For a disgustingly subtle anti-Choice message, look at this guy's campaign site. He's after Kennedy's seat:

http://www.stevepagliuca.com/

Look at how he frames his anti-Choice stand. It's beautiful! Tens of thousands of people, unsuspicious, are going to not realise what he's saying. Hell, I was already suspicious and on the watch for a gimmick and I *still* had a hard time working my way through the multiple negatives in which he couches his anti-Choice stand.

This thing wasn't worth a vote before they decided to throw in the misogynistic rider.

Kill this one. Start over. Vote out the 2-faced fools who snarled this up.

just another example of the Obama admin completing the 3rd bush term.........the only democrats that are happy with the Obama admin are the ones that ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION.

Someone - anyone, name me one thing Obama has deliverd the "change" on?

but give me a list where's he's sold us out and it's like a stephen kinng novel, a 800 page horror story: womens rights,
heath care sellout, endless war, troop increases, bailouts for the fatcats and NOTHING for the common american, coup in honduras, sellout to the israelies ending the peace process, new milutary bases in Columbia where the easiest way to die is by being a union organizer.

SO much for the community organizer in chief.

and you can forget abut climate change that actually imposes any real change,

you can forget about peace

you can forget about jobs EVER coming back - we're in the new "normal"

hey maybe that was the change Obama promised us - NO MORE JOBS IN AMERICA!

tax the middle class, and Obama is now trying to make the Bush tax cuts permanent - something he hopes will fly under the radar due to the debate on health care -

besides he's never met a corporate handout he didn't fully embrace....

progressives and 1st time voters are the true constientency that elected Obama and now we get a big "screw you"....

when do we get to fight back - after the knife is drawn across our throats?

and don't give me the "he's only one guy" - if he really truly wanted progressive change he'd have millions covering his back,

if he really wanted a true health care bill he could say the word and millions would march on Washington.....

but he doesn't want that...... he's more interested in destroying the democratic party from within.....

"....cut out funding for male-exclusive stuff, like prostate cancer, Viagra, male infertility, vasectomies, growth-hormone shots for short little boys, long-term care for macho guys who won't wear motorcycle helmets and, I dunno, psychotherapy for pedophile priests."

Totally agree........I am sick of Catholic Bishops and male evangelicals pompously dictating how women control their bodies. Here's a little pro-active action you can take:

Send a coat hanger to pro-choice Dems who voted for #Stupak Amendment: http://www.sendacoathanger.com @credomobile Please RT

I skimmed Peter Beinart's brainless essay.

I can't understand why racial and gender equality is a "cultural" issue.

I also can't understand why reproductive rights is a "small tent" issue when the majority of the American public (including men and women alike) wants to keep abortion legal and safe.

Another thing I can't understand is what exactly I'm sacrificing as a male in order for women to have reproductive freedom. Anti-choice hurts men also. How does it help me? Who is it that often has to support these unplanned children?

What do I or any other man have to fear from feminism?

The majority of men do not want to control women.

"Guys always want to control women (yes, there are exceptions, etc., blah, blah) - witness all religions, hierarchical corporations with few women in charge, the military where women soldiers get raped and harrassed terribly, and the most controlling entity of all - marriage.

Guys do not like women controlling our own bodies. Period. Even if they say they support our right to reproductive freedom, they don't really when it hits close to home. Not really. They want to have a say. No Way, Guys."

Talk about a "reactionary" position some are taking. I don't want to control you.

Do the "blue dogs" represent most American men or women?

It's what the American Taliban wants.

The only team we have is each other.
Stop voting for the other teams,
oops team.

Great article and one more thing worth mentioning. Among all women, single women have the most to lose with the current system from taxes to health care in general.

Hold on a sec. We've got someone telling us that she's tired of putting her abortion priotities on the back-burner and she even put off voting for a woman because Obama was "the best possible president".

Weren't the Nation and other "progressive" media sources telling pacifists and environmentalists to put war, pollution, poverty, etc. on the back burner, because "that's the price of change"? That we should shut up and take one for the team (a team we are not even on, nor would we be allowed to play for if we did join) by not voting Nader or Green Party (Nader supporters are quite familiar with literally being told to shut up).

But nevertheless, we as a country went and paid the price they asked for change and reform, and what did we get? A president who doesn't care about ending war, pollution poverty OR the frustrations of abortion rights advocates.

This is not only a very hypocritical essay, but it is also missing the point quite badly.

