• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    blueberry on Serial: Yes, innocent people i…
    Monster from the Id on Serial: Yes, innocent people i…
    Monster from the Id on Serial: Yes, innocent people i…
    katiebird on Serial: Yes, innocent people i…
    r u reddy on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    riverdaughter on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    Mr Mike on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    katiebird on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    riverdaughter on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    Sweet Sue on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    riverdaughter on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    Bob Harrison on The Neuroscience of Creat…
    katiebird on Who could have predicted?…
    katiebird on Who could have predicted?…
    Mr Mike on Happy Hanukkah!
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama big pharma Bill Clinton Chris Christie cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean Joe Biden John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Keith Olbermann Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare occupy wall street OccupyWallStreet Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    April 2010
    S M T W T F S
    « Mar   May »
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    252627282930  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Dogs used to rape prisoners at Bagram?
      I don’t know.  But Pinochet did the same (plus rats), it’s not without precedent. I hope not: The war veteran, who loathed manipulating Western politicians even as he defended tactics of collective punishment, continued his account: Afghan prisoners were tied face down on small chairs, Jack said. Then fighting dogs entered the torture chamber. “If [...] […]
  • Top Posts

Things that make you go “hmmm…”

Moving in different directions?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in Ottawa this week for the G8 Summit, and she had something to say about abortion rights (in Canada).

“I’m not going to speak for what Canada decides, but I will say that I’ve worked in this area for many years,” Clinton told reporters. “And if we’re talking about maternal health, you cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion.”

More from Clinton on abortion rights in Canada:

“We should be beyond arguing about family planning. Rich women in every culture have access to family planning. It’s poor women who don’t. And I’ve always believed if it’s good enough for a woman of education and affluence, then why isn’t it good enough for a woman who is struggling to raise the children she already has? So family planning, to me, should be just obvious and available.”

Hmmm…

Now isn’t that interesting? Of course it must be just a coincidence that President Obama recently issued an executive order that will effectively make insurance coverage for reproductive health care unavailable for most U.S. women.

Conservative Canadians are quite put out that Secretary Clinton saw fit to lecture them on abortion rights, especially considering Obama’s recent actions. For example, Lawrence Martin of the Globe and Mail writes:

On the issue of maternal mortality and the need for access to abortion, Ms. Clinton’s views should have come as no surprise. In case anyone wasn’t aware, they got the news brusquely at a news conference.

Martin wonders why Clinton’s criticisms of Prime Minister Harper’s views on abortion couldn’t have been delivered privately. Is it possible her message was intended for someone other than Harper?

What do you think?

About these ads

132 Responses

  1. I’ve been wondering whether we might hear something from Hillary on this issue.

  2. Very disappointing.

    • She can’t come right out and criticize the bill, can she? If she started criticizing Obama’s policies directly, wouldn’t she have to resign?

    • Very disappointing. Makes me feel even more unrepresented. Like you said…no one is taking a stand for us here. I had hoped she’d find a way to make a stronger criticism.

      Do you have a link to the interview segment where she praises the bill?

        • thanks.

          <<>>

          OT but also annoying, at the least, that the interviewer asked her “what’s it like to be working with the ol’ campaign rival?”

          come on….how else could she ever possibly reply to that tired old question?

        • That doesn’t sound like a ringing endorsement to me. Notice she pointed to Canada’s single-payer program, and just said it was a step. Always the diplomat.

          • She said it was “a very important” step, and the context of the question was whether the compromises were worth it.

          • Yes, I noticed the single payer reference too. Hillary still rules!

          • She’s a great woman and is doing wonderful things — there is no one doing more for women *around the world* than her. The comments on reproductive rights were separate from her comments on the HCR legislation here. Her reproductive rights comments were global. Our problem is domestic.

        • I wouldn’t call that praise.

        • You really need to read what she said. It’s an important step and it needs improvement.

          Whoopee.

          For that she gets trashed here? Give me a break.

          And the strong statement on abortion deserves real applause. Cheers, Hillary.

