president to listen? I will get us out of Iraq as president.

selise @ 119

solai @ 114

Obama’s nephew in Iraq

it was the nephew of a woman he met in nh.

sorry

punaise @ 111

not directly on topic, but a stinging example of birth-related misogyny is a scene from the Spanish movie “Pan’s Labyrinth“. The brutal, facist capitan tells the doctor that if it comes down to it, the doctor shall save the life of the baby over the life of the mother (his wife).

After killing the doctor that was more concerned with the living mother than the child. Of course, the doctor was also a ‘traitor’ in the father’s ugly mind. Leaving the mother to the unkind mercies of a new physician.

kucinich – stop all funding for the war – now.

punaise @ 112

not directly on topic, but a stinging example of birth-related misogyny is a scene from the Spanish movie “Pan’s Labyrinth“. The brutal, facist capitan tells the doctor that if it comes down to it, the doctor shall save the life of the baby over the life of the mother (his wife).

Haven’t seen it punaise. Would this be the capitan’s heir who is to live?

Kucinich!

CTuttle @ 103

Petrocelli, a SCOTUS decision cannot be be challenged within the Judiciary, they are the final Arbiter, however, Legislative branch can amend the Constitution!

SCOTUS can rule that current law is constitutional. Congress can repeal with no SCOTUS ability to intervene.

solai @ 116

Questions seem to be in the ‘gotcha’ category

Of course, only republicans get soft ball questions. That’s all they can answer. Wouldn’t want to hurt their feeling or anything or they might start whining about the dastardly “librul media”

Hot Flash, I concur with you that SCOTUS had no true rationale for their decision, bluntly pointed out by Ginsberg in dissent, I strongly dislike abortion on demand, however, it is none of my business!!!

Kucinich is looking good. So is Richardson. Edwards not bad.

wow, richardson pushing the withdrawal line. I realize kucinich is doing it also, but Richardson has far greater credibility. wow.

Richardson: This war is a disaster; we must end it. I would withdraw all including residual by the end of 2007. Intensive diplomacy. Security conf w/ Iran and Syria. Donor conf. for other countries to take over reconstruction

solai @ 124 -

next time you’ll correct me… that’s one of the reasons for listening together. *g*

Richardson: withdrawal combined with a postwar strategy. kind of a mixture of Biden and Kucinich.

richardson – possibly set up three different entities in Iraq.

me: and then Turkey attacks the Kurds.

fyi – cspan radio is carrying the debate

Petrocelli @ 123

CTuttle @ 102

Petrocelli, a SCOTUS decision cannot be be challenged within the Judiciary, they are the final Arbiter, however, Legislative branch can amend the Constitution!

Would this require a veto proof vote?

Another thing Congress can do is impeach the SC Justices. Well, maybe, it’s never been done. Yet.

leinie >

“…I just don’t understand what is so freaking THREATENING about letting women have bodily autonomy?…”

It threatens to disrupt their ability to borrow against future cash flow.

Bonded indebtedness is key to the continual growth of the facade economy that continues to prop up Industrial Capitalism (and the power brokers behind it). If the birthrate drops then that particular governmental authority loses some ability to borrow against future tax revenues.

And yes, folks, I AM VERY SERIOUS about this. Look into how bonding authority works. The Roman Catholic Church uses their projected future collection revenue as colleratal to borrow against today.

SERIOUSLY

The emotional hocus pocus is just a smoke screen to create a climate to easily control behavior. Bet on it.

Inform yourself and gain power.

“Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.” – John Maynard Keynes

What the troops need? A boat ride home.

jayt @ 137

richardson – possibly set up three different entities in Iraq.

me: and then Turkey attacks the Kurds.

Well, not like we haven’t sold out the kurds before, like in ‘91/92

HotFlash @ 107

Absolutely! But we are discussing here second trimester abortions. In most cases of unwanted pregnancy, the procedure is done in the first trimester. Second trimester abortions are more often done is cases of a *wanted* pregnancy that has gone wrong. The law now requires that a woman carry a child to term even if it is seriously deformed or even dead, and in cases where continuing the pregnancy would risk the life of the mother. Here are a few things that can go wrong in a wanted pregnancy.

Petrocelli says:- HotFlash, in Canada, abortions are allowed up to 5 months, correct?

I don’t know this guy….Gravel

Jayt: you got it. There’s nothing we can do to stop the Kurds from declaring independence.

Gravel: The war was lost the day GB invaded on a fraudulant basis

Petrocelli @ 121

CTuttle @ 102

Petrocelli, a SCOTUS decision cannot be be challenged within the Judiciary, they are the final Arbiter, however, Legislative branch can amend the Constitution!

Would this require a veto proof vote?

That, and here’s the kicker, two-thirds of the State Legislatures must ratify the amendment! There are a few ways to amend the Const. but that is the principle route!

HotFlash @ 127

punaise @ 112

not directly on topic, but a stinging example of birth-related misogyny is a scene from the Spanish movie “Pan’s Labyrinth“. …

Haven’t seen it punaise. Would this be the capitan’s heir who is to live?

yes.

aliasofwestgate says:

After killing the doctor that was more concerned with the living mother than the child. Of course, the doctor was also a ‘traitor’ in the father’s ugly mind. Leaving the mother to the unkind mercies of a new physician.

indeed.

intense movie!

Graavel is going OFF on the war.

jayt @
137

richardson – possibly set up three different entities in Iraq.

me: and then Turkey attacks the Kurds.

The kurds can handle themselves. They kicked Saddam’s ass for a decade in spite of his attempts at genocide against them. I’d bet if you asked them if they wanted independence as their own country/entity, they’d overwhelmingly support it.

Mutant Poodle @ 104

I want to go back to a thought that someone posted in the blogosphere…and I wish I could credit it. It is that, if you scratch the surface of most of the forced birth crowd, you’d find people whose ethics are completely situational – if their daughter was raped, or even pregnant by the wrong man, well, then, we’d have to get together as a family and decide what to do.

Only Alan Keyes (and you know how far out I’m going when I cite him) called bullshit on that favorite theme in a Republican presidential debate: you’re either pro-life, he said, or you’re not.

I think this is more about fear of women’s sexuality, that women will choose to have sex, that women will choose to have sex with someone else, and then their small-minded rules about proper female behavior go out the window.

In the Promise Keepers Dad world view, the only women who need abortions are out of control sluts. When their abstinence-only schooled unwed daughters come home pregnant, I imagine the cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.

Oh, ya mean those daddies who have parties where they dance with their good little girls to celebrate their virginity? Talk about some sick f****d up Freudian sh*t.

Sorry MOD, for the zig at 115.

Gravel. A rad.

CTuttle @ 133

Hot Flash, I concur with you that SCOTUS had no true rationale for their decision, bluntly pointed out by Ginsberg in dissent, I strongly dislike abortion on demand, however, it is none of my business!!!

Abortion is not a method of birth control. I know of (almost) no one who has made that decision lightly. But it should be available. The best way to avoid abortions is good sex education and available contraception, including morning-after pills.

Hilary calling Obama, Barak; talk amongst yourselves

I’m lost: Why does Hilary get a rebuttal to Obama’s statement? I didn’t hear him say anything that refered to her.

Hillary: Barack right. We need political solution to end this war. Get Repulics on board. Middle of multi-sided sectarian civil war and need all on board.

dakine01 @ 122

Hillary takes responsibility for her vote. Sincere vote. If I knew then what I know now, would not have voted as I did. Question is what to do now. Prez is clueless. Hope he does not veto. Bush will not get us out of Iraq. I will.

Hillary is coy. What Hillary knew when she voted for the war is not the issue. What is the issue is what Hillary believed when she voted for the war. Hillary can always say she did not know that Tenet was a liar but she had plenty of reason to believe that Tenet was unreliable and a liar. She had plenty of reason to believe that she needed to check the facts. She did not believe that it was important to do that because she believed, in her heart of hearts, that the facts were not important. She just made a political move. Hillary is the classic small time corporate lawyer playing politics.

Williams: Perception problems. Barack goes first based on donors who may have been corrupt.

So far I like the questions. And some of the answers.