And a few of us even managed to vote for a presidential candidate who was both black and a woman, without having to compromise a choice for "the best possible president".

All of the incarnations of health insurance which the democratic "leadership" are toying around with in both houses of congress, under the "guidance" of the Obama administration, are fraudulent bailouts for the insurance companies which will make health care coverage more complicated, more expensive, and more difficult to ever really change.

The demands of conservatives for things like the Stupak - Pitts admendment are, I believe, merely included so that IF they are removed, progressives will breath a sigh of relief. In fact, the whole attempt here is to further beat us into submission to the will of the corporate-run state.

Look at how this one issue is being used to divide us. This was deliberately done by the democratic leadership.

The reason the democrats are so terribly concerned about trying to appease the republican pigs is that they are all coming from the same church of greed. They don't give a damn about anyone who isn't rich. Women are easy targets to them and the poorer the woman, the less they care.

Looks like some of the posters here need to understand that right wing Christian nuts in Congress voted against abortion, not ALL males everywhere.

In case you haven't noticed, many of our rights and freedoms we've taken for granted for years are under assault these days. Even with all that "change" that was voted into office last year. Just remember next time you're voting that Dems and Repubs = same party. Both are owned by the same masters. I voted for the last person of either of those parties when I held my nose and voted for Obama. Never again. He's the same thing as before, he just talks nice to you while sticking to you, whereas Bush and Cheney were street punks all the way.

Now that they have you hopping mad about the abortion issue they can continue to fleece us economically and take your money and other rights from us, and you, while you're distracted. They are masters of this game.

Thank you, Katha, for being angry and showing it. Men say - too often - that we're "emotional." Well, if our right to control our own bodies is being taken away, you bet we're going to be emotional - and angry - and not afraid to show it.

Guys always want to control women (yes, there are exceptions, etc., blah, blah) - witness all religions, hierarchical corporations with few women in charge, the military where women soldiers get raped and harrassed terribly, and the most controlling entity of all - marriage.

Guys do not like women controlling our own bodies. Period. Even if they say they support our right to reproductive freedom, they don't really when it hits close to home. Not really. They want to have a say. No Way, Guys!

Not having an abortion when she needs/wants one means a women is stuck for at least the next 20 years raising a child she may not have wanted. What does that do to her and the child?

So, yes, Katha is right to be angry that men, again, want us to wait. They said that when Black males got the vote and we had to wait another forty years - even though we were in the forefront of getting that vote for Black males.

Then in the 60's the males in the antiwar movement didn't want us to raise the issue of equal pay for women or women's right to choose because they said it would distract the movement. But we did anyway, demonstrated in the streets, educated lots of women on our rights, and won. Only to have men try to take it away ever since.

All the world's major religions (maybe not Buddhism, I don't know about that) put restrictions on women, that we should serve men, because men like to be in charge of women and our reproductive abilities. And so we will fight again.

Who would have thought a no-health-care non-reform no-change bill would turn into the anti-abortion bill?

If you expect change back from your tax dollars from Democrats or Republicans, look more closely, they have already robbed the till.

They have an expensive lifestyle of the very rich to maintain.

They do very hard work, with a whole empire of resource looters and warmongers to please explain.

And there are far too many hungry mouths to feed , and not enough jobs to supply.
So if you need an abortion, to the government do not apply.

Each extra human must add to their power, with more in thrall,
Another future slave or soldier, prostitute or prole.

No matter that each extra person becomes an extra earths burden.
Deny it all you will, yet climate change will winnow all for certain.

It is remarkable that the same parties, which are trying to block abortions, also oppose rational measures to reduce their prime cause--unwanted pregnancies. Experience shows that concerted assistance in family planning and contraception are the most effective measures for reducing abortions. Until we detooth these radical organizations that have impeded these essential measures, the abortion issues will issues will persist.

Translation: Stupak passed an amendment against abortion so let's make all men sacrifice. And that's progressive? This is the same writer who voted Democrat while I voted Nader and Greens. I am not a feminist but I voted for Nader who respects feminism while the writer sounds feminist but voted anti-feminist. Either vote Green or stop complaining.

It's insane, since this bill was a pro insurance company horror even before the Stupak amendment was introduced. It wasn't hard to believe that Democrats would turn on anything feminist, except a woman's right to choose. This was the issue where supporters were supposed to say: "The Democrats may not be very good, but we can't vote Republican, or else conservative justices will be put on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade." A woman's right to choose was the one issue that Democrats pretended they would defend no matter what. Oops.