          • I’m not trashing her. I think I can comment and say how I feel whether it is a complement or criticism of Hillary. I’ve been one of her strongest supporters. But on this, I’m disappointed and won’t shy away from saying so. It is what it is.

    • It was an exceedingly diplomatic answer, IMO. She hardly lauded it. And, unlike Obama, who argued he would be the last President to work on the issue, she said, “we’ll take stock of it. I mean, you’re never done with these kinds of things. You learn all the time. But it was a very important step.” She lauded the “political system” that brought Canadians single payer.

      • Well I guess I’ll remain an outlier on this. I won’t rationalize just because it’s her.

        • Excuse me, you make the assumption I am rationalizing. That’s silly. We have different opinions. I read the interview and thought wow, that’s not exactly a ringing endorsement. That was my reaction not a rationalization.

          • It’s funny, but not in a ha ha way.

          • I’m with you, masslib. That was my reaction: Wow, that’s not a ringing endorsement. She put it very well: It was hard to do and important, and it needs improvement.

            She even explicitly endorsed abortion, used the word, and is being attacked for that. And made the point about all women deserving good care — everywhere. Good on her.

            I really am impressed. She finds a way to say what needs to be said.

          • Sure..

        • Her comments sound just like the diplomat that she is. Furthermore, she’s not going to publicly criticize her boss, especially in another country. Nagonna happen. And I don’t think it’s a ringing endorsement either. She called it “a step” and said “you’re never done” – unlike Obama who is doing his victory lap and moving on to offshore drilling.

          Her language about abortion rights tells me what I need to know about how she feels.

  3. Yes, I have been thinking she seems to be painting herself into a corner by supporting O on several issues.

    Disappointing is an understatement, SOD

  4. Or get canned, BB

  5. I love Hillary and did everything I could in my neck of the woods to get her elected. She won my county in the primary. But as Taylor Marsh likes to remind her readers,Hillary is an establishment Democrat.She will always support the President in public.

    In private I hope she gave the President the same piece of her mind that she gave the Canadian press.

    • I really wish sometimes she would speak to us.

      • Yep. Those who we most need to speak out for us are the most constrained in their options to speak out without adverse consequences.

        • Who is going to support Obama for re-election? Not the Republicans. Who? Hillary has already said she would probably just serve one term as SOS. In her position, she really can’t publicly criticize Obama or get involved in politics. This was a chance for her to speak out and she did it. I’m not saying it was heroic or anything.

          • I agree. She did it as best she could given the circumstances.

          • Yeah, I agree. The position we’re in sucks, but it is nice to see someone in public life say something that’s not all mealy mouthed and weasily. Considering the climate the “big tent” has brought us and how it’s becoming less and less socially acceptable to talk about reproductive rights, that’s a pretty strong statement.

          • I agree. I even think it’s just a bit heroic.

          • Agreed. And, it was certainly more than the other Democrats who pretend to be pro-choice, by far, and those other Democrats don’t even work for the administration.

      • I feel that way too. I’m just hoping that this will be at least a little thorn in Obama’s side. As the Globe and Mail said, she could have made these criticisms in private. I think she did it at a press conference so the scardy-cat Prez would be aware of it.

        • Definitely. Indeed, the other comments she makes about reproductive health really drive the point home. You would not knw or suspect that she worked for an admin. that enshrined Hyde to the public sector or reaffirmed the conscious clause.

      • She will ~ when the POTUS is a Republican again.

      • As Sect’y of State, Hillary can’t really get involved in domestic issues.

        But that’s one major reason i didn’t want her to take the SOS position — I wanted her in the Senate fighting for us.

        • Schumer and Kennedy, spurred on by Obama who wanted her as his prize Secretary of State, made sure that she realized she had no future in the Senate
          after taking on the unaccomplished but preferred next-new-thing corporate-backed media male candidate of no convictions other than himself, but selling Hope+Change and not a Clinton who cared for the people, and she by not quitting while winning as ordered to do, had to leave the Senate and be the fraudulent one’s prize.

          Her tenure as SoS, however, makes her a much more valid force for women worldwide.
          I think the future must be in NGOs here and abroad. We have been abandoned by government, and the silly media tries to create an us v. them mentally that makes sure the only entities that benefit are corporations.

          Must we never have a peace dividend? Who really benefits from the war every twenty years? Whose multi-national interests are the tax payers supporting?

      • SOD,

        Criticise her when she deserved it, not when she’s stuck between a rock and a hard place politically.

        As far as I’m concerned, Hillary speaks to us as much as she possibly can, considering her present situation. I still remember how she was attacked by her own party for speaking on our behalf. Do you think if she, as obama’s SOS, contradicts his policies in any significant way that the Chicago thugs in the obama admin, the media, the DNC won’t go after her and discredit and undermine her as SOS? It’s not because she’s an “establishment democrat”. That’s simplistic and doesn’t take into consideration what she would be up against were to ever speak what’s on her mind in the present political climate that is suffocating us all. It would be unbelievably naive to believe she has that kind of power.

        I think it is so unfair and indicative of how much we still expect from women than we do from men, when it comes to expecting our representatives to stand up for what’s right by representing the best interests of the people over special interests. That’s been the problem all along because women, in general, do not have the power to take on the boyz club in D.C.

        Let’s not forget nor minimize that Hillary has always stood on the side of the people. Her record shows it. Her record on standing up for women, in particular, and the people, in general, is precisely why the power elite did not want her to get the dem nomination for president. The boyz wanted a puppet who would do their bidding and that’s why obama is in the WH. I’m certain Hillary is well aware of this reality and knows what she must do in order not to enrage the beast to come after her like they did during the primary. I’m pleased that many of her supporters also realize what is up against and don’t criticize her unfairly when she does not take on the administration she is supposed to “support”.

        Hillary has proven worthy of our loyalty and more importantly, I trust her. Period.

  6. SOD~ Yup,we have been abandoned. I had an email exchange with my daughter this morning. I told her the women’s movement was dead and so are all it’s allied organizations. Bought off for access and a place on the guest list.

    I charged her generation with thinking things would stay the same without their involvement and now they are going to have to build it again.

    • The women’s movement is not dead. It’s just that you cannot look to the establishment groups any more. They believe now in working in the system. That was only necessary when we didn’t have the vote. That’s why I suggest we need to all work together as much as possible where we can. I also believe that eventually, some of the women who are feminists that buy into the antiabortion line are worth dealing with and of course, we need to reach out to women who work for civil rights for various racial or ethnic interests. We’ve always been talked out of our own rights for the rights of the unborn, or soliders dying some where (mostly sons) or for racial justice. But it all starts with mothers … there is no human rights without women’s rights and it’s a matter of getting some women to realize that … even if they are lesbians, won’t be mothers, and are drawn to gay rights … we’ll never be equal partners if we distill into interests that are secondary to our own

      • there is no human rights without women’s rights
        True that.

      • You are so right, Kat. The biggest obstacle to our moving forward is the way we’ve broken into racial or ethnic groups. We are all women and no matter what color or beliefs we all have the same basic needs.

        Now that it is clear that none of the pols will support our reproductive rights or our sons and daughters dying on foreign soil – we need to look out for ourselves and forget about “party loyalty” and use our votes to make something good happen.

        If we don’t come together at some point the “women’s movement” may, in fact, die.

        we’ll never be equal partners if we distill into interests that are secondary to our own BINGO!

      • It’s that common consciousness I’ve talked about before that we lack. AAs have it; GLBTs have it; we (women) do not. It is our biggest challenge. We do not see ourselves as others see us. We have the unfortunate belief that we are all different – AA women, gay women, straight women, mothers, wives, single, childless. We are not. We are all women and society views our sexual lives as public domain.

        • We need an awareness campaign to root out this undercurrent of thought.

          • To add to the barriers you’ve mentioned:

            “Women are the only oppressed group in our society that lives in intimate association with their oppressors.”  ~Evelyn Cunningham

            That includes all male family members- husbands, fathers, sons…

            Also many women see other women as competitors. I was surprised to learn from some graduate student, who believed in women’s equal rights, that they didn’t have many close women friends in high school.

            We’re up against it, but that didn’t stop Susan B. and Elizabeth Cady. Lead on SoD!

          • I come at this from a slightly different angle. Sometimes, depending on the context, I see where people may be coming from when they say “I personally oppose abortion but support choice” and think there should be room for that in the choice movement when it is rooted in women’s rights. Not because of right-wing personal responsibility memes but because I want the issue to shift back to a woman’s autonomy. The flip side of the personal responsibility meme that associates “women” and “fault” is the idea that abortion should be legal but not because it’s a woman’s choice–it’s the choice of the guy, his family, their belief system, etc. That idea combined with the notion that daughters are a burden whereas sons are a blessing is just as insidious and ugly a mix to me–it is another form of women-responsibility-fault.

          • Women in this country are not safe in their bodies. You can be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. You can be raped. You can be brutalized. Marriage in most states still implies chattel status. If you are a mother that grants you almost a special powerless state. The society sees it as a simple sign of your wanton sexuality and unless you’re ‘taken care of’, you’re a burden. It’s all about the fact that we cannot be safe in our bodies. That is why abortion rights is central. But if we have to bring women to this idea within the other ways then we must. We are not safe even just walking our streets or in are homes. We are victims of stalking, predators, rape, violent spouses, etc and our children have those issues too.

          • And most of it is accepted as a social norm. That is the most frightening part.
            –boys will be boys
            –she shouldn’t have worn that
            –she’s not a good mother
            –her husband has a right to expect [it]
            etc etc

        • I think it’s because we are raised in an androcentric patriarchy. We are brought up to identify with men. Men are the default. Men are whole. Women are not whole until a man makes us “complete” and gives us his name. From a gender perspective, a large percent of women simply don’t identify with other women. Worse, they often seem to view other women as threats, as competition for the male attention that actualizes their existence. Add in all the “women are evil” elements of our dominant organized religions and you get the misogynistic mess that is our culture.

  7. Sing it Hillary! A leader leads…that’s what she does. Of course, Obama was too busy playing basketball with CBS News this morning, and answering softball questions. Can we have an adult for president please?

  8. I highly doubt that she’s even indirectly criticizing Obama here. If her criticism is being directed anywhere in the US, it’s toward the convenient and willing scapegoats that the conservatives are playing by making poor Obama sign things he would rather not sign in an ideal world. It sounds more like another episode of bad cop, good cop–Obama uses our rights as a bargaining chip and then dispatches Hillary to say what she’s been saying on women’s rights for decades, as a reminder to American women that this administration is oh so pro-choice and don’t you forget that in 2012.

    • I can’t believe that Hillary has completely forgotten what happened to her in the campaign. No liberal can possibily believe that Obama is pro-choice at this point. He has lost his base. Just look at the poll Dakinikat posted on earlier. No one wants him to have a second term. Hillary will get her own back one way or another.

      Again, I’m not saying she’s a hero. She’s human, and she hasn’t forgotten how she was betrayed by the Dem leadership. I don’t believe that.

      • I agree. The tone of that message is pure Hillary. We’ve seen her deliver that message many times before, speaking for herself. Remember when she slammed Spence? Hillary doesn’t need Obama, certainly, to tell her how to speak about women’s rights.

      • Obama is pro-Obama. That’s his only agenda.

      • bb, I’m *not* criticizing Hillary, nor am I unhappy with her. I was prepared for her to praise this bill. I just don’t think she’s putting this out there without the administration wanting her to put this out there.

        • Hillary chooses to work within the system and she’s gotten far that way in any traditional sense of the word. But it is what it is. I’m sure she realizes the costs and she’s rationalized whatever they are …

          • yup. That is Hillary. She raised hell trying to get real reform–she did her part, took a lot of heat for it, and is now letting the pieces fall where they will. I’ve got no gripe with Hill on this. But, I do have a gripe with the Axelbama administration who seems to think they can get away with their shenanigans by having Hillary speak on women’s issues at the global level as she has been long before Obama was president. Hillary being Hillary does not cancel out Obama being Obama.

          • Obama will want Hillary’s help to attract women under his tent. At some point Hillary will probably have to decide if she’s going to campaign for him or not. My bet is she’ll be full time on the SoS gig till the end of the term and she won’t have time for domestic stuff, that is unless BO decides not to run.

          • Get used to the words Hillary Clinton, Sonia Sotomayor, and Lilly Ledbetter being mentioned in the same sentence. I think that’s their 2012 pitch to women in a nutshell.

          • Oh and Michelle Obama, too.

          • And “toned arms?”

          • Lol Do you want my secrets for toned arms? Just send one absentee ballot to your local polling place. Satisfaction guaranteed!

        • If Obama really expects anyone to think he’s pro-choice, he’s a lot stupider than I think he is–and I don’t think he’s all that smart. The irony of someone from the US lecturing Canada on this issue certainly wasn’t lost on the rest of the world.

          • Too many people still do think he’s pro-choice though. All he does is feed the image of the Obama that they “want to believe in.”

  9. So, what’s the hidden message? Move to Canada? I guess I am thick or something.

    • Hidden message? What was hidden?

    • If I were a woman in need of an abortion and without means, I would ask Canada for asylum and then call the press and I would encourage other women to do so. It would make a huge statement if very woman in need of an abortion here in the US post the Jane Crow EO asked Canada for asylum as a political prisoner or asked for political refugee as a refugee from politics here in the US that kills women.

  10. Speaking of koolaid, Naomi Wolf admits we are still headed for fascism under Obama.

    http://www.alternet.org/story/146184/?page=entire

    Why does anyone listen to her anymore?

    • I certainly don’t. She’s embarrassing.

    • What???? did she miss Christmas, New Years, AND Hanukkah?? No ponies under the tree? No kittens? rainbows? candy? Nothing?

      po po Naomi.

    • Whether you agree with Naomi or not, two things that are always true about her, having known her a bit. One, she loves and craves attention. Two, she has a very vivid imagination. She will create the narrative that will sell in a given environment.

  11. Speaking as a Canadian, I think most of would have caught this as a statement about recent developments in the States. But it’s also a statement on the American anti-abortion sentiment that’s been bleeding across the border for the last decade or so. It used to be a total non-issue in Canada.

    • Sandra, the anti-abortion rhetoric here is coming mostly from the extreme religious fundies and Roman Catholics desperate to preserve their middle-ages stranglehold on women. Why do you think Canadians are beginning to re-think the issue?

  12. Think about it.

    • I know you mean women SoD. But I have thought the same. :-(

      • There ain’t nobody standing up for me either.

        • I can respect everyone else’s opinion of her statements but I am still disappointed and saddened to see it.

          • The sad thing is I braced myself for some time for Hillary to react exactly as she has once the bill passed, Stupakistan and all. I agree completely that we do not have anyone at that level of government speaking up for women on the domestic front. The world has Hillary. America has Pelosi.

        • I guess I was already disillusioned when Hillary didn’t realy fight for the nomination and a roll call vote after May 31, 2008. But I do agree with you SoD. No one is fighting for women’s reproductive rights. It is horrifying to me. I guess I was just grasping for straws.

          • You’re right.

          • You’re assuming that Obama ordered Clinton to make that public statement? If that’s what happened, then she should resign. I don’t think he told her what to say, but if she is “just following orders,” then I would lose respect for her permanently.

          • No, not at all. I think her statement was her own.

          • Sorry to be such a downer on this but it makes me sad. BTW — Good morning!

          • You are not grasping at straws. She clearly was taken a shot at what just happened here in the US. It’s a completely different tone than the one just set by the President and the Democratic Party here. Further, I think people need to recognize, Bill and Hillary Clinton were adamant the Democrats need to be a pro-choice Party. Remember Casey senior. Obama argues the Party needs to make room for anti-choicers. He has moved the Party away from the strong pro-choice position, note Tim Kaine at the DNC. This is a real intra-Party fight. And, now you have gone from noting the fairly obvious to she should resign if Obama “ordered” her to do this? C’mon, why on earth would anyone in their right mind think Hillary was “ordered” by Obama of all people to say these things?

    • Not only that, they are lying to our faces that “women are the big winners of this HCR”. Newspeak

      • And the saddest part is that there are so many people who guzzle this disinformation as if it were, well, koolaid. (sigh)

  13. Tristero:

    Most of the people I see regularly don’t follow politics that closely, especially these days now that we no longer have a sociopath and a drooling maniac in the two top posts in the executive branch (Which was which is your choice. Or combine the two). My friends think Obama is doing a good to excellent job. Sure they don’t like this decision, or that cave-in, but on the whole, they think highly of him.

    Now we have a sociopath and a drooling idiot in the two top posts in the executive branch. Hardly an improvement. My friends (that’s y’all) follow politics very closely, and they think Obama is a piece of shit.

    • That would make a wonderful campaign slogan. Obama: Beloved by 10 out of 10 people who don’t follow politics.

    • Another deluded analyst whoever that is. Sad thing is Hullabaloo’s traffic has picked up in the past six months, the pandering must be working. Sanctuary for weary Obots suffering from withdrawl.

    • This is the WH that said triggers are more progressive than the public option–Marvelous job!

  14. I think,I think, you heard that “right” between the lines BB. I heard the song “This Ones for the Girls” today. One of the celebratory songs from her primary campaign and I couldn’t get through it. I was overcome with such powerful feelings of longing and sadness and indignant betrayal… After all the years of working so hard to change the status of women in this country and in the world, it has become excruciatingly obvious that until the patriarchal system is dismantled there will be no “justice for all” . And right now I am at a loss about what will make that happen. Is this it for the human race? Have we reached the immoveable force that will stop our progress as a species? Will we just continue to evolve more complex and crushing strategies to survive within a patriarchal system? And that will be it until life on earth ends? I still have faith in the universal never ending power of life, but my faith in the ability of humans as a whole to become more than we are is broken. Just saying….

  15. I just took a peek at some wingnut blog reactions to this story. Predictable as ever, they are taunting Stupak for getting nothing for his efforts–they take Hillary’s statements as confirmation that Obama is “pro-abortion” and his executive order was an empty gesture.

    I think the executive order actually does have an insidious, practical effect on chipping away at women’s abortion rights, but even putting that aside and going further than that, the deeper ugliness of Obama/Pelosi using these rights as a bargaining chip is that they (the Democrats) are part of the system keeping women’s energy caught in limbo fighting for rights that should be a given–so that it takes that much energy away from the women’s movement in fighting on other issues. If pro-choice and pro-life women can’t start looking past the issue of abortion as a distraction that the oligarchy uses to keep us from fighting back on other issues, we are doomed to this limbo. Imagine if American women would just call the bluff on both sides of the aisle with regard to repealing Roe v. Wade. Imagine if they understood this was a canard and actually fought back on healthcare. Some of us want single payer, some of us don’t, but a lot of us who don’t agree on that point, do oppose the bill on the grounds that forced purchase of junk insurance is bad for everybody, especially for women, and that insurance companies shouldn’t be able to discriminate based on preconditions. Imagine if that conversation had been allowed to stew and people realized enough common ground to work on that. Instead that conversation was diverted with all the Stupak shenanigans. Pelosi and Obama needed the Stupak shenanigans to pass this bill. They needed some left/right issue to split the consensus. And, who better to sell out than the silly wimminz.

  16. Sad how much has not changed:

  17. Been looking at some census type numbers. In 1980, women 16-34 were 15% of the total US population. In 2000, women in that age range dropped to 10% of the population. In 2016, the figure will be closer to 11%.

  18. I’ve just returned home and have been thinking about this thread. I think for me, its not exactly about how Hillary played this, or responded, or didn’t respond. I get that she’s the consumate politician…..

    But it seems to me, that we’ve reached an unsettling departure point, once again. I feel like a curtain has been drawn, a door closed, a tide has turned, the train has left the station. Pick your metaphor. I don’t like the act I witnessed, the room I’m left in, the beach I’m stranded on, or the bizarre city I’d like to abandon, but have nowhere to go.

  19. If Pink were writing a letter to Sarah Palin…

  20. OT: Obama announcing profiling checks for incoming flights tomorrow:

    The Obama administration will announce Friday a new screening system for flights to the United States under which passengers who fit an intelligence profile of potential terrorists will be searched before boarding their flight, a senior administration official said.

    The procedures, which have been approved by President Obama, are aimed at preventing another terror attack like the one attempted by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian suspected of ties to al Qaeda who tried to blow up an airliner Christmas Day with a bomb hidden in his under wear, the official said.

    Isn’t that special.

  21. Conservative Canadians??? lol, Harper is not popular in Canada at all right now. Their “conservatives” are not at all like the far right at home in the U.S…

    Abortion rights within their health care plan there are not threatened despite what Harper may privately believe. She had no reason to say this in public at all unless it was to reaffirm her own beliefs to the public in the U.S.. Really it’s preaching to the choir in Canada because they are not going to get rid of reproductive health care rights within their system. EVER. The “religious” have almost zero power there with regard to how laws are made or changed despite the very high Catholic population. It’s just not seen as a “voice” in government in Canada.

    If she said this publicly the message was not to “Canadians” I say this as an American living in Canada. It was pretty clear who was being lectured and it certainly wasn’t the Canadians.

    There’s a double message there to me. ..she’s done what she could do under the circumstances regarding this health care bill and no I don’t like it but, for her to come out and say what she did about reproductive health care rights under the guise that they are in any way threatened in Canada is telling. Canadians would never stand for having those rights removed from health care services and she knows it.

    If she were POTUS I have NO DOUBT that Stupak would have been told to sit down and shut up….and perhaps we’d not have ended up with Romneycare…and perhaps despite my multiple health issues I could finally move home!

    I was extremely pleased she made these comments. :)

    • Hillary’s comments to the Canadian press re: women’s reproductive health were in the context of Harper’s decision to exclude funding for family planning from a foreign aid package being proposed during the upcoming G-20 (I think) conference being held in Canada this summer. Parliament was in a kerfuffle over the issue before Clinton ever showed up. Her comments were quite an overt criticism of Harper’s agenda.

      Hillary Clinton is the first American woman since Eleanor Roosevelt to play a central role on the world stage. Madeline Albright and, certainly, Condaleeza Rice never achieved her status. Other countries have had women of world prominence: Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi, Benazir Bhutto, Angela Merkel come to mind. In her time, Eleanor Roosevelt experienced disgusting levels of ERDS just as Hillary is faced with neverending CDS.

      The position of Secretary of State precludes engaging in domestic politics; and that’s a blessing as well as a curse. After all, if Hillary remains in her present position for Obama’s entire term, her job will preclude her participation in his re-election campaign. Were I her, I’d stay on the job for that benefit alone.

  22. I just returned from B0botland. For a second tere, I thought I was here. Just watch

    http://edgeoforever.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/b0bots-revised-hope-and-change-i-hope-to-hell-he-changes-his-mind/

    • Sounds like the Gyllenhaals’ dad on Huffpo:

      I shouldn’t have been surprised, or shocked or completely horrified – to have learned that Obama has now opened up all these new drilling fields for oil – the east coast, Alaska. The Jeb Bush politicos et. al. must be so pissed off. Obama’s outflanked them with their primary constituency and patrons, the oil gang. Brilliant!

      Only I’m wondering how my friends will now explain this to me. I want to understand. I do. More jobs? National security? Enough gas into the future so that the big cars still being built in sad Detroit will remain cheap to drive?

      What’s fascinating is there doesn’t even seem to have been any public argument or discussion for making this drilling decision happen. No melt down can be pointed to; no bankruptcies; no skyrocketing medical costs. Why now? Why at all?

      I need a little help here again. I’m open to listening. I like my friends. And I really like that hope springs eternal. I could really use a little hope about now.

      Obama keeps taking Hope away so that he can keep pretending to give it a comeback. His voters keep asking to be talked down off the ledge every time he reverses his campaign promises.

  23. So is obvious praise is ok, just not a “ringing endorsement?”

    Why does everyone think you’re “attacking” or “trashing” Hillary simply by criticizing? I didn’t get the memo about that. I didn’t sign any waivers of ability to criticize when I became a Hillary supporter.

    What people are objecting to is that you are attacking those of us who don’t agree with you as akin to Obot rationalizers.

    • I’m not attacking anyone. I’m stating a position. Try again.

      • Maybe I’ll go away. {{rolls eyes}}

        • Right, my thought process wasn’t rationalizing. I didn’t think, gee, maybe Hillary said she liked the health reform package but really she’s just pretending to. I take her at her word that she sees it as a step. My response was wow, here’s Obama and the Dems saying they just passed the new civil rights, no President will have to revisit it, and here’s Hillary with a luke warm response. Interesting.

          People expect Hillary to react with high praise to health insurance reform because it is her signature issue. When she doesn’t lots of people are going to notice. As for her comments on reproductive health care, it’s hard to not see them in the context of what just happened here in the US. What she argued Obama and the Democrats could have easily argued all along if they were serious about womens health.

  24. masslib, on April 2, 2010 at 7:49 am Said:

    It’s a completely different tone than the one just set by the President and the Democratic Party here.

    She’s taking that tone on behalf of the President and the Democratic party, though. She is speaking as part of the Administration not separate from it. I don’t say that as a criticism of Hillary, either. Hillary isn’t above scrutiny, but this isn’t even about Hillary. It’s about an Administration which is trying to have it both ways. Sell women out but then not stand in the way of woman’s right champion saying her piece about women’s rights around the worafter the fact. What Hillary said about maternal health, reproductive health, and family planning is what she’s always said, and it’s spot on, but
    Hillary speaking up for women globally does not make up for Obama selling out women domestically.

  25. I agree with SOD fully on this. It’s also a continuation of the same old U.S. tendency to criticize other countries for what we are blatantly doing ourselves. So Hillary lecturing the Canadians about reproductive rights is kind of like Obama (and for that matter Hillary) going to other countries and lecturing to them about “human rights violations” and “terrorism”–while we blow up civilians in two wars that are, by any measure, illegal war crimes. If I’m fed up with this, I can just imagine how much other countries are too.

    I knew Hillary made a devil’s choice when she agreed to be SOS; she would be a good Dem, she would be a team player. She would prop up our lousy policies at home and abroad, because she has no choice if she wants to keep her job and any sort of influence.

    I have not lessened in my admiration of her one whit for all that she did in the past, but this is what I expected so I can’t say I am disappointed. I don’t like it, however, and I don’t have to like it. The Obama supporters are the delusional, irrational ones, not Hillary supporters.

    It does come down to this: NOBODY in either party speaks for us, or stands for us. Not one. The question is, what do we do about it? I know that nobody here bought into the LOTE arguments last election and chose not to vote for Obama. We took a lot of flak for it, too. (Duh! Who can forget?) I suspect that our numbers have grown though. Everywhere I go, I find people who are thoroughly fed up with both parties.

  26. I can not wait until Hillary retires as SOS and starts her foundation. She will be released from Dem party politics and can say whatever she needs to for the first time in her life, and for the rest of her life.

    As someone up-thread said – the rest of the world has Hillary and we have Nancy. In a couple of years we will have Hil again and it will be the REAL deal. Plan now to contribute your time and funds to her next endeavor – she is really our only chance, she knows it, and she will be ready to go.

    It will be delicious and beautiful and I will join the march. I am already excited.

  27. Personally, I don’t care what Hillary or any one else in the Democrat party says about reproductive health and choices. All I care about is what they DO about the topic which is move backwards or do nothing. That doesn’t work for me. After their last few years of blatant misogyny the Dems will have to actually DO somethings to get my vote.

    • Agreed. No point in voting for Dems automatically…why enable your own destruction??>

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 472 other followers

%d bloggers like this: