The Stupak Problem....

I've been hearing Rachel Maddow and others come out scathingly against Bart Stupak and the abortion issue with the upcoming health care reform bill that's slated to be voted on soon. At first - I'm like: "yeah yeah, Bart bad bad guy..."

Then ... a couple of nights ago - Rachel had the night off and we watched Chris Hays (who did a great job - but please do something about the pen!) ... and he had on Diana DeGette from the U.S. House of Representatives on the program.

Now Rachel's contention is that there is no mention of abortion in the pending legislations ... that - Democrats didn't want this to be a sticking point for anyone in order to pass health care reform. The concept was to keep things "status quo." Which in my opinion makes perfect sense and what not.

Except.

When Diana was on the program with Chris - towards the end of the segment, she began to articulate the position a bit more differently. I'm paraphrasing, but she said that the way the current system is, a woman who has bought private insurance can be covered under her plan to receive services associated with having an abortion.

THEN, Diana DeGette stated: "We want to make sure that this feature is also available in a government created market" when health care reform passes.

Wait, wait, whoa. Huh?

Technically, there is no change or provision for abortion, HOWEVER ... When Diana articulated that she wants to have the government negotiate plans in this special health care market - that would include the same provisions as the woman who would be opting for private health care insurance ... a light bulb went off.

I think I understand Bart's contention here.

Abortion is still a very very very divisive issue as it always has been.

But it's disingenuous to portray the abortion reference as being just "status quo." It's not really. Even if the bills out there do not expressly say: "government mandated abortion options," it does say government will negotiate plans for the public just like the ones a woman can get in private ... which is technically *not* status quo anymore.

Keep in mind that this has nothing to do with the right of a woman to choose - as much as it is the coverage options and negotiations initiated by the government which I can see from Bart's perspective as being a step forward in the pro-choice column. In Bart's mind a huge step forward is my guess.

Not that I'm against that -- because I *am* pro-choice and believe that a woman should hold that decision for herself. I do think women should be allowed to get treatment and that's my personal belief and opinion. But the Bart Stupak position contemplates the overall goal for health care reform.

UPDATE: As of this entry - I noticed tonight on Rachel's program that there's little that can be done for Bart's amendment - because the Senate bill has to be passed in its entirety anyway so Bart's efforts are all for not.

But I'm disappointed a bit in Rachel - for spending so much time attacking Bart, without being a bit more credible in her reporting about what Bart's position was. There *is* a difference when you put out all the pieces on the table - and whether you're pro-life or pro-choice, one needs to remain objective when observing that there *is* a difference in the approach. Regardless of your politics - having an honest discussion is better than trying to carry on a bias-slanted one that's based on a half-truth.

C'mon Rachel - you're better than that.

Teflon Thinking....

The polls conducted this past week are nothing short of incredibly ... stupid.

Fifteen percent of Republicans polled DO NOT believe that Medicare is a government program. Fifteen percent! When you take the other health care reform myths that are out there - the Republicans have been biting at things hook, line and sinker. The poll took into consideration where these folks get their news from ....

....Fox News of course.

Which ties into an amateur video we found recently where they interviewed people outside the Grand Junction town hall -- where they are adamant that Fox News is fair and balanced.

Unbelievable.

But the other night we watched the Rachel Maddow show when she had Bill Maher on. I must say, Bill is spot on with why Republicans continue to think the garbage that is being dished out to them. Even in the face of fact after fact -- they continue to tow the conservative anchor with them.

Bill's rationale? Republican-minded folks aren't interested in facts, they're interested in things that FEEL RIGHT. For example:

- No weapons of mass destruction
- No connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda
- Even an admittance that the charges of WMD were trumped up
- Even disavowing every soul that tried to lend credibility to the discussion
- Even discounting and dismissing those specialists who are leaders in their field
- Even blatantly ignoring the incredible interrogation techniques by Saddam's CIA handler

You STILL have Republicans who are adamantly CONVINCED that not only was there a link between Saddam and Bin Laden, but there were weapons of mass destruction when there was absolutely nothing found before or after.

Even when confronted with indisputable facts -- Republicans insist on siding with "what feels right" because they can't stand to be wrong. It's not in their programming. Bush couldn't admit it. Cheney never will, nor will Rove. And in the eyes of the punditry like Hannity and Limbaugh, it's gospel. Every talking point feeds their insatiable appetite because if it comes from their puppet-master of choice - then "by golly, it has to be true."

Republicans simply can't accept how far out of touch they are - and yet - they insist the sky is green and the grass is blue because someone told them so. I guess that's why there's such a diverse way of thinking in the liberal side of things because we are smarter and don't need to be hand-fed the talking points that come from a self-absorbed entertainer. We are free-thinkers with a lot of different ideas and for that - we're able to make smarter decisions rooted in reality than trying to trump up some ridiculous lie such as Palin's "death panels."

With as many lies that the Republicans weave -- it's no surprise to me to hear about Tom Ridge's claim that he was pressured to elevate the threat level at key times during the 2004 Presidential race. Of course the Bush fellas deny such a thing happened - but then this is coming from the same troupe that said that there was a link between Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

Yeah - wash your hand with THAT bar of soap Republicans....

*sighs*

I fail to see how having such a disconnect with the truth gets Republicans anywhere. The "feel good" candy they're biting down on - is bound to disappear someday. But I guess those who keep selling snake oil to their Republican base has that challenge of how else to manipulate their party.

Who knows - maybe they'll start saying we're due for an invasion from the Klingon Empire.....