• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    pm317 on I am American
    pm317 on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Propertius on I am American
    Propertius on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I am American
    pm317 on I am American
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump 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 John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove 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 OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    November 2009
    S M T W T F S
    « Oct   Dec »
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • The Roots of Trump’s Policy of Separating Children from Parents
      So, you’ve all heard about this by now. It is, obviously, a terrible crime. And yeah, evil. It is an extension of Obama’s policy of holding families (without splitting them up, but still in terrible conditions). If you want to understand the link, read this Twitter thread. Thread: How did we get here? In 2015, […]
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Martha Coakley is a Shoo-In for the Massachusetts Senate Nomination!!


Angry about being upstaged by Coakley?

Breaking News from Politico: Pelosi Endorses Capuano!

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be endorsing Rep. Michael Capuano in the Massachusetts Senate special election, choosing her House colleague over Attorney General Martha Coakley, who is seeking to become the first female senator in the state.

Pelosi will be heading to Boston tomorrow morning to make the formal endorsement….

In her statement, Pelosi noted Capuano’s support for the historic health care legislation that she shepherded through the House. Coakley said she opposed the legislation that passed through the House because it contained a provision restricting federal funds from going to abortion providers.


Martha Coakley for President!! **

Coakley was way ahead of all the other candidates anyway, but now that sex-traitor* Nancy Pelosi has endorsed her challenger, Martha can’t possibly lose!

Go Martha Go!! You can contribute to Coakley’s campaign here.



This is an open thread.

* h/t Dakinikat for the “sex-traitor” terminology
** h/t Quixote for the “Martha Coakley for President” idea

digg!!! tweet!!! share!!!

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Add to: Facebook | Digg | Del.icio.us | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine


102 Responses

  1. Sign me up and send me an absentee ballot.

    We’ll elect her the Chicago way!

  2. I just saw this elsewhere. Ladies, this is war. Pelosi needs to hear from us that if she can’t endorse a woman she should keep her mouth shut.

  3. $$ to Ms. Coakley…Hopefully she will be the start of retaking the Democratic Party from the corrupt Obamacrats.

  4. Nancy feels dissed. Coakley said that she would oppose the HRC and that it was a step backward for women, Good for her, I am really starting to like her. Nancy Pelosi on the other hand is beginning to remind my of another strong woman. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLrTPrp-fW8

  5. Pelousy doesn’t seem to like or support other powerful women. She likes being the Queen Bee.

  6. Most of the “liberal/progressive” boys just do NOT get it. They are expecting women to act like . . . well the botox maven from SF.

    This is war — the dems declared war on women last Saturday.

  7. Gawd. Pelosi is turning into a real avert-your-eyes piece of work. What’s wrong with the fine people of San Fran electing such a slimeball?

    • She is really embarrassing. And when I think how thrilled I was about the first woman Speaker.

      • I was thinking the same thing earlier today, BB – I was really excited when she became speaker – and then, and then, and then along came O.

        I’m really embarrassed for her most of the time.

        • I hope Pelosi gets munsoned in the next election.

        • I was embarassed by her long before Obama. I disliked her “impeachment is off the table” stance.

          I hold Pelosi partially responsible for alot of crap during Bush admin.

          • amen sista. Nancy is like the media. Whoever she wants, you know is bad for the public….and infallible guide really. Nancy + wants = bad

  8. http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/senate-candidates-clash-on-health-care-in-massachusetts/

    Do we want someone that stands up for women or do we want someone who throws women under the bus back by axis sally



  9. Should we start calling her Nancy “Coathanger” Pelosi? Or would Nancy “Back Alley” Pelosi” be better?

    • I think this fits axis sally pelosi pretty good. This is not the first issue that she has gone against the good of women and the country.



    • I vote for Back Alley Nancy.

  10. My tweet about this post on Twitter has already been retweeted three times! They love Martha out there!

  11. I just commented at her site:
    You know, my mother was overwhelmed with delight when you became Speaker of the House. She didn’t think that a woman would achieve that position within her lifetime. I was delighted with her.

    Then you chose to attack Hillary Clinton and support Obama, the person who claims to have the interests of women at heart, but who had already proven his basic sexism on the campaign trail and has continued to worsen his record having gotten to the White House.

