“Waxman made a deal that is unacceptable. We signed a pledge to reject any plan that doesn’t include a robust public option, and this plan doesn’t have a robust public option"
Rep. Barney Frank, (D-M.A.) a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is upset that their principles have been sacrificed to further President Obama's agenda. “I don’t think it would pass the House," Frank said of the Blue Dog/Waxman deal. "I wouldn’t vote for it."This division among the Democrats comes as Obama's approval ratings drop to their lowest point yet.
I think I’m trusted. I certainly want to be trusted. I’m not particularly concerned if I’m liked.
Polling shows Pelosi isn't liked or trusted by a vast majority of Americans.
Almost no one wants to fund abortion, regardless of their position on abortion as a whole.A few weeks ago, 19 pro-life House Democrats, including John Murtha of PA, wrote a letter to Speaker Pelosi warning that:
Without an explicit exclusion, abortion could be included in the a government subsidized heath care plan under general health care.These pro-life Democrats insisted they would oppose any attempt at health care reform that would "directly or indirectly" provide coverage for abortions.
We're also hoping that that personal responsibility extends to lifestyle... we need to make some basic changes in what we eat, how much we exercise...Seeing as we're currently fighting against a massive government takeover of the health care industry, Benjamin's weight is hardly America's top concern. Besides, if Obama can sign tobacco legislation and then sneak off for a cigarette, Benjamin can certainly preach about healthy eating and then drive through McDonald's.
Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.
The goal is to have a means and a mechanism to keep the private insurers honest. The goal is non-negotiable; the path is negotiable.Today, President Obama fired back all the way from Russia, with a statement saying:
I am pleased by the progress we're making on health care reform and still believe, as I've said before, that one of the best ways to bring down costs, provide more choices, and assure quality is a public option that will force the insurance companies to compete and keep them honest. I look forward to a final product that achieves these very important goals.Apparently the path isn't as "negotiable" as Rahmbo thought.
Any requirement that student organizations hosting controversial events pay for extra security is unconstitutional because it affixes a price tag to events on the basis of their expressive content. The Supreme Court addressed precisely this issue in Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123, 134-135 (1992).University of Arizona's decision to absorb the security cost is a victory for free speech on college campuses. Adam Kissel, Director of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program, said:
One by one, universities are remembering their duty to protect controversial speech, rather than unduly burdening it or letting it be shouted down. Those who fulfill the important task of bringing dissenting viewpoints to the university must be protected from those who respond to dissent with violence or disruption.Read more about the case here.
Yes, he did violate young boys. He did put them in terribly inappropriate positions. And that's a terrible signal to be sending out to society -- that we're somehow condoning that behavior. And you are condoning it when you give him the type of --- when we give him the type of regal coverage! And millions of people fighting to get to this mega-memorial! I mean, this is --- this is wrong!King's remarks certainly place him in the minority. Rep. Charles Rangel responded to King's remarks, saying:
I'd rather leave it alone. It's unfortunate that it's been said. I hope he's sorry he said it, but talking about it is not going to help or ease the pain that he has caused.All the major media outlets are currently covering Jackson's star-studded mass memorial, which is scheduled for 1 p.m. today at the Staples Center in Los Angeles.