Re: Rock Bottom

“I am your worst-case scenario. And I’d do it all again.”
.
“…and one day your child will marry the former prez’s daughter.”

PHENOMENAL. She won the war.

Marjorie Margolies did the right thing and she KNOWS she did. This is what I wonder about people on a daily basis, how can you go against everything you know to be right and expect right thinking people to believe you are worth anything.

I have a lot of respect for Ms. Margolies. I wish more politicians would vote their consciences and spare us the posturing lies and self serving, bare faced hypocrisy.

LM
http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/technology-savvy-nigerian-criminals-are-the-greatest-threat-to-national-security/

Bart Stupak just on Fox has again said “No, I will not vote for this bill as it is currently written”.
.
I find it odd, that TIME.com writers continually ignore this very important block of individuals. They seem to know that Nancy will never reach 216 without them. But, they keep touting other stories such as the “Slaughter Rule” controversy.
.
I said it back weeks ago when it was even proposed that the Senate Bill would be the only avenue to pass this legislation. WIthout Stupak and his gang, this goes no where.
.
Is this just some type of stalling tactic, TIME.com reporters? Or, do you know and realize that this will not go anywhere, but beating a dead horse keeps people coming back?
.
Unless Nancy pulls some trick from under her skirt (which I am sure she has done many times to get to where she is today as Speaker of the House), this bill is going no where.

Rusty, your consistency amazes me. It’s almost sublime.
.
Of being wrong, that is.
.
Lovely Amy has frequently written about Stupak and his friends, probably much to the annoyance of other commenters. Read her stuff along with the other swamp reporters (or as you call them, shills).

Amy is a pro-abortion, former ex-Jesus Girl who should be relegated to the confines of some Nunnery just because she is a hack.
.
I am simply pointing out that TIME.com and their gaggle of reporters do not have a clue as to what is really going on right now in the Healthcare debate.
.
No Bart Stupak and company votes, no healthcare bill. It is that simple.

Well he is one of 15, we will see. Even now ,Rusty, there is political theater going on. What is there to say he doesn’t have a hall pass?

The biggest problem with your theory Rusty is that Stupak’s “gang” is peeling off and moving to support the bill. Largely because the Catholic nuns are calling BS on the Catholic bishops’ stance and urging Catholics to back the bill.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100317/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul

And with Kucinich shifting to support as well the opposition on the left is collapsing.

Will you admit that you were wrong when the bill passes?

Rusty, it’s not “ex-Jesus Girl”, it’s “Bible Girl”. Amy is NOT a hack, fyi, but you may be onto something about the nunnery. Was she once kicked out of a nunnery during Harvard Divinity School or her time in England?

Keep waiting for that glacier to melt while you’re at it, Acmeanvil

Unless Nancy pulls some trick from under her skirt (which I am sure she has done many times to get to where she is today as Speaker of the House)

Are CNN and Time still corporate siblings? Somebody tell Jon Klein and Ed Henry we’ve found another voice to add “diversity” to the stellar line up at Glen Beck’s former netowork. Rusty can fill in when Erick Erickson goes on vacation.

Shorter Marjorie Margolies: My constituents were too stupid to understand that I was helping them.

I wonder if it will ever occur to Democrats that part of their job is to make arguments in support of their positions. Sure, sometimes you may find yourself on the wrong side of your constituents as a matter of principle. But, more often than not, the’ll respect you for having the courage of your convictions.

Margolies represented the exact opposite approach. She told her constituents that the budget was bad and that she opposed it then she voted for it. No wonder she was out on her butt.

Rusty: Why do posters on the right have to display their misogyny so often?
1. Is it their need to be abusive?
2. Is it their concern about their masculinity?
3. Are they intimidated by women like Pelosi?
4. Are they just brainless commentators that have other way to express themselves?
5. Have they run out of Viagra and Rush won’t loan them any so they are peakish?
5. Or, all of the above?

That should be no other way to express themselves. By the way Rusty, I assume you would like all women who you disagree with to get themselves to a nunnery. Well, I love that the nuns are speaking out and supporting HCR in opposition to the Catholic bishops who have been so busy covering up child abuse.

He would fill in very well as one of the hate speakers.

…apr, thanks for this tip. I just read a quickie blog piece about this… http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/03/17/group-of-catholic-nuns-supports-health-bill/
I see a serious post from Amy on this in the crystal ball. She needs to snag some on-record interviews fast and quote ‘em here. Good job finding this, apr.

It amazes me how Time has repeatedly misread the consequences of the Margolis story. She didn’t make a principled stand in favor of a bill and president she supported. Indeed, she repeatedly told her constituents that she didn’t support it and she bet everything on a scenario where the Democrats could pass the bill without her support so that she could cynically vote against something she now says she was for.

Now the way she tells the story she sacrificed her career by voting her conscience. But isn’t what she tried to do worse? She tried to not vote her conscience but to wind up with the same result. She tried, basically, to fool her constituents. Shouldn’t we tall that as a tale of cowardice rather than courage?

As a Democrat, I can safely say I wouldn’t elect Marjorie Margolies to the office of dog-catcher.
.
You’d have to run Benito Mussolini as the GOP candidate against her –then I’d think about how I would vote.
.
Marjorie Margolies is a profile in failure and venality; a DLC Democrat.

de: Thanks for posting the link.

Having been raised Catholic and attended parochial schools, I am thrilled whenever nuns take an independent stand.
/
Of course, this will rile his holiness. American nuns are already under scrutiny for being too uppity.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02nuns.html
/
If you have seen the picture Doubt it is about the suspicion of abuse by a priest. Many people find the head nun as being manipulative and overly zealous.
It is more subtle. Watch the scenes of the food eaten by the priests and that eaten by the nuns. Nuns are often classic enablers of the misogyny of the male clergy. Glad they are speaking out.

I know, such an awful, cynical view of people. Courage is “I know you might throw me out of office for this but here’s why I’m doing it.”

What if (and this has happened) a big company executive said something like “I knew there was accounting fraud going on but I didn’t want to lose my job over a confrontation with the CEO so I just kept my mouth shut but I really really hoped somebody else would call the SEC.” Would we document that person’s courage or their trial?

SZ — I think Margolies would make a pretty good dog-catcher, if it came to that. She looks relatively youthful and athletic. I just wouldn’t want her anywhere near Congress.
.
Still, I’ve seen far worse than what she did. At least, when it was clear that she had to do the right thing, she did it. Contrast that with Bart Stupak, who would, if he could, torpedo HCR because he’s too stupid to realize what 60,000 Catholic nuns realize — that there is no substantive difference on abortion funding between Stupak’s eponymous amendment and the provision in the Senate bill.
.
If Margolies is guilty of grandstanding, at least she’s grandstanding for doing something worthwhile. And if there’s such a thing as justice, Stupak’s district will dump him in November, even if it’s at the cost of electing a Republican. He can grandstand to his family — or at least those family members who will have anything to do with him.