    Now you’re doing it again. You’ve chosen to ignore the crisis in which women find themselves by choosing to back an opponent of Martha Coakley who has taken a principled stand against eviscerating the already substantially weakened Roe.

    I am not surprised, but I am disgusted. You make me fear (even more) for my daughter’s future.

    We need women in Congress. We need many more. We need true liberals in Congress. We need many more. We do not need to travel so far to the right that the Democrats are indistinguishable from the Republicans.

    You should be ashamed.

    • From the heart and well cone. I know that it won’t phase the O’s prime enabler, however, if enough people do this, it will surely make them stop and take invewntory. or do they care?

  12. Oops, I meant well “done”. Mea culpa.

  13. I’m with Martha.

  14. Pelosi clearly wants to be the only powerful woman in Washington so to remain she tries to take down female candidates.

  15. If we had more women in the House and Senate, then neither Nancy nor Martha would be put in this position. I don’t envy either of them. But, I think we need more people to stand up for principals if we’re ever going to change, so I’m going with Martha on this one.

    On a slightly ironic note, this line from last week’s premiere episode of “V” struck me:

    “Compromising one’s principals for the greater good is not a shameful act. It’s a noble one,” said the aliens/visitors to the humans just before they launched their plot to destroy the world.

    • Diane- I think one of the problems with having so few elected female representatives, is that each one become ‘symbolic’ rather than human. There is no reason to expect all women politicians to be good and noble and brave, it is just that when we have so few the stinkers really stand out.

      • That’s a pretty astute observation.

      • Honora – That’s a good point and another reason why we need more female politicians. However, I have to step back from being overly critical of Pelosi. Disappointed, yes. But, not ready to roast her. Why? Becauses right now we have had 3 women (Pelosi, Snowe and Coakley) who have had high-profile roles influencing and influencing the discussion around health care reform. I, personally, don’t want to skewer any of them because they are showing the rest of the women of America that we can have the power to make things happen (even if we don’t agree with how they are doing it). Hopefully we can use this to encourage more women to run for higher office, because that brings me back to my original point that there wouldn’t be such a debate about health care, let alone a Stupak amendment.

        • Oh how PC.

          WOMEN are often women’s worst enemies and these women can NEVER be given a pass.

          Nancy — back alley — Pelosi — is not only screwing women but she has harmed this nation by her self serving actions.

        • Diane you present a different pov that has some merit to it. But I have difficulty with your pov because “half measures avail us nothing”—now or in the past. It is only when we have dared to stand strong, resolute and united that we have moved forward. Actually, I will give Snowe her due in this regard—she took a view on costs and the role of government and she was able to make a huge impact. Note that her role was not about reproductive health but about governance issues. There was no need for the House to go down this path. They could have stood for keeping this out of the bill and won. I think part of this is about Nancy Pelosi and Catholicism.

        • I couldn’t disagree more. Nancy is doing more harm to women now that has been done in decades. What an accomplishment. I don’t know the reasons she has embraced “The Family” and their Stupak amendment, but she has. It is insidious and it is destructive. It doesn’t matter that Nancy is female, she is pushing an agenda or facilitating an agenda of eroding women’s rights. That can not be tolerated.

  16. I’m all in on a Draft Martha for Pres. movement.

    • Why not? Obama ran after less than two years in the Senate, and Martha has tons more experience than he did. Martha in 2012 after Obama self-destructs!

      • Let’s see if the DNC highlights her in the next convention, like they did Bill Clinton, John-John and Obama. She does have a penis, right??

  17. Coakley for Pres–she deserves to be the most powerful woman in American politics over Pelosi any day.

  18. Nancy is like the Evil Tom Joad, wherever there’s an opportunity for bros over hos, I’ll fly 3000 miles to be there. After a while it starts to look like a pattern. If I were her daughter, I’d be afraid to turn my back to her.

  19. Tom Tancredo announces he’s running for Governor of Colorado in 2010


    • Great, Dems make a deal with the devil (GS) and self destruct. And now we’re going to get kooks like this everywhere. We’re getting one in VA. Thanks “Back Alley” and “Backtrack”.

  20. Btw, Coakley is involved in this program here in MA, the name escapes me this second, but it trains young women for careers in politics to increase our numbers. Martha is a Hillary, not a Nancy, hand up not slap down.

    • Martha endorsing Hillary:

      Attorney General Coakley’s statement follows below:

      “I am determined to see a successful Democratic campaign for President in November. I believe that the Democratic primary has demonstrated to the American people that there are two able and hard working candidates, either of whom can win the presidency. Either will be a huge improvement for America over what the Republicans have offered for the last eight years and what they offer now for the next four. I will support whoever is the nominee of the party.

      “However, as one of two unpledged delegates elected by the Massachusetts State Committee, I have determined to cast my vote for Hillary Clinton. Running for office under any circumstances is arduous and stressful; it is at times exhilarating and at times exhausting. It tests the issues, the families and supporters, and the very core of the candidate. Running for President of the United States is all of that many times over.

      “Regardless of the outcome of the primary, Mrs. Clinton’s energy, stamina, and resolve have changed the course of history for women seeking office, including the presidency, and I dare say, have changed the course of history of Presidential politics in the United States. It is for these reasons that I will vote for Hillary Clinton in August at the Nominating Convention.”

  21. we really to un-elect pelosi, she is a national disaster!

  22. I’m voting for Martha bb, have been a fan of hers for a long time. And Capuano has one big ass mistake on his record for me – he backed Barry from the beginning. Now, if memory serves me correctly our Commonwealth went to Hillary by 15 points – but Mikey still had his vote in Barry’s column – Martha was in Hillary’s column from the beginning – who has the ‘superior judgment’ between the two?

  23. May the people of MA make history and the correct decision. I think it is a little early to push Coakley for Pres. but , but, but—–heck let’s at least get her in the Senate!. I am sending money.

  24. The Health Care Reform Bill throws women, people who choose not to spend their money on Health Care Insurance and old people under the bus. The promises made by the Democrats for freedom of choice is a sham. What freedom? Pelosi got funding for abortion taken out of the Bill, will put people in jail who choose not to pay for Health Care Insurance and cuts Medicare by a half a trillion dollars which will eviscerate Medicare funding. What a nightmare.

    • yup, definite nightmare … and they said the republicans would be the ones to take away choice from us

    • Some health insurance reform, which may be accomplished on the backs of women, the infirm and elderly people, and increased taxes for the middle class. Some progress. This is such a regressive bill, in so many ways, that it is too hard to list them all.

    • well of course it throws these groups under the bus, those are exactly the groups that were treated like subclass citizens during the Democratic primaries:

      working class
      older voters

      the Democratic party spoke of this energized sexism, classism, and ageism as uniquely “inspiring” and “hopeful”

  25. I had a talk with an Obot friend tonight. We talk about politics but avoid talking directly about Obama or Pelosi or any one politician in particular because she knows that I’m not a fan of the current administration. We were talking about a wide range of topics including the economy and the record number of job losses, the powers that be who can’t get their act together to give everyone in this country universal health care, and the ongoing wars in Iraq in Afghanistan.

    We agreed on everything but at the end of every rant she would add “But it’s not Obama’s fault, Bush did all of this”. And I’m past the point of arguing because if there are people who still can’t see that Obama does in fact have the power to end the war and fight for universal health care, then they just don’t want to face the facts no matter what has happened and what will happen in the next 3 years. All I said was “uh-huh” then moved on to another topic.

    I know it seems crazy that anyone could still support Obama in 2012 after everything that has happened but I know people who will fall into that camp because they will STILL blame Bush for the economy, and the wars, and the health insurance industry. Will most of America love Obama to do the same? I honestly doubt it. I think Obama will lose in 2012 and he only has himself to blame. Bush actually gave him and the Democrats the ability to change the system. They decided to follow Bush’s practices and they will pay in 2010 and 2012.

    • Yep. I think the Dems were willing to go with a bozo like Obama instead of a competent candidate because they felt like Bush was the Golden Ticket that would guarantee them 40 years in office–and they wouldn’t have to do a damn thing except cash the cheques and pass the buck. What they don’t get is that people are suffering and need help. They gave the Dems one more chance to prove they’re serious, and they squandered it on hubris. Can’t go back to this well again, either. After suffering through 4 years of this, Bush is a distant memory.