Next round…embarassing questions for each of them….(sigh)

punaise@149

It was an incredble piece of storytelling and art. That’s one reason i love it so. It’s a throwback to the old world stories. Blood, brutality and magic. Not Disney’s santizied versions.

oh great – now it’s ’smear a dem’ time.

solai @ 161

Next round…embarassing questions for each of them….(sigh)

It’s going to be a night of gotchas, that’s all.

Glad y’all are live blogging the debates! Thanks! (I’m not near a TV and I’m doing some delicate work on another screen that contraindicates watching C-Span online.)

haircuts. O jesus.

CTuttle @ 147
Petrocelli @ 121
CTuttle @ 102
Petrocelli, a SCOTUS decision cannot be be challenged within the Judiciary, they are the final Arbiter, however, Legislative branch can amend the Constitution!

Would this require a veto proof vote?

That, and here’s the kicker, two-thirds of the State Legislatures must ratify the amendment! There are a few ways to amend the Const. but that is the principle route!

however, I don’t think you would need a Const. Amendment to undo this particular SCt decision……Congress could just pass a law.

HotFlash @ 154

CTuttle @ 133

Hot Flash, I concur with you that SCOTUS had no true rationale for their decision, bluntly pointed out by Ginsberg in dissent, I strongly dislike abortion on demand, however, it is none of my business!!!

Abortion is not a method of birth control. I know of (almost) no one who has made that decision lightly. But it should be available. The best way to avoid abortions is good sex education and available contraception, including morning-after pills.

Touche!

Breaking….Edwards is rich

Edwards: about the haircut; why out of campaign funds? Edwards: a mistake. Do I live a privleged lifestyle? Yep, but haven’t forgotten where I come from.

RonD @ 167

haircuts. O jesus.

Yeah. We’re really getting at the important issues.

Hedge funds explained in 30 seconds.

I’m not going to denounce any of the debaters. Yet.

For Edwards: Why was Haircut paid out of campaign funds?

Edwards: A mistake which I rectified.

Edwards: I’m blessed with money but not where I came from. We didn’t have the money to pay prices on menu. I want all to have chances I had.
Williams follow-up: You counsel hedge funds, do they make America better?

Edwards: They have money. Need money to lift people up who are struggling

aliasofwestgate – minor clarification. el capitan said it to the real doctor, well before the docotr’s demise. the girl overheard from beneath the bed.

Brian to Edwards: Hedge funds? Whaaaaat? Edwards 45 million withour health ins. Raise the min wage

Hedge fund question: try to catch Edwards. I want somebody to ask Bush that at his next presser.

solai @ 170

Breaking….Edwards is rich

Well, that should disqualify him. Only rich Republicans are qualified to be President.

Did Brian Williams not see Moyers last night?

Petrocelli @ 145

Petrocelli says:- HotFlash, in Canada, abortions are allowed up to 5 months, correct?

Petrecelli, abortions are not illegal in Canada at any time. But most are done within the first tri.

jayt @ 163

oh great – now it’s ’smear a dem’ time.

They better do the same when they host a Republican debate. (They’re going to do that, right?)

oddmommy @ 167

however, I don’t think you would need a Const. Amendment to undo this particular SCt decision……Congress could just pass a law.

That’s right – SC upheld a law passed by Congress, all that would have to happen is to pass a law rescinding this one.

punaise @ 176

aliasofwestgate – minor clarification. el capitan said it to the real doctor, well before the docotr’s demise. the girl overheard from beneath the bed.

Thanks. It’s been some months since i’ve seen the film. I’m waiting for it’s release on DVD now.

Hillary: Yeah I have rich constitutients on Wall ST but also a lot pf poor who can’t afford healthcare. We need to raise up all .

mrsmarks @ 181

jayt @ 163

oh great – now it’s ’smear a dem’ time.

They better do the same when they host a Republican debate. (They’re going to do that, right?)

But the Republican candidates are so serious…

clinton – we know how to regulate hedge funds.

me – is this true? (i am among the hedge fund ignorant)

Wow, Williams’ questions next week better be just as tough for the GOPers. We Vinnies in our basements will be watching you, Brian!

