Women's Health Care Sacrificed in Both Versions of the Health Care Bill

So what are you going to do about all those (0.00 / 0)

"Pro Choice" women in the House that supported that bill?

The bill passed both the House and Senate with no votes to spare.

---

by: bigsage @ Fri Jan 15, 2010 at 13:17:25 PM UTC

I know, right? (0.00 / 0)

There was massive pressure for everyone to get on board this bill from leadership.  Some people even got special kick-backs for their states.

I guess I'm going to express the opinion that better people should run for leadership, especially for key leadership positions and committee chairs.

---

by: Montana Cowgirl @ Fri Jan 15, 2010 at 14:33:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

On that (0.00 / 0)

we could not agree more.  But how does this plan deal with the mental gender inequality so prevalent in the public eye?

I'm about to date myself as having been born in the '60s and grown in the '70s, but we really need a re-introduction of the ERA.

And more to the point; women need to make their rights heard.  I actually get angry sometimes that many women are willing to look at almost any voting block or constituency other than their own.  There was a "million man march" on the capital.  Why not a "million woman march"?  Women have been the firmament for equal rights for GBLT persons, and health care for AIDS victims.  But when it comes to organizing for women, women kinda suck at it.  That gender makes up 51% of the US population, which damned well means they should have a commanding voice in our governance.  But they don't.

I am not now, nor ever would, blame women for the "sin of Eve".  But for crying out loud, women got the vote decades after black males did.  Does this seem right to anyone?  Beuller?  Beuller?  Yes, better people should run for leadership; but if women won't stand for their own, those leaders won't be women.

I'll be the first to admit that I was mad as hell at the PUMAs.  But it wasn't because they wanted Hillary or nothing.  They wanted Hillary or a heinous misogynist Republicant; and many wouldn't stand for what they professed to stand for, the rights of women to be equals in our society.  If Hillary Clinton had stood for a reintroduction of the ERA I would have voted for her in a gorram heartbeat.

Montana Cowgirl, your gender is in the majority.  But you have much work to do.  If you want better, meaning those with vaginae, you'd best work for that very thing, because expecting men who seek power to just give up the boost afforded by a penis is not likely to happen.  There's a lot of men, such as myself, who are willing to support such an effort, and you have the power of majority anyway.  Voting blocks are rated on race, and age.  Almost never has anyone taken the gender divide seriously even when it was as pronounced as it was in 2008.  That's your hope, right there.  That's your change.  Maybe, just maybe, in this 'post-racial' society, we need to scream long and loud about becoming a post gender society.  Just spit-balling ...

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 00:07:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I could not agree more. (0.00 / 0)

I  will only be voting for men and women who aren't total fearful sellouts.  

There was, in 2004, a 1.2 million women march on the capitol, the March for Women's Rights.  Women felt so powerless against a second W presidency that that's that some thought we could do (use the march as an organizing tool to build our base.)

You would think we would have the base now to take some action.  But it seems like some of the (national) women's groups are so eager to be "in" with Obama, Baucus --whomever, that they just accept what they are given.

Bad idea.

---

by: Montana Cowgirl @ Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 02:15:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Obvious typo above was unintentional. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Montana Cowgirl @ Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 02:16:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]