    • Gee, doesn’t she know that O is the preznit now and he can make changes and clean up the mess that Bush made????? Duh

  26. I sent Martha money. That’s what talks. I also posted a link on my Facebook page and became a Fan.

  27. Nothing here that an Confluence reader doesn’t already know or think or feel, but it’s recent and by a writer I’ve started to read regularly.


  28. Catholic priests have four Sundays to campaign for this Michael Cupano guy. I’m sure they will be out if force with threats of excommunication and worse.
    TC readers in Massachusetts should go to mass armed with note books and a witness to document any attempts by the Church to sway the vote.

  29. You guys are just too fast. I came home late tonight, and checked email first, finding this link re: Coakley from a group of NY Dem activists. I copied it all, furious and ready to share it with all of you. Of course, you were already on it. Love this place:

    Trading Women’s Rights for Political Power

    A GRIM reality sits behind the joyful press statements from Washington Democrats. To secure passage of health care legislation in the House, the party chose a course that risks the well-being of millions of women for generations to come.

    The Democratic majority has abandoned its platform and subordinated women’s health to short-term political success. In doing so, these so-called friends of women’s rights have arguably done more to undermine reproductive rights than some of abortion’s staunchest foes. That Senate Democrats are poised to allow similar anti-abortion language in their bill simply underscores the degree of the damage that has been done.

    This, then, is where we stand as party leaders celebrate passage of the House bill. When it comes to abortion, they seem to think all positions are of equal value so long as the party maintains a majority. But the party will eventually reap what it has sown. If Democrats do not commit themselves to defeating the amendment, then they will face an uncompromising effort by Democratic women to defeat them, regardless of the cost to the party’s precious majority.

    In the meantime, the victims of their folly will be the millions of women who once could count on the Democratic Party to protect them from those who would sacrifice their rights for political gains.


  30. When I listen to POTUS, I am amazed at the attitude of democrats in regard to the Stupak amendment. To them, passage of this bill is the most important thing to accomplish, even at the cost of a woman’s right to choose. Lanny Davis was going to be on a radio show tonight, espousing this viewpoint ie passage of the bill was the end goal, even if the Stupak amendent was included in the final product. The world has gone mad. I feel like Alice in Wonderland. Everything is upside down and doesn’t make sense anymore. The democratic party has gone against its entire platform and the leaders have sold women down the river. All to pass this debacle of a bill, just to give Obama and the dems a “win.”

    • Well, it’s not really that much of a surprise, considering they were willing to abandon their own Party Charter to manipulate the delegate count in favor of O last year. The same end justifies the means b.s. to justify fraud and misogyny. A pox on their heads.

  31. Here’s a couple of tidbits. The RNC’s Health Insurance plan covers abortion. Tim Kaine is pro-life while Michael Steele says he’s for individual choice.

    What’s wrong with that picture?

  32. […] Martha Coakley is a Shoo-in for MA Senate […]

  33. Evil Bill Donohue says he doesn’t think Catholic bishops have accomplished as much in a generation as they have with the Democratic congress via the Stupak amendment. And he made clear this is with respect to restricting abortion. I hope the coathanger Dems are happy.

    He also threatens Obama that if they undo this amendment, Catholic bishops and the Catholic church won’t work with him on anything for the rest of his presidency.

    • Yeah, no kidding. Anyone who thinks they will doublecross the Bishops is crazy. They would raise hell and never let up. Obama will declare war on liberals, but he doesn’t have the balls to take on the Church. Keep dreaming.

  34. My mom and dad are brother and sister.

  35. Coakley defending women’s rights:

    • I can’t stand Margery Eagan (she’s like our answer to MoDo crossed with Mike Barnacle or some Republican leaning faux populist), but that was a really good answer. 🙂

  36. Wow! At least Nancy is consistent, huh? Pull up the draw bridges – no other women after me!

  37. You can count on Nancy to disappoint. Like others have said, maybe this will turn out to be a positive thing for Martha Coakley.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: