Gay Patriot Header Image

HOT! VERY HOT: Stupak May Have A Deal

Over at FDL (hey, you’ve got to know what your enemies are up to), word is that all that activity around the office of that lady with all the Botox all day might have been a precursor to a deal on Bart Stupak’s anti-baby-killing wishes.

Seems Nancy may let him substitute his language disallowing federal funds (read: Your and My Tax Dollars) for abortions. Not sure why this would make a difference, there’s no way it’d pass in the Senate, but perhaps all the machinations are beyond me. Thought I was following it up till now.

Funny thing, though, is that it sure as hell has the pro-baby-killing Left in a tizzy. It’s even got my Congresswoman, Diana DeGette (D-Would be the best place in the world, but for her) threatening to scuttle the whole thing. Wow, what irony it’d be if she and her Infanticide Cabal were actually responsible for killing this thing after all this. I might even send her a fruit basket.

Either way, though…sure is interesting that Pelosi would even be bothering with Stupak. Seems to me that word was she’d written him off long ago. That she’s engaging with him suggests she’s not as close to 216 as we’d all thought?

This shit still ain’t over… Stay tuned.

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)

Share

13 Comments

  1. As I read it in the FDL piece, it seems that Stupak is agreeable to a vote on changing the language AFTER the House votes for the bill. Which means, I guess, that if the Stupak amendment (SA) fails, it won’t kill the bill because the bill will already have been passed.

    Stupak thinks he can win the vote even if it comes after the main vote. If it does pass, then he just needs 51 votes in the Senate to sustain it (aren’t y’all glad there is reconciliation???). Not quite sure what happens if the SA passes the House but the Senate rejects it – I guess it would just die.

    Comment by Tano — March 20, 2010 @ 12:24 am - March 20, 2010

  2. And in related news, seems Barack Obama is using official government email to order government employees to perform partisan political acts and threatening their jobs if they don’t.

    Now spin for us, Tano, and explain why that’s right, even though it’s completely illegal to order Federal employees to perform acts of political propaganda.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 20, 2010 @ 2:50 am - March 20, 2010

  3. I thought everyone should see an article over at Breitbart’s Big Government that confirms (yet again) what conservatives have always known about liberals–that their success at the ballot box and at marshaling public support for their policies depends upon the success of their efforts to keep the public uninformed and completely ignorant of the inconvenient details of the legislative items they push through Congress. The article exposes a memorandum making the rounds of Democrat offices in DC which gives advice on how Democrats and their staff members should deal with those pesky questions about the healthcare “reform” bill, for example:

    “do not allow yourself (or your boss) to get into a discussion of the details of CBO scores and textual narrative. Instead, focus only on the deficit reduction and number of Americans covered.”

    http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/03/19/dem-memo-do-not-allow-yourself-to-get-into-a-discussion-of-health-bill-score/#more-92490

    Tano, this is standard operating procedure for your party. They know that a discussion of the details of the CBO scores and the “textual narrative” of the bill (read: what it will cost and what it says) will negatively impact support for the bill, so their solution is to suppress such a discussion. They’re shameless deceivers and they know that your continued ignorance is essential to their success. How is it possible that you don’t feel betrayed or at least embarrassed by how you’ve been fooled and used by these people?

    Comment by Sean A — March 20, 2010 @ 3:06 am - March 20, 2010

  4. ND30-seems you scooped a post I have in the pipeline.

    If Nancy’s talking a deal with Stupak, it means she doesn’t have the votes to pass it. This thing hangs by a slender thread. I know she wants to go it without him, but, an abortion restriction would need 60 votes–and wouldn’t survive reconciliation.

    If this passes, Obama has made health care into the neverending issue; they’ll be batting changes between the House and Senate back and forth for a few weeks, then fixing the fixes, then forced in the future to fix even more fixes when public outcry over a great variety of provisions and payoffs comes to light.

    The only way to end this thing is to defeat the bill on Sunday and wait until we have more responsible figures in the congressional leadership to put forward reforms more in line with what the American people want–which won’t raise taxes or increase the costs of our health care services or limit their availability or have government dictate what we can or cannot use.

    We don’t need reforms that add another layer of bureaucracy or two or three.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — March 20, 2010 @ 3:33 am - March 20, 2010

  5. Tano: go fuck yourself and hide under the bed. You think it’s funny that our nation is under attack from within? My father fought for this country, got three purple hearts and a broken back and still managed to come home and raise a family. I’ve bled for this country as well and you think your snarky little remarks will pass for intelligent discourse? Fuck You! I’ve read your remarks over the months and I’m tired of trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. You think it’s entertaining to snipe at patriotic Americans that only want to keep us the greatest nation on earth? I may not be gay but I surely can appreciate every comment and word on this blog and understand that every one of them loves this country and we all have similar values. This country is in peril and unlike you, there are many of us that will not allow her to be transformed into something that our forefathers would be ashamed of. I can only hope that one day you’ll grow up and see what we see.

    Comment by Dave B — March 20, 2010 @ 5:55 am - March 20, 2010

  6. Dan, you’re absolutely right! Pelosi doesn’t have the votes! She has shown such contempt for even the idea of working out a deal with the pro-life crowd that it’s plain: working with Stupak was her very, very, very last resort.

    But not only does she not have the votes — this means she can’t get them either!

    1. All these former “No” votes that have switched to “yes” are WINDOW DRESSING. They’re phony. They always were. They were her reserves. They would have voted “yes” the first time if Nancy had needed their votes, but were allowed to vote “no” because Nancy didn’t need them, and they needed political cover.

    Nancy is using these votes, which she held in reserve, to create the APPEARANCE of momentum where none exists.

    The truth is she NEEDS and has now USED UP ALL of her reserves. And she STILL doesnt have the votes.

    That is why she is dealing with Stupak. She has no other alternative.

    BUT!!!!

    2. There is NOTHING she can do that will satisfy Stupak that the psychotic pro-abortion militant fiends will accept!

    SO:

    3. The bill is already dead. Pelosi is now trying desperately to save face by concocting a poison pill that will allow her to pass SOMETHING through the house, that she can at least PRETEND is a sincere attempt, knowing full well whatever it is will die in the Senate because she has tried everything and failed to find enough votes to pass the senate bill. It can’t be the public option for example, because that has already been done and it failed the senate, so any attempt to pass that again would immediately expose the fact that Nancy couldnt get the votes.

    A change in the abortion language would do just that. It will be spun as a real attempt at compromise to pass the bill, but it will be unable to pass the Senate because it is a policy change not a budgetary change and therefore the Byrd rule means it must muster 60 votes, which it cannot do.

    But by passing something with a poison pill that could at least plausibly be called a sincere attempt, Reid and the Senate get the blame, not her! (This has ALWAYS been about egos.) And because the Senate will be unable to pass the house reconciliation bill, the “deem and pass” vote will be null and void (since the House will only “deem” the bill to be passed once the Senate approves reconciliation), so Obama wont be able to sign ANYTHING.

    YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST. This is what is going down! Mark my words! (unless it’s something else altogether, in which case nobody should quote me until after the fact lest it lead to someone changing their vote) And when you see other people writing about it, remember where you heard it. The same guy who told Republicans to threaten Democrats’ dirty deals. (And yes, I am mildly serious about that, I called and emailed that idea to my representative, plus Boehner, Cantor and McConnell’s offices several days before Coburn did it, so it’s at least possible that it came from me. And that’s certainly more fun to believe than that it was a coincidence, so I’m sticking with it. )

    Comment by American Elephant — March 20, 2010 @ 7:07 am - March 20, 2010

  7. Oh, how silly of me! Reid doesn’t get blamed if the bill has to break a filibuster in the Senate! Republicans do! Reid only gets blamed if he cant pass a simple majority — and policy changes cannot be passed in reconciliation. And of course Pelosi would rather pin the failure of this fascist bill on the GOP than on Reid. (although better Reid than herself)

    So just that one minor change to the above.

    Comment by American Elephant — March 20, 2010 @ 8:50 am - March 20, 2010

  8. I don’t understand why Americans (I am Canadian) are focusing so much on the CBO score, on procedural steps etc. The ABSOLUTE reason why this bill is a disaster is because it will reduce access to health care by increasing waiting times and limiting choice, plus it will signifigantly reduce the quality of healthcare by reducing the number of new and effective procedures that usually come to market over the maturation of varioius illnesses/diseases.

    In Canada, the length of time you have to wait for an MRI or CAT scan can be over 90 days. The wait to see a specialist can be over 180 days and surgery can also be over 270 days in waiting. If you need more tests or test are inconclusive, the duration can stretch on and on. If you want a second opinion, the total time to combat disease/illness can run over 2 years. All this time of course, you become sicker and sicker. You have reduced income and it affects your personal life – i.e. relationships with people, family etc. It is devestating.

    Did you know that in my country, I can spend $5000 in one night gambling at a government owned casino but I can’t spend the same $5000 to go and see a doctor to try and get healthy. In my country, even prostitution is legal and considered moral (as long as she visits your house, not you visiting her place – outcalls are legal, incalls are illegal), but buying healthcare is illegal and considered immoral.

    Comment by Mike — March 20, 2010 @ 9:26 am - March 20, 2010

  9. #3 – Sean,

    Sorry but I gotta run, so this will be short.
    The memo you refer to seems to be a hoax. Not surprising actually – what do you expect from Breitbart? – LINK

    Comment by Tano — March 20, 2010 @ 10:04 am - March 20, 2010

  10. #8: Uh, no, Tano. It appears that the Democrats are denying that the memo is authentic, which means nothing, particularly considering that the strategy described in the memo is precisely the one they are following. For example, the Democrats leaked the $940 billion “pricetag” because it came in under a trillion bucks, but a closer look reveals that the number does not include the Medicare doc “fix” that was in earlier versions of the bill.

    And by the way, what does “what do you expect from Breitbart” mean? I realize that his websites have been a thorn in the sides of your masters for some time, but that’s only because he tells the unvarnished truth about the scumbags that infest the Democratic Party, not because he peddles false information.

    Comment by Sean A — March 20, 2010 @ 10:15 am - March 20, 2010

  11. It means Tardo only believes news approved by the Obama Ministry of Truth, and he has to go because he’s late for the two minutes hate.

    Comment by American Elephant — March 20, 2010 @ 10:50 am - March 20, 2010

  12. “It means Tardo only believes news approved by the Obama Ministry of Truth, and he has to go because he’s late for the two minutes hate.”

    Brilliant, AE! Love the allusion to Orwell’s “1984″. That’s increasingly the kind of world we’re living in and it’s scary as hell. I hope, Hope, HOPE enough Americans wake up before it’s too late!

    Comment by Seane-Anna — March 20, 2010 @ 11:13 am - March 20, 2010

  13. Today’s Two-Minutes Hate is on Sarah Palin’s hair.

    Comment by American Elephant — March 20, 2010 @ 1:17 pm - March 20, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.