Now there really is no reason, no excuse. "Sacrifice" has been the order of the day from the beginning of the Obama administration. I don't buy the idea that the "perfect is the enemy of the good." I find that argument to simply be an excuse for abandoning right in favor of wrong. But at this point, there are no morals left to give up, no more Faustian bargains to make. The Obama administration has been at least as bad as the Bush administration. I think this is a good time for Democrats to say "this is the last straw," and quit supporting the Democratic Party.

Bring America Back !!!!

****The Catholic Pro Life Vote is a humongus vote crossing way over the 2=party system and registrations labels!

***Being staunchly Pro-Choice, the only way Obama overcame that was to pick Joe Biden, a Catholic, as VP, and by putting King George's 20% war prez popularity rating right in the laps of McCain-Palin !!!! Palin's family values turned out not to be so valuable, when Obama promised End to War, and Massive Change to hang on !!

***Three years from now , especially if the Health Reform debacle goes wrong, Obama will roast at the spit of the Pro Choice voters, while still failing with the Catholic Vote !
Team Obama is, and will be in Dire Staits so maybe they will ask Joe Biden to take one for the Team, and put Hillary Clinton over at VP to garner some pro choice supports.

***My impression is that Obama does not care a whole lot even if he does not repeat as the Prez! He already achieved the vital goal of breaking the color barrier== that role in history assures Him of most any high pay job in our Nation,
with lobbyists, Chicago Corps, or whatever. He will always be "The Man", sort of like 'Tiger'====unless He turns back the USA to Jebby Bush and Neocon Cabal who eagerly wait in the Wings (west), and hide way behind issues like abortion !

***Neocon front men, Mitt Romney and Hoot Huckaby have stated their willingness and general felicity to have Jebby Bush as their running mate for the Big House.
Looks like the Catholics and the Pro Choicers will be alongside.

There needs to be a SPERM TAX.

Tax the sperm producers heavily & often.

It never ceases to amaze me that sperm producers fail to acknowledge their role in any pregnancy.

Let the sperm tax pay for women's health care - and everyone else's too.

I just received two absolutely infuriating emails, one from Move On and one from my teachers' union, encouraging me to write to congratulate my representatives who voted for the House bill, and to encourage those who didn't to vote for it the next time around. Neither email even mentioned the Stupack amendment. These two supposedly liberal groups obviously embrace the idea that any bill is better than nothing, even one that is comfortable putting women's rights on a "rider."

Could this be the moment I have been hoping for, when the vast majority of progressives recognize the hypocrisy of the Democratic party and truly begin to mobilize behind a third party whose values reflect our own?

I await your cynical replies.

Abortion is the one issue on which I part company with progressives. I believe it is an extreme act to abort ones child. Abortion adds greatly to the death culture in America. Life, all life, is sacred and should be respected. This is not a Christian value but a universal value.

War is the Republican's extreme act and abortion is the Dem's extreme act. Both are extremes and both are greatly harmful. Those who cannot see this are extremists and extremists need to be reigned in if our society is to survive.

I always ask the question, would you have rather been aborted? One need go no further than that question to understand the selfish and extreme nature of abortion.

Extremists never understand but I hope more thoughtful people will.

For life to be sustained on Earth, life must become a supreme value.

Katha didn't mention ways men could make a sacrifice, so here goes... No more prostate cancer care. No more care for men involved in accidents, crazy athletic injuries, and homicides caused by other men overhyped on testosterone. No more viagra. No more Rogaine. That would be a start for payback.

Of course, pregnant women carrying unwanted babies should not get support for prenatal and labor and delivery. If abortions aren't paid for, then dealing with the sorry outcome of unwanted children shouldn't be either.

There, we're even. Is everybody happy?

No health care for women but I'll bet it covers Viagra.

I understand that the Republican National Committee provides health insurance for its employees that will pay for abortions.

Is that hypocrisy or what?

I couldn't agree with you more.

Let's use the ballot box, and vote the idiots out of office.

"It's the feeling that you've been rolled," said Eleanor Smeal, of Feminist Majority. Or haven't been paying attention.

The feminists are just another group who, like many of us, bought Obama's "change we can believe in" lies.
I'm glad they're finally waking up, too.

This healthcare bill is an insult to the American people, not just women.

And by the way Katha, you point out indignantly that Stupak is a member of the Family, but fail to mention that Hillary is also closely associated with that group.

In DC, things seldom fall out clearly along Ms. Pollit's us vs them, men vs women categories. Those impassioned divisions are strictly for the hoi polloi.

Quite an emotional rant, Katha.

When Obama claims this is a healthcare bill, not an abortion bill, the obvious question is "then how did abortion wind up in it?" Why did the Democrats not refuse to go there, telling Stupak and the clerics that "This is a healthcare bill, not about abortion?"

Because like all other issues that used to be important to the Democratic Party, little things like the separation of church and state and the right of women to discuss their care with their doctors without the oversight of mullahs in Washington, it got horse-traded away at the minor expense of the polite little women who helped elect Obama and Stupak and the rest.

This is not about abortion. This is about the fact that the faith-based religious fundamentalism--that was a bad thing when Bush was nurturing it--is now more important to Democratic power than the decades-long fight women waged to be treated as full citizens with the full right to decide their own health care issues in private. Don't blame women for protesting when it is the party that made that choice. If women leave, it is because the party they helped build told them, once again, to sit down and shut up.

Obama, with his fierce urgency of now, the our time has come hope and change trademark has consistently pandered to corporate and Republican interest since taking office. One could look at his board of religious consultants and know Obama is right there with Stupak. As usual, the bystander in chief takes no credit, but I'm sure he's happy with the result.

No bill, is better than Obama's bill. When the country sifts through the wreckage of Obama's first term, maybe it will be ready for real change, single payer.

This bill was deliberately written to ignite this sort of distracting argument. On the surface, putting the Stupak amendment into the bill was a cynical gesture to win over anti-choice "blue dogs." But I believe the real design was to give a large chunk of the progressive movement something to get fired up about other than the main issue, which is the continued sell out of the Democrat party (including 55 of the 57 members of the "progressive" caucus) to the corporate owned, Wall Street controlled health insurance industry. Instead of asking why we abandoned HR 676, the only fiscally responsible bill that will provide health care to everybody, we have articulate, high profile progressive writers like Pollitt throwing around the old angry gender-identity arguments.

I get that the amendment is a slap in the face to women. And Beinart and the crowd at the Daily Beast are morons if they think that this bill is a step towards "rebuilding the American welfare state." It's an unprecedented corporate give away, literally using force of law to enslave American citizens to the corporate health insurance corporations.

But the only true "pro-woman" position is to argue for single payer--it would mean the end to higher rates for women. It would mean women would be able to get their necessary pap smears, mammograms, etcetera. It would mean decent prenatal care for all women, so that we would not trail behind several third world nations when it comes to infant mortality. The bill Congress passed is terrible for women for most of the same reasons it is terrible for everybody, and that would be a more productive focus than complaining about Viagra (which, for the record, SHOULD NOT be covered in a national health plan).

Briggs Seekins

briggsseekins.wordpress.com

Not ROLLED; Pullosi PUNCHED!

The Corp. elite owns DC. Obama is just another Corp. stooge.

Men are already making enough sacrifices. Where were you when HR 676 was crushed? See what happened to Creigh Deeds when opposed single payer for all Virginians? Women have longer life expectancies than men and I respect that. Men work longer hours and most prisoners are men. How about giving men credit where it's due? Abortion is yesterday's issue and that's why Creigh Deeds went down in flames.

Today's issues are about things like transportation and leg cramps. If my wife has a pregnancy and I'm stuck in the middle of I-64 congestion as always, there should have been long term help from the state government in terms of getting those highways well funded and improving busing and adding rails to ease up congestion so people can get to their places a little less rough.

Here's another one. I either stand up all day or sit down all day at work. Without tights under my pants, my legs would be restless. Why not make it okay for men and women to show off their legs in tights instead of making it too much of a fashion thingy for women to show off but calling men "gay" for grooming their legs or wearing tights in public? Let's do all that and then we'll help ease that "abortion" issue. I respect a woman's right to choose but I think this issue is overstretched.

Pollitt's discussion about the left being out maneuvered by the reactionaries on this issue is a familiar pattern. Obama and the so-called liberal Congress has been out maneuvered on a whole host of issues since election day and before.

It's time to radicalize the Democratic Party or look elsewhere for leadership who has what it takes to stand up to these bullies.

Holy crap! Where are all the real men?