Odd Mommy, I see your point, in regards to the net result of the Ruling, but, it would circle back around to the necessity of a veto proof majority!

One “gotcha” after another. Thhis could get old quick.

I hope the question for Kucinich is about his recent articles of impeachment re Cheney…

god. Edwards isnt prepared to answer the haircut q.

Um, hello, should simply say “I paid a man $400 to come to my house and cut my hair. If I went there its $125. It was worth it to have him come.”

Expensive? Yes. Extravagent? No.

There is no greater champion for the working man on this stage or in this country, he needs to drive that home and not be coy.

Damn. Missed Oppty.

RonD @ 177

Hedge fund question: try to catch Edwards. I want somebody to ask Bush that at his next presser.

I don’t understand what they’re getting at here.

mrsmarks @ 181

jayt @ 163

oh great – now it’s ’smear a dem’ time.

They better do the same when they host a Republican debate. (They’re going to do that, right?)

Oh yeah. Sure they will. Count on it. Uh huh. And Michael Moore will moderate said debate.

Richardson asked why he’s last to call for Abu to resign since he was a latino.

Richardson: YEah, his being hispanic affected my decision. Wanted to give him a chance to explain.

Hedge funds are not transparent, no effective oversight. Sound familiar?

About impeachment of USSC. Just once.
http://www.fjc.gov/history/hom…..ics_ji_bdy!OpenDocument&Click=

Samuel Chase, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the United States.

Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on March 12, 1804, on charges of arbitrary and oppressive conduct of trials; Trial in the U.S. Senate, November 30, 1804, to March 1, 1805; Acquitted on March 1, 1805.

The rest of the list is lower courts.

Of note, the latest. Alcee Hastings. Convicted/removed.

HotFlash @ 180

Petrocelli @ 145

Petrocelli says:- HotFlash, in Canada, abortions are allowed up to 5 months, correct?

Petrecelli, abortions are not illegal in Canada at any time. But most are done within the first tri.

I get the sense that Harper will work to reverse this if given a majority.

Dodd and his chair of the banking committee getting him lotsa money for the campaign. Whose debate questions are these, anyhow?

Blank Kludge @ 196

About impeachment of USSC. Just once.
http://www.fjc.gov/history/hom…..ics_ji_bdy!OpenDocument&Click=

Samuel Chase, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the United States.

Impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on March 12, 1804, on charges of arbitrary and oppressive conduct of trials; Trial in the U.S. Senate, November 30, 1804, to March 1, 1805; Acquitted on March 1, 1805.

The rest of the list is lower courts.

Of note, the latest. Alcee Hastings. Convicted/removed.

And now serving in House as Dem from Florida

Not a single policy question yet.

Williams to Dodd: you are the most DC person son of a US senator, you’ve been around for decades how do you make the case for reform?

Dodd: very proud, dad was a prosecutor at Neuremburg. Really? I’m a long advocate of campaign finance. We’ve had 6 yrs of on the job training with Bush – we need experience

Dodd’s dad a prosecutor serving at the Neuremburg trials.

dakine01 @ 174

For Edwards: Why was Haircut paid out of campaign funds?

Edwards: A mistake which I rectified.

Edwards: I’m blessed with money but not where I came from. We didn’t have the money to pay prices on menu. I want all to have chances I had.
Williams follow-up: You counsel hedge funds, do they make America better?

Edwards: They have money. Need money to lift people up who are struggling

Is this NBC’s John Williams or FOX’s Juan Williams? Either way, they’re Republican tools.

can i vote against williams?

i want another debate moderator and another set of questions

Maybe Dodd will review his Dad’s notes on prosecuting war criminals.

Kucinich anti-war before polls relfected that, Why aren’t you getting better polls?

K: Not poularity contest. War not good matter of policy. Wrong decision made and apologies not enough. Over 3300 americans dead, possibly over 650k dead Iraqis.

Kucinich is stealing stature from the others who voted to go to war.

Edwards should say he’s shaving his head in sympathy with cancer vics for the rest of the campaign.

solai @ 116

Questions seem to be in the ‘gotcha’ category

They do, don’t they. At least we got Edwards’ haircut addressed so the important issues are being covered.

.smapdi @ 195

Hedge funds are not transparent, no effective oversight. Sound familiar?

that’s what i thought… if true, i want a candidate who is willing to say it.

Phoenix Woman @ 203

dakine01 @ 174

For Edwards: Why was Haircut paid out of campaign funds?

Edwards: A mistake which I rectified.

Edwards: I’m blessed with money but not where I came from. We didn’t have the money to pay prices on menu. I want all to have chances I had.
Williams follow-up: You counsel hedge funds, do they make America better?

Edwards: They have money. Need money to lift people up who are struggling

Is this NBC’s John Williams or FOX’s Juan Williams? Either way, they’re Republican tools.

NBC’s Brian Williams but still a tool of the ruling class.

Biden can you reassure that you won’t talk everyone to death?

Biden: YES.

THE END

Asked of Biden if he could hold his tongue, he simply said yes. Laughter all around!

Loo Hoo @
202

Dodd’s dad a prosecutor serving at the Neuremburg trials.

I saw that movie when I was a kid – gut wrenching. Nice Smackdown, Dodd !!!

Gravel is great!

solai @ 192

RonD @ 177

Hedge fund question: try to catch Edwards. I want somebody to ask Bush that at his next presser.

I don’t understand what they’re getting at here.

They’re getting at the fact that he’s rich, and therefore being disingenuous when he says he’s fighting for the little guy.

Of course that’s not true, but it can drive a wedge between him and his natural constituency, which is why it’s being deployed by the wurlitzer. He needs to counter this shit.

Helen @ 212

Biden can you reassure that you won’t talk everyone to death?

Biden: YES.

THE END

Nice to see Brian Williams shut down.

Gravel’s nuts – I like him.

Loo Hoo @ 213

Asked of Biden if he could hold his tongue, he simply said yes. Laughter all around!

That was a beaut.

Gravel is a bit shrill…

Gravel a case and a half! All options on the table means nukes.

Gravel: No nukes. It’s immoral; we should get out of Iraq – it’s there country. How obnoxious of us. They are dying in vain in Iraq.

Gravel’s passion is great.

Gravel: How the hell did the rest of thes clowns get here. When they stand up and say nothing off the table that’s code for nukes. I will say no nukes. not gonna happen. We just need to get out of Iraq. It’s their country so lets get out.

Me: I’m beginning to LIKE Gravel even though he stands no chance!

Petrocelli @ 199

HotFlash @ 180

Petrocelli @ 145

Petrocelli says:- HotFlash, in Canada, abortions are allowed up to 5 months, correct?

Petrecelli, abortions are not illegal in Canada at any time. But most are done within the first tri.

I get the sense that Harper will work to reverse this if given a majority.

Another good reason he should be sent packing to the Fraser Institute. BTW, you see the water stuff? Or if your French is up to it, the original from le devoir (mine’s too creaky).

Asks Hillary why GOP all wants to run against her.

Hillary takes it as a reverse form of flattery that she was beat up on universal health care in the 90s.

Williams to: Lots of people hate you why are repugs worried.

Hilary: If they were not worried they would not be so vitriolic, clean up cronyism of Bush years.

Wiki re hedge funds:
Hedge funds are not currently subject to any direct regulation by the SEC, the NASD, or other federal regulating commissions, unlike mutual funds, pension funds, and insurance companies.
Linky

New thread from emptywheel.

Ahhh, Subpoena Power. Or, Why Is Henry (Mostly) Smiling

I would like to see more questions about the Middle East. Banning premptive non-provoked wars would be good as well. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict too.This guy Gravel is not polished, but I like the substance of what he’s saying.

things come undone:

my grandfather was told by Doctors that it was my grandmother’s life and or my father’s life and while the nuns did put presure it still was my grandfathers choice. I admit that I could be wrong I’ll ask my sister who went to Catholic School but I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is not that heartless.

Look, I don’t mean to sound harsh, but you say you’re “pretty sure the Church is not that heartless.” You are just flat out wrong about that.
Note that it was the DOCTORS, not the nuns or the priest who gave your grandfather the choice. (But also note they gave your grandFATHER the choice, not your grandMOTHER).
Trust me, talk to anyone old enough to remember abortion policy pre-Roe. Check out the propaganda of the “pro-life” movements. You will see, anyone who proceeds from the Catholic position makes NO exception, not for life of mother, not for a fetus who has no chance to survive. Nothing. It’s all in God’s hands–and humans take no action to change that. Believe me, the Catholic Church IS that “heartless.” It’s a matter of principle, you see.

Williams, ask this: do you agree with the “unitary executive theory?”

Questoins on dmestic policy, beginning with abortion.

Most American people support last week’s ruling? WTF?

New abortion action. Edwards says decision is a perfect example is what’s at stake in ‘08.

urban pirate @ 216

solai @ 192

RonD @ 177

Hedge fund question: try to catch Edwards. I want somebody to ask Bush that at his next presser.

I don’t understand what they’re getting at here.

They’re getting at the fact that he’s rich, and therefore being disingenuous when he says he’s fighting for the little guy.

Of course that’s not true, but it can drive a wedge between him and his natural constituency, which is why it’s being deployed by the wurlitzer. He needs to counter this shit.

FDR was rich and came from a privileged background too and he created Social Security.

TeddySanFran @ 198

Dodd and his chair of the banking committee getting him lotsa money for the campaign. Whose debate questions are these, anyhow?

Rove’s?

FYI, Emptywheel is upstairs

Woah, nice Repug framing by Brian Williams on the D & E. WHat an asshole.

Loo Hoo @ 213

Asked of Biden if he could hold his tongue, he simply said yes. Laughter all around!

Excellent

Eureka Springs @
238

FYI, Emptywheel is upstairs

Do ya want us to blog the debate there or here?

Partial Birth:

Edwards: this decision is a perfect example of what’s at state in this election President will make decision for a woman. I believe in a woman’s right to chose. Gov’t should not decide. Shoudl show respect for other views.

Obama: Most Americans recognize a profoundly difficult decision for women. I trust women to make decision with Dr and clergy. Believe that’s where most american’s are.

I cannot BELIEVE that anyone possessing any remnant of a soul continues to milk this haircut bullsh*t.

Hello, MORONS? The issue is what Edwards will DO for the poor people who the Bushites have murdered, maimed and robbed for the last six years…..

urban pirate @
239

Woah, nice Repug framing by Brian Williams on the D & E. WHat an asshole.

Brian Limbaugh…..Because he thinks Rush hasn’t been given the respect he’s due.

-GSD

Barack: I trust women to make these difficult decisions. Lets talk about broader areas of agreement.

smapdi @ 229

Wiki re hedge funds:
Hedge funds are not currently subject to any direct regulation by the SEC, the NASD, or other federal regulating commissions, unlike mutual funds, pension funds, and insurance companies.
Linky

thank you.

so, if i heard correctly – that clinton said we know how to regulate hedge funds – she was wrong. i’m gonna check on that.

Biden: There IS a right of privacy. That’s why Bork went down thats why I opposed Roberts and Alito and led effort against Thomas. Decision a trojan horse dishonest reason to gut roe v wade.

I’m very discouraged lately, seeing the misogyny that seems so pervasive. I guess I fooled myself for a while that it had gotten better.
Not a bit.

dakine01 @ 241

Eureka Springs @
238

FYI, Emptywheel is upstairs

I just want a latte…)

Do ya want us to blog the debate there or here?

CTuttle @ 188

Odd Mommy, I see your point, in regards to the net result of the Ruling, but, it would circle back around to the necessity of a veto proof majority!

yes, that it would.

doesn’t sound like biden gets it wrt SCOTUS abortion rights decision.

selise @ 246

smapdi @ 229

Wiki re hedge funds:
Hedge funds are not currently subject to any direct regulation by the SEC, the NASD, or other federal regulating commissions, unlike mutual funds, pension funds, and insurance companies.
Linky

thank you.

so, if i heard correctly – that clinton said we know how to regulate hedge funds – she was wrong. i’m gonna check on that.

What’s bubbling under the question is the suggestion that the Dems are going to put the free-wheeling hedge fund crowd under regulation. That’s something the hedge funders aren’t anxious to see happen.

Dodd asked if he was upset in vote since he voted to confirm Roberts. says that roberts mislead in answers. Not covering himself in glory on this one.

mrsmarks @ 252

What’s bubbling under the question is the suggestion that the Dems are going to put the free-wheeling hedge fund crowd under regulation. That’s something the hedge funders aren’t anxious to see happen.

i think you are exactly correct.

Model justice
Richardson: Whizzer White. Williams:Living? Ginzberg
Dodd: Ginsburg
Edwards: Ginsgurg or Breyer

this is going quickly… i’m going to have to review the transcript….

Any role of gov’t fail student at VaTech?

Hilliary:Yes. Goes on to talk about columbine, keeping guns out of hands of mentally unbalanced and limit access for those who should not have them.

Now he’s trying to get them to say they’ll ban guns.
“did govt. fail the VT students?”

dakine01 @ 257

Any role of gov’t fail student at VaTech?

Hilliary:Yes. Goes on to talk about columbine, keeping guns out of hands of mentally unbalanced and limit access for those who should not have them.

hope she’s not planning on keeping a master list of people who have been treated for any kind of mental illness. (i don’t think this is what she was saying… just something i worry about).

this really *is* a gotcha-session. I’m gettin’ a little pissed. Brian Williams must have studied at the feet of Timmeh.

My eyes are beginning to glaze over.

Biden: Dangerous writing is reason to deny civil rights!

Dakine, et. al. Marcy says upstairs is fine. See you there.

Is it just me, or does it seem like the lion’s share of the questions are going to The Top Tier?

smapdi @ 262

Biden: Dangerous writing is reason to deny civil rights!

this debate is making me depressed.

will that get me on a list?

mrsmarks @ 264

Is it just me, or does it seem like the lion’s share of the questions are going to The Top Tier?

Not just you.

things come undone @
85

tejanarusa @ 63

things come undone @ 52

We need to divide our enemies I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is still ok with Abortion when the mothers life is in danger, or if its a choice between the mother and the child. We just need a gutsy Bishop or Pope’s opinion on this subject on record to throw back at the Supreme Court Justices who blame being Catholic for their decision. We need to point out that Scalia’s postion on this issue is harsher on women than the Catholic Church’s postion was preVatican2.

Huh? How old are you? You need to watch/read The Cardinal. That statement could not be more wrong. In this century (not in medieval times, or when “quickening” was still believed to be the time when the fetus became quick, or alive), the Church has NEVER favored an exception for the life of the mother.

For the Church, in the case of Mother v. Unborn Fetus, it’s foreordained, Mother ALWAYS loses, Fetus ALWAYS wins.

Didn’t the “quickening ” idea die only recently when they discovered the baby has a heartbeat seperate from the Mothers? Also my grandfather was told by Doctors that it was my grandmother’s life and or my father’s life and while the nuns did put presure it still was my grandfathers choice. I admit that I could be wrong I’ll ask my sister who went to Catholic School but I’m pretty sure the Catholic Church is not that heartless.

Ok the Catholic Church is heartless still Ireland and France two majority Catholic Countries do allow abortions when the mother’s life is threatened. We just change tactics use Ireland and France as examples of Catholics being sane and start attacking the Church.TV ads with priests forcing rape victims and mothers carring deformed fetuses to give birth should be played in protestant areas of the country. AntiCatholic bigotry can play to our advantage we can make the Fundementalist Protestant Preachers appear to be the stooges of Rome. This way we divide the fundementalist Protestant/Catholic alliance and also we divide the remaining proCatholic Protestants from their antiCatholic flocks. Only by threatening to take away the religous tolerence in this country that lets Catholics thrive can we get the Catholic Church to reconsider trying to force their religous beliefs on the rest of America.

selise @ 254

mrsmarks @ 252

“…That’s something the hedge funders aren’t anxious to see happen.”

i think you are exactly correct.

And that is part of what is behind the case up for review by SCOTUS about campaign finance reform.

The big money people want to game the system by making tons of cash via “hedge funds” (a form of market manipulation only available to a select few) that they then spend in political campaigns to elect political hacks that are “puppet string” friendly.

Same old game with a new covering.

“Proof depends on who you are. We’re looking for a preponderance of evidence, and some people need more of a preponderance than other people.” – John Kantner

John Edwards looks depressed

leinie @
48

HotFlash @ 40.

Control is the key, isn’t it?

Cuz even if they get to the Holy Grail, and Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortions don’t stop. They just get to punish the sluts that dare to have the sex by either forced pregnancy or what, a murder conviction if the terminate? Control.

I just don’t understand what is so freaking THREATENING about letting women have bodily autonomy?

You know what I want? Constitutional amendment, guaranteeing the right to privacy. Yeah, I know. They’ll respect it about as much as they do the 4th, 5th, and 8th, but I can dream that they treat it with the reverence they give the 2nd.

Until quite recently I’d have said the same thing. But, in light of statements like Ann coulter’s “There is no right to procreation.” I’ve rethought the issue and decided we have to either rely on the 9th Amendment as a receptacle (in the Constitution) of ALL of our unenunciated rights or we have to perhaps rewrite it to specify that the People embody ALL and ANY rights you can imagine and that they needn’t be specified in the Constitution to be recognized as existing and as being unalienable.

We must establish clearly that We the People have ALL the Rights and the Government has NONE. The Government is only assigned duties and powers — with most important the duty to protect America and it’s citizens’ lives (including pregnant women).

Once you’re there (and I know most of us already are) then it’s easier to discuss the freedom to keep and bear arms or the freedom of speech (even slander and libel) or the freedom of assembly and all the other well-known rights without being confused by Conservative pundits who say the Government decides which to support or how to balance one against the other (as in the life of a fetus vs. the life of a woman).

Helen @
146

Gravel: The war was lost the day GB invaded on a fraudulant basis

Good so far.

Who is Gravel?

katymine @
25

It is generational amnesia…. Who in the medical profession under the age of 55 remembers what life before legal and safe abortions?

At the ripe age of 20 in my third year of nursing school, I held the hand of a 14yr old child who bled to death following her illegal abortion. An event that I remember 35 years later, that has imprinted itself on my psyche and forever made me a PRIVACY advocate.

The idea that someone without any medical education are telling practicing physician’s how to practice is beyond any sane rational thought. But then we do know that wingnuts really do not think.

My mother’s pre-Roe horror stories are legion, but this one stayed with me:

A taxi pulled up to the hospital. The driver literally dumped his female passenger on the sidewalk before the emergency room and drove off. The staff rushed out to the woman because she was clearly unconscious and drenched in blood. One look at the source of the blood, and they knew what they had on their hands: A botched abortion.

They tried everything to save her, to no avail. She bled to death from a perforated uterus, my mother holding her hand even though she wasn’t conscious, as nurses have done for decades.

The woman had no identification on her. The only thing on her was the remnant of a plane ticket to Mexico for that day or the day before. So they knew where the procedure had been done.

But no one knew her name. No one claimed her. She was buried in an unmarked grave.

There is the tragic case of Gerri Santoro. The link is to an article I wrote about her. Gerri has been all but forgotten now. But she was all too familiar, for her fate was that of too many women during the pre-Roe years.

Some of the other nifty little facts of this era: Hospitals and regular doctors performed abortions pre-Roe, but only the rich could afford them. Doctors would say that a woman had “endometriosis” requiring a D&C. She’d get admitted to the hospital and get her surgery. The procedure cost in the thousands of dollars; my mother was in the operating room for one woman who paid $10K for her abortion. In the 60s.

When California legalized abortion in 1967 (Ronald Reagan was the Governor signing the legislation), Dallas’s airport at the time, Love Field, became a madhouse on weekends, with planes to L.A. and San Francisco packed with women seeking abortions.

These anti-abortion people do not understand that they will not make abortion go away. They won’t stop people from fucking, either.

I wish they’d grow the hell up.

The monied will go outside the country for this late term (and rare) abortion procedure, and as usual the poor destined to suffer the consequences.

For Roberts and Alito, women’s deaths during their pregnancies aren’t bugs, they’re features.

Features? Perhaps more apt had you